SEE IF/WHETHER as embedded Q (Zwicky's suggestion)

Laurence Horn laurence.horn at YALE.EDU
Tue Jul 25 16:16:32 UTC 2000


At 11:08 AM -0400 7/25/00, RonButters at AOL.COM wrote:
>In a message dated 7/25/00 12:45:31 AM, rtroike at U.ARIZONA.EDU writes:
>
><< Also, in varieties that can invert auxiliaries in embedded questions, my
>sense is that this is possible (though not being a native speaker I can't
>be sure):
>
>        He asked me to see IF I couldn't pry the lid off.
>
>        He asked me to see COULDN'T I pry the lid off.
> >>
>
>I think that this would have to be "He asked me to see COULD I pry the lid
>off" (no negative); "*He asked me to see COULDN'T I pry the lid off." I'm not
>a native speaker, but I have been recording these constructions for 30 years
>here in North Carolina.

This brings up a related question I had, connected to another of Arnold's
postings.  I wholeheartedly endorse his characterization of the
distribution of "try and" from a few days ago, i.e. that the first verb
must appear in the base (non-inflected) form and the second IS the base
form (as in this example from a novel I'm reading:  "Most of them
[classmates] try and be nice to you [someone who limps from polio]; some of
them make fun of you").  What I was wondering is whether speakers from
dialects in which there is zero-agreement for third person singular (at
least some of the time) can say things like

She try and be quiet.
He try and finish his work.

Anyone know?

larry



More information about the Ads-l mailing list