Tell me more ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 12 down vote favorite

So I saw this xkcd, and when I tried reading it, I always felt like the ending was a bit... unbalanced.

It says:

You're in a box on wheels hurtling along several times faster than evolution could possibly have prepared you to go. (Next 5 miles.)

I can't figure out what's wrong with it, though... it's as if some word (e.g. "at"?) was supposed to follow the word "go".

So I was wondering, is the sentence grammatically correct, or is it indeed missing something?
If so, what?

share|improve this question
10  
The sentence is gramatically fine and, moreover, is exactly suited to the feeling its author wishes to express. If you remove or change a word — imperfection ensues. – Robusto Jul 2 '12 at 22:04
6  
So what's wrong with ending a sentence with an infinitive? It seems far more fluent than OP starting his first sentence in this post with the word so. Is it just me? I find that a really inappropriate way to introduce a question on ELU. It sounds like a stand-up comedian's opening line. – FumbleFingers Jul 2 '12 at 23:26
The grammar is perfect. One thing that you COULD add is a comma after "wheels", but it doesn't really need it. – user16269 Jul 3 '12 at 0:01
3  
@FumbleFingers: I wasn't trying to criticize the xkcd (heck, it's not even supposed to be grammatically correct); I was just asking a grammar question... no need to get annoyed. – Mehrdad Jul 3 '12 at 0:15
1  
@FumbleFingers: lol, okay thanks.. – Mehrdad Jul 3 '12 at 0:45
show 1 more comment

2 Answers

up vote 33 down vote accepted

It's perfectly fine. Let's rewrite it to see what's going on.

Original:

You're in a box on wheels hurtling along several times faster than evolution could possibly have prepared you to go.

"box on wheels" => "car"
"hurtling along" => "going"

Creates:

You're in a car going several times faster than evolution could possibly have prepared you to go.

Now we can erase this unnecessary part:

You're in a car going several times faster than evolution could possibly have prepared you to go.

Finally creating:

You're in a car going faster than evolution could possibly have prepared you to go.

If you want to go even further, you can simplify all this to:

You're going faster than you are prepared to go.

Seems all fine here!

share|improve this answer
2  
Awesome answer, thanks! – Mehrdad Jul 2 '12 at 22:11
7  
Two more steps: You are going faster than you should, and Slow down! – TimLymington Jul 2 '12 at 22:14
2  
very good, +1. As has been said on these boards by those more sage than I, "grammar isn't about strings of words, it's about constructions and their constituents". – Mark Beadles Jul 2 '12 at 23:29
3  
Hmm. "You're going faster than you are prepared to go" would normally be interpreted as meaning "...faster than you are willing to go". A more fluent version is "You're going faster than you're designed to [go]" (most speakers would omit that final go). – FumbleFingers Jul 3 '12 at 0:38
2  
So basically, it was 'You're going faster than you're prepared to go', and OP thought it said, 'You're going at a higher speed than you are prepared to go at.' – Saad Rehman Shah Jul 3 '12 at 4:51
show 1 more comment
up vote 4 down vote

I think it would be better phrased as:

You're in a box on wheels hurtling along several times faster than evolution could have possibly prepared you to go. (Next 5 miles.)

share|improve this answer
9  
Personally, I disagree. "could possibly have" clearly sets the emphasis on "prepared you to go". "could have possibly prepared" muddles the "possibly" and the punchline. I therefore prefer the original. – Rex Kerr Jul 3 '12 at 4:17

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.