Embedded Files
Дата публикации: Feb 21, 2016 4:15:9 PM
hardly / scarcely / barely / no sooner
Hardly, scarcely and barely can all be used to say that something is only just true or possible.
They are used with words like any and anyone, with adjectives and verbs, and are often placed between can, could, have, be, etc. and the main part of the verb:
They have sold scarcely any copies of the book.
I barely recognized her.
His words were barely audible.
I can hardly believe it.
*I hardly can believe it.
Hardly, scarcely and barely are negative words and should not be used with not or other negatives:I can’t hardly believe it.
You can also use hardly, scarcely and barely to say that one thing happens immediately after another:
We had hardly/scarcely/barely sat down at the table, when the phone rang.
In formal, written English, especially in a literary style, these words can be placed at the beginning of the sentence and then the subject and verb are turned around:
Hardly/Scarcely had we sat down at the table, when the phone rang.
Note that you usually use when in these sentences, not than.
You can also use before:
I scarcely had time to ring the bell before the door opened.
No sooner can be used in the same way, but is always used with than:
No sooner had we sat down at the table than the phone rang.
Hardly and scarcely can be used to mean ‘almost never’, but barely is not used in this way:
She hardly (ever) sees her parents these days. She barely sees her parents these days.
No sooner … than, Hardly…when
If the second event occurs immediately after the first, we can express that idea using the structure no sooner … than.
Note that in this structure no sooner introduces the event that occurred first.
No sooner had I arrived at the station than the train came. (= I came first and the train arrived right after me.)
No sooner had we heard the noise than we rushed to the spot.
No sooner had she finished one project than she started working on the next.
No sooner had I closed my eyes than I fell asleep.
Note that did is also possible in this structure.
No sooner did I arrive at the station than the train came.
No sooner did we hear the noise than we rushed to the spot.
When we begin a sentence with a negative word, we put the auxiliary verb before the subject.
No sooner had she read the letter than she started crying. (NOT No sooner she read the letter than she started crying.)
Note that when and before are not possible in this structure.
Hardly and scarcely
It is possible to express the same idea using hardly/scarcely…when.
Hardly had I reached the station when the train came.
Scarcely had I reached the station when the train arrived.
As soon as
This structure is also used with the same meaning.
As soon as I arrived at the station, the train came.
As soon as she finished one project, she started working on the next.
Inversion after "so", "such", "as"
So unhappy did the boy look that we gave him all the sweets that we had. = The boy looked so unhappy that we gave him all the sweets that we had.
Таким несчастным выглядел мальчик, что мы дали ему все конфеты, которые у нас были. = Мальчик выглядел таким несчастным, что мы дали ему все конфеты, которые у нас были.
Such was her disappointment that she started to cry. – Her disappointment was so strong that she started to cry.
Таким было её разочарование, что она начала плакать. – Её разочарование было таким сильным, что она начала плакать.
Owls live in tree hollows, as do squirrels. – Owls and squirrels live in tree hollows.
Совы живут в дуплах деревьев, как и белки. – Совы и белки живут в дуплах деревьев.
As was the custom, three fighters and three shooters were chosen.
Как следовало по обычаю, были избраны три бойца и три стрелка.
Subject-auxiliary inversion after SO + adverb / adjective and SUCH
When adverbial or adjectival phrases starting with so are placed at the beginning of the sentence for emphatic effect, the subject and auxiliary are inverted:
So quickly did he run that the others couldn't catch up with him. (He ran so quickly that the others couldn't catch up with him.)
So strong was the wind that we couldn't open the window. (The wind was so strong that we couldn't open the window.)
So + adjective can be replaced with such:
Such was the wind that we couldn't open the window. (The wind was such that we couldn't open the window.)
Such are conditions on the mountain that exposed skin can become frostbitten in only minutes.
Such was her astonishment that she leaned against the wall, incapable of making another move
Such was the force of her presence that what came after her was defined in terms of her absence.
Inversion in condition clauses
Certain condition clauses (if-clauses) can be cast without any conjunction such as if or unless, instead using subject–auxiliary inversion to indicate their meaning.
The principal constructions are as follows:
In the first conditional (where the condition clause expresses a possible future condition), inversion can be applied to the form of the condition clause constructed using should:
If you feel hungry, ... (usual condition clause; present tense with future meaning)
If you should feel hungry, ... (should form of the condition clause)
->
Should you feel hungry, ... (inverted form)
In the second conditional (where the condition clause expresses an unlikely or counterfactual present/future condition; this may also occur in the mixed conditional), inversion is possible in the case where the verb is were – the past subjunctive:
If she were here, ... (usual condition clause)
->
Were she here, ...(inverted form)
As a special case of the above, when a condition clause based on a different verb (normally with hypothetical future reference) is formulated using the were to construction, inversion is again possible (provided were and not was is used):
If you shot, ... (usual condition clause; past tense)
If you were to shoot, ... (were to construction)
->
Were you to shoot, ... (inverted form)
In the third conditional (where the condition clause expresses a counterfactual past condition; this may also occur in the mixed conditional), the condition clause formed with the auxiliary had can be inverted:
If he had written, ... (usual condition clause; past perfect)
->
Had he written, ... (inverted form)
The above can be written with the were to have construction, inversion once again possible.
If he were to have written, ... (were to have construction)
->
Were he to have written, ... (inverted form)
Inversion is also possible when the present subjunctive be is used (e.g. "Be he called on by God..." for "If he be called on by God..."), but this is archaic usage for condition clauses; it is still occasionally found in dependent clauses expressing "no matter whether ...", e.g. "Be they friend or foe ..." (equivalent to "Whether they be friend or foe ...")..
+
(also if it were not for) - если бы не, только благодаря ... мы ...
Used in forming a clause expressing that a specified person or thing prevented a particular outcome:
‘were it not for the strikes, we would have seen much better results’
‘I would have had fun on the vacation were it not for this’
We would know nothing about the relationship were it not for recent researches
if it were not for/if it had not been for - used for saying who or what prevented something from happening
If it hadn’t been for the two men who rescued me, I’d probably have drowned.
If it weren’t for the fact that he’s my father, I’d accuse him in public.
If it hadn't been for Miranda, I would still be looking for a suitable house = Without Miranda, I would never have managed to find a house that suited me.
+
see IS. Conditionals
Had it not been for his foresight in ensuring everybody had lifejackets, everyone on board would have drowned.
But for his foresight, everyone on board the yacht would have drowned.
Were it not for your kindness, I'd still be living in that tiny bed-sit in the town centre.
But for your kindness, I'd still be stuck in that tiny flat in the town centre.
But for your help, I wouldn't have finished my work yeasterday.
ONLY AFTER, ONLY IF, ONLY IN THIS WAY etc., NOT UNTIL
When only after, only if, only in this way etc. are placed at the beginning of the sentence for rhetorical effect, the subject and auxiliary are inverted:
Only after lunch can you play. (You can only play after lunch.)
Only after finishing your homework can you play. (You can only play after you finish your homework.)
Only after you have finished your homework can you play. (You can only play after you have finished your homework.)
Only by guessing can you solve this puzzle. (You can only solve this puzzle by guessing.)
Only if everybody agreed would I accept this position. (I would only accept this position if everybody agreed.)
Only in this way does this machine work. (This machine only works in this way.)
Only then did they discover his secret. (They only discovered his secret then.)
Only when he needed some help did he call me. (He only called me when he needed some help.)
Only when I filled my glass did I notice that it was broken. (I only noticed that my glass was broken when I filled it.)
The last sentence can be rephrased as:
Not until I filled my glass did I notice that it was broken. (I didn't notice that my glass was broken until I filled it.)
If only is followed by the subject at the beginning of the sentence, there is no inversion:
Only you can understand. (No one else can understand.)
Complete explanation here
+ here
Эмфатическая инверсия
He had hardly had dinner when smb called him
Hardly had he had dinner, when ...
Hardly had she sat down when a very stout gentleman flopped into the chair opposite hers, (to sit down, to flop) (Mansfield)
Hardly had Elinor take more than half a dozen steps... when a hand fell on her arm from behind
Had he scarcely read three pages when he was interrupted.
No sooner had Ms Betsy got(ten) to know that Mrs Copperfield had given birth to a son than she went away from home.
Hardly had I stayed in the room for five minutes than the door opened and she entered.
Речевые модели Эмфатическое инвертирование
see 20120210 - Speech patterns.doc
Вопрос:Почему логическое выделение второстепенных членов предложения (= все что следует за глаголом = дополнения и обстоятельства), если их перенести в начало предложения, потребует и “вопросительный” (инвертированный) порядок слов?
Задание: Выполните Emphatic Inversion, перенеся выделенную часть высказывания в начало предложения, и переведите его.
She knew so very little about it.
+
а это тоже пример эмфатической инверсии?
So, out Finn would go and they take off their coats and fight hard.
So, out Finn would go and they take off their coats and fight hard. ⇐ So, Finn would go out and they take off their coats and fight hard.
Это частичная/неполная инверсия в довесок модальному would (= модальность persistence) для эффекта quasi-eye-rhyme = типа действие в не-нигилистической реальности так быстро происходит, что даже в лингвистической реальности послелог бежит перед паровозом - самим глаголом, чтобы визуально go и take сблизились также близко как и в предметной реальность и были почти внахлест.
Вопросы: Как такой эффект возникает с т.з. закона оппозиции? Как перевести фразу сохранив семантику частичной/неполной инверсии?
И только (лишь) Финн выходил, как сразу они снимали куртки и дрались.
+
?
Napoleon (beside himself):. ..Once more, and only once, will you give me those papers or shall I tear them from you by force! (Shaw)
see also the other inversion structures there:
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse