|
|
Thu Jul 03, 2008 21:09 pm No X is so ... that ...[don't/won't/should not]... |
|
|
| I think "won't" works. The implication is "if you look long or hard enough." |
|
Barb_D I'm here quite often ;-)
Joined: 13 Jun 2008 Posts: 231
|
|
Fri Jul 04, 2008 13:19 pm No X is so ... that ...[don't/won't/should not]... |
|
|
Any of the variations of (1) is perfectly grammatical.
"No problem is so big that you don't find a solution to it." = Mister, you find a solution to any problem, no matter how big it is!
"No problem is so big that you won't find a solution to it." = Mister, you're so good at solving problems that you'll find a solution to any problem, no matter how big it is!
"No problem is so big that you shouldn't find a solution to it." = You shouldn't ignore problems or be intimidated by them. No matter how big they are, you should find some kind of solution.
All of the variations are perfectly grammatical. |
|
Jamie (K) I'm a Communicator ;-)
Joined: 24 Feb 2006 Posts: 4227 Location: Detroit, Michigan, USA
|
 |
Sat Jul 05, 2008 2:32 am No X is so ... that ...[don't/won't/should not]... |
|
|
Dear Barb_D and Jamie (K),
I appreciate your help and comments.
Unfortunately and regrettably, we don't learn what kind of cognition our choice of a modal in an embedded clause (as in "Work hard so that you [may/can/should/will] pass the test." corresponds to. So we tend to fool ourselves that the resulting differences in meaning can be small enough to ignore.
Thank you
Seiichi MYOGA |
|
Seiichi MYOGA I'm new here and I like it ;-)
Joined: 02 Jul 2008 Posts: 27
|
 |
|
| no two languages are so similar that they can be considered... | It is not true that any... |