MSGID: 1:153/716.0 ededdad9   
   REPLY: 2:221/6.0 5ed82a4e   
   CHRS: IBMPC 2   
   Hi, Anton!  Recently you wrote in a message to Ardith Hinton:   
      
   AH>  I could have written "... none of which has [blah blah]   
   AH>  but all of which we are still using."  Although it would   
   AH>  have made a nicer parallelism I felt it might be   
   AH>  unnecessarily wordy.   
      
   AS>  Indeed. The amendment I had in mind (but withheld) was   
   AS>  the following:  "none with magic(k)al powers, but all   
   AS>  of them still in use".   
      
      
             I consider it a reasonable alternative....  :-)   
      
      
      
   AS>  My other misdoublt about it (withheld, too) was that "but"   
   AS>  does not seem to introduce any kind of contradtion! On the   
   AS>  other hand, magical items, being rarer, are likely to be   
   AS>  used longer.   
      
      
             The latter is +/- what I had in mind.  Once I am dead & gone my   
   heirs & executors may not see any further need to keep various household   
   items.  If I owned a magic ring they might feel differently about it.  But if   
   I'd never told them this ring had magical powers, or if they preferred to   
   believe the old lady was delusional, you might see it offerred for sale as   
   "antique jewellery".  ;-)   
      
      
      
   AH>  As a native speaker I depend heavily on my Russian modem   
   AH>  buddies & foreign language textbooks to identify the names   
   AH>  of verb tenses.   
      
   AS>  I think the terminology is largely the same in English   
   AS>  Grammars written in English, by the English, and for the   
   AS>  English.   
      
      
             Exactly.  One of the reasons I like traditional grammar is that I   
   can communicate with people of all ages... from all over the world... knowing   
   their dictionaries & grammar books will employ +/- the same terminology mine   
   do.  :-)   
      
      
      
   AH>  In general the present tense would work too, but in this   
   AH>  example I figure it would change the emphasis as well as   
   AH>  the rhythm I had in mind.  :-)   
      
   AS>  If I grasp this distinction corretly, then I should say   
   AS>  that a busy and professional photographer may say: "I am   
   AS>  using a Horizon camera,"   
      
      
             Such a person might say "I am using [blah blah], as we speak... but   
   I use different equipment under different conditions."  :-)   
      
      
      
   AS>  whereas a time-to-time amateur like me who shoots several   
   AS>  film rolls a season may say: "I use a Horizon camera"?   
      
      
             If that is the only camera you have, yes.  Although I continue to   
   use the cutlery I inherited from various people I have other cutlery as   
   well... and I won't bore you by explaining in detail which item I use for   
   which purpose(s).   
      
      
      
   AS>  That the sound of your original version is better is "fixed   
   AS>  with the golden nails to the walls of inevitable necessity".   
      
      
             "Necessity is the mother of invention", or so I am told.  While I   
   can hardly compare myself to Mozart I can see now why I understood intuitively   
   what he meant when I did sight reading.  It simply wouldn't work any other   
   way.  Yet my writing area, like Beethoven's manuscripts, is littered with   
   revisions.  :-Q   
      
      
      
   AH>  If I knew he'd reverted but my brain slipped a cog, I   
   AH>  might say "I forgot he'd been vegetarian as an impecunious   
   AH>  student but modified his stance after he began doing hard   
   AH>  physical work in the construction industry....  :-)   
      
   AS>  Your extrapolation has given new life to my example, but I   
   AS>  see no cogs slipping...   
      
      
             Upon reading your reply I see I forgot the end quotation marks   
   there. Even English teachers make misteaks, but I appreciate the compliment...   
   [grin].   
      
      
      
      
   --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+   
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/120 123 18/0 90/1 116/116 120/340 601 123/0 25 50 131 150   
   SEEN-BY: 123/170 755 135/300 138/146 153/250 757 7715 154/10 30 40   
   SEEN-BY: 154/50 700 203/0 221/0 6 226/30 227/114 702 229/101 424 426   
   SEEN-BY: 229/664 1014 240/1120 1634 2100 5138 5832 5853 8001 8002   
   SEEN-BY: 240/8005 249/206 317 261/38 280/5003 313/41 317/3 320/219   
   SEEN-BY: 322/757 331/313 333/808 335/206 364 370 342/200 382/147 640/1384   
   SEEN-BY: 2454/119 3634/0 12 15 27 50 4500/1 5020/1042   
   PATH: 153/7715 3634/12 154/10 221/6 335/364 240/1120 5832 229/426