Re: OT: THEORY Fusion Grammar

Hi all,

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Roger Mills wrote:
>
> Gary Shannon wrote:
> > --- René Uittenbogaard wrote:
> > > Even more can go inside the "er .. mee" construct:
[snip example]
> >
> > I really having trouble understanding the function of
> > "er...mee" in this sentence. What, exactly, is the
> > "er...mee" telling us? It's not what the torch was lit
> > "with", so what is it?
>
> I been wondering about this too. Is there more context? Has the speaker
> previously mentioned some device, and you are supposed to light the torch
> _with it_ (er...mee)??
>
[snip speculation from Gary]
>
> Hmm, perhaps er...mee is to be interpreted as sort-of "thereupon,
> then, at that point...", just as "With that,..." is sometimes used as a
> transition in Engl., not implying any instrument, although properly
> it should refer to some previous act or situation.
>
> Deathless prose examples:
>
> "You're a total idiot," she said. With that, she stomped out of the room.
> (from my memoir, "Life with Mother")
>
> I really want that, he thought. With that, he clicked the "buy
> now" button.
> (from forthcoming "1001 Nights on E-Bay")
Roger,

I don't think "With that,..." is *originally* quite as
meaningless as you seem to imply.  Try replacing
"With that, ..." by "On doing so, ...".  Surely the "so"
*does* "refer to some previous act or situation",
just as you say it should.  One could also quite
idiomaticaly replace the "so" with "which" or "that":
 a. "With that, ..."
 b. "On doing so, ..."
 c. "On doing which, ..."
 d. "On doing that, ..."
all seem to say much the same thing, referring to
the completion of an act described previously.
One might even say:
 e. "With that done, ..." or
 f. "That done, ..." - right?

It becomes, in effect, an adverbial phrase of time.
One might replace it with "thereupon" as you
suggested, or "immediately afterwards" etc.

Deconstructing the USAGE of "With that, ..." is
pretty much OT Gary's original post, but I guess
one shouldn't deride it for that ...

Can Gary's "fusion grammar" approach work with
such a phrase in English?  Sure, why not?

With "er ... mee" in Dutch?  Well, if it really means
something like "with it (a previously-referenced
object)", this kind of separation of "fusible atoms"
should cause no more grief than separable verbs do.
BTW, is there a workable way of fusing those? If
so, then the fusional approach should work just
fine.

Regards,
Yahya