I like how they say those things.

[Phaedrus]

(1) I like how they say those things.

Would you agree with me that (1) is ambiguous? Can it not mean either (1a) or (1b)?

(1a) I like the way that they say those things. (i.e.: I like the manner in which they say those things.)
(1b) I like it that they say those things. (i.e.: I like [the fact] that they say those things.)

If it can, should we say that one meaning is proper and the other informal?

There is no context, incidentally. I could make up an infinite number of variations. The question is purely grammatical.

Thank you.

 

[probus]

I agree it's ambiguous and could mean either. In addition to context, in speech the intonation would be a further clue as to which meaning is intended.

 

[jutfrank]

Yes, it is ambiguous. As soon as I read the first line of your post, I'd already guessed what your question was going to be about.

Concerning your actual question, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'proper'. Do you mean to say that the proper interpretation is the one that is most likely, given no other context?

If I understand correctly what you're doing, I might suggest introducing additional examples, such as:

I like how she speaks.
I like how she completely ignores him.

I think the first above example is very likely to be interpreted in the first (manner) way whereas the second is very likely to be interpreted in the second ('the fact that') way. My point is that meaning comes only loosely from sentence structure. Proper interpretation is not a grammatical concern.

 

[Phaedrus]

Concerning your actual question, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'proper'. Do you mean to say that the proper interpretation is the one that is most likely, given no other context? . . . My point is that meaning comes only loosely from sentence structure. Proper interpretation is not a grammatical concern.

In asking whether one is the "proper meaning" and the other an "informal meaning," I mean to ask whether, grammatically, the sentence with "how" really means (1a) rather than (1b). Sometimes people worry about whether they should use "like that-[clause]" or "like it that-[clause]," and they are usually told that the British consider "like that-[clause]" incorrect, even though many Americans are OK with it; so they settle for "like it that-[clause]" or for "like the fact that-[clause]" instead.

Meanwhile, there is this structure with "like how-[clause]," which seems to me a bit more natural-sounding than both "like that-[clause]" and "like it that-[clause]." My only worry about it, which keeps me from recommending it to others as a genuine alternative to "like that-[clause]" and "like it that-clause," is simply that somebody might try to argue that "like how-[clause]" really has the manner meaning and only idiomatically the "like that-[clause]" meaning. But perhaps I'm mistaken about that.

 

[jutfrank]

In asking whether one is the "proper meaning" and the other an "informal meaning," I mean to ask whether, grammatically, the sentence with "how" really means (1a) rather than (1b).

I'm not completely sure what counts as 'grammatical' meaning, and what exactly it is.

Sometimes people worry about whether they should use "like that-[clause]" or "like it that-[clause]," and they are usually told that the British consider "like that-[clause]" incorrect, even though many Americans are OK with it; so they settle for "like it that-[clause]" or for "like the fact that-[clause]" instead.

I can't see a problem with like that-[clause]. I've never heard anyone say it's incorrect if it's used properly. It's very common, as you know.

... is simply that somebody might try to argue that "like how-[clause]" really has the manner meaning and only idiomatically the "like that-[clause]" meaning.

I'd like to hear them try! And I'd be interested in the theory of meaning that supports their view. I certainly fancy my chances convincing them otherwise.

 

[emsr2d2]

I think it's fairly natural to use "like/hate how" to mean the same as "like/hate that".

I like how he always produces the best present for any occasion.
(I'm not saying that I like the way he produces the best present, but the fact that he does.)

I hate how you always manage to insult me and pretend you're complimenting me.
(I wouldn't be saying that I specifically hate the way the other person does it. I would mean that I hate the fact that they do it at all.)

 

[Phaedrus]

Great point, ems! It caused me to realize that the same thing happens with "know how" and "remember how," too:

Be sure to take your wallet. You know how they always ask to see some form of identification.

I remember how they kept asking for more.

 

[Phaedrus]

Follow-up question:

Are sentences like (2) below, with "the way [that]" rather than "how," ambiguous in the same way?

(2) I like the way (that) they say those things.

That is, can "the way [that]" go either way, too? I feel that, for me, it can; but something about this bothers me.

(2a) I like the way in which they say those things.
(2b) I like the fact that they say those things.

 

[jutfrank]

With your example (2), yes.

I think the optional linker that disambiguates it to the 'the fact that' interpretation, though.

 

[Phaedrus]

I think the optional linker that disambiguates it to the 'the fact that' interpretation, though.

That's interesting. If 'that' disambiguates to the 'the fact that' interpretation, what do you suppose the default interpretation is in the case of the zero relative?

"I like the way you walk. I like the way you talk.
I like the way you walk; I like the way you talk, Susie Q." (source)

I can only get the 'the way/manner in which' interpretation there. Would the addition of 'that' change that for you ("I like the way that you walk . . .")?

 

[jutfrank]

I too only get the manner interpretation there, with or without 'that'. This is a very unambiguous case, I think.