2

Is there a difference in these two sentences, and if so, what is the difference?

  1. Immediately afterwards I remembered having met her.
  2. I remembered having met her immediately afterwards.

I think there is a difference but cannot identify what it is.

tchrist
  • 134,759
YDAU
  • 59
  • 1
    Related to, and probable duplicate of, one or another of: http://english.stackexchange.com/q/9600 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/9702 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/7128 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/13364 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/4016 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/5430 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/7128 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/83399 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/105747 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/38374 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/5466 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/28950 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/15301 – tchrist Jul 04 '13 at 15:33
  • After a quick scan, I'm not sure any of these deal with possible ambiguities. The OP doesn't tell us what the referencing event is, but in the second variant, the 'immediately afterwards' could be when the remembering or the meeting took place. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 04 '13 at 16:08
  • @EdwinAshworth I see what you mean: “(Yesterday I remembered) having met her” vs “I remembered (having met her yesterday)”. – tchrist Jul 04 '13 at 16:14
  • 3
    The second one has the usual attachment ambiguity. Normally intonation would clarify it, but in writing that's not possible. – John Lawler Jul 04 '13 at 16:15
  • 1
    Related: http://english.stackexchange.com/q/79724 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/7863 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/22483 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/16370 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/40847 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/16791 http://english.stackexchange.com/q/61839 – tchrist Jul 04 '13 at 16:23
  • @tchrist You're doing a better job than a duplicate file finder I once had. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 04 '13 at 16:38
  • @tchrist: Presumably you (and at least one other) have closevoted against Are there any rules on the positioning adverbs should take in a sentence? But I can't see anything in either that question or the answers thereto covering this particularly unusual ambiguity. And you've put up far too many other alternatives for me to wade through them all. I think the specific issue here concerns "order of precedence" when associating afterwards with some previously mentioned or implied reference time. – FumbleFingers Jul 04 '13 at 18:31
  • @John Lawler: Can you come up with a context where spoken intonation would always disambiguate? I can't make up my mind whether it's even possible to say my example #2 in a way that's totally unambiguous. But it seems to me it would normally still be ambiguous, even in speech. – FumbleFingers Jul 04 '13 at 18:37
  • Quite often, no doubt. The point is that in context, it's rarely an issue. Sentences outside of content are like fish out of water; you really can't see how they work. But they do. – John Lawler Jul 04 '13 at 19:25
  • @FumbleFingerst Yes, you're right: it was a premature closevote. The second set of related questions are better. – tchrist Jul 04 '13 at 20:26
  • @tchrist: Okay - I can't deny the *first* one of your *second* set (Is “Betty learned that Albert telephoned after Isaiah visited” ambiguous?) does embody the same type of ambiguity. I'm happy to closevote against that, but not against any others in your second list. Nor do I see much of relevance in the first question in your first list (Are there any rules on the positioning adverbs should take in a sentence?), despite the title. It doesn't even mention possible ambiguity. – FumbleFingers Jul 04 '13 at 21:30

1 Answers1

4

As John Lawler comments, "the second one has the usual attachment ambiguity".

I find it quite tricky to show that ambiguity - but first let's simplify things by replacing immediately afterwards with later, since it makes no difference to the issue under consideration. Then precede both versions by the same context...

1: I photoshopped a girl out of my graduation ceremony picture. Later I remembered having met her.

So far as I'm concerned, that can only be interpreted as meaning after I'd photoshopped her out of my picture, I remembered having met her (but it says nothing about when I actually met her).

2: I photoshopped a girl out of my graduation ceremony picture. I remembered having met her later.

This version could mean the same as #1, but it could also mean I met her after the ceremony (in which case it says little or nothing about when I actually remembered having met her).

Obviously the speaker himself would know which meaning he intended with #2. But personally if I were reading just those words, I would naturally assume the second meaning. I think the reason for my assumption is simply that with terms like afterwards, later, by default I go with the nearest (i.e. - most recently-mentioned) referent that could feasibly apply.

FumbleFingers
  • 140,184
  • 45
  • 294
  • 517
  • @YDAU: I hope you also read Rachel's answer to the question this may validly be closevoted against. It goes into more detail about the general case, and how to avoid the ambiguity if necessary. – FumbleFingers Jul 05 '13 at 03:28
  • Actually I understand the attachment ambiguity (verb attachment?) but was confused by the 'remembered having met'and why in the first case 'immediately afterwards' would attach to 'remembered' but in the sentence end phrase it would attach to 'having met.' – YDAU Jul 05 '13 at 10:45
  • @YDAU: Having looked at it more closely, I can't actually see anything in that earlier answer about any possible "default" attachment where there's potential for ambiguity. My position, as stated above, is that one should assume the nearest credible referent. In your case (and my structurally similar example), all possible referents must have been mentioned before the adverbial phrase, so I think the default should be the last one of those. Your text doesn't explicitly give any possibilities - but mine gives two, of which I opt for the latter (the ceremony itself, not the photoshopping). – FumbleFingers Jul 05 '13 at 13:23