On Aug 16, 4:55 pm, David Monaghan <monaghand.da...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 13:13:10 -0700 (PDT), rantingrick > > <rantingr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >If conciseness is all you seek then perhaps you prefer the following? > > >ORIGINAL: "I used to wear wooden shoes" > >CONCISE: "I wore wooden shoes" > >ORIGINAL: "I have become used to wearing wooden shoes" > >CONCISE: "I like wearing wooden shoes" > >However as you can see much of the rich information is missing. > > Indeed. Neither of your two concise examples has the same meaning of the > originals.
Really? Are you sure? ------------------------------------------------------------ ORIGINAL1: "I used to wear wooden shoes" ------------------------------------------------------------ CONCISE_1a: "I wore wooden shoes" the word "wore" is "past tense" and can be replaced with the "past tense" phrase of "used to wear" without changing any meaning whatsoever -- albeit the latter is childish! CONCISE_1b: "I wore wood shoes" Wooden = "object made of wood" = "flesh of a tree" Wood = "the flesh of a tree" Completely interchangeable! CONCISE_1c: "I<<wood shoes" Considering that "I" is an object that has overloaded the left shift operator with an instance method to append a single argument (in this case "wood shoes") to instance "I's" feet. Obviously if an object didn't like wooden shoes it would not have a method that accepts them... yeah it's a bit of a stretch, but not so much that it's impossible to comprehend! ------------------------------------------------------------ ORIGINAL_2: "I have become used to wearing wooden shoes" ------------------------------------------------------------ CONCISE_2a: "I like wearing wooden shoes" the word "like" is a positive "present tense" inflection of emotion as it regards to wooden shoes; as is the phrase "become used to" -- albeit the latter is childish. CONCISE_2b: "I like wooden shoes" If you like wooden shoes it's only natural to assume that you would wear them. CONCISE_2c: "I like wood shoes" Wood, Wooden, we've been here before. CONCISE_2d: "wood shoes: +1" Since the fact about "wearing" them can go without being said, you get the picture... although this too is a stretch, but not impossible! ------------------------------------------------------------ > Different phrasings of all but the most basic sentences often have subtle > differences of meaning which native speakers intend and understand. 1984 has > been and gone. Shame on you! Guido himself admitted that hidden descriptors are real. The inception has begun! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
