Indeed

Zastanawiam się nad różnicami w umiejscowieniu słowa 'indeed' w zdaniu. Przykładowo:

1) You don’t look like one of those guys indeed,
2) Indeed, you don't look like one of those guys,
3) You don't indeed look like one of those guys.

Istnieje w ogóle jakakolwiek różnica w odbiorze?

Z góry dzięki za reply :)

No idea?

Przeważnie takie słowa piszemy na końcu. Niby nie jest to jakimś wielkim błędem, ale może się tak zdarzyć, że poleciałyby punkty za składnię zdania. Jeśli napiszesz tak, jak w drugim zdaniu, to też będzie poprawnie. Jednak nie robi się tak, jak w trzecim przykładzie.

Indeed mozna użyć w środku zdania

Nie chodzi mi o poprawność, tylko różnicę w odbiorze.

It's an emphasizer and it normally precedes the element it emphasizes.
Postposed position may sound a bit old-fashioned. Medial is quite typical for that of an emphasizer.
Its emphasizing force is ‘sitting’ within the verb phrase.
Fronted is a disjunct. It’s separated from the whole sentence syntactically, more than others in any case, hence its meaning extends over the whole sentence too, in my opinion.

Thank you very much! May the preserved dumplings be with you :)

I think the mid-position

Sorry, Terri:
I think THAT the mid-position is particularly common with auxiliaries, and in the case of the adjectival phrase 'very X indeed' (it was very big indeed), 'indeed' habitually comes at the end of the sentence, augmenting the emphasis even more in this way.

@Flub
Safeguard Sav's advice indeed!

In order not to establish a new thread... Now something that's a different kettle of fish:

They’d been supposed to defend us against the devil witch that was soon to appear.

Hmm, something is wrong here. Any idea?

were there many devil witches around?

Nope. Just a single one.

, who

Indeed ;) But what about the tenses?

EDIT:
But without the comma

the comma has to be there if it is known that there is only one witch.
'd been supposed' may make sense in a broader context. Were they still there?

Yes, they were still there. But does it change anything?

And could I also say about her that:

She’s a knavish hag with the whole company, being her equal in villainy.

??

>>Yes, they were still there. But does it change anything?

You may not need the pluperfect here then. Unless you’re weaving forward and backward within a period in the past and want to reverse the order of events in your narrative to make the ‘then’ reference clear enough for the reader.

Being the villain of the piece ( idiom ), she is/was ..quite a bitchy witch.. ? :)
Or else ‘Being a villain without equal (another idiom), she is..

Knavish, villainy ?
What are you writing ..a contemporary corporate version of The Canterbury Tales? :)

Very close :]


Nah, I mean, the whole company was equally villainous as the witch was. I wan't to create a sort of "dorównująca jej pod względem villainy"

Bitchy witch, heh ;)

There is a very short sentence, I can't tranlate properly:

Taki (koń), na którym dotarłbym aż do granic lasu.

The one capable of reaching even the boundary of the forest? I have no other idea...

Yeah, as Sav wrote: no need to use the Past perfect there.

The horse I can ride on to reach the forest’s edge.
Are you chasing that witch? Is she at least sexy ?

You have a problem with them rel'tives. No comma in your sentence, please.


Taki (koń), na którym dotarłbym aż do granic lasu.

A horse/steed that could take me as far as the forest edge

Thanks :] You deserved preserved dumplings :)

But what with:
She’s a knavish hag with the whole company, being her equal in villainy.

Is that correct or not?

@mq
Sorry ;)

@sav
You don't expect me to tell you more details about my witch? :) Fat chance! She's unpredictable. She shall even be fancied you :P

hag with the whole company? what's that supposed to mean
and who's 'her'. It apparently isn't 'she', is it?

"To podła wiedźma z całą kompanią jej równych" - as the entire sentence. Both "she" and "her" means the witch :P

So, should I change anything?

To be sb's equal in sth - dorównywać komuś pod względem czegoś
PWN-OXFORD

with a whole company of her equals

you wrote: to podła wiedźma z tą całą kompanią, będąca równą jej w łotrostwie.

>>To podła wiedźma z całą kompanią jej równych"
Or .... ‘That wicked witch, being in cahoots with others of her ilk.’

She is not wicked, but dastardly, cruel, ruthless and insane. Thhat is why I've chosen "knavish hag". The only thing I want is to tell whether it is correct or not. But i think, there's no mistake. After all, thank you very much :]

@mg
cause I don't want to translate it directly, but change it a little bit so that it sounds better

you're doing it wrong.
Your original translation does not mean what you intend it to mean.