get to the barn

[donatta]

Czy ktoś spotkał się z takim wyrażeniem?
Teoretycznie może pochodzić z końca lat czterdziestych.
Teoretycznie może być idiomem, przenośnią bądź skrótem myślowym.

Mam swój typ, ale czekam na sugestie.

[bunkum]

...(grain) barn. livestock barn, cattle barn, timber barn, furniture barn, antique barn, street-car barn (=zajezdnia)...
or any large, drab room or building

[felusiak1]

I think she knows what barn is.

[bunkum]

> I think she knows what barn is.

I don't think you know what is barn. (right word order)

[felusiak1]

I think you need to study harder

[donatta]

I know what barn is.
I also know the above word order is the correct one.

By the way, get to the barn means to die.

[felusiak1]

Never heard that one

[donatta]

Me neither. And I couldn't find it anywhere, apart from this particular book.
Guessed from the context :-).

[bunkum]

> I know what barn is.
> I also know the above word order is the correct one.

No, it is not, and you are wrong.
The above word order... is not the right word order either.
The word order above would be the right word order.

In a nutshell, you are clueless on the word order issue.

> By the way, get to the barn means to die.

Yes, it could, but, by the same token, getting the barn out could mean throwing up and refinishing the barn could mean flushing the toilet once again after you have done your thing in there.
But I don't think you can wrap your head around all of this.

[felusiak1]

wow. is you is or is you ain't stubborn as a mule/

[donatta]

Bunkum, take it easy or you'll give yourself a heart attack.
1. I know what is barn - is a sentence a pre-intermediate student of English would use, an intermediate student of English could use, but not anyone who speaks English fluently.
2. above can used both in the attributive and predicative sense so stop getting excited.
3. I didn't ask about geting the barn out or refinishing the barn or any expression with barn other than get to the barn. So tell me, which part of "what does 'get to the barn mean'" you didn't get?

[bunkum]

> Bunkum, take it easy or you'll give yourself a heart attack.
> 1. I know what is barn - is a sentence a pre-intermediate student of Eng
> lish would use, an intermediate student of English could use, but
> not anyone who speaks English fluently.

You are ignorant of basic English grammar. Read up.

> 2. above can used both in the attributive and predicative
> sense so stop getting excited.

No.
Above is still an adverb, and I don't care what liberated newspeak grammarians push to you. Above-mentioned is still half-acceptable as an attributive adjective, bur above alone ain't.
End of story.

> 3. I didn't ask about geting the barn out or refinishing the barn
> or any expression with barn other than get to the barn. So tell me, whi
> ch part of "what does 'get to the barn mean'" you didn't get?
The whole thing.
I say get to the barn means get to the restroom. Prove it doesn't. Got it?

[felusiak1]

Oh my God! You're a fcuking asshole.
Eat shit.
I hope you know what asshole is.

[joasia_44]

Bunkum, mylisz dwie rzeczy.
Zdanie podrzędne dopełnieniowe ma formę zdania twierdzącego bez inwersji.
Czyli:
What do you want? I don't know WHAT I WANT.
Tu wydawałoby się, że będzie zawsze szyk orzeczenie - podmiot.
Ale:
angielski.na6.pl/zdania_podrzednie_zlozone
poczytaj na końcu tego artykułu o poszczególnych rodzajach:

He is smarter than I thought.
She isn?t as pretty as everybody says.

Podsumowując:

I'm sure, that I love you.

ALE

You have to be sure who you love. (I wanna know what love is....)

Wszystkie absolutnie poprawne, angielski nie jest tak prosty, jak by się wydawać mogło :)

[bunkum]

You joined the confused crowd.
Anyway, I will give it a try.

First answer any simple question of the type (Who/what/which)+(copula be)+(any noun complement)?
For example, What is a barn?

You can always answer this type of question in two ways:
(1) By defining barn: A barn (=subject) is a farm building for storing crops or housing livestock (everything after is is a complement). Mind you, here barn is the subject.
(2) By explaining: A cow barn (=subject) is a barn (=complement). A hay barn (=subject) is a barn (=complement)…. Again: here barn is a complement.

Now make two affirmative statements about what Felusiak doesn’t know while keeping in mind the two possible answer structures:
for answer (1): Felusiak doesn’t know what a barn is.
for answer (2): Felusiak doesn’t know what is a barn..

Version (1) is out of whack with the first two posts in this thread.

> Wszystkie absolutnie poprawne, angielski nie jest tak prosty, jak by się wydawa
> ć mogło :)
It is simpler than you think.
By the way, you tend to comma-splice.

[felusiak1]

Stubborn.
Let's substitute barn with it.
for answer (1): Felusiak doesn’t know what it is.
for answer (2): Felusiak doesn’t know what is it.

Check. Mate

[bunkum]

You don't know what is it can be paraphrased as You don't know what constitutes it.

It is so when the interrogative pronoun what is the subject of a what-clause.

Try again, and again, and one day you may get it:

Felusiak doesn’t know what constitutes a fool.
Wisper from offstage: Ignorance of his ignorance constitutes a fool.

Felusiak doesn’t know what a fool constitutes.
Wisper from offstage: Nothing, God willing.

[felusiak1]

GFY

[baba67]

Mowic na temat coś w rodzaju ad rem