help with meaning

beneficii   Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:03 pm GMT
Anonymous Coward (AKA Guest),

>>I am also a native speaker and think your suggestion is nonsense. As said, the word "rename" contains the idea of "to". Now that is a fact.<<

Why don't you come out from behind your guest label?

Pos (AKA M56),

>>?? "it fit"??

"it fit the formal grammar..."

Is that also your invention? <<

What? Would you say "fitted"? "It fitted [sic] the formal grammar?"

Boy, you are clueless.
beneficii   Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:11 pm GMT
Pos,

>>Please remember, do not dictate the law to me, son. Your argument above sounds like the ones I've heard many nonnatives use when they've made an error in usage. <<

Actually, I'm curious. What arguments do you hear "many nonnatives use when they've made an error in usage"?
Divvy (Blackpool, UK)   Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:38 am GMT
<You have to understand, "Rename A to B" (where A represents the original name and B represents the new name) does not sound wrong to native speakers of English.>

It sounds wrong to me.
Guests   Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:41 am GMT
<<Why don't you come out from behind your guest label? >>

Why don't you respect that label? BTW, haven't seen you question other guests. Now why is that? And, for all we know you could also be Kef. Right?
M56   Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:49 am GMT
Pos and other nonnatives, it has been shown that "rename to" is used by native speakers in a certain area of usage, i.e. the IT world. Therefore, it must be acceptable to some native speakers, be it as jargon, which it certainly is. The problem with Beneficii's use above is one of incorrect register, genre and/or text type. He/she used it in normal communication, when it is normally reserved for and restricted to the above register, etc..

Maybe it is no longer grammatically incorrect, but both native and nonnative users should be aware of register, as well as grammar. So, Bebenfici''s use was inappropriate, not ungrammatical.
Dolly   Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:53 am GMT
<<I remember I hated it, and would just go with my ear, but apparently the teachers didn't think it fit the formal grammar of it enough and dinged me. >>


It sounds odd to me too. Is it American English?

I'd use "it fitted". Why wouldn't you?
Native to the core   Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:54 am GMT
it fitted
it would fit
*it fit
Dolly   Mon Jul 30, 2007 8:27 am GMT
Is this then OK, natives?

"He reanimated the dog to life."
Guest   Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:10 am GMT
<?? "it fit"??

"it fit the formal grammar..."

Is that also your invention? >

What's wrong with "it fit"?
Guest   Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:22 am GMT
<What's wrong with "it fit"? >

????
furrykef   Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:41 am GMT
<< How about it? I can't find any examples of rename + preposition "to". Where are they? >>

Antimoon didn't turn it into a URL correctly. Either copy and paste the full URL in your web browser, or put this into google (with quotes): "rename * to" site:microsoft.com

(Don't forget the site:microsoft.com part, which must be outside the quotes.)

<< Hey, guys, can we also use "replace" with the preposition "to"? >>

I can't think of an example where I would.

<< Maybe Kef would say "replace this dish to the kitchen". >>

No, because I never use "replace" that way. I might say "replace the plastic dish with a porcelain one" -- using "replace" to refer to an exchange. Or I might say "I need to replace my watch", implying the exchange: putting a new watch in place of the old one.

<< ?? "it fit"??

"it fit the formal grammar..."

Is that also your invention? >>

I see nothing wrong with this either.

<< "He reanimated the dog to life." >>

No, I wouldn't say that. For one thing, it seems redundant, since "reanimated" already implies bringing it to life, but using "reanimated" without "to life" may sound strange out of context... I'd just say "He brought the dog back to life," or "He revived the dog," or something like that.

- Kef
Pos   Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:06 am GMT
<No, I wouldn't say that. For one thing, it seems redundant, since "reanimated" already implies bringing it to life, but using "reanimated" without "to life" may sound strange out of context... I'd just say "He brought the dog back to life," or "He revived the dog," or something like that.>

Interesting. You'd use "to" with rename, but not with "reanimate". Where is the logic, the system?

<<<< ?? "it fit"??

"it fit the formal grammar..."

Is that also your invention? >>

I see nothing wrong with this either. >>

Really? Should I look to Microsoft again?

LOL!
Dolly   Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:20 am GMT
I agree with Pos, there seems to be no logic in your argument regarding "rename". As said, rename also implies "assign to".
Guest   Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:21 am GMT
<Really? Should I look to Microsoft again?

LOL!>

All you have to do is check dictionary.com. "fit" is listed as a past tense of "to fit".
Dolly   Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:42 am GMT
Are these OK, then?

The tailor fit the trousers by shortening them.

Specialized training fit her for the job.