"what with"

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Does anyone know the "technical" linguistic term for this usage of "what" or more specifically, "what with"

Wh-movement or something along those lines?

It seems unnecessary in the sentence, and works fine if it's removed. However, I hear people using this all the time.

Example: It's a good time to plant your flowers, what with all the sun we've been having.

Just curious, a friend and I were mulling over it the other day :o)

― Rachael, Thursday, 15 April 2004 22:10 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd say it was a conjunction, what with it acting in place of because in that sentence.

― Robbie Lumsden (Wallace Stevens HQ), Thursday, 15 April 2004 22:43 (twenty-two years ago)

It's a good time to plant your flowers, because all the sun we've been having.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 15 April 2004 22:45 (twenty-two years ago)

well, today was dour.

but i like gray skies.

― Robbie Lumsden (Wallace Stevens HQ), Thursday, 15 April 2004 22:49 (twenty-two years ago)

You're so indie.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 15 April 2004 22:57 (twenty-two years ago)

are gray skies indie? damn. i think my liking comes from watching Manhattan too much (is woody allen indie? well, he ain't no good ol' boy, that's fer damn sure).

also the sun gives me headaches (christ that is indie!).

― Robbie Lumsden (Wallace Stevens HQ), Thursday, 15 April 2004 22:59 (twenty-two years ago)

What's with the 'gray' spelling?

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:11 (twenty-two years ago)

y'know, i dunno. i think they're both valid spellings. My ex-girlf's step-dad was called Gray. i wonder if that had anything to do with it. I think i spelt it grey before i went out with her...

― Robbie Lumsden (Wallace Stevens HQ), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:13 (twenty-two years ago)

It's not that it's not valid - it's just unusual (in this country, anyway). I think I think of it along with 'gaol'.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:15 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it's lovely with an 'a', in fact.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:15 (twenty-two years ago)

awww, thanks...

― Robbie Lumsden (Wallace Stevens HQ), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:16 (twenty-two years ago)

what with all the sun we had today, i enjoyed myself immensely even though i was at the office.

― lauren (laurenp), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:17 (twenty-two years ago)

what with this chest infection, I shouldn't be staying up past one smoking rollies.

― N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:18 (twenty-two years ago)

i think part of the credit goes to my outfit, what with those cheerful stripey socks.

― lauren (laurenp), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:18 (twenty-two years ago)

"what with" is best used as the beginning of a phrase which ends with "and all."

That Billy Bob's a lucky fella, what with Sue Ann agreein' to marry him and all.

― martin m. (mushrush), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:24 (twenty-two years ago)

i find "what with" is best used to ascertain a single usage of "with"

― Robbie Lumsden (Wallace Stevens HQ), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:26 (twenty-two years ago)

haha 'smoking rollies'!

― cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 15 April 2004 23:56 (twenty-two years ago)

are gray skies indie?

well, Iron Sky was a track by Basingstoke indie band Mega City Four. Can't remember which album, may have been Sebastopol Road.

― MarkH (MarkH), Friday, 16 April 2004 07:16 (twenty-two years ago)

"What with" is less causal than "because of" though, that's why it exists!! I think "given" is a closer synonym, i.e. the thing you're mentioning is just one of a number of factors (albeit the most important one). But then you'd sound like a Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, what with your "givens" and wherefores and all, instead of a folksy good ol boy.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 16 April 2004 10:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Right, but in most of the examples above you could drop "what" off, and the semantics of the sentence wouldn't change. So the "what" part is redundant. I think this is what Rachael meant. The answer to her question is, obviously, that all languages (except esperanto and volapük, maybe) have redundancies. They're never merely functional.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Friday, 16 April 2004 11:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh I get it; Rachael wants to plant some sunshine in with her flower seeds!! Frankly it's the kind of loony behavior to be expected from someone who can't spell her own name right.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 16 April 2004 13:19 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.