[fpc-pascal] OT: Re: http://www.freepascal.org/future.var

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Howard Page-Clark wrote:
> On 06/06/2013 08:32, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
>> Reinier Olislagers wrote:
>>> On 6-6-2013 7:52, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>>>> Reinier Olislagers
>>>> <reinierolislagers-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> schrieb:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5-6-2013 22:02, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>>>>>> I'am opposed to an LLVM backend but if Jonas implements one I can and
>>>>>> will not influence this :)
>>>>> That's clear enough, thanks!
>>>> Of course I meant .... I can not and will not ...
>>>
>>> Sure, I understood you: German and Dutch are much alike in this
>>> particular construction where you leave out one not/nicht/niet, I
>>> think ;)
>>
>> English is the same. Don't worry about it.
>>
> I'm not a good enough linguist to know if English is "the same", but 
> Florian's original statement in English is ambiguous. It could be taken 
> to mean "I can influence an LLVM implementation, but I will not," or it 
> could be taken to have an implied earlier "not" to mean "I cannot and 
> will not influence..."
> However it is a very curious construction in English, which immediately 
> makes the reader think "What does he mean exactly?"

It's not curious at all. He explicitly said "can and will not", he did 
not say "can but will not".

Anyway, this is veering OT even for an OT thread, all I was trying to 
say was that his English was entirely adequate- at least to somebody who 
dates back to the time that grammar was taught as distinct from being 
allowed to "develop naturally" :-)

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]