On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 22:30:06 +0100, Cyrano de B.
<Cyr@no.deB> wrote:
>> "If someone decides to waste her time to translate this stuff..."
>
>> In the sentence given, you need to use the present participle of the verb
>> to translate instead of the infinitive form:-
>>
>> "If someone decides to waste her time translating this stuff..."
>>
>> I wish I had the ability to explain why. :-)
>
> I am not a native speaker (of english), but tell me if you agree with me on
> this explanation of mine:
>
> "to waste her time to translate this stuff" seems to be a literal
>
> But here, the sentence means that BY DOING that (translating), you will
> waste time. The time-wasting is the consequence of the translating.
>
> If "TO" was used ("waste her time to translate this stuff"), "to" would
> suggest a goal (as "POUR traduire" in french). As if the goal of wasting
> one's time was to "translate this stuff", which makes no sense.
Both forms above are in fact missing words (as is commonly done in
English when the meaning is clear):
"If someone decides to waste her time in order to translate this stuff..."
"If someone decides to waste her time by translating this stuff..."
So they both mean the same (the time is being wasted to accomplish the
goal of translation), and in the longer form are both good English
(although the first is a little more formal), but the second in the
shorter form only misses out the preposition 'by', which is often
acceptable in English, whereas the first omits "in order" and thus loses
understandability.
> It is like in the old example of "I stopped smoking". You'll hear a lot of
> french people say "I stopped to smoke", because in French we say "j'ai
> explicitant un peu!).
cigarette", possibly? (My French is very rusty!)
> "To+verb" often has that sense of goal, I find. If it
> can have that sense, then it probably does.
In the sense of "in order to do", yes, but the goal normally follows the
verb.
Chris C
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
|