|
|
"be going to and conditionals
Leech has said that "be going to" is incompatible with conditionals, giving this sentence as an example.
*If you accept that job, you‘re never going to [gonna] regret it. But I can't see why "be going to" should be incompatible there. Can you?
<<*If you accept that job, you‘re never going to [gonna] regret it.>>
I don't see anything wrong with this sentence. However, I'd probably say "If you accept that job, you'll never regret it." instead. I think it just boils down to which form you hear more often. I don't think there are really any rules for this kind of thing.
<<I think it just boils down to which form you hear more often.>>
??????????????????????
>>If you accept that job, you‘re never going to [gonna] regret it.<<
This is perfectly grammatical to me, I must say, even though like Guest I would probably actually phrase it as "If you accept that job, you'll never regret it." I myself have not even heard of such being ungrammatical in any English dialects myself.
<<
<<I think it just boils down to which form you hear more often.>> ?????????????????????? >> What I was trying to say above is that perhaps "Leech" is just suggesting that you use the more common construction in this case (the one with " 'll " rather than "gonna"). Maybe the form with "gonna" is frowned upon in the UK, Canada, NZ, or OZ?
>>Maybe the form with "gonna" is frowned upon in the UK, Canada, NZ, or OZ?<<
At least here in North America, "gonna" is *extremely* common in normal speech; actually, its absence would be quite strange outside of formal speech here.
<<But is the "to" a preposition in "be going to"? >>
Yes. "to" is always a preposition. It is used to introduce the infinitive/supine, which is descended from an Old English verbal noun (eg. "to cumenne/cumenni" , dative of earlier germanic "quemanjo" - 'coming'). This association in Mod English may no longer be recognized, but it is a relic of the preposition 'to' plus a verbal noun.
>>But is the "to" a preposition in "be going to"?<<
If one is really speaking on a very historical level, it was one during the Old English period, where it was used with the inflected infinitive of a given verb in dative case. However, it became grammaticalized as an infinitive marker during the Middle English period, which it remains in classical English. But then, in modern spoken English it has become bound to "going" as what is effectively a purposive affix (even though it is not written out as an affix), which normally associated with a stem change in "going" outside of careful speech.
If you really think about it this way:
I am going to sit = I am on my way (i.e. going) to a sitting [down]; I am going to a sit-down; I am going to an act/action of sitting then it can be thought of as a preposition toward an action and it still echoes the original sense. But I think the term "particle" used to introduce the infinitive is proper and conventional discription. |