Thread: Is it a mistake?

The exact boundaries of what is climate and what is weather are not well defined and depend on the application.

I found this sentence in Wikipedia. Why "is" are put before the nouns and not after? There're no direct questions there, so why? I'm totally confused.

I guess it must be "The exact boundaries of what climate is and what weather is are not well defined ..."

Originally Posted by Vincent Tailors

The exact boundaries of what is climate and what is weather are not well defined and depend on the application.

I found this sentence in Wikipedia. Why "is" are put before the nouns and not after? There're no direct questions there, so why? I'm totally confused.

I guess it must be "The exact boundaries of what climate is and what weather is are not well defined ..."

what climate is ... - какой климат есть ... (что за климат есть ...)

I think there are 2 questions in this sentence.

"what is climate" and "what is weather"

Not really. I don't see any questions here.

"Точные границы того, что есть климат и что есть погода точно не определены".

Это ошибка и я не вижу ничего удивительного здесь - Википедия открыта для редактирования для любого юзера. Ты можешь например исправить эту ошибку.

Это не ошибка. Так звучит культурнее. Это - стиль!

Носители английского, вы согласны со мной, да?

Originally Posted by basurero

Это не ошибка. Так звучит культурнее. Это - стиль!

Носители английского, вы согласны со мной, да?

Do textbooks lie then?

Originally Posted by Vincent Tailors

Do textbooks lie then?

No they don't.
"Advanced Grammar in Use":
"...if the original question begins what, which, or who followed by be + complement, we can put the complement before or after be in the report:
• 'Who was the winner?' —> I asked who the winner was. (or ...who was the winner. )"

Originally Posted by Vincent Tailors

The exact boundaries of what is climate and what is weather are not well defined and depend on the application.

I found this sentence in Wikipedia. Why "is" are put before the nouns and not after? There're no direct questions there, so why? I'm totally confused.

I guess it must be "The exact boundaries of what climate is and what weather is are not well defined ..."

The phrase "what is" is equivalent to "that which is" in this sentence. There's a small distinction between "The exact boundaries of what is climate" and "The exact boundaries of what climate is." It's not a mistake.

"What is" before a noun doesn't always imply a question, i.e. "He spoke of what is happiness." There's a minor distinction btwn "He spoke of what is happiness" and "He spoke of what happiness is." The former, happiness is the predicate and new information. The latter, the description of what constitutes happiness is the predicate or attribute.

Thank you all! Now I understand.

Originally Posted by Vincent Tailors

"Точные границы того, "что есть климат?" и "что есть погода?" точно не определены".

Originally Posted by Vincent Tailors

The exact boundaries of what is climate and what is weather are not well defined and depend on the application.

I found this sentence in Wikipedia. Why "is" are put before the nouns and not after? There're no direct questions there, so why? I'm totally confused.

I guess it must be "The exact boundaries of what climate is and what weather is are not well defined ..."

"what is climate and what is weather" - there is nothing wrong with this order. In this context, it would sound weird if it was "what climate is and what weather is."
But, Wikipedia is wrong stating that there is no (large) difference between climate and weather. There is a huge difference, it's like difference between климат and погода in Russian.

Originally Posted by mashamania

The phrase "what is" is equivalent to "that which is" in this sentence. There's a small distinction between "The exact boundaries of what is climate" and "The exact boundaries of what climate is." It's not a mistake.

"What is" before a noun doesn't always imply a question, i.e. "He spoke of what is happiness." There's a minor distinction btwn "He spoke of what is happiness" and "He spoke of what happiness is." The former, happiness is the predicate and new information. The latter, the description of what constitutes happiness is the predicate or attribute.

Yes, I think mashamania has got it exactly right. Though it might help learners of English to know that the first version ("He spoke of what is happiness") is in my opinion much much less common than the second version. I'd be very surprised to find it anywhere other than in high-level philosophical, discursive or literary texts.

Белка.

It's not an error... Its just asking question in the form on a question. A bit unusual but not completely wrong. Ever watched Jeopardy?

"What is, asking answering a question in the form of a question."

CORRECT!!!

Это риторические вопросы

Originally Posted by belka

Originally Posted by mashamania

The phrase "what is" is equivalent to "that which is" in this sentence. There's a small distinction between "The exact boundaries of what is climate" and "The exact boundaries of what climate is." It's not a mistake.

"What is" before a noun doesn't always imply a question, i.e. "He spoke of what is happiness." There's a minor distinction btwn "He spoke of what is happiness" and "He spoke of what happiness is." The former, happiness is the predicate and new information. The latter, the description of what constitutes happiness is the predicate or attribute.

Yes, I think mashamania has got it exactly right. Though it might help learners of English to know that the first version ("He spoke of what is happiness") is in my opinion much much less common than the second version. I'd be very surprised to find it anywhere other than in high-level philosophical, discursive or literary texts.

Белка.

Yes, I also think mashamania gave a good explanation.

And Белка is correct... normally this "style of grammar" is only used in textbooks for school, University and high-level texts. It's not a colloquial style... it's academic. And it is intended to "trigger" thinking in the reader or student.

No worries... Most native English-speakers wouldn't recognize the difference.

P.S. I like Dogboy's 'Jeopardy' analogy.