51–60 of 82 posts
I think part of the reasoning behind this type of response is that each response is dealing with a different level of abstraction. > A: Did you see any birds at the park? > B: Yeah, no - I didn't see any. B is first acknowledging the question and it's intent - as well implying that maybe he did look for birds - which then flows into the fact that 'no' - he did not see any. This can be done with the 'No, totally' exam…
No, English is messed up :P I learned about some of this from learning Japanese where I had to learn you answer the question directly rather than confirm the negative by repeating it. In Japanese: Q: You don't like cigars do you A: Yes (Yes I don't like cigars) In English Q: You don't like cigars do you A: No (it's effectively confirming the negative of "like") My Japanese friends learning English of course found Eng…
I like the way Mandarin does this. There's no pure "yes" or "no," just a negation you can apply to a verb. The answers would be either "like" (yes, I like cigars) or "not like" (no, I don't like them).
Seems simple enough to me. The "No" is directed at defusing a redundant introductory lecture. Translate as: "No, you don't have to explain further, I completely understand" "No, stop, I've already heard of that and I'm totally onboard with your opinion" I spend a lot of time being introduced to topics I'm already familiar with, but just nodding politely or saying "yeah" is interpreted as active listening, as "I'd lik…
I think this is the correct explanation. Can someone find a counter-example where "no" is used in the weird way the New Yorker piece is describing, but where it can't be taken to mean "No, you don't have to go on; I know exactly what you're talking about/asking"? The example given by yathern... > A: I wasn't sure if you'd like to go to the park - do you want to? > B: No, totally! Definitely want to go. ...seems to fi…
I haven't listened to it, but I've heard that this goes into a bunch of different scenarios:
http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/lexicon_valley/2013/0...
I would blame the French. Frenchmen speaking English badly often say Borat like phrases, for example "its great, no?". It happens when you learn vocabulary without grammar rules.
What grammar rule is violated? The question "is it not?" Is completely valid English and common with French speakers. I would literally argue that it's ironic that most English speakers have a bad command of the language. Of course you're experience may be different. The reality is that grammar is often, especially in spoken language, is butchered. It's affect is that many people could care less.
:P
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like the way Mandarin does this. There's no pure "yes" or "no," just a negation you can apply to a verb. The answers would be either "like" (yes, I like cigars) or "not like" (no, I don't like them).
Does this work for questions phrased in the negative? Ni bu hui shuo zhongwen ma? (You can't speak Chinese?) could be responded to with "bu hui", "hui", or "dui" I think. "Dui" (correct) would mean... Right, I cant? "Dui bu dui" is also an interesting departure for this...
But another, perhaps more natural way of negatively phrasing the question would be "你不会说中文，是吗？" or "你不会说中文，对吗？" or even the odd formulation that you mention "你不会说中文，对不对？" (You don't speak Chinese, right?), in which case you could respond with 对/不对 ("that's right"/"that's not right").
It feels almost like there is an implied leading question like: "Am I wrong?"
I've always wondered how "awful" came to mean "bad" (the opposite of "awe full") and then has apparently added the meaning "very" ("awfully good"?)?