Zompist Bboard Again

mèþru wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:26 am give or provide both work, but provide is a bit more formal (maybe even snooty, but I still use it)

Thank you!

I would use "with" with "provide" in this instance.

Raphael wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:21 amBasic English language question: in English, what do you call the thing that you're doing with an answer when you're answering something? Do you "give" an answer, do you "make" an answer, do you "provide" an answer, or something else entirely?

"make" is usually the wrong choice when translating from other European languages. We're much more likely to "do" things.

Raphael wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:21 am Basic English language question: in English, what do you call the thing that you're doing with an answer when you're answering something? Do you "give" an answer, do you "make" an answer, do you "provide" an answer, or something else entirely?

Normally I'd say I "answered" them. Failing that, I would give them answer. Provide is "better" in slightly more formal settings - I'd always use 'give' when talking with friends, but I'd use 'provide' when I was writing something in a work concept. "The clients provided us with an answer" sounds appropriately inhuman... but if you use "I provided an answer to Bob" in conversation you sound a bit stuffy.

On the syntax:
The transitive is plain: John provides an answer.
The ditransitive is probably best with 'with', particularly in the past tense: John provided Bob with an answer
However, the ditransitive also works the other way around with 'to', and I'd be tempted to use that in the present tense: John provides an answer to Bob.
Then again, I might use 'with' in the present in the plural (provides us with answers).
It's also possible to have a pure ditransitive: John provides Bob an answer. However, while I'm sure this happens in speech, on the page I think it looks a bit old-fashioned, a pure ditransitives often do in English (other than with 'give'). Having said that, I think this is found plenty in older writings.

It used to be possible to "make" an answer. However, these days if I heard this I would assume a) you're quoting something old, b) you're a foreigner, or c) you're a lawyer. [I don't know if lawyers actually do say things like "the defendant made answer pursuant to the statute", but it sounds like the sort of thing they might say.]

Come to think of it, I might also use 'make an answer' where the context encourages comparisons to 'make a sound', 'make a gesture', etc. Perhaps a child grunting might be making an answer, for example.

But yeah, in general, more casual 'give', more formal 'provide'. Or just 'answer'.

There are of course other options, depending what you're doing. For instance, a common one is "formulate an answer", but that's more the stage before answering than the answering itself.

I think the main difference between Sal's post and mine is the differences in word usage across the pond. A lot of what British people say comes off as haughty or snobbish here.

I agree with all of you but one other point I'd note is (at least for me), "provide" is the more natural term to use when the source of the answer is something impersonal, and you're inferring the answer from it, as opposed the answer deriving directly from a human source ("I couldn't find Bob and was looking all over. Where could he have gone? At last a footprint in the snow provided the answer.") Though "give" is still grammatical and not *that* unusual-sounding there, I'd just go with "provide" over it most of the time.

Seems like every day I discover minor lexical differences between US and UK English of which I was previously unaware. The latest are "blowlamp" and "swallow hole". I know in most cases these must predate the North American terms, but to my ears they just sound like attempts to be different for the sake of being different.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:38 pm Seems like every day I discover minor lexical differences between US and UK English of which I was previously unaware. The latest are "blowlamp" and "swallow hole". I know in most cases these must predate the North American terms, but to my ears they just sound like attempts to be different for the sake of being different.

Now that you raise the word "blowlamp", I think I may have seen or read it somewhere at some point. However, I didn't immediately know what it meant. Come to think of it, I think I have heard other "lamp" concepts meaning some sort of burning implement, though I can't think of the details right away.

To me, "swallow hole" and "sinkhole" are different. A sinkhole is where a big hole opens up in the ground unexpectedly; a swallow hole is a long-term geological phenomenon to do with rivers and limestone and whatnot. I've never heard "shakehole" and wouldn't know what it was.

“The Proto-Ndu contrast of word-final voiceless stops (p, t and k), the nasal n and the rhotic r has been lost in Manambu, all five segments merging as r.”

-Aikhenvald, Typological Plausibility and Historical Reconstruction

Would you ever refer to a residential bathroom as a "restroom"? I had guests at my residence ask if they could use my restroom, and it sounded strange to me, as if my residence were a commercial building.

I wouldn't but I also use "bathroom" for a bathroom in any other context. I'm just not much for polite euphemisms I guess, even though "bathroom" originally was one too. Different families teach their kids different words, and some keep using those words as adults. Mine never saw a problem with "bathroom", apparently.

And sometimes people like to be playful...you've probably heard "i have to use the little boys room" from an adult male talking about their own bathroom at home? That and "potty" .

-

That's pretty quirky. My old apartment had two bathrooms, only one of which had a bathtub. For me, if it's in a house it's a bathroom, and if it's in a public building (office, restaurant, gas station...) it's a restroom. I don't think I'd be surprised at someone using the other word though. "Washroom" could be used for either.

Space60 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:47 am Would you ever refer to a residential bathroom as a "restroom"? I had guests at my residence ask if they could use my restroom, and it sounded strange to me, as if my residence were a commercial building.

"Restroom" is a polite euphemism for "bathroom".

To me, all bathrooms are restrooms but not all restrooms are bathrooms. But in the moment, I might use them interchangeably as long as someone understands I need to take care of certain biological functions. But I agree that a bathroom proper has a place to bathe; A restroom does not.

The distinction I am used to is that a restroom is a euphemism for bathroom, but it is specifically used for bathrooms in public places, whereas a bathroom in someone's home or a hotel room or like is still just a bathroom.

zompist wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 3:39 pmThat's pretty quirky. My old apartment had two bathrooms, only one of which had a bathtub. For me, if it's in a house it's a bathroom, and if it's in a public building (office, restaurant, gas station...) it's a restroom. I don't think I'd be surprised at someone using the other word though. "Washroom" could be used for either.

Yeah, I was at a party at a private residence on Saturday and one of the guests was looking for the bathroom. I can't remember now if he asked "Where's the bathroom?" or "Where's the restroom?" because both sound equally likely in my head. "Restroom" sounds more formal, but since it was the first time most of us had been there and not everyone knew everyone, we were using a more polite standard of behaviour. Had it been a smaller knot of better friends, "restroom" might have sounded odd.

My usage aligns with Zompist's and Linguoboy's. Also note that a real estate listing for a "half bathroom" doesn't have a shower/bathtub.

Zaarin wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:38 pm My usage aligns with Zompist's and Linguoboy's. Also note that a real estate listing for a "half bathroom" doesn't have a shower/bathtub.

To me a half bath (I rarely hear the full half bathroom) is still a bathroom - not a restroom (one would never call a bathroom in a public place a half bath) - and the term is used mostly when describing real estate, not in everyday conversation unless one is buying or selling a house.

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:25 am

zompist wrote: ↑Sun Feb 17, 2019 3:39 pmThat's pretty quirky. My old apartment had two bathrooms, only one of which had a bathtub. For me, if it's in a house it's a bathroom, and if it's in a public building (office, restaurant, gas station...) it's a restroom. I don't think I'd be surprised at someone using the other word though. "Washroom" could be used for either.

Yeah, I was at a party at a private residence on Saturday and one of the guests was looking for the bathroom. I can't remember now if he asked "Where's the bathroom?" or "Where's the restroom?" because both sound equally likely in my head. "Restroom" sounds more formal, but since it was the first time most of us had been there and not everyone knew everyone, we were using a more polite standard of behaviour. Had it been a smaller knot of better friends, "restroom" might have sounded odd.

To me this would unambiguously be a bathroom, because it is in someone's home, rather than in public.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 2:35 pm

Zaarin wrote: ↑Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:38 pm My usage aligns with Zompist's and Linguoboy's. Also note that a real estate listing for a "half bathroom" doesn't have a shower/bathtub.

To me a half bath (I rarely hear the full half bathroom) is still a bathroom - not a restroom (one would never call a bathroom in a public place a half bath) - and the term is used mostly when describing real estate, not in everyday conversation unless one is buying or selling a house.

That's what I said.