Query Details
| Query Subject: |
Enjoy Oneself (by) Doing?
|
|
| Author: | Hiroaki Tanaka | |
| Submitter Email: | click here to access email | |
| Linguistic LingField(s): |
Syntax
Lexicography |
|
| Subject Language(s): |
English
|
|
| Query: |
Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:46:06 +0900
Hiroaki Tanaka hiro-t@ias.tokushima-u.ac.jp Enjoy Oneself (by) Doing? Dear Linguists, My former teacher in the university I graduated, a famous lexcographer here in Japan, who is compiling many English-Japanese dictionaries, wants to know whether the following ''enjoy + oneself +(by) + doing'' is currently used in America, Britain and other English speaking countries. Logically, ''enjoy + oneslef + doing'' consturction in (3) below is impossible, because ''enjoy'' does not take double object construction. But he arugues against this, saying that the developmental strategy of ''enjoy'' is from (1a) to (1d). The questions are: (i)Which type in (2a)-(2e) do you think is the most appropriate, acceptable structure of ''enjoy''? (ii)Which do you think is the most old-fashioned, out of use, type in (2a)-(2e)? (iii) Do you think are there any regional differences among these sentences? (1) a. enjoy oneself by doing -->b. enjoy oneself (by) doing -->c. enjoy oneself doing -->d. enjoy doing (2) a. I had a good time playing golf. b. I enjoyed myself playing golf. c. I enjoyed myself while playing golf. d. I enjoyed myself playing golf. e. I enjoyed playing golf. For your information, I refer to the curious omission of ''enjoiy oneself'' in the 5th edition of Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary(OUP), although there is one in the 4th edition of the dictionary(The children enjoyed themsleves playing in the water). I will post a summary. I'm looking forward to your replies. Please e-mail me directly to the following address. Enjoy yourself answering my question! Thanks a lot in advance. Best wishes, Hiroaki Tanaka Associate Professor Faculty of Integrated Arts and Sciences Tokushima University, Japan 1-1, Minamijousanjioma, Tokushima, 770-8052, Japan phone & fax: +81 886 56 7125 e-mail: hiro-t@ias.tokushima-u.ac.jp Dear linguists, I have lately been working on a project on phrases (German: ''Phraseologismen'') and idioms and their representation in the mental lexicon. Unfortunately only little scientific research has been carried out in this field yet. I would therefore like to inquire whether you have any information on publications, research projects etc. concernig the above mentioned subject, especially on the question how to access and generate idioms and phrases. I would be very glad to hear from you. Best wishes Udo Lakemper - --------------------------------------------------------- Udo Lakemper Germanistisches Institut Ruhr-Universitaet Bochum Udo.Lakemper@ruhr-uni-bochum.de http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/www-public/lakemubz/welcome.htm I'm posting this question on behalf of a friend who studies music. Can anyone direct her as to the proper pronunciation of the following two phrases of the madrigal ''Come Again'' by John Dowland (1563-1626): 1. To see, to hear, to touch, to kiss, to die with thee again in sweetest sympathy. 2. I sit, I sigh, I weep, I faint, I die in deadly pain and endless misery. My friend has been instructed to make ''sympathy'' and ''misery'' rhyme with ''die'' in her singing. Was ''die'' pronunced as we would say it today? Should ''sympathy'' and ''misery'' rhyme with ''die'' according to the English pronunciation in the 16.th century? I realize that this is not the spelling used in the original, and I don't have the original orthography. I seem to recall vaguely from somewhere that during the Renaissance period, words ending with an [I] (sympathy, misery) had an -ie sequence for the final vowel. Could it be that the words were orthographical look-alikes but not sound-alikes? Please answer to my e-mail address: bente.moxness@hf.ntnu.no Regards, Bente |
|
| LL Issue: | 9.116 | |
| Date posted: | 24-Jan-1998 | |
|
Back |
||
|
|
||
|
Sums main page
|
||
|
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
|
Report Broken Link
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents. |
|
