From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Reitter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: NEWS.22: `allows' without an object Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:51:39 +0100 Message-ID: <0214BD85-1410-480A-A982-9F2942138212@gmail.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1180432312 5559 80.91.229.12 (29 May 2007 09:51:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 09:51:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bob@rattlesnake.com, Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 29 11:51:50 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HsyMo-0008OW-CT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 11:51:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HsyMn-0000H3-R4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 05:51:49 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HsyMj-0000FM-SF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 05:51:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HsyMj-0000E8-20 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 05:51:45 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HsyMi-0000Dk-RF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 05:51:44 -0400 Original-Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.170]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HsyMi-0003ly-NK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 05:51:44 -0400 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 34so2018764ugf for ; Tue, 29 May 2007 02:51:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=cmje50Dm3u7FWRd17j5HQkQQ5qbxFgS25OnNfL/CZtSGdf40pYoRQMHt2L568VPDPUhhBLf/L4Ytm5+NOoOScYDhmkY7Ft+6h31Lw+pCITttGkBMSApUlw1ZRPgyw9DsPuBRJp3ksoleD97MRWPc6fKoXmiyzGlDeLuIsEj2lM0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=c0LOU7szHTCkBwd0MjmyRLGs5+MbHWRDabmbVw4uDTuRZYyvZhkSYAuvXiY5SSxBeooO3COvbqS9CMlqV3vDsHidJiJGBMEY26hcrRs9Bl4L09C+SCr45p53nRUSbl4G2i3d/KENzb7mrnJuT0/ZlHrRo7BtEKJQGup8cxrt50A= Original-Received: by 10.66.218.15 with SMTP id q15mr5936535ugg.1180432302609; Tue, 29 May 2007 02:51:42 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from ?10.5.5.200? ( [84.9.229.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o24sm6720323ugd.2007.05.29.02.51.41; Tue, 29 May 2007 02:51:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 (Google crawlbot) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:71933 Archived-At: On 29 May 2007, at 09:48, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> I think "allows reading mail" is also okay, and doesn't require >> "you". > > That's indeed what I was told, and that's a source of the confusion > (for me > at least): in most contexts, "blabla to read mail" and "blabla > reading mail" > translate into the exact same thing in French, so I tend to not > know when to > use which. > In the specific case of "allow" and "enable", I know I'm not alone ;-) "Reading" is used as a noun here, and "allow + noun" is an English construction. Additionally, English allows for the omission of the agent of nouns that have been converted from verbs (read -> reading): "Reading was popular in the 50's" is okay, even though it is not specified who is reading. (The genitive takes the place of the subject, otherwise: "Peter's writing was awful.") "Allow" is a control verb, where the entity that experiences the "allowing" is realized as an object, but is also the subject of the complement clause: "A allows B to do X" means "A permits that B do X". A complement with "to" always means that a clause follows, and this calls for a subject in English. With a control verb like "allow", you should therefore always use the extra object: "The rain allows John to go back to bed." In the general case, I find the verbal style better than the noun style, but native speakers may have a different view. -- David Reitter ICCS/HCRC, Informatics, University of Edinburgh http://www.david-reitter.com