From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Robert J. Chassell" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: NEWS.22: `allows' without an object Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:33:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1180434798 14617 80.91.229.12 (29 May 2007 10:33:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:33:18 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 29 12:33:13 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 1Hsz0r-0000HD-62 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 12:33:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hsz0q-0004RJ-Ow for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 06:33:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hsz0n-0004RE-BA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 06:33:09 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Hsz0k-0004R2-TY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 06:33:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hsz0k-0004Qz-OC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 06:33:06 -0400 Original-Received: from cpe-69-205-32-54.nycap.res.rr.com ([69.205.32.54] helo=rattlesnake.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Hsz0k-0008Sh-Bb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 29 May 2007 06:33:06 -0400 Original-Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.115) Tue, 29 May 2007 10:33:03 +0000 (UTC) In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Tue, 29 May 2007 06:03:25 +0300) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4 (tstamp-) 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:71939 Archived-At: As Alan Mackenzie says, "allow" needs a direct object, > This version of `movemail' allows you to read mail from a wide range of > ^^^ I think "allows reading mail" is also okay, and doesn't require "you". `Reading' serves (or maybe the object is the whole phrase, `reading mail' -- I don't know.) Stefan Monnier wrote ... 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. I did not know. That explains a great deal. As Alan Mackenzie says, this instance needs `the person or thing being empowered'. On its own, in English, the phrase `to read' fails. The English is confusing. It may be that you can only comfortably learn this kind of construction when very young. You could write, `enables reading mail', too; that makes more sense. Before Eli Zaretskii made this observation, I had not noticed the distinction between gaining permission and gaining an ability, but it is there and important. After all, we are not talking about humans getting permission from the `movemail' code, as `allow' suggests, but gaining from it the power to act. -- Robert J. Chassell GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8 bob@rattlesnake.com bob@gnu.org http://www.rattlesnake.com http://www.teak.cc