It

Question

e.gIt's good when her efforts are recognized.("It" refers to the things described in the following when-clause: her efforts being recognized)Now about this:When a new person is added in an office, almost everyone will move his desk so that the newcomer will have his share of space. This may mean moving from positions that have been occupied for a long time, and away from favorite views from the window. The point is that the office will make its own adustments voluntarily. In fact, it is a signal that they have acknowledged the presence of the new person when they start rearranging the furniture. What does "it" refer to? The things described in front (i.e. the office making its own adjustments voluntarily)? Or the things described in the following when-clause (i.e them starting rearranging the furniture)?

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

I think "it" refers to all the changes, collectively, that are being made in the office.

GPY · Answer

TakaIt's good when her efforts are recognized.("It" refers to the things described in the following when-clause: her efforts being recognized)

I don't totally agree with that explanation. I think that this is a dummy "it" with no specific referent in the text. You could say, a bit vaguely, that it refers to "the situation" that arises as a result of her efforts being recognised.

TakaWhen a new person is added in an office, almost everyone will move his desk so that the newcomer will have his share of space. This may mean moving from positions that have been occupied for a long time, and away from favorite views from the window. The point is that the office will make its own adustments voluntarily. In fact, it is a signal that they have acknowledged the presence of the new person when they start rearranging the furniture.

In my opinion this is, in the sense intended, very strictly a faulty construction that would nevertheless be widely accepted. It only appears faulty when one tries to drill down into exactly what "it" really means. In my opinion, it does not have a specific referent, and neither does it properly serve as a dummy "it". (In a sense that I believe is not intended, "it" could refer to making adjustments voluntarily.) I can well imagine that different people will have different views about this question.

Taka · Answer

GPY You could say, a bit vaguely, that it refers to "the situation" that arises as a result of her efforts being recognised.

Same idea here, but just in different words. You think these "it"s are of the same kind, don't you?

I like it when you sing.
"Can I smoke here?" "I'd prefer it if you didn't,"

(In a sense that I believe is not intended, "it" could refer to making adjustments voluntarily.)

But no matter what the intention, you don't think it's possible to interpret it in the same way as above, do you? It's impossible to take "it" as a word which refers to "the situation" that arises as a result of what is described in the following "when-clause", isn't it?

GPY · Answer

TakaSame idea here, but just in different words. You think these "it"s are of the same kind, don't you?I like it when you sing."Can I smoke here?" "I'd prefer it if you didn't,"

Yes, pretty much.

TakaBut no matter what the intention, you don't think it's possible to interpret it in the same way as above, do you? It's impossible to take "it" as a word which refers to "the situation" that arises as a result of what is described in the following "when-clause", isn't it?

In the right context it's OK. For example, "It's difficult when you're not here" is OK because it's "the resulting situation" that is difficult, In your example, though, I don't think that "the resulting situation is a signal" totally makes sense or is really what is meant. I think what is meant is that the act of rearranging the furniture is the signal, and that is why I think the formulation is strictly speaking not exactly right (though, as I say, in practice few people would notice any error).

Taka · Answer

GPY In your example, though, I don't think that "the resulting situation is a signal" totally makes sense or is really what is meant. I think what is meant is that the act of rearranging the furniture is the signal

Great explanation! Logical and persuasive.

Then why can't we say now it's clear that "it" in question refers to the things described in front (i.e the office making its own adjustments voluntarily) when that option is crossed out? What is it that makes you hesitate to say "it" clearly refers to them?

You said:

In a sense that I believe is not intended, "it" could refer to making adjustments voluntarily.

What do you think is the sense intended?

GPY · Answer

TakaThen why can't we say now it's clear that "it" in question refers to the things described in front (i.e the office making its own adjustments voluntarily) when that option is crossed out? What is it that makes you hesitate to say "it" clearly refers to them?

If "it" refers to making adjustments voluntarily then it sounds as if making adjustments voluntarily is a separate signal-creating activity going on at the same time as rearranging the furniture. I think that can't be the intended meaning. The intended meaning must, I think, be that the act of starting to rearrange the furniture is the signal (and is an example of making adjustments voluntarily).

Originally I thought there was, strictly speaking, a grammatical problem with "it" referring to the act of starting to rearrange the furniture (even though that is evidently the intended meaning). However, I am beginning to question whether that is true. It could be that I was wrong, and we should just adopt that explanation.

By the way, I have worked in offices before, but I have never seen one that would behave anything like as described here!

Taka · Answer

GPY If "it" refers to making adjustments voluntarily then it sounds as if making adjustments voluntarily is a separate signal-creating activity going on at the same time as rearranging the furniture. I think that can't be the intended meaning.

I'm not sure if I understand your "separation." Could you elaborate it?

Originally I thought there was, strictly speaking, a grammatical problem with "it" referring to the act of starting to rearrange the furniture (even though that is evidently the intended meaning). However, I am beginning to question whether that is true.

Are you saying that you are beginning to think that there is no problem with "it" referring to the things described in the following when-clause even though grammatically "it" refers to the resulting situation?

By the way, I have worked in offices before, but I have never seen one that would behave anything like as described here!

It's about the typical American way of accepting a new person in the office, so things in the UK might be different.

GPY · Answer

TakaI'm not sure if I understand your "separation." Could you elaborate it?

If "it" meant "making adustments voluntarily" then the resulting sentence would probably mean "When they start rearranging the furniture, [then, in the resulting situation] making adjustments voluntarily is a signal that they have acknowledged the presence of the new person". Another possible interpretation is to treat "acknowledged the presence of the new person when they start rearranging the furniture" as an action, and have the sentence mean "Making adjustments voluntarily is a signal that this action has occurred/is occurring". I don't think either of those meanings is what the author intends.

TakaAre you saying that you are beginning to think that there is no problem with "it" referring to the things described in the following when-clause even though grammatically "it" refers to the resulting situation?

I think it's clear that the author intends "it" to mean "rearranging the furniture". I think my earlier quibbles about whether this was strictly correct may have been too fussy, and that we should probably just accept this usage without complaint.

Taka · Answer

GPYIf "it" meant "making adustments voluntarily" then the resulting sentence would probably mean "When they start rearranging the furniture, [then, in the resulting situation] making adjustments voluntarily is a signal that they have acknowledged the presence of the new person".

Right. I agree that this interpretation is impossible.

Another possible interpretation is to treat "acknowledged the presence of the new person when they start rearranging the furniture" as an action, and have the sentence mean "Making adjustments voluntarily is a signal that this action has occurred/is occurring".

I seem to have a little difficulty understanding the idea that this doesn't really make sense. Could you help me digest it? Why don't you think it really make sense?

GPY · Answer

TakaI seem to have a little difficulty understanding the idea that this doesn't really make sense. Could you help me digest it? Why don't you think it really make sense?

It's too convoluted and complicated to grasp, especially when compared to the simple alternative.

It

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions