Nanoha FanFiction Discussion

[Satashi]

Originally Posted by TheShinySword

Zaffy is chewbaka in the SW we talked earlier in the thread. He's Obi-wan in this one and you're missing a T in thought

1) missing and h in Which.
You use In when something is going inside of something (EX: He went in the house)
On is when something is going on something (EX: He stood on the roof. He put the pin on his chest)

My explanations may be vague but that's because these are really basic English words that are hard for me to explain.
2) yes

explanations were dead on. in=inside, on= ontop

[Edit]Page claim for... That picture of Nanoha and Fate french kissing

[Evil Rick]

Thanks for the help Satashi and TSS

Event and Scroll of Vatican Knights 2 chapter 3 had been alredy fixed, currently working on chapter 4 to post it later

[DezoPenguin]

Originally Posted by TheShinySword

Zaffy is chewbaka in the SW we talked earlier in the thread. He's Obi-wan in this one and you're missing a T in thought

1) missing and h in Which.
You use In when something is going inside of something (EX: He went in the house)
On is when something is going on something (EX: He stood on the roof. He put the pin on his chest)

My explanations may be vague but that's because these are really basic English words that are hard for me to explain.

And because, of course, English is a ridiculous language, there's at least one circumstance where they mean the same thing...depending on what country you're from: addresses. The British say* "He lives in Baker Street," while the Americans say, "He lives on Baker Street."

*or at least said; my knowledge of British English tends to die out around the 1950s.

...for Rick's purposes, though, that example should be pretty much ignored...

[Satashi]

English is a stupid language. It's one of the few that don't have male-female specific spelling for words, and also it's, I think, only one that doesn't have a set formula for words.

like, in English you can say:

The hat is red
or
The red hat

but in other languages it's specifically either adj. after noun or noun after adj. You can't go either way.

[Jimmy C]

The two are used differently. The first is a complete sentence, the second is merely a noun phrase.

The second can be the subject of a sentence.

eg. The red hat hung on a hook.

You can't do that with the first.

EDIT: What kind of gender specific words would you be referring to? We do have gender specific nouns, for example actor/actress. English does have set formulae for words. It has multiple formulae for each class of suffix or prefix, not to mention the rule-breaking irregulars.

[TheShinySword]

Originally Posted by Satashi

English is a stupid language. It's one of the few that don't have male-female specific spelling for words, and also it's, I think, only one that doesn't have a set formula for words.

.

I like that fact it doesn't assign gender specific words for the most part (French always got me with it's masculine and feminine nouns). Those are pains in the ass. (Saying English is a stupid language annoys me. All languages have their faults.)

And I don't know what you mean set formula as we do.

The hat is red
or
The red hat

but in other languages it's specifically either adj. after noun or noun after adj. You can't go either way.

The flexibility makes it wonderful imo and that's incorrect in many languages certain adj. go one place but other adj. go the other so one has to memorize the positioning for each individual type of adj.

[Satashi]

Originally Posted by Jimmy C

The two are used differently. The first is a complete sentence, the second is merely a noun phrase.

The second can be the subject of a sentence.

eg. The red hat hung on a hook.

You can't do that with the first.

EDIT: What kind of gender specific words would you be referring to? We do have gender specific nouns, for example actor/actress. English does have set formulae for words. It has multiple formulae for each class of suffix or prefix, not to mention the rule-breaking irregulars.

The hat hung on the rack is red

for gender specific, I was referring to words in spanish that end with "o" are generally masculine and "A" is feminine.

[TheShinySword]

Originally Posted by Satashi

The hat hung on the rack is red

There's quite a difference between your sentence and Jimmy_C's, the subject is different. The red hat is no longer the subject. Instead the hat that is hung on the rack is. The focus of Jimmy_C's sentence is the fact that the red hat is hung on the rack. The focus of yours is the redness of the hat. As fiction writers intention plays deeply into our choice of how to form sentences with every sentence we must ask ourselves what are we trying to tell the readers? Is the hat red or is the red hat hung?
http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/ar...e-position.htm
http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/ar...e-position.htm
Adjectives are interesting beasts indeed. You can't have a Beautiful she. But she can be beautiful.

Spoiler for cause I was bored:

"The hat... hung on the rack... is red."

"Is that odd?"

"W-well it was brown before wasn't it."

"No no it's always been a red hat."

"I'm pretty sure it was a brown hat before."

"That hat has never been brown as it is a red hat."

"Being a red hat makes it not a brown hat?"

"Exactly."

"What if I were to paint the red hat brown?"

"Then the red hat would be brown."

"But it wouldn't be a brown hat?"

"Quite not. Because we've already established that it's a red hat."

"What if I were to say, 'the hat which was formerly a red is now a brown hat'."

"Well that would be alright because you're informing us there's been a change."

"But I can't just say the brown hat."

"Well the hat is red you know."

And they continued on.

[Satashi]

Originally Posted by TheShinySword

There's quite a difference between your sentence and Jimmy_C's, the subject is different. The red hat is no longer the subject. Instead the hat that is hung on the rack is. The focus of Jimmy_C's sentence is the fact that the red hat is hung on the rack. The focus of yours is the redness of the hat. As fiction writers intention plays deeply into our choice of how to form sentences with every sentence we must ask ourselves what are we trying to tell the readers? Is the hat red or is the red hat hung?
http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/ar...e-position.htm
http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/ar...e-position.htm
Adjectives are interesting beasts indeed. You can't have a Beautiful she. But she can be beautiful.

Spoiler for cause I was bored:

"The hat... hung on the rack... is red."

"Is that odd?"

"W-well it was brown before wasn't it."

"No no it's always been a red hat."

"I'm pretty sure it was a brown hat before."

"That hat has never been brown as it is a red hat."

"Being a red hat makes it not a brown hat?"

"Exactly."

"What if I were to paint the red hat brown?"

"Then the red hat would be brown."

"But it wouldn't be a brown hat?"

"Quite not. Because we've already established that it's a red hat."

"What if I were to say, 'the hat which was formerly a red is now a brown hat'."

"Well that would be alright because you're informing us there's been a change."

"But I can't just say the brown hat."

"Well the hat is red you know."

And they continued on.

It is an ex hat!

[ghazghkull]

Originally Posted by TheShinySword

There's quite a difference between your sentence and Jimmy_C's, the subject is different. The red hat is no longer the subject. Instead the hat that is hung on the rack is. The focus of Jimmy_C's sentence is the fact that the red hat is hung on the rack. The focus of yours is the redness of the hat. As fiction writers intention plays deeply into our choice of how to form sentences with every sentence we must ask ourselves what are we trying to tell the readers? Is the hat red or is the red hat hung?
http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/ar...e-position.htm
http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/ar...e-position.htm
Adjectives are interesting beasts indeed. You can't have a Beautiful she. But she can be beautiful.

Spoiler for cause I was bored:

"The hat... hung on the rack... is red."

"Is that odd?"

"W-well it was brown before wasn't it."

"No no it's always been a red hat."

"I'm pretty sure it was a brown hat before."

"That hat has never been brown as it is a red hat."

"Being a red hat makes it not a brown hat?"

"Exactly."

"What if I were to paint the red hat brown?"

"Then the red hat would be brown."

"But it wouldn't be a brown hat?"

"Quite not. Because we've already established that it's a red hat."

"What if I were to say, 'the hat which was formerly a red is now a brown hat'."

"Well that would be alright because you're informing us there's been a change."

"But I can't just say the brown hat."

"Well the hat is red you know."

And they continued on.

English can be such a confusing language...but then again every language has its quirks :P

[Jimmy C]

Originally Posted by Satashi

The hat hung on the rack is red

Since TSS explained this comprehensively, I'll skip it. I'd just want to point out that TSS didn't mention that the minimum you need to make this sentence grammatically correct is to put "that" before "hung", although he put it in his reply. Having "that" turns "hung on the rack" into a subclause of "the hat", so you can have another verb after that (your "is").

for gender specific, I was referring to words in spanish that end with "o" are generally masculine and "A" is feminine.

Is that just nouns, or does it apply to verbs too? Like I said, English has similar with the "-ess" suffix to denote feminine nouns, though it doesn't apply to every noun. As a result, use of such gender specific nouns is optional, not compulsory. In fact, English would be better served if it had a gender neutral pronoun for people.

Originally Posted by TheShinySword

You can't have a Beautiful she. But she can be beautiful.

That's because "she" is a pronoun, not a noun. You cannot attach more words to pronouns to form noun phrases.

[TheShinySword]

Originally Posted by Jimmy C

Since TSS explained this comprehensively, I'll skip it. I'd just want to point out that TSS didn't mention that the minimum you need to make this sentence grammatically correct is to put "that" before "hung", although he put it in his reply. Having "that" turns "hung on the rack" into a subclause of "the hat", so you can have another verb after that (your "is").

You're right I added that is without even thinking about it. *chuckles*

Is that just nouns, or does it apply to verbs too? Like I said, English has similar with the "-ess" suffix to denote feminine nouns, though it doesn't apply to every noun. As a result, use of such gender specific nouns is optional, not compulsory. In fact, English would be better served if it had a gender neutral pronoun for people.

Indeed as his or her becomes bulky and results in most people (including myself at times) us the grammatically incorrect but functional they. You can use one ("one spell correctly" as opposed to He/she/you/I however the meaning does change a bit as one refers to literally everyone) but it's not quite the same and doesn't work at all times.

That's because "she" is a pronoun, not a noun. You cannot attach more words to pronouns to form noun phrases.

I used a bad example for my point which had nothing to do with the pronoun.

This would have been better to use. Your sister can be older and can be an older sister but grammatically she can't be elder than you only your elder sister.

[Keroko]

Originally Posted by Jimmy C

Is that just nouns, or does it apply to verbs too? Like I said, English has similar with the "-ess" suffix to denote feminine nouns, though it doesn't apply to every noun. As a result, use of such gender specific nouns is optional, not compulsory. In fact, English would be better served if it had a gender neutral pronoun for people.

I think he means nouns... In my experience English doesn't have as much of these compared to other languages.

Take Dutch, for example. The term 'neighbor' is translated into 'Buurman' literally translating to neighborman, and 'Buurvrouw' or neighborwomen. 'buurjongen' and 'buurmeisje' are used for younger neighbors, boy and girl respectively.

Basic nouns are different, but also alter depending on their use in a sentence. Taking the red hat example:

"The hat is red" translates to "De hoed is rood." 'rood' being translation for red.

However, "A red hat" translates to "Een rode hoed." 'rood' here translates to 'rode' as it becomes part of the subject.

[TheShinySword]

Originally Posted by Keroko

I think he means nouns... In my experience English doesn't have as much of these compared to other languages.

Take Dutch, for example. The term 'neighbor' is translated into 'Buurman' literally translating to neighborman, and 'Buurvrouw' or neighborwomen. 'buurjongen' and 'buurmeisje' are used for younger neighbors, boy and girl respectively.

Basic nouns are different, but also alter depending on their use in a sentence. Taking the red hat example:

"The hat is red" translates to "De hoed is rood." 'rood' being translation for red.

However, "A red hat" translates to "Een rode hoed." 'rood' here translates to 'rode' as it becomes part of the subject.

@.@ I'm glad our red hats don't change their spellings like that. I'm also very thankful that that English isn't that complex when it comes to relationships (Memorizing all the family relations in Mandarin was a nightmare for me I can't begin to imagine having to memorize different relations for every single thing).
People talk about the difficulty of English but there are points where English is mercifully simple.

[Satashi]

Originally Posted by TheShinySword

People talk about the difficulty of English but there are points where English is mercifully simple.

Because mainly in English a rule isn't set in stone. They say "this is the rule to go by, but there are exceptions."

"I before E except after C."
Neighbor, weight, science.

AKA "Yeah we screwed up this language so we'll just keep adding things onto it and hope it all works out."

Did you know that peas, like the food you eat, used to be singular and plural like "sheep" and "fish"? When America got the standard "s= plural", they created the word "Pea"

[TheShinySword]

Originally Posted by Satashi

Because mainly in English a rule isn't set in stone. They say "this is the rule to go by, but there are exceptions."

"I before E except after C."
Neighbor, weight, science.

AKA "Yeah we screwed up this language so we'll just keep adding things onto it and hope it all works out."

Did you know that peas, like the food you eat, used to be singular and plural like "sheep" and "fish"? When America got the standard "s= plural", they created the word "Pea"

Satashi all languages are like that because languages are always changing it's because they're always changing that language is wonder full. Because no rule is set in stone. There is an exception to everything. And yes I did know that.

[Keroko]

Originally Posted by TheShinySword

People talk about the difficulty of English but there are points where English is mercifully simple.

No doubts there. I'm curious what people have difficulty with when learning the language... I grew up reading English books, watching unsubbed or English subbed TV, and internet, so I kind of learned English naturally. I never really had a problem, or can't recall a problem, that you'd normally run into when learning a language myself.

[yuiseppe]

Originally Posted by Keroko

No doubts there. I'm curious what people have difficulty with when learning the language... I grew up reading English books, watching unsubbed or English subbed TV, and internet, so I kind of learned English naturally. I never really had a problem, or can't recall a problem, that you'd normally run into when learning a language myself.

The main difficulty I had was getting to know the exceptions to the 'rules'. In fact I doubt I know all of them even now. It is mildly irritating that when I extrapolate from certain conventions, I find out that in one or two particular instances, there is an exception which just doesn't seem to be based on anything.

English isn't my first language, and it might be inappropriate to compare it with eastern languages due to the difference in origin, but in my own experience, English does have a crud load of exceptions relatively speaking.

For the avoidance of doubt, when I say 'exception' I don't mean 'flexibility' in creating a sentence in different ways.

[krisslanza]

English is my first language yet I'm often told my grammar is horrible

[Evil Rick]

Looks like I accidentaly started something