Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. AlexAD's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Russian
      • Home Country:
      • Belarus
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Feb 2011
    • Posts: 668
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #1

    You are (being) almost inaudible.

    Hello.

    Can I say, 'You are (being) almost inaudible' when I really can't hear a man who I am talking with? Is the part in brackets mandatory?

    Thanks, Alex.
    Last edited by AlexAD; 13-Jan-2012 at 12:17.

  2. JohnParis's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • France

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 773
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #2

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    "Inaudible" is an adjective, and it does not seem to modify, describe, identify or quantify anything in your sentence. Furthermore, an adjective usually precedes the noun or the pronoun which it modifies.
    I think you need to rephrase your sentence. I understand what you are trying to say, but you are not expressing it grammatically.
    John

  3. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 23,265
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #3

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    Quote Originally Posted by AlexAD View Post
    Hello.

    Can I say, 'You are (being) almost inaudible' when I really can't hear a man who I am talking with? Is the part in brackets mandatory?

    Thanks, Alex.
    "You are almost inaudible" sounds fine to me. "You" stands for the noun "your voice". (Just at the moment, I can't think of the literary term for using the whole to mean a part; but the sentence is legitimate, and grammatical to me).

    No, "being" should not go there.

    PS: If you're talking on the internet or a phone, etc. and reception is not good, you can also say things like "You're breaking up", which is not to be taken literally.

  4. AlexAD's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Russian
      • Home Country:
      • Belarus
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Feb 2011
    • Posts: 668
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #4

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    JohnParis, thank you for pointing this out.

    So what if I replaced the adjective inaudible with the inaudibly adverb?
    I have learned from the OALD examples that I can say, 'Your voice is almost inaudible' but it sounds to my ears a little abundant (can I say that?).
    So I just want to figure our can that example can be reduced to a simpler form.

    P.S. Raymott's point seems sensible to me as well. So what would we do about these two versions ?

  5. JohnParis's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • France

    • Join Date: Oct 2011
    • Posts: 773
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #5

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    "Your voice is almost inaudible" is a perfect sentence. It clearly and succinctly explains exactly what you want to say.

    "...but it sounds to my ears a little abundant (can I say that?) No, abundant isn't the word you are looking for.
    Redundant means no longer needed or useful; superfluous, but I'm not certain that is what you wish to say either because "inaudible" means "unheard" and "almost unheard
    " is not redundant.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Jan 2012
    • Posts: 902
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #6

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raymott View Post
    "You're breaking up", which is not to be taken literally.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • England

    • Join Date: Jun 2010
    • Posts: 21,479
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #7

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    I'd just say 'I can hardly hear you'.

    Rover

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 11,818
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #8

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    How about "Would you please speak up?" (Or "...talk louder?")

  6. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,135
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #9

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raymott View Post
    (Just at the moment, I can't think of the literary term for using the whole to mean a part;
    synecdoche (literature) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

  7. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 23,265
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #10

    Re: You are (being) almost inaudible.

    Thanks. Hmm, strange that the two opposite concepts should have the same name.
    Another example would be "England play(s) Australia tomorrow at Lords", in which "England" and "Australia" refer to their respective cricket teams. I thought there was a more specific term for that.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •