I'm sorry to relieve your call

Question

Is the given sentence correct?I'm sorry to relieve your call.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

Sorry. It makes no sense whatever. Can you rephrase it to give us an idea of what it's supposed to mean? receive?

CJ

Jackson6612 · Answer

CalifJimSorry. It makes no sense whatever. Can you rephrase it to give us an idea of what it's supposed to mean? receive?

Question 1: It was supposed to mean that I'm sorry to terminate your call or hang up on you. I heard it somewhere.

Question 2:
What is the difference between the meaning of these sentences?
1: It makes no sense.
2: It makes no sense whatever.

Thank you for the help.

CalifJim · Answer

Jackson6612It was supposed to mean that I'm sorry to terminate your call or hang up on you. I heard it somewhere.

I've never heard "relieve" used in that context.

Jackson6612What is the difference between the meaning of these sentences?
1: It makes no sense.
2: It makes no sense whatever.

whatever or at all add emphasis. absolutely no sense at all is even more emphatic.

CJ

Jackson6612 · Answer

Thank you, Jim. You can hear this usage between 8:04 and 8:10 on the following video. Perhaps, I heard it wrong.

Yankee · Answer

Hi Jackson

It does sound like she says "relieve this call", but I have never heard the word "relieve" used that way either.

I wonder whether she said or meant to say that she had to "leave this call". That would make more sense to me. On the other hand, I suspect she did feel a sense of relief when she finally hung up.

Jackson6612 · Answer

YankeeIt does sound like she says "relieve this call", but I have never heard the word "relieve" used that way either.

I wonder whether she said or meant to say that she had to "leave this call". That would make more sense to me. On the other hand, I suspect she did feel a sense of relief when she finally hung up.

Hi Amy,

Question 1:
What do you mean where you said or meant to say? Do you intend to say that she used relieve by mistake though she wanted to use leave instead? I also think it would have made a lot more sense if she had said Sorry, I have to leave your call.

Question 2:
Is this possible to have two or more questions in series separated with a comma, and, and or and all ending with the same single question mark? For example:

What do you mean where you said or meant to say and do you intend to say that she used relieve by mistake though she wanted to use leave instead, or...?

You used the word wonder in this sense: ''²wonder 2: transitive verb: to be curious or in doubt about'' (M-W's Col. Dic.).

²whether

used as a function word usually with correlative or or with or whether to indicate (1) until the early 19th century a direct question involving alternatives; (2) an indirect question involving stated or implied alternatives <decide whether he should agree or raise objections><wondered whether to stay>; (3) alternative conditions or possibilities <see me no more, whether he be dead or no — Shakespeare><seated him next to her whether by accident or design>

— whether or no or whether or not: in any case <they've only been married a very few weeks, whether or no — Thomas Hardy>

Question 3:
function word
:a word (as a preposition, auxiliary verb, or conjunction) expressing primarily grammatical relationship

How would you describe a grammatical relationship?

Question 4:
I would have written the phrase see me no more, whether he be dead or no as: see me no more, whether I be dead or no. In no way I'm trying to amend Shakespeare. I know I'm having a problem in understanding the text because I do not know the context. Perhaps some of you can contextualise the phrase so it makes some sense to a person like me.

Question 5:
I would have wirtten the phrase seated him next to her whether by accident or design as: seated himself next to her whether by accident or design''. Am I phrasing it the right way without altering the meaning? Perhaps you can make it more clear in meaning by changing it into a sentence.

Question 6:
Is there any difference in meaning between the given sentences?
1: They have only been married a very few weeks.
2: They have only been married for a very few weeks.

Please watch the following video if you have found my lengthy posting boring. I will ask a question about it in my next post.

Jackson6612 · Answer

Help, please.

Yankee · Answer

Hi Jackson

Jackson6612What do you mean where you said or meant to say? Do you intend to say that she used relieve by mistake though she wanted to use leave instead?

"Meant to say" = wanted or intended to say (but didn't).

Jackson6612Is this possible to have two or more questions in series separated with a comma, and, and or and all ending with the same single question mark?

Why not? If you only need one period/full stop for a compound sentence, why should things be any different for a "compound question"? As a rule, though, I don't think it would be a good idea to attempt more than two questions in a single sentence.

Jackson6612How would you describe a grammatical relationship?

Is it enough if I say "how things relate to each other grammatically in the context of a sentence or text"?

Jackson6612I would have written the phrase see me no more, whether he be dead or no as: see me no more, whether I be dead or no.

The word "be" is subjunctive. I don't know the broader context for that phrase, but without any context I would understand it to mean "not see me anymore, no matter whether he is dead or alive."

Jackson6612I would have wirtten the phrase seated him next to her whether by accident or design as: seated himself next to her whether by accident or design''.

"Seated him" suggests that someone showed him where to sit and/or made the decision where he should sit. Your revision changes the meaning because it removes the idea that someone else besides "him" was involved.

Jackson6612Is there any difference in meaning between the given sentences?
1: They have only been married a very few weeks.
2: They have only been married for a very few weeks.

.No, not really. Some people might object to omitting the word "for", but I like it better without.

Jackson6612 · Answer

Jackson6612²whether

used as a function word usually with correlative or or with or whether to indicate (1) until the early 19th century a direct question involving alternatives; (2) an indirect question involving stated or implied alternatives <decide whether he should agree or raise objections><wondered whether to stay>; (3) alternative conditions or possibilities <see me no more, whether he be dead or no — Shakespeare><seated him next to her whether by accident or design>

— whether or no or whether or not: in any case <they've only been married a very few weeks, whether or no — Thomas Hardy>

Question 3:
function word
a word (as a preposition, auxiliary verb, or conjunction) expressing primarily grammatical relationship

How would you describe a grammatical relationship?

Yankee.
Jackson6612How would you describe a grammatical relationship?
Is it enough if I say "how things relate to each other grammatically in the context of a sentence or text"?

A certificate of marriage expresses or stands for a relationship that two persons are legally married. The couple itself doesn't expresses any relationship. Am I correct?

I would have written the definition as: a word which has a grammatical relationship with other words in a sentence or text.

Jackson6612Question 4:
I would have written the phrase see me no more, whether he be dead or no as: see me no more, whether I be dead or no. In no way I'm trying to amend Shakespeare. I know I'm having a problem in understanding the text because I do not know the context. Perhaps some of you can contextualise the phrase so it makes some sense to a person like me.

Yankee
Jackson6612I would have written the phrase see me no more, whether he be dead or no as: see me no more, whether I be dead or no.
The word "be" is subjunctive. I don't know the broader context for that phrase, but without any context I would understand it to mean "not see me anymore, no matter whether he is dead or alive."

If I'm angry with someone then I might say to him ''don't see me anymore, no matter I be dead or alive''. This makes no sense to me to say ''don't see me anymore, no matter my neighbour be dead or alive''. What does it have to do with the third person? It's me who is requesting, warning, or ordaining not to see him so mentioning the death or aliveness of some other person is irrelevant.

Yankee
Jackson6612Is there any difference in meaning between the given sentences?
1: They have only been married a very few weeks.
2: They have only been married for a very few weeks.
No, not really. Some people might object to omitting the word "for", but I like it better without.

Do the following sentences have the same meaning?
1: I like it more without (for).
2: I like it better without (for)

Jackson6612Please watch the following video if you have found my lengthy posting boring. I will ask a question about it in my next post.

Can you, please, transcribe the conversation the ladies were having before Mr. Weatherman jumped in the scene?

Yankee · Answer

Hi Jackson

Jackson6612A certificate of marriage expresses or stands for a relationship that two persons are legally married. The couple itself doesn't expresses any relationship. Am I correct?

I'd say that is not a very appropriate comparison. However, I might say that a marriage license indicates a marital relationship between two people. You might also say that the license functions as a legal validation of a marital relationship, I suppose.

Jackson6612If I'm angry with someone then I might say to him ''don't see me anymore, no matter I be dead or alive. This makes no sense to me to say don't see me anymore, no matter my neighbour be dead or alive''. What does it have to do with the third person? It's me who is requesting, warning, or ordaining not to see him so mentioning the death or aliveness of some other person is irrelevant.

The first thing you should have done was to find the broader context for the phrase you quoted. That might have clarified things for you right away.

I see no inherent problem in using "he" in that phrase. It simply depends on the context and what the writer means. Perhaps the speaker intends to stay away from "him" (if "he" is still alive) and thus the speaker will never be seen by "him" again. Perhaps the speaker doesn't know for sure whether "he" is dead or alive, but obviously if "he" is dead, then "he" won't be able to see the speaker anymore.

Also note that the word "Don't" was not used in the quote, and the word "see" was not capitalized. Thus, there is no reason for us to assume that the quote was a complete sentence, much less a command. Maybe the quote omitted something such as "He will", for example.

Jackson6612Do the following sentences have the same meaning?
1: I like it more without (for).
2: I like it better without (for)

Yes, they mean the same thing.

I'm sorry to relieve your call

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions