| Pages in topic: [1 2 3] > |
English grammar Thread poster: Jolanda Teuniss
|
|---|
Why is it more common to say....Breakfast is a good start TO the day, instead of....Breakfast is a good start OF the day?
I know intuitively that the first sentence is used more often, however I am doing a translation for a Dutch company and they insist on using 'OF'....
I don't know why I prefer 'TO'.
Is there an explanation?
| | | |
S Kelly
Local time: 00:56
Member (2012)
Italian to English
+ ...
The correct form is " start to the today"
It is not a possessive i.e. the breakfast does not belong to the day.
Your client is wrong.
| | | |
Andriy Yasharov 
Ukraine
Local time: 02:56
Member (2008)
English to Russian
+ ...
| Breakfast is a good start to the day | Feb 13, 2017 |
[Edited at 2017-02-13 10:17 GMT]
[Edited at 2017-02-13 10:17 GMT]
| | | |
Sometimes I find the best way to deal with stubborn customers like this is to offer an alternative phrasing, like "Breakfast is a great way to start your day"
| | |
|
|
|
Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 00:56
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| "I don't know why I prefer ..." | Feb 13, 2017 |
Jolanda Teuniss wrote:
I don't know why I prefer 'TO'.
It's something I think we all come across, maybe more so in English than other languages.
You certainly have to convince your client that you're right. Maybe substituting other verbs would help. Using 'make' might not convince them, but 'give' should. Also, replacing 'start' with 'introduction' might make the need for 'to' clearer. Those arguments don't really hold water, but they may help convince the client.
| | | |
Kay Denney
France
Local time: 01:56
French to English
|
Tony M
France
Local time: 01:56
Member
French to English
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Grammatical differences between NL and EN | Feb 13, 2017 |
I think one of the problems here is that in languages that can (almost!) freely concatenate nouns together like DE — and to the best of my knowledge, NL too, at least to some extent — it is very difficult for native speakers of such languages to understand that in EN it is not natural to use the noun group 'start-of-the-day' because we consider 'start' to be the whole direct object of the main verb, and 'to the day' only the indirect object.
One can to some extent understand thi... See more I think one of the problems here is that in languages that can (almost!) freely concatenate nouns together like DE — and to the best of my knowledge, NL too, at least to some extent — it is very difficult for native speakers of such languages to understand that in EN it is not natural to use the noun group 'start-of-the-day' because we consider 'start' to be the whole direct object of the main verb, and 'to the day' only the indirect object.
One can to some extent understand this if you consider that we would indeed say "The start of the race was delayed..." where 'start-of-the-race' this time is indeed a perfectly valid subject noun group.
Of course, there is another point to bear in mind: whilst 'dawn' or 'sunrise' might be considered the 'start-of-the-day', in sense terms, 'breakfast' could not be; so it would lead to a rather Pinter-esque non sequitur. Hence the options 'get your day off to a good start' etc. might be the best way to side-step the issue.
[Modifié le 2017-02-13 12:58 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
| Time vs. Manner | Feb 13, 2017 |
I'm not a native speaker, but in my opinion it's a matter of nuances of meaning. The way I see it, if you just want to refer to a specific point in time, you could use "of", while with "to", it seems to me you're actually referring more to the way you're starting the day (its "quality") rather than to the beginning of the day in itself (I guess you would probably never say "At the start to the day...").
E.g.
"He's been working on that since the start of the day." -> From the m... See more I'm not a native speaker, but in my opinion it's a matter of nuances of meaning. The way I see it, if you just want to refer to a specific point in time, you could use "of", while with "to", it seems to me you're actually referring more to the way you're starting the day (its "quality") rather than to the beginning of the day in itself (I guess you would probably never say "At the start to the day...").
E.g.
"He's been working on that since the start of the day." -> From the moment the day started
"Drinking in the morning is not a good start to the day." -> X is not a good way to start the day
At any rate, you could change the wording, as others suggested, or send the client some of the countless examples you can find online (including dictionaries).
"start to: There’s no better start to the day than a healthy breakfast." - http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/start_2
"a perfect start to the day" - http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/start_2
"It was not a good start to the day." - http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/beginning
"Best Start to the Day" - http://www.kelloggs.com/en_US/nutrition/best-start-to-the-day.html ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
neilmac
Spain
Local time: 01:56
Spanish to English
+ ...
| A Dutch oven | Feb 13, 2017 |
Your client is mistaken. A clear example of "the customer is NOT always right"...
| | | |
It's something you also find in phrases like "alternative ending to the film".
I don't know what it's called as a point of grammar. All I know is that a native speaker of English would never say "a good start of the day" or "a surprise ending of the film".
Another good example of why it's best to translate only into one's native language.
| | | |
| If Proz is anything to go by... | Feb 13, 2017 |
Elizabeth Tamblin wrote:
It's something you also find in phrases like "alternative ending to the film".
I don't know what it's called as a point of grammar. All I know is that a native speaker of English would never say "a good start of the day" or "a surprise ending of the film".
Another good example of why it's best to translate only into one's native language.
... nearly everyone in the Netherlands is or claims to be a native English speaker. And those who aren't or don't claim to be translate into English anyway. And they often assume they know English far better than we do. After all, it's an anyone can do it language. All this has been discussed before in http://www.proz.com/forum/kudoz/21666-english_who_needs_the_natives.html
[Edited at 2017-02-13 13:38 GMT]
| | | |
mariealpilles
France
Local time: 01:56
Member (2014)
English to French
+ ...
As a linguist specialist, without hesitation, I can tell you that "to" is a projection, a look to the future, hence going to school. "Of" expresses a part of something, hence soup is a part of the meal.
I hope this answers your query.
| | |
|
|
|
| "start to" vs "start of" | Feb 13, 2017 |
I do not know either, as a point of grammar, but it seems to be that we would generally say "_a_ (something) start _to_", and "_the_ start _of_".
I don't know if this helps you at all :/
Actually, by googling ""start to" "start of"" I have found this page which may help a little: http://www.spotlight-online.de/node/8387/results
| | | |
Another good reason to rewrite things like this, rather than just argue your case, is that other non-English readers might also think it's strange/wrong even though it isn't, leaving a bad impression.
| | | |
Toon Theuwis (X)
Belgium
Local time: 01:56
English to Dutch
+ ...
writeaway wrote:
... nearly everyone in the Netherlands is or claims to be a native English speaker. And those who aren't or don't claim to be translate into English anyway. And they often assume they know English far better than we do.
Then you should watch this hilarious video. People in The Netherlands are being interviewed by an alleged BBC journalist who wants to know "how it comes that the Dutch speak so well English"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-S_XbHQw9I
| | | |
| Pages in topic: [1 2 3] > |
Login to reply/comment 
