I will occasionally have an argument

[5jj]

Please let me know where you think what I've said is wrong, or badly worded.

Sorry, but i am giving up - probably ;-).

There are too many ideas floating around in this thread for my ageing brain to cope with. I read through the whole thread a couple of minutes ago and I am not absolutely certain that I agree 100% with everything I wrote! If the thread carries on, I shall follow it with interest, but I am unlikely to participate any more.

 

[Alexey86]

are in some way predictable outcomes

Doesn't in some way predictable mean probable?

So it's the predictability of the outcome that is characteristic.

I know that every time I go to the park there is a probability that I will find new plants. I can't really predict whether I will find some or not.
I only dare to predict that tomorrow will be Sunday.

But the version without will lacks the modality. It lacks the speaker's understanding of how the outcome is predictable. In the version with will, the speaker is saying that the outcome is characteristic.

Thank you! The difference between the variants is clearer to me now. I would just change predictable to probable.

 

[jutfrank]

Sorry, but i am giving up - probably ;-).

There are too many ideas floating around in this thread for my ageing brain to cope with. I read through the whole thread a couple of minutes ago and I am not absolutely certain that I agree 100% with everything I wrote! If the thread carries on, I shall follow it with interest, but I am unlikely to participate any more.

Fair enough. Though you should know that I always value your perspective on difficult questions like this very highly.

 

[Alexey86]

I would just change predictable to probable.

After having thought a bit, I think these are two sides of the same coin: subjective and objective. Predicting is what the subject is doing, while probability is an objective characteristic of the outcome.

 

[jutfrank]

Doesn't in some way predictable mean probable?

No, not at all. Not if by 'probable' you mean 'more likely than not'.

I know that every time I go to the park there is a probability that I will find new plants. I can't really predict whether I will find some or not.
I only dare to predict that tomorrow will be Sunday.

When we say that the sun will rise tomorrow, the prediction comes only from the repeatability of outcome by observation—it has every morning so far, so we can assume it will again. The certainty we have is not a fact about nature itself but rather a conclusion we draw from observation. The outcome is predictable, with a very high degree of probability—that's exactly what certainty is, in my view, where it applies to inductive reasoning. (Mathematical/logical certainty is quite different.)

Words such as occasionally, always, often, etc., when paired with modals such as will, modify only the frequency with which we can expect certain outcomes.

I would just change predictable to probable.

But that's not right, unless by 'probable' you just mean 'having a certain probability'. The trouble here is that the word probable is normally understood to mean 'having a greater chance of happening than not happening', which is not what the speaker means, as shown by his use of the modifier occasionally. With the plants example, you can predict that there's a low probability, based on observations of all previous outcomes. That's still a prediction.

Anyway, I'm glad we've gotten somewhere, at least.

 

[jutfrank]

After having thought a bit, I think these are two sides of the same coin: subjective and objective. Predicting is what the subject is doing, while probability is an objective characteristic of the outcome.

I've just read this. I think I see what you mean, yes.

 

[Alexey86]

But that's not right, unless by 'probable' you just mean 'having a certain probability'.

Yes, that's what I mean. I agree probable itself is misleading.

After having thought a bit, I think...

Not the best style.

What do you think of Charlie's opinion (#39): "What changes might be what Jutfrank calls its aspect, and I might not fully appreciate the significance of that. My unschooled opinion is that his use of will signals that he's imagining, recalling, or visualizing. Without will, he would simply reporting. (Jut, if you're reading this, you can tell me whether I'm on the right track.)"

 

[jutfrank]

What changes might be what Jutfrank calls its aspect, and I might not fully appreciate the significance of that. My unschooled opinion is that his use of will signals that he's imagining, recalling, or visualizing. Without will, he would simply reporting. (Jut, if you're reading this, you can tell me whether I'm on the right track.)

But his use of will there certainly doesn't say anything about his mood. With or without it, it would be clear that he enjoys showing his kid things in the microscope and talking about them — a typical dad!

First of all, I'll aplogise to you Charlie for not answering before. For some reason I didn't actually see your post. I've no idea why—I'm a bit blind today. Sorry.

I don't think I used the word 'aspect' in this thread, apart from to say that I don't think this can be understood very usefully with aspect.

Um, whether you're on the right track—I think maybe you are, yes. The modality (what is expressed with the modal verb will) tells us something about the speaker's attitude to the facts rather than about the facts themselves. Hmm, maybe I could explain what I mean like this:

a) The sun rises tomorrow at 6:35.

This is presented as a fact. There's no modality expressed. I think this is what Charlie may be getting at when he says without will it's "simply reporting".

b) The sun will rise tomorrow at 6:35.

This is different in that there is a modality expressed by will. You could understand that the difference is that the speaker is saying something about his understanding of the facts. In other words, he's saying that he's making a prediction rather than stating a mere fact. The 'certainty' is a function of the speaker's attitude about the probability of the sun rising at that time. This certainty is in the speaker's mind, if you like, rather than in some way in nature itself. I think that's what Alexey is getting at with the subjective/objective distinction.

I think I'm at that point now where I have no idea if my elaborations are making everything clearer or muddier than it was before!

By the way, Charlie, when Alexey mentions 'mood', he doesn't mean mood in the sense of feeling happy or annoyed or whatever—it's a technical linguistics term. I like to use 'modality' instead.

And Alexey, I recall you promised your next question would be an easy one! (Still, I'm thankful it's not about the word the.) :-D

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Glad I asked!

 

[Alexey86]

I think that's what Alexey is getting at with the subjective/objective distinction.

Yes. Prediction is about the subject's certainty.

By the way, Charlie, when Alexey mentions 'mood', he doesn't mean mood in the sense of feeling happy or annoyed or whatever—it's a technical linguistics term. I like to use 'modality' instead.

Yes, I mean modality. I should've pointed out the distinction more clearly. I see now how mood can be ambiguous.

And Alexey, I recall you promised your next question would be an easy one!

Actually it is. I fully agree with you after just a couple of replies.:-D