And lo on Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:10:55 +0100, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did  
spake, saying:

> Doctor John <doc### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>> >   "The car which has its windows rolled down's parked there."
>> >
>> >   The subject is 'car', and the verb is very far away from it, and
>> > contracted with a completely unrelated word. Feels even more awkward.
>> > When contracted, the verb looks like it's related to 'down', but of
>> > course it isn't. It's related to 'car'.
>> >
>
>> This should, of course, be written 'The car, which has its windows
>> rolled down, is parked there'.
>> Now do you see why you can't contract 'is' in this case?
>
>   My point, exactly. :)
>
>   One could think of it as "the rest, of it, is easy" in the same way,
> but of course commas are usually not used in these types of short
> expressions, while they make sense if you think about it.

Hmm I was trying to see if it came under the heading of  
restrictive/non-restrictive clauses or inappropriate separation of terms;  
or just a verbal screw-up... I'm still thinking.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message