it has rained four times since October.

[raymondaliasapollyon]

No, I definitely didn't say that. Maybe this is the source of your confusion. Read post #2 again. In the speaker's mind, May is conceived of as a point in time. In reality, this could be anywhere in the month, between the 1st and 31st.

I find the meaning "a point in time" a bit unclear. Is the whole month of May, or anywhere in the month, considered a point in time?

Right, now I see where you're going wrong. The sentence is very likely to mean that the last time it rained was in May, but it does not necessarily mean that.

An American told me the sentence ("Since May it has only rained once") means that it rained at least once in May, and has rained exactly once on June 1 or later. The time frame seems to have begun on June 1.

Do you think the sentence can mean something else?

This is the definition, yes. There's only one definition. And yes, you have to distinguish the difference between conceived points in time and periods of time. This is key to understanding this question.

Let's try to keep posts shorter by dealing with only one point at a time.

Dictionaries generally have (at least) two time-related senses for "since."

 

[jutfrank]

An American told me the sentence ("Since May it has only rained once") means that it rained at least once in May, and has rained exactly once on June 1 or later. The time frame seems to have begun on June 1.

Do you think the sentence can mean something else?

There's an important difference between what a speaker means or is likely to mean with an utterance (speaker meaning) and what a non-contextualised sentence means in itself (sentence meaning). Don't get these two kinds of 'meaning' mixed up.

If you're talking only about sentence meaning (which I gather you are), then Since May it has only rained once is very simple: There is a point in time labelled 'May' and there is another point in time understood as 'now'. In the period of time between those two points, only one instance of rain has occurred. Whether it rained in May is unknown.

However, it is very likely that if this sentence were uttered, the listener would assume that the speaker is saying that it did also rain in May. Otherwise, why would the speaker mention May at all? That's just an assumption, though. There is nothing within the grammar of the sentence that says that it rained in May (a period of 30 days). All we know is that it rained only once since May, where May is a point in time.

I find the meaning "a point in time" a bit unclear. Is the whole month of May, or anywhere in the month, considered a point in time?

Yes, this is hard to understand. Don't think of May as a month. Think of it as just an imagined point on a timeline.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

There's an important difference between what a speaker means or is likely to mean with an utterance (speaker meaning) and what a non-contextualised sentence means in itself (sentence meaning). Don't get these two kinds of 'meaning' mixed up.

If you're talking only about sentence meaning (which I gather you are), then Since May it has only rained once is very simple: There is a point in time labelled 'May' and there is another point in time understood as 'now'. In the period of time between those two points, only one instance of rain has occurred. Whether it rained in May is unknown.

Does that period of time include or exclude the month of May?

 

[jutfrank]

Does that period of time include or exclude the month of May?

No. It's just a period of time between two points in time, where the first point is referred to as 'May'. May is conceived as a point in time, not a month. You could think of it as a zero-dimensional point along a one-dimensional timeline.

This point in time, being referred to as 'May', will obviously be understood as existing some time within the month of May, including both the conceived beginning and end points of that month (the first day to the last day inclusive). Any other points outside of that range would not be called May.

However, interpreting speaker meaning, it is very likely that we would assume the speaker means that it has only rained once since the end of May, because if the last time it rained was still in May, it would be a very strange and misleading to say. In other words, we would interpret that the last time it rained was after the last day of May and the time before that was before the last day of May and after the first day of May.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

No. It's just a period of time between two points in time, where the first point is referred to as 'May'. May is conceived as a point in time, not a month. You could think of it as a zero-dimensional point along a one-dimensional timeline.

Why did you say "No"? I was asking an or-question.

This point in time, being referred to as 'May', will obviously be understood as existing some time within the month of May, including both the conceived beginning and end points of that month (the first day to the last day inclusive). Any other points outside of that range would not be called May.

So May is point in time, and it exists within the month of May? You have a rather unusual conception of May.
Why didn't you simply say "since May" refers to the period of time between some time within May and the present?

However, interpreting speaker meaning, it is very likely that we would assume the speaker means that it has only rained once since the end of May, because if the last time it rained was still in May, it would be a very strange and misleading to say. In other words, we would interpret that the last time it rained was after the last day of May and the time before that was before the last day of May and after the first day of May.

Do you know why it would be strange and misleading to say "Since May it has only rained once" to mean the event specified by "rained once" occurred in May, whereas it's perfectly natural to say "He has lived in Boston since May" to mean the event specified by "lived in Boston" began in May?

Also, since you distinguish between sentence meaning and speaker meaning and claim "Since May it has only rained once" can mean something other than what the American told me, could you think of a scenario for the sentence where the event specified by "rained once" occurred in May?

 

[jutfrank]

Why did you say "No"? I was asking an or-question.

It was a no to both options. Asking an either/or question was not appropriate. It neither includes or excludes.

So May is point in time, and it exists within the month of May?

It's conceived as a point in time in the speaker's mind. That doesn't mean it is a point in time. Don't confuse thought with reality. Stop thinking of May as a month. Think of it as a word referring to a thought (a point in time) in the speaker's mind.

You have a rather unusual conception of May.

We're talking about the speaker's conception of the word May when he makes the utterance.

Why didn't you simply say "since May" refers to the period of time between some time within May and the present?

Do you really want me to answer that? The short answer is that that was my best answer. The suggestion you offer would not have been strictly accurate. The point doesn't have to be within May. It could be the conceived end point of May also. This is crucial because it's part of what you're wondering about, I think.

Do you know why it would be strange and misleading to say "Since May it has only rained once" to mean the event specified by "rained once" occurred in May, whereas it's perfectly natural to say "He has lived in Boston since May" to mean the event specified by "lived in Boston" began in May?

Yes, I do. (I don't think you've got it right about the latter sentence by the way. It's not accurate to say that the event began in May. Strictly speaking, it's the period (the timeframe) that began in May. The event happens in the timeframe.)

Also, since you distinguish between sentence meaning and speaker meaning and claim "Since May it has only rained once" can mean something other than what the American told me, could you think of a scenario for the sentence where the event specified by "rained once" occurred in May?

I've been trying to but it's difficult. I think I just about can though, yes. Obviously, rather forced and unrealistic, however.

I've already spent over an hour trying to answer your questions in the best way I can and I don't get any sense of your gratitude. In fact, I get the impression again you don't particularly like what I'm saying. Is that correct? I don't really feel like carrying on.

I'll summarise one more time where I think you're confused: Remember that language uses words. These words are just sound signals that refer to thoughts in the mind. In the utterance in question, May is a word. You keep thinking of it as a month, which is why you can't understand what I'm saying. We know from the use of the word since that the word May is referring to a point in time. It is not referring to the whole concept of the period of the month of May.

I would make a similar point about other prepositions. For example, from...to. When you say from May to December, you have in mind those two words as beginning and end points on a timeline. You're not using those words to refer to two periods. The period is the duration between the two points. It doesn't matter whether you say from 1939 to 1945 or from the 12th to the 18th century. You're still referring to two points in time.

Try to think about what is going on in the speaker's mind. Don't get hung up on what you think are scientifically objective descriptions of the world.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

It was a no to both options. Asking an either/or question was not appropriate. It neither includes or excludes.

What do you mean by "neither includes nor excludes"? If we say "from A to B," the period of time either includes or excludes A. (And I think that's why "from A to B" can be qualified with "inclusive" to avoid confusion.)

It's conceived as a point in time in the speaker's mind. That doesn't mean it is a point in time. Don't confuse thought with reality. Stop thinking of May as a month. Think of it as a word referring to a thought (a point in time) in the speaker's mind.

It is not a problem to treat it as a point in time. But this figurative way of looking at the issue should be precise, and that means we have to know whether or not that point is included in the time frame. It's too metaphysical for me to think of May (a point in time) as existing within the month of May, as you described in post #26.

Do you really want me to answer that? The short answer is that that was my best answer. The suggestion you offer would not have been strictly accurate. The point doesn't have to be within May. It could be the conceived end point of May also. This is crucial because it's part of what you're wondering about, I think.

Isn't the end point of something also part of it, and hence within it?

Yes, I do. (I don't think you've got it right about the latter sentence by the way. It's not accurate to say that the event began in May. Strictly speaking, it's the period (the timeframe) that began in May. The event happens in the timeframe.)

Not accurate in your theory, but it is accurate enough for ordinary people to say the event of living in Boston began in May. When else do you think the person moved to Boston and started to live there? The difference in interpretation of the since-phrases between the "rained once" and 'moved to Boston" examples has to be explained anyway, regardless of what theory we have in mind.

I've been trying to but it's difficult. I think I just about can though, yes. Obviously, rather forced and unrealistic, however.

Doesn't that suggest that your theory leaves room for improvement? Your theory apparently permits a reading in which the rain occurred anywhere within the time frame, including May (I say "apparently" because you seem to be ambivalent as to whether May as a point in time should be considered to be included in the time frame) but in fact, people generally would not interpret "Since May it has only rained once" that way.

I've already spent over an hour trying to answer your questions in the best way I can and I don't get any sense of your gratitude. In fact, I get the impression again you don't particularly like what I'm saying. Is that correct? I don't really feel like carrying on.

I appreciate your willingness to discuss the topic with me, but your theory is too metaphysical and ambivalent for me to grasp. And frankly speaking, I doubt other native speakers can understand it.

 

[Tarheel]

Summary. You had a question. Jutfrank gave you an answer. Rather than accept his answer you chose to argue. What a waste of time!

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

Summary. You had a question. Jutfrank gave you an answer. Rather than accept his answer you chose to argue. What a waste of time!

Would you accept something that does not make sense to you?

 

[Tarheel]

If it doesn't make sense to you then say so. Endless arguing is pointless.

Before saying native speakers wouldn't understand his explanation maybe you should have asked one.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

If it doesn't make sense to you then say so. Endless arguing is pointless.

Before saying native speakers wouldn't understand his explanation maybe you should have asked one.

Well, I did say it is too metaphysical for me to understand. And arguing helps to expose the inadequacies of a theory.

And since you've offered to decipher justfrank's theory, could you please tell me what it means to treat May (a point in time) as existing within the month of May?

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

Tarheel didn't offer to do anything.

I took his statement "Before saying native speakers wouldn't understand his explanation maybe you should have asked one" to mean that he has something to offer in connection with deciphering justfrank's theory. If he was not offering to do anything, why did he bother making that statement? Making that statement with no action would be sheer pretense.

I'm a frank guy. If the above has offended anyone, I apologize.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

There is no pretence about anything in suggesting that before you wrote "I doubt other native speakers can understand it", it might have been a good idea to ask a native speaker about this. That seems reasonable enough to me.

Here's one way to settle the argument once and for all. All we have to do is answer a few questions. What does it mean to treat May (a point in time) as existing within the month of May? How does that move differ from simply treating May as a point in time? And if we agree that precision is a criterion of any scientific theory, why can't the beginning point of a time frame be considered to be either included in it or excluded from it?

 

[jutfrank]

I just wanted to be clear that the point in time referred to by May could be the very end point of the month of May. I didn't like your use of the preposition within because, strictly speaking, the two end points that mark the boundaries of a timeframe do not exist within that timeframe. That's quite crucial.

What does it mean to treat May (a point in time) as existing within the month of May? How does that move differ from simply treating May as a point in time?

I don't understand the questions. Are you quoting me here? Which post?

The point in time referred to as May exists within the month of May.

 

[jutfrank]

My 'theory' (it's not actually my theory) is very simple. I'll set it out again in stages.

It has only rained once since May.

1) There's a point in time in the speaker's mind called 'May', which sets the beginning of a timeframe that stretches up to the present moment.

2) The speaker is saying that in that timeframe, there has been only one occasion of rain.

3) It may be true (in fact very likely) that the beginning point of the timeframe, referred to as May, is also conceived as the previous occasion of rain. It may also be true (but very unlikely) that the previous occasion of rain was a long time before the beginning point of the timeframe.

4) We assume that the beginning point in time referred to as May was indeed some time within the calendar month of May.

I don't think that's too metaphysical to understand. I hope native speakers are able to follow what I'm saying.

 

[emsr2d2]

For me, "It has only rained once since May" means "It has only rained once since May finished", therefore it has rained only once since June 1st. I'm starting to think that even native speakers don't necessarily agree on what these kinds of statements mean.