"There is nothing that she won't do."

Forums: English, Grammar, Esl, English Grammar
Email this Topic • Print this Page

"There is nothing that she won't do for a tan"

Is the underline clause a relative clause or an extraposed subject?
Can I paraphrase it like this, "She won't do nothing for a tan" or "That she won't do for a tan is nothing" ?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 2 • Views: 885 • Replies: 15

[+3] - engineer - 06/17/2013If you want to rephrase it, it would be "she will do anything for a tan."
[+3] - engineer - 06/17/2013It's a relative clause. This is a confusing sentence because it is essentially a double negative. Nothing - won't do => will do anything.

@hothead2629,

If you want to rephrase it, it would be "she will do anything for a tan."

1 Reply

@engineer,

So is the underline clause a relative clause or an extraposed subject?

1 Reply

@hothead2629,

Quote:

Can I paraphrase it like this, "She won't do nothing for a tan"

Collo for "She will expend no effort whatever in order to tan," and yes collo is often contradictory. However, we'd say "nothin' "

Quote:

or "That she won't do for a tan is nothing" ?

Very awkward. Furthermore might be misunderstood to mean, "She wouldn't do that because a tan is insignificant, "("that" unspecified while it'd need "….do, for…..")

1 Reply

@dalehileman,

Dale, that was entirely confusing, and in my view, wrong.

Engineer is right.

Quote:

There is nothing that she won't do for a tan

Hothead, you have not understood this.

It means she is so keen to get a tan, she will go to any lengths.
She will do anything to get that tan.

2 Replies

@hothead2629,

It's a relative clause. This is a confusing sentence because it is essentially a double negative.

Nothing - won't do => will do anything.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

entirely confusing, and in my view, wrong

What specifically Mac, and how

0 Replies

@McTag,

It's not that I don't understand the meaning of the sentence; I just want to know the grammatical function of the clause because I thought that relative clause are supposed to be able to be paraphrased by turning the antecedent of "that" into the object of the clause, and when I tried it, it looked confusing. "She won't do nothing"

1 Reply

@engineer,

I understand now. Thanks engineer for your reply.

0 Replies

@hothead2629,

Quote:

It's not that I don't understand the meaning of the sentence; I just want to know the grammatical function of the clause because I thought that relative clause are supposed to be able to be paraphrased by turning the antecedent of "that" into the object of the clause, and when I tried it, it looked confusing. "She won't do nothing"

My word, my goodness.

I've been a fairly successful user of this language for a number of years, and I've never had to try to tackle such a thing. Why do people make up such turgid rules?

anyway

"She won't do nothing" could indicate she will do something, or she might do anything. I want to meet this girl.

Wink

2 Replies

@McTag,

Quote:

"She won't do nothing" could indicate she will do something, or she might do anything.

In a literal and purely grammaticlal sense Mac, yes it could. However--over here anyhow--from time immemorial "She won't do nothin' " means she won't do anything

Quote:

I want to meet this girl.

I don't think you'd like her

0 Replies

@McTag,

Quote:

I've been a fairly successful user of this language for a number of years, and I've never had to try to tackle such a thing. Why do people make up such turgid rules?

McTag, McTag, McTag.

One should understand that you don't have to be able to describe the intricacies of language in order to perform the intricacies of language. Little children do it daily and often.

The rules are already there and the ones that are real aren't made up. There has been a serious effort, after centuries of folks repeating the most inane absurdities, to rectify the situation by accurately describing [not "making up"] the complexities of language.

1 Reply

@JTT,

So there I am, patronised again, even after posting a fairly light-hearted remark.

JTT, why don't you just **** off?

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

So there I am, patronised again, even after posting a fairly light-hearted remark.

Better use more emoticons because it's getting harder and harder to tell when you are serious, McTag.

I'd be pleased to hear that,

Quote:

I've been a fairly successful user of this language for a number of years, and I've never had to try to tackle such a thing. Why do people make up such turgid rules?

was all just a big joke, but you've advanced this notion more than once.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Every gentleman knows: when he is invited to **** off, off he should ****.

1 Reply

@McTag,

You'd love to be let off the hook, AGAIN. Sorry, McTag, but opinions just don't cut it, especially opinions wherein reality is completely ignored.

0 Replies

"There is nothing that she won't do."

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know