0
Usenet Posted 19 years ago
Usage
Somebody blew out the hatch
In one scene from Star Trek episode ('The Naked Now'), the following exchange occurs:
Riker: Somebody blew out the hatch. They were all sucked out into space. Data: Correction, sir... that's blown out.
Riker: Thank you, Data.
Data: A common mistake, sir.
What exactly is the mistake here? If the phrase was 'Somebody has blew out the hatch', then of course the correct form would be 'Somebody has blown out the hatch'. But there were no auxiliary verbs.
Thank you!
Ilya V. Goz
Riker: Somebody blew out the hatch. They were all sucked out into space. Data: Correction, sir... that's blown out.
Riker: Thank you, Data.
Data: A common mistake, sir.
What exactly is the mistake here? If the phrase was 'Somebody has blew out the hatch', then of course the correct form would be 'Somebody has blown out the hatch'. But there were no auxiliary verbs.
Thank you!
Ilya V. Goz
Top answer
[nq:1]In one scene from Star Trek episode ('The Naked Now'), the following exchange occurs: Riker: Somebody blew out the hatch. then of course the correct form would be 'Somebody has blown out the hatch'. [/nq] You're right, but Cappie might have said "Somebody's blew ~~", but the "'s" was only noticed by Data because of his superior hearing.
- [nq:1]In one scene from Star Trek episode ('The Naked Now'), the following exchange occurs: Riker: Somebody blew out the hatch.
- then of course the correct form would be 'Somebody has blown out the hatch'.
- [/nq] You're right, but Cappie might have said "Somebody's blew ~~", but the "'s" was only noticed by Data because of his superior hearing.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
12 Answers
0
[nq:1]In one scene from Star Trek episode ('The Naked Now'), the following exchange occurs: Riker: Somebody blew out the hatch. ... then of course the correct form would be 'Somebody has blown out the hatch'. But there were no auxiliary verbs.[/nq]
You're right, but Cappie might have said "Somebody's blew ~~", but the "'s" was only noticed by Data because of his superior hearing.
You're right, but Cappie might have said "Somebody's blew ~~", but the "'s" was only noticed by Data because of his superior hearing.
00
[nq:1]In one scene from Star Trek episode ('The Naked Now'), the following exchange occurs: Riker: Somebody blew out the hatch. ... would be 'Somebody has blown out the hatch'. But there were no auxiliary verbs. Thank you! Ilya V. Goz[/nq]
He means they were blown out, not sucked out.
Chris R
He means they were blown out, not sucked out.
Chris R
00
[nq:1]In one scene from Star Trek episode ('The Naked Now'), the following exchange occurs: Riker: Somebody blew out the hatch. ... course the correct form would be 'Somebody has blown out the hatch'. But there were no auxiliary verbs. Thank you![/nq]
No, what Data was correcting was the notion that "they were sucked" into space. Technically, lower pressure areas do not "suck" air from higher-
No, what Data was correcting was the notion that "they were sucked" into space. Technically, lower pressure areas do not "suck" air from higher-
00
[nq:2]In one scene from Star Trek episode ('The Naked Now'), ... the hatch'. But there were no auxiliary verbs. Thank you![/nq]
[nq:1]No, what Data was correcting was the notion that "they were sucked" into space. Technically, lower pressure areas do not ... blew out the hatch. They were all blown out into space" is the scientifically correct way to say what happened.[/nq]
Just hold your *
[nq:1]No, what Data was correcting was the notion that "they were sucked" into space. Technically, lower pressure areas do not ... blew out the hatch. They were all blown out into space" is the scientifically correct way to say what happened.[/nq]
Just hold your *
00
[nq:2]No, what Data was correcting was the notion that "they ... space" is the scientifically correct way to say what happened.[/nq]
[nq:1]Just hold your ****** horses, there! If you want to say "blown" rather than "sucked", fine (it just means you're ... there was a pressure gradient, and that they were "equalised" into space. The blowing and sucking are subjective, not "scientific".[/nq]
[nq:1]Just hold your ****** horses, there! If you want to say "blown" rather than "sucked", fine (it just means you're ... there was a pressure gradient, and that they were "equalised" into space. The blowing and sucking are subjective, not "scientific".[/nq]
00
[nq:2]Just hold your ****** horses, there! If you want to ... into space. The blowing and sucking are subjective, not "scientific".[/nq]
[nq:1]Tell us that when a storm blows a tree down on your car.[/nq]
Excellent point but I don't think I've ever declared "the wind blew the tree down" to be the "scientifically correct way to say what happened".
... And besides, the redshirts wer
[nq:1]Tell us that when a storm blows a tree down on your car.[/nq]
Excellent point but I don't think I've ever declared "the wind blew the tree down" to be the "scientifically correct way to say what happened".
... And besides, the redshirts wer
00
[nq:2]Tell us that when a storm blows a tree down on your car.[/nq]
[nq:1]Excellent point but I don't think I've ever declared "the wind blew the tree down" to be the "scientifically correct way to say what happened". ... And besides, the redshirts were pulled out by wires.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -[/nq]
This thread sucks ... or is that blows?
[nq:1]Excellent point but I don't think I've ever declared "the wind blew the tree down" to be the "scientifically correct way to say what happened". ... And besides, the redshirts were pulled out by wires.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -[/nq]
This thread sucks ... or is that blows?
00
[nq:2]No, what Data was correcting was the notion that "they ... space" is the scientifically correct way to say what happened.[/nq]
[nq:1]Just hold your ****** horses, there! If you want to say "blown" rather than "sucked", fine (it just means you're not kinky enough). The "scientifically correct way to say what happened" is that there was a pressure gradient, and that they were "equalised" i
[nq:1]Just hold your ****** horses, there! If you want to say "blown" rather than "sucked", fine (it just means you're not kinky enough). The "scientifically correct way to say what happened" is that there was a pressure gradient, and that they were "equalised" i
00
[nq:2]Excellent point but I don't think I've ever declared ... wires.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -[/nq]
[nq:1]This thread sucks ... or is that blows?[/nq]
Blowed if I know.
... Although the alternative to that sounds like more fun.
[nq:1]This thread sucks ... or is that blows?[/nq]
Blowed if I know.
... Although the alternative to that sounds like more fun.
00
[nq:2]Just hold your ****** horses, there! If you want to ... a pressure gradient, and that they were "equalised" into space.[/nq]
[nq:1]Almost, but not quite. The air pressure was equalised between inside and outside. The people were blown (propelled) into space by the moving air.[/nq]
Which was "drawn" into the lower-pressure area, not blown.
[nq:1]It is similarly "scientifically wro
[nq:1]Almost, but not quite. The air pressure was equalised between inside and outside. The people were blown (propelled) into space by the moving air.[/nq]
Which was "drawn" into the lower-pressure area, not blown.
[nq:1]It is similarly "scientifically wro
0
Related Questions