Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

i didn’t downvote but i think “i have {{person}} working for me” is fairly idiomatic american english. that’s why i was confused.


But that's not what it says, it literally says 'we have a Filipino woman, who works for us'. The difference is subtle and that's what made it jump out at me. If it were written the way you just did that likely would not have happened. I assume this is because this isn't my first language even though I use English more than Dutch these days but oddities like that jump out at me likely much more pronounced than they would to someone who is born into the language.

If I had written something to the same effect it would likely have been 'A Filipino woman who works for us' just to avoid that sense of possession, doubly so because of the context.


> it literally says 'we have a Filipino woman, who works for us'.

It _literally_ does not say that. You added a comma which changes the expression.


Apologies, I did not cut-and-paste but wrote it out, that was not intentional, and any change in the expression can be ignored, to me it still reads just the same, I checked my original comment and there I fortunately did get it right.


i was chalking it up to the language difference as well, i was aware that english isn’t your first language. i see what you are saying but for example i have a black engineer who works for me, and he’s one of my best. and neither of us think he is a slave. nobody native speaking english would bat an eye at that sentence even formed that specific way. with the comma though, i would agree with you. it’s subtle.


I figured pointing out that I realized that the OP did not mean what I read into it would pre-empt the ridiculous barrage of follow up comments and pile-ons but that was wishful thinking on my part.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: