Suan in Korea has some interesting (and complicated!) questions:
As I study English more and more, I have more questions. Here is the first question.
In Korean school, we are taught that 'make, have, let' are special verbs only if they have the meaning that 'make somebody or something do or persuade somebody or something do'. In my country, in case the verbs are used, we call them the pattern 5. That pattern consists 'subject + transitive verb + object + objective complement'.
The verbs are special because when they are used in the sentences in pattern 5, 'bare infinitive' is used in that sentence.
For example,
My mother let me go there.
The boss made me clean the office.
He had me sing a song in front of the crowd.
But I found the sentence like 'He had his audience listening attentively' in a dictionary.
Present participle not bare infinitive is used in this sentence. Can this sentence be right?
He had me singing a song in front of the crowd.
Yes. In this usage, "had me singing" means "caused me to sing, even if I didn't want to!" We have many such expressions:
I had him eating out of my hand. (He was like a dog taking food from me.)
She had them cheering and laughing. (She made them very happy.)
You'll have them begging for more. (The audience will want more of what you give them.)
And how about these sentences?
The boss made me cleaning the office.
He had me singing a song in front of the crowd.
The first one is wrong: It should be "The boss made me clean the office." The second one is like the ones above.
And 'get' is a special, too. That's because 'get' is used with 'to infinitive' only.
But I also found the sentence 'Can you really get that old car going again?' in a dictionary.
Can 'I got my men doing that' be used like 'I got my men to do that'?
"Get" is a difficult word for new English speakers, because it can do so many things! It can mean "obtain": I must get his new book. It can also mean "cause" or "persuade": Get her to drive you to Busan.
And yes, you can use it with "ing" verbs also:
Can you really get that old car going again? (Can you make it run?)
I got my men doing that. (I ordered them to do it.)
I'll get cracking on this assignment. (I'll do this job very quickly, right now.)
The teacher got them thinking about the problem. (The teacher made them think.)
And teach me how native speakers in Canada and the U.S use this form.
The examples I've given are the way that native speakers would use "get" and "got."
Here is another question. This is lighter than the above. I saw this sentence in the reference book published in Korea.
'My aunt brought up me.'
Isn't this sentence incorrect? I think that 'My aunt brought me up' is right. Which is correct, I or the reference book?
You're right.
And the last question:
These sentences are from your reply.
We Koreans love it because not only it is delicious but also it is good custom.
CK:
We Koreans love it; not only is it delicious, but eating songpyeon is also a good custom.
Why are 'it' and 'is' exchanged in position in this sentence?
And is the form 'V+S' used more frequently? In Korea, we haven't seen this pattern.
We use "inverted sentence order" in questions ("Are you studying?" instead of "You are studying."). We also use it to make a point very strongly.
Here is the sentence in subject-verb order: "It is not only delicious; it is also a good custom."
Here is the sentence in inverted, verb-subject order: "Not only is it delicious, it is also a good custom."
Notice that in subject-verb order, we need a semicolon because we have two independent clauses. We have two independent clauses in the inverted order also, but we use only a comma (I'm not sure why!).
In the inverted order, the sentence starts with "Not only." Words at the beginning of a sentence get more attention, so we pay more attention to the "not only"—and it prepares us for more information: "it is also." A native speaker will see "not only" and expect to learn even more:
Not only do I speak Korean, I also speak English and Japanese.
Not only is Ewha a women's university, it's also world-famous.
Recent Comments