DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Even Greener Pastures
HTML https://evengreener.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Questions about the Use of Language
*****************************************************
#Post#: 17376--------------------------------------------------
Re: To be taken ill
DIR By: SuKi
Date: July 2, 2019, 1:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Looking at the answers from Neal, Jerry, Susan and Steven, it
seems that we actually have two different expressions here:
Take ill = only AmE. Very rarely used any more. Sounds either
archaic or rural.
Be taken ill = only BrE. Slightly old-fashioned but still in
use, especially in polite non-medical contexts.
Thoughts, anyone?
#Post#: 17377--------------------------------------------------
Re: To be taken ill
DIR By: SHL
Date: July 2, 2019, 1:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: SuKi link ---
>
> Looking at the answers from Neal, Jerry, Susan and Steven, it
seems that we actually have two different expressions here:
>
> Take ill = only AmE. Very rarely used any more. Sounds
either archaic or rural.
>
> Be taken ill = only BrE. Slightly old-fashioned but still in
use, especially in polite non-medical contexts.
>
> Thoughts, anyone?
>
--- End Quote ---
SuKi,
I can’t disagree. If someone were to say they had taken ill,
this sort of image would come to mind:
HTML https://i.ibb.co/8MrRbLx/2-A777-A08-10-AD-4-D4-D-A1-B7-72-BAED013-A5-B.png
HTML https://ibb.co/6YHp87t
I must say the Germans have given us some great pharmaceuticals
;)
#Post#: 17379--------------------------------------------------
Re: To be taken ill
DIR By: Nikola
Date: July 2, 2019, 3:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: SuKi link ---
>
> Looking at the answers from Neal, Jerry, Susan and Steven, it
seems that we actually have two different expressions here:
>
> Take ill = only AmE. Very rarely used any more. Sounds
either archaic or rural.
>
> Be taken ill = only BrE. Slightly old-fashioned but still in
use, especially in polite non-medical contexts.
>
> Thoughts, anyone?
>
--- End Quote ---
It would seem that way. Also, the American one is used with
"with". I don't suppose you could do that with "be taken ill",
could you? It would have to be "by". You probably wouldn't do it
anyway because, as you said, you are not to give more detail
about the condition.
So even when Steven writes "taken ill with a cough" the "taken"
is still in the active voice? As in "have you taken" rather than
"have you been taken"?
#Post#: 17382--------------------------------------------------
Re: To be taken ill
DIR By: SuKi
Date: July 2, 2019, 4:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think you can add "with...+ ailment" with the passive form.
There are some examples here:
HTML https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/be-taken-ill-sick
#Post#: 17386--------------------------------------------------
Re: To be taken ill
DIR By: Truman Overby
Date: July 2, 2019, 6:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: SuKi link ---
>
> You probably know this already, Nikola, but 'be sick' only
means 'throw up' in BrE.
>
> "I was sick yesterday" (AmE) = Stative verb, meaning "I
wasn't well", in general terms
> "I was sick yesterday" (BrE) = Active verb, meaning "I
threw up" ( but may otherwise have been fine - only refers to a
single incident).
>
> Here's another one for the list... 'chunder'.
>
--- End Quote ---
It can also mean to throw up in AmE. So as you say, it can mean
a general unwell feeling or to vomit in AmE. I've heard people
say "He got sick all over the car." I'd say though that in
general, we say throw up, vomit, etc.
But to get back to the question, I'll reiterate that you can
forget about the whole taken sick, taken ill, etc. I'll agree
with Neal that it's archaic in AmE. I would guess that any
American under 50 would give you a funny look if you used it.
#Post#: 17387--------------------------------------------------
Re: To be taken ill
DIR By: NealC
Date: July 2, 2019, 6:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It is something you would hear in a Beverly Hillbillies or Green
Acres rerun :-)
#Post#: 17395--------------------------------------------------
Re: To be taken ill
DIR By: SHL
Date: July 2, 2019, 10:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Nikola link ---
>
> [quote author=SuKi link=topic=1192.msg17376#msg17376
date=1562049223]
> Looking at the answers from Neal, Jerry, Susan and Steven, it
seems that we actually have two different expressions here:
>
> Take ill = only AmE. Very rarely used any more. Sounds
either archaic or rural.
>
> Be taken ill = only BrE. Slightly old-fashioned but still in
use, especially in polite non-medical contexts.
>
> Thoughts, anyone?
>
--- End Quote ---
It would seem that way. Also, the American one is used with
"with". I don't suppose you could do that with "be taken ill",
could you? It would have to be "by". You probably wouldn't do it
anyway because, as you said, you are not to give more detail
about the condition.
So even when Steven writes "taken ill with a cough" the "taken"
is still in the active voice? As in "have you taken" rather than
"have you been taken"?
[/quote]
Yeah, it looks like it was always used in the active voice.It
sounds weird in the passive voice.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page