Thread: My questions about English

Originally Posted by oldboy

Will who be appeared in the film: Jack or Mary?

Я думаю, что правильный вопрос должен звучать так:
Who will appear in the film? - Кто появится в фильме?
Это future simple, используется вспомогательный глагол will + первая форма глагола. А твой вариант, по-моему неправильный. Я не могу объяснить почему, просто в книжках так не пишут, видимо твое предложение в принципе построено неверно. Ну и по существу вопроса: Джек заплатил Мэри миллион долларов, чтобы появиться в фильме. Т.е. в фильме появится Джек.

Originally Posted by oldboy

Jack paid Mary a million dollars to appear in the film.
Will who be appeared in the film: Jack or Mary?

I believe it would be Mary who is going to be in the film. Jack is paying her to appear. Typically, you are not paying someone so that you can work, you are paying them to do work or in this case, appear in the film.

Another example of that type of sentence would be the following one that is much clearer as it includes the name of the film:

20th Century Fox paid $550,000 to the Smithsonian Institution for the right to use its name in "Night at the Museum 2: Escape From the Smithsonian," the Washington Post reported.

So, the Smithsonian is getting paid by 20th Century $550,000 so that 20th Century can use the name Smithsonian.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

I believe it would be Mary who is going to be in the film. Jack is paying her to appear. Typically, you are not paying someone so that you can work, you are paying them to do work or in this case, appear in the film.

Ouch, I think that I understand written English quite well. Is there a way to Jack's appearance in the film? Maybe he failed casting and paid for his role?

Well, let's simplify example:

Uwe Boll paid dev to appear in Postal 3

Who will appear in Postal 3? Uwe Boll or developers? I guess it will be Uwe Boll. Am I right?

Logically the question cannot be answered. The sentence is grammatically ambiguous, either one could appear in the film. Without context you cannot tell.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

Logically the question cannot be answered. The sentence is grammatically ambiguous, either one could appear in the film. Without context you cannot tell.

hehehe... I was using logic to answer the question. But you are correct, if the sentence was not about appearing in a film, it would be more difficult to answer the question.

Originally Posted by delog

Ouch, I think that I understand written English quite well. Is there a way to have the answer be Jack's appearance in the film? Maybe he failed casting and paid for his role?

Well, let's simplify example:

Uwe Boll paid dev to appear in Postal 3

Who will appear in Postal 3? Uwe Boll or developers? I guess it will be Uwe Boll. Am I right?

The sentence should be

Uwe Boll paid the producers to appear in Postal 3

In that sentence it would be harder to determine who was going to be in the film, Uwe or "the producers" but I would go with Uwe due to the "logic" of the sentence because now you have the entity that is making the film being paid.

But this whole thing goes back to understanding the business to make the best choice for the answer and in the past OldBoy has asked us questions from a book or somewhere else.

If I were to pick from the two choices, FOR that sentence, I would pick the person who is getting paid as actors get paid to appear...even if it is just $1

George Clooney was paid $1 each for writing, directing, and acting in Good Night, and Good Luck, which cost $7.5 million to make.

bitpicker, rockzmom, delog thanksa lot.

Like bitpicker I also incline to that it's impossible to say 100% who is appearing in the film.