IpseDixit - English

[IpseDixit]

Ok, I'll check it out. Thnx.

Just so you know, it ain't cheap! Even the paperback version is $50+. You won't find a better one-volume resource for the contemporary language, however.

Yep, I imagined that. Good things come with a price. :\

[IpseDixit]

hey, is this one here?

[linguoboy]

hey, is this one here?

That's the one! I'm surprised to see it available for free.

[IpseDixit]

hey, is this one here?

That's the one! I'm surprised to see it available for free.

Me too. It was the first result of Google!

[IpseDixit]

hey, is this one here?

is it* this one here

[IpseDixit]

I've noticed that sometimes I have trouble choosing between this and that when I'm writing. I do know the rule that this is for near things and that for far things, but this rule doesn't help me much when, like in a forum, there aren't spatial coordinates and this/that aren't use to point at concrete objects but to refer to things previously mentioned/said.

For example, I quote a post and I want to say that I agree with what's been said in that post, should I write "I agree with that" or "I agree with this"?

[Dormouse559]

Here's what I think: If you've quoted the post, "this" is a good choice (one way of expressing agreement with something on the Internet is to simply write "This" under the quote). If you put your comments after the quote, "that" can also work. But if you don't quote the post, "that" is better. I think generally, "this" refers to things that come after it, and "that" refers to things that come before it, but that Internet usage I mentioned above has muddied things a little.

[linguoboy]

I agree with this.

[Dormouse559]

Haha, very funny.

[IpseDixit]

If you put your comments after the quote, "that" can also work.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. :\

[Dormouse559]

If you quote the post, you could put text before or after it. Before the quote, you could say, "I agree with this", but not "I agree with that".

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. :\

After the quote, you could say either "I agree with this" or "I agree with that".

[IpseDixit]

If you quote the post, you could put text before or after it. Before the quote, you could say, "I agree with this", but not "I agree with that".

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. :\

After the quote, you could say either "I agree with this" or "I agree with that".

Oh, ok. Thanks. BTW, what about it?

[linguoboy]

What about it?

[IpseDixit]

What about it?

Can I use it in place of this/that?

[linguoboy]

What about it?

Can I use it in place of this/that?

You mean, can you say, "I agree with it" to show agreement with something someone has just posted?

It is absolutely unidiomatic and a clear sign of being a non-native speaker. You need a clear antecedent before you can use "it". For instance:

"What do you think of this article?"
"I'm not sure I agree with it, but it was an interesting read."

"It" refers back to "this article". But if someone just posted the article, you'd need to use a demonstrative.

[IpseDixit]

Yep, that's what I meant. Thnx.

[IpseDixit]

Is it true that that (when it works as relative pronoun) cannot replace who in this kind of sentence:

My brother, who works in a bank, says this is a good time to apply for a mortgage.

Btw what do you call that kind of sentence (the underlined bit)? In Italian it's called incidentale but I wasn't able to find an English translation.

[linguoboy]

Is it true that that (when it works as relative pronoun) cannot replace who in this kind of sentence:

My brother, who works in a bank, says this is a good time to apply for a mortgage.

Btw what do you call that kind of sentence (the underlined bit)? In Italian it's called incidentale but I wasn't able to find an English translation.

That's a relative clause, a particular kind of subordinate clause. They come in two types, restrictive and unrestrictive. According to the punctuation, this is the latter.

Style guides prescribe who when the antecedent is human, but colloquially it's not unusual to hear "that" or even "which".

[Dormouse559]

That said, I'd find it weird if someone used "that" or "which" with a human antecedent in an unrestrictive relative clause, like the one in the example sentence. It would sound fine to me if someone did that with a restrictive clause, though.

[IpseDixit]

When do I have to use the past infinitive in -ing* (e.g: having seen) instead of the simple -ing form (seeing)?

*probably it has another name but I don't know it.