BS: Declining Standards of English

Subject: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: bubblyrat
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 08:33 AM

This morning, I opened my Yahoo page, and almost immediately encountered a news headline that said " STORM REEKS HAVOC "----Has anyone else been as similarly shocked ( and outraged !! ) as I was ???

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 08:38 AM

Bubbly Rat

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Canadienne
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 08:46 AM

Increasing usage of duplicate/repetitive exclamation marks etc.   

Wasn't there something about this intolerable assault on our sensitivities recently? :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 08:54 AM

Yes, when TV presenters say "I was sat ........"

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: clueless don
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 08:58 AM

I have the impression that some newspapers (including my own Washington Post) have essentially stopped using editors, leaving the reporter herself/himself to run spell check and then print the story as is. Perhaps I am wrong, but the Post often prints letters in its "Free for all" letters column on Saturdays pointing out grammtical/usage mistakes in stories.

Don

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 09:06 AM

This is the result of years of Tory mismanagement of the education system, which Labour has been gradually putting right over the past ten years (the evidence being that exam results have improved year on year since Labour took over).

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 09:18 AM

I disagree with that Scrump. There have been too many changes and different "fashions" for teaching and both parties have been guilty of that - like the idea that pupils should not be taught to learn times tables off by heart. I'm now looking through what I've written to try to make sure my grammar is OK!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 09:20 AM

Oops eanjay, I forgot the :-)

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 09:22 AM

Nice one :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 09:55 AM

you fink .. but I dunno ...

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Leadfingers
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 09:56 AM

When was the last time you heard any one actually say 'JEWELLRY and NOT Joolery ??

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: folk1e
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:01 AM

Don't forget any language that is relevant will eveolve. You (and I) may not like the particular use it is put to at the moment but just consider what it would be like if we all talked in "old english"
Personaly I get an inordinate amount of humour from hearing my American friends attempt to say words that are imported from "forign" languages and therefore spelt differently!

Life Bueoy   Boy / Beueouey
Alluminium   Al u min ium / Alluminum
Birmingham   Birmingam / Birming ham

Then again I expect they quite enjoy my mangling of "their" lexicon.
I suppose that all language (eccept Legaleese) is a form of communication and if the meaning is conveyed the purpose is served!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:02 AM

Umm...Terry...I think it is spelled jewelry. Oh! Well, I looked it up and lo and behold its another one of those words the wrong-headed colonists have run off with and made up their own spelling for!

"Jewellery (spelled jewelry in American English) consists of ornamental devices worn by persons, typically made with gems and precious metals. Costume jewellery is made from less valuable materials. However, jewellery can and has been made out of almost every kind of material.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewellery"

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:03 AM

I'd spell it JEWELLERY or, if in the US, JEWELRY.
But I'd probably say BLING cos it's quicker.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: kendall
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:35 AM

We have, among other irritants, a local weather reporter who insists on pronouncing "especially" as if it had an X instead of an S.
Expecially. Drives me batty!
Even experienced narrators are apt to say Anartica or artic.
Then there's the wildlife expert who can't pronounce "Orangutan" right.They insist on sticking an extra G on the end.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Hollowfox
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:43 AM

The one that really jolted me was the use of service as a verb. This was from a speaker at a professional training day, and the speaker, with a straight face, said that we here at the library serviced our patrons. I'd only heard this word as a verb when a brothel or the artificial insemination of cattle was involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:49 AM

I really don't think I care. I was taught all that at school. However I think it was just another excuse to beat the shit out of us. Another reason they could think they were superior to the peasantry they were fated to teach.

Whenever I see a journalist who doesn't know the difference between two, to, and too; or they're, there and their - I think well done mate! At least you didn't get fooled into accepting their crap values about what is important, like I did.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:50 AM

I hate radio announcers who say "the smawning"/"the seevning" instead of "this morning"/"this evening".

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bee
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:00 AM

No copy proofing is done anymore, except with spellcheck, leading to frequent misuse of words. 'Reek' is a properly spelled word, just the wrong one. A human proofreader would have caught it and replaced it with 'wreak'; spellcheck doesn't catch such things.

I wouldn't blame poor spelling on the modern education system, though: my dad went to school in the thirties and couldn't spell to save his life. I could spell correctly very early, semmed natural and easy, but my brother struggled to remember word spellings.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Janine
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:02 AM

Heard on BBC Radio 4 (who should know better)- 'academic consumers'. What ever happened to students?
Annoying too is syllable dropping: p'lice, p'lite etc
And why is 'target' used as a verb for just about everything from giving aid to shooting somebody?
Jan
PS Just going to target the tea

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:07 AM

I'm with you, WLD, but I'm a-feared we're in a distinct minority in this august company.

That being said, however, whenever I hear someone say [insert favourite objectionable word, phrase, or pronunciation from this or previous threads on the subject], it makes me want to have a peasant flogged!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:15 AM

" STORM REEKS HAVOC "- ...*grin*...I suspect this was the result of someone noticing that they had been saying "WRECKS HAVOC", and telling them verbally to get it right, instead of spelling it out.

You gotta 'splain deeze tings in plain langwidge.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Seiri Omaar
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:15 AM

I saw "straight" (the term the guy meant) being spelled "strait" in a paper in a second-year university paper.
Which led my roommate to cry, "Oh, the Bering! Oh, the Bering!" and laugh himself silly.
Yey for HUMAN proofreaders!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: able
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:17 AM

I lost track of the number of grade 12 graduates who even had post secondary education that I had to let go, because they couldn't read or write. In Canada, it appears that we have an egalitarian educational system that requires everyone to graduate. This, in spite of the fact that they should have been stopped at grade three as they used to be. Now, grade 12 means they put in the required 12 years. The reason for this decay is simple, only 10% of people are intelligent, the remainder are not. The 90% got tired of being on the outside looking in. Give it another fifty years, and an IQ of 90 will be above average intelligence. Thankfully, I won't have to be around to tolerate this.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Midchuck
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:18 AM

"Network" is a noun.

"Fund" is a noun.

"Data" is a plural noun. The singular is "datum."

But nobody cares....

Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Seiri Omaar
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:22 AM

Evolution of the language?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:25 AM

I wouldn't blame poor spelling on the modern education system, though: my dad went to school in the thirties and couldn't spell to save his life. I could spell correctly very early, semmed natural and easy, but my brother struggled to remember word spellings.

Some people seem to be good at spelling (I like to think I am :-), but there are plenty of people who have difficulty with it, and there always have been.

But I still think some of the 'progressive' teaching methods in the past couple of decades or so has not helped to improve people's spelling. Spell checkers have helped make it easier for people to 'get away' with not being able to spell, but as has been pointed out, it wouldn't have stopped the howler that started this thread.

Now, the threat of a damn good thrashing if you spell a word wrongly would help to focus these young whippersnappers' minds on getting it right :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:30 AM

Spell checkers? That's easy: c-h-e-c-k- ...

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:31 AM

Anyone else noticed whether their local tv news is always presented in the present tense? Our local does that and it drives me nuts! They also post their news stories online, exactly as they broadcast them on tv. It does not translate well and they are full of grammatical and spelling errors. I am sure both of my old English teachers are in a constant turning over in their graves.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:33 AM

It's just because they can't talk proper like what I does.

:D

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:47 AM

"I am sure both of my old English teachers are in a constant turning over in their graves."

If they're anything like the other teachers that people here seem to admire so greatly, they're probably burning in hell for all the "damn good thrashings" they gave to kids who had trouble with spelling.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Michael
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:48 AM

Katlaughing; It's because they are all living in the passed.

PS I note you were taught Old English, can you still speak it?

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scoville
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 11:54 AM

I think it's actually "WREAKS HAVOC"

* * * * *

That HPV vaccine commercial that repeats 'One less, one less' over and over drives me insane.

ONE FEWER, YOU ILLITERATES.

And I heard on NPR this past Saturday that somebody is lobbying to change the proper possessive of "Arkansas" to "Arkansas's", despite the fact that proper possessive for words ending in "s" is well established to be, in this case, "Arkansas'".

* * * * *

I'm not even that big a language snob. Some people cannot spell. My best friend, who reads voraciously, writes well, and can hardly be accused of being illiterate, is not a natural speller. I don't care how people talk in informal settings, what colloquialisms they use, how incoprehensible are their accents, etc., but people and media in formal and professional contexts should know proper English.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: bubblyrat
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:00 PM

Two years ago ,I worked in a theatre that had,among other interesting facilities, a "Principle Dressing Room " in which there was a sign, over the sink (drainer ) asking people to " wash there cups after use " . I would have said something,but it was against my principals !!!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bernard
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:03 PM

Some newsreaders' lazy pronunciations:
Government becomes guvverment...

Burglary becomes burgulry...Whilst I'm at it, has anyone else noticed that words such as 'wool' and 'wall', 'bull' and 'ball', are becoming indistinguishable in the pseudo Southern English 'corporate speak'... an accent that seems to have evolved and doesn't appear to belong to any particular area. The letter 'L' and the letter 'W' have become interchangeable, and are vowels to all intents and purposes!

Or is it just me?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Desdemona
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:04 PM

I'm actually studying Old English now; they didn't give a rat's ass about "proper" usage in the ways we think of it (no standardized spelling, spaces between words, lines of poetry, etc.). It's also pretty exciting to wait til quite near the end of a sentence to find out what the verb is!

In terms of Modern English, however, my own pet peeve is the use of an apostrophe when the writer means to make something plural. It makes me absolutely crazy, and really inspires me to take the sort of guerilla punctuation action advocated by Lynne Truss in "Eats, Shoots and Leaves," to wit: carrying a large black sharpie at all times to correct such abominations as "Ice cream sundae's sold here." Ice cream sundae's WHAT sold here? And WHO is Ice cream sundae, anyway, and why aren't all three of his or her names capitalized?

I'm ever more convinced that the "Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation" is long overdue!

~D

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: wysiwyg
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:09 PM

At least once a week we pass a sign inviting us in to come in and sing Karkoe. We pronounce it kar-koh-ee. I'm convinced it's a new technique. One of these days I'm gonna call them up and ask where to get good karkoe tracks. I think we may never be able to say "karaoke," correctly, again.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST, heric
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:14 PM

I think it's rotted haddock.

I was suffering through this stuff just yesterday due to a counselor's spelling of counsellor. I done figured out that in Commonwealth English, words that end in -l preceded by a vowel usually double the -l when a suffix is added, while in American English the letter is not doubled.   However, for words where two –ll's are preceded by a vowel, the American spelling will retain the doubled consonants when a suffix is added, but, in Commonwealth English, the second –l is dropped when a suffix is added, as in enrollment/ enrolment, skillful/ skilful. I agree with weelittledrummer that it is hard to give a shit. But then I again, I am just noticing that placement of punctuation marks (esp commas) relative to quotation marks and parentheses is transpondally divergent as well, which is going to torment me.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:15 PM

I could understand...

Sewerage Treatment plant REEKS havoc.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:31 PM

You could understand it, but you'd still be off base grammatically. Havoc is a chaotic condition and has no referent to olfactory experience; further, the verb to "reek" does not take an indirect object without the preposition "of". You could say that the havoc reeked of sewage, or the plant reeked of havoc (with a little poetic license). But "reeks havoc" is meaningless.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Donuel
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:38 PM

It goes without saying but\
there are many examples of headline puns that are intentionally mispelled.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:40 PM

The seweráge reeked havocilly, an unholy olfactorial pastiche.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: catspaw49
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:48 PM

Hey Amos.......Does y'all think that a leek could reek?

Jus wundrin

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:49 PM

Well, gol danged...

What the heck is this all 'bout, anyway??? Next thing ya' know you'all gonna want to put up cameras in everybody's bedrooms... I mean, let's get real here fir jus' one minute: language is an ever evlovin' thing an' I know there's plenty o' folks who don't believe in no evolution 'cause they is into this "design" thing where God taught up Adam and Eve the Queen's English they way that God wanted it spoken and never to be changed... But guess what???

No don't, I'll tell ya'all what instead...

There ain't nuthin' in the Bible 'bout the Queen 'er her English... I done read it!!!

Now ifin' you'all gonna go get yer panties in a wad over this then fine... Wad away but...

...you all come 'round my joint tryin' to install no cameras in my bedroom 'er try to relearnt me up an' ya' better pack several days worth of lunches and bring alot of folks wid you and a lotta duct tape, too...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:49 PM

An old question to test knowlege is: "What is the present tense of 'wrought'?"
and, of course, there are two correct answers. In regard to God ("What hath God wrought?"), it's 'wreak'...while in regard to iron, it's 'work'.

Now, I am quite aware that spelling does not come easy to some people, even if they try. I have a good friend who has a HIGH government position, but who has serious dyslexia and cannot spell well....but he does know words! Listening, you'd barely know he has a problem. Many years ago, I realized he was saying 'wif' for 'with', because he genuinely had heard it wrong, and most of his comprehension is verbal.

What upsets me are those who know they have a problem and do nothing about it....even refusing to USE a spelling checker or look up a word before they toss it into conversation, or, worse yet, a TV program or sign.

There is a fine line between 'local usage and pronunciation' and 'obstinate cultivation of ignorance'.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: kendall
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:51 PM

Language was invented so we can communicate with each other. So, when someone misspells a word, it slows down the reader, and when there are many misspelled words, it gives one a headache trying to slog through.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: The Sandman
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 12:52 PM

thaw touba eth enilced fo gnalskcab,.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 01:16 PM

was anyone in serious doubt, that the storm smelled

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 01:36 PM

Scoville told us, in part:

And I heard on NPR this past Saturday that somebody is lobbying to change the proper possessive of "Arkansas" to "Arkansas's", despite the fact that proper possessive for words ending in "s" is well established to be, in this case, "Arkansas'".

Au contraire, mon frere!

Your "well established to be" principle is one side of a long-running controversy.

Strunk & White's The Elements of Style, long a standard and respected reference, gives as its VERY FIRST rule the following:

"1. Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's."

(Note, that's the singular, not plural.)

"Follow this rule whatever the the final consonant. Thus write,
    Charles's friend
    Burns's poems
    the witch's malice

Exceptions are the possessives of ancient proper names in -es and -is, the possessive Jesus', and such forms as for convenience' sake, for righteousness' sake. But such forms as Moses' laws, Isis' temple are commmonly replaced by
    the laws of Moses
    the temple of Isis"

And it goes on with pronomial possessives and the its/it's problem.

As to Arkansas' and Arkansas's, it should be noted that "Arkansas" is pronounced "Arkansaw", and to spell it Arkansas' is thus wrong on any account.

The apostrophe has no phonetic value of its own, so that a possessive such as Kansas' (if you like that approach) should not be pronounced "Kansas's".

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 01:41 PM

A storm smells of ions, of salt, of water in the wind. It may, poetically, reek of chaos and imminent harm, even of death on the march. But, to be pedantic, I doubt a storm smells anything. It is too busy being chaotic to organize anything as delicate as an olfactory sense organ.

I know these distinctions seem terribly dull and pedantic. But they are the subtle paths and switches of communication. Ignore tham at your peril -- when you cut down your communication, you cut down your own power and life-force in the world, to some degree.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 01:47 PM

Kendall, I ax you, whut's wrong wit expecially and ectually? purfecly good inglesh.

(The commentator favorite that bothers me?- "The fact of the matter is:")

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 01:50 PM

I thought that was once a fine and useful rhetorical device, Q -- cutting, in theory, through a cloud of opinions to a core matter of fact. I guess it has grown over used by those who don't, in fact, fulfill its intent; but it is not an error in language, is it?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 01:50 PM

At this point in time . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 02:18 PM

You think people should prefer "at the present location, time-wise"?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bill D
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 02:21 PM

"it should be noted that "Arkansas" is pronounced "Arkansaw", "

well, *grin*...the Arkansas River is pronounced Ar-KAN-sas as it passes thru Wichita, and until it crosses the border into Ar-kan-saw.
You do NOT want to say "Ar-kan-saw" in Wichita.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Alec
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 02:33 PM

Politicians think refute and dispute are synonyms.
Journalists think effete and effeminate are.
They also think this about noisome and noisy.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 02:47 PM

So be careful when you say the storm was noisome.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Michael from Manitoba
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 02:49 PM

Yesterday I saw a sign outside a builder's supply store that offered a special on "Course Concrete". The store is on a street leading to the university. I bet all those undergrads are dashing in to pick up a few bags.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Nickhere
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 03:40 PM

I think we do need a standardized spelling to maintain widespread mutual comprehension. I'm not really in favour of 'anything goes' English. It's true that some people can get hopelessly hung up on itsy-bitsy rules at school. At the same time, I'm glad I had my times tables drilled into me, or was obliged to learn to read and write (all of which involved some degree of conformity to rules). I would feel very foolish if I was unable to read the ingredients on the food container, or check my change and had to rely on a calculator all the time to know if I was being swindled. Not all conformity is bad - when it is mutually beneficial. You take the parts that are useful for the greatest good.

In the past langauges drifted due mainly to geographical divisions: it's no accident that the dialects of latin being used 2,000 years ago evolved into Spanish across the Pyrenees, French in the Gaul region, but stayed closer to the latin original (Italian) on the Italian peninsula. TV and the internet have mitigated the diversification of English to some degree, our main problem as English speakers is not dialect but understanding each others' accents. Since these vary a lot, if spelling was to reflect local pronunciation we'd quickly return to a situation as in the middle ages (before printing) where scribes wrote words as they heard / spoke them, often several different ways on the same page. That's fine if you're familiar with the accompanying accent and can 'de-code' the text, but not suitable for a more global context.

We could overhaul English and perhaps update the spelling if the changes were universally accepted - this happened with the introduction of printing in the 1400s (which demanded standarised spelling) and now we have a similar situation vis a vis the internet.

Two good books on the topic are David Crystal's "The English Language" (pub. Penguin Books) and Lynne Truss' book "Eats Shoots and leaves" (Pub. Profile Books)

Good punctuation might seem unimportant, but look at these two phrases:

Woman: without her, man is nothing.
Woman without her man, is nothing.

Spot the difference?

These are a few of my favourites, spotted from around town recently:

Note in post office: "electricity bills now excepted" - you can pay any bil you want here, but they won't take your electricity bill!
In a restaurant: "Sirlion stake €8" - but poor Sir Lion might object to being carved up like that!
Note in a pub: "sorry for the inconvience during works" - I've never seen an 'inconvience' but it might be interesting to meet one.
A friend: "a bought a few momentums while I was on holiday" - and I suppose they are still moving around as much as when he bought them?
Note on notice board: "For sale, moases basket for child" (written with the pronuciation from that part of the city)
Likewise, another note in classifieds: "Room to let - suit professional, non-smooker" (again pronounced with the typical exaggerated 'upper-class' accent of that part of town. Probably a typo, but funny for the perhaps unintended effect all the same).
Or when people & companies misuse words. The most typical example being every year around Christmas when we get yet another 'Ultimate Dance Music compilation number XYZ!!" Surely, after the last ultimate ultimate collection we had really seen the last of them?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: kendall
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:11 PM

It's just the sort of thing up with which I will not put.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:14 PM

Where did you put it?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Nickhere
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:24 PM

Kendall - very good, ha ha! I like the effort not to end with a preposition! We have a joke here about a very 'proper' sort of fellow who's going along down the street. This ruffian, maybe looking for a fight, shouts across the street at him "Whaddya' lookin' at?"
The 'proper' gent turns and replies "My good man, do you not know that one must never end a sentence with a preposition?"
The ruffian, momentarily perplexed, stops, scratches his head and replies, "a'right so. Whaddya' lookin' at, LANGER?"

(I don't know if you are familiar with the term, but 'langer' is not a compliment!)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:24 PM

There's a sign for a Vacncy in a barbers shop near us... makes me cringe every time I go past it (at least 6 times a week).

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scoville
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:37 PM

au contrere, mon frere

En fait, je suis votre soeur.



And, OK, I blew it. Well, the Arkansas part, at least.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:39 PM

We all use "this" when referring to something. I had an English teacher who embarrassed the heck out of me when I gave a verbal book report and said, "This book.." He asked me if I had it in hand. Of course I did not, so he used that opportunity to point out he misuse of "this."

Nickhere, doesn't your second example need a comma after "Woman" i.e. Woman, without her man, is nothing.

Mike, I don't remember being taught Old English but my teachers are still old English teachers from my past.**bg**

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:45 PM

Nickhere- some good points. I had to smile at 'standardise' in paragraph 3. Paragraph 1 had 'standardize.*
The Oxford English Dictionary uses the spelling standardize, the ending -ize adopted for these verbs. In England, some call this Oxbridge spelling (Oxford, Cambridge).
In the UK, standardise is used by most people. In one episode of the excellent Inspector Morse mysteries, Morse identified a note as a forgery because the writer spelled recognize with an 's,' identifying himself as 'illiterate.' His sergeant, a product of average schooling, looked pained, but did not say anything. Many humorous touches in the series, based on differences in Oxbridge vs garden variety English speech.

In North America, we have standardized on standardize, recognize, etc.

*(See -ise and -ize in Oxford English Dictionary; I won't take up space by going into the reasoning here).

Amos, 'the fact of the matter is ...' is effective if there is 'fact' involved, but most talking heads mean 'My opinion is ...'

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Nickhere
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 04:48 PM

Q, You caught me!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Mooh
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 05:04 PM

Yous, as the plural of you, drives me crazy. I once started a thread about it and got some folks in complete agreement and others (one by PM) very angry with me.

Sigh.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 06:27 PM

that's contraire, mon vieux


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 06:57 PM

Too many to list!

Loan, as a verb.
"Checkout" for "till"
As noted above, the confusion of "less" and "fewer".
Also as noted above, the pompous and illiterate misuse of "refute".
"Regular" (which means recurring with a fixed periodicity) for "ordinary".
"The hoi polloi", when "hoi" means "the".

The newsreader "Its 11 o'clock and I'm Sadie Nicholas" - Doh! Who are you the rest of the time?

Three or more alternatives.

Managementspeak in general.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bonecruncher
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:08 PM

I can write English as well as you lot, in fact weller!
Colyn.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Becca72
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:11 PM

Were it a shit storm it would certainly reek....

My least favorite month just ended...not because it's typically the month we get the most snow, but because I cannot stand to hear it pronounced Feb-U-ary. What happened to the first R? It's a little thing, but it sure does get up my nose. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: bobad
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:19 PM

"others (one by PM) very angry with me."

And well they should be, every good hoser knows the plural of you is youse, as in youse guys.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:28 PM

Not all of youses guys got it right, IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: bobad
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:31 PM

I thought you pluralized youse when you were talking about more than six guys, but I could be wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:31 PM

Regular has several meanings only one of which implies periodicity. The reason it gradual became a substitute for "usual" or "ordinary", in my guess, was the meaning of "average in size, or usual amounts" as in 10-regular sizes shoes. Literally, it means "by the rule", so it implies averageness or compliance with some defined order of things.

"Youse" is common in blue-collar Canadian, probably because of the French influence, perhaps?, but it is also a standard in certain regions of New York, notably Brooklyn.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:36 PM

And youse guys is regular guys and I don't mean not irregular but just decent what.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:40 PM

Only just?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: katlaughing
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:49 PM

And, New Jersey, Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: bobad
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:51 PM

youse Pronunciation (yz)
pron. Chiefly Northern U.S.
You. Used in addressing two or more people or referring to two or more people, one of whom is addressed.

http://www.tfd.com/youse

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:52 PM

as anybody who has tried to get a gig on the English folkscene knows, ones life force is pretty bloody limited.

the amount ones language limits it - well we've all heard the Wittgenstein thing - the limits of my language are the limits of my world - but I think that's a crock.

as an essay in communication the yahoo headline was entirely understandable.

the perils of pretending I don't understand things because I know too much about spelling - bold adventurer that I am, I will risk!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 07:53 PM

Risk is a board game.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 08:19 PM

you, you-all, all-you-all? I think it was in Guys and Dolls that one of the characters said 'all youse.

au contraire is furrin. Contrariwise (used as early as 13 and aught something. Spelled-spelt with a 'y' at first) better.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 08:34 PM

Wittgenstein was a ass.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Joe_F
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 09:14 PM

Posted on alt.usage.english a while ago:

[...] Relatively fewer women -- from a third to a half as many --
call themselves lesbians compared with men who identify as gay.
                   -- A political scientist in _The New York Review_

Now, class --

This fellow did have a problem, tho it probably didn't seem like one
to him. He had yoked together "fewer", which calls for "than", and
"as many", which calls for "as". His solution was to use that piece
of syntactical duct tape "compared with", which, come to think, he
might have used anyway. I sympathize. The variety of linking words
required by the various idioms of comparison in English *is* a
frequent nuisance, and must be a puzzle to learners:

as big _as_
bigger _than_
similar _to_
different _from_ (or so say the school grammars)
the same _as_
other _than_
equal _to_

etc. Every time you want to use two of those constructions together,
you have to either tread on the toes of one of them or resort to a
wordy & pointless contrast-within-a-contrast. If I were dictator, I
would be tempted to level them all -- probably to "than".

In the real world, I would say that the parenthetic construction has
less claim on the following syntax than does the initial one, and I
would lay down (if not as a rule of grammar, then as a rule of
stylistic hygiene) that comparatives should never be followed up with
anything but "than". There is a special reason to avoid "compared
to/with" after comparatives: It results in (and perhaps results from)
a confusion of two usefully distinct idioms:

The force on the earth due to Mars is smaller than that due to the
sun.

The force on the earth due to Mars is small compared with that due
to the sun.

The second statement is properly a much stronger one, roughly
synonymous with "...*much* smaller than...". It suggests that the
smaller force is negligible as a first approximation.

So I would try my luck with

Relatively fewer women [...] call themselves lesbians than men
identify as gay.

Well, not really. With some of the trash cleared away, the Elegant
Variation stands out in all its distracting silliness. "Identify as"
-- here, at least -- means the same as "call themselves". No problem,
for me, deciding which to get rid of (I think Erik Erikson was a
crackpot):

Relatively fewer women [...] call themselves lesbians than men
call themselves gay.

And now, off with its head! "Relatively" before a comparative is
usually open to the same objection as "compared with" after one -- it
mixes & confuses two constructions that ought to be kept distinct:

The moon's gravitation is the main cause of the tides; the effect
of the sun is smaller.

The moon's gravitation is the main cause of the tides; the effect
of the sun is relatively small.

The business of "relatively" here is to clarify the bearing of "small"
by harking back to the preceding clause; "relatively small" is short
for "small in relation to that of the moon". That is not quite the
same, in emphasis anyway, as "smaller"; it suggests a classification
(with the moon as standard) rather than a mere description, and it
implies *considerably* smaller.

I did say "usually", and I can imagine meaning something by
"relatively fewer":

Smoking causes most cases of lung cancer; it causes relatively
fewer cases of heart disease.

That might mean: In actual numbers, smoking may cause more heart
disease than lung cancer, but there is so much more heart disease that
smoking is more prominent in the cancer statistics. Yes, I can
imagine it, but I wouldn't write it. Slovenly use of "relatively" has
been so common for so long that most readers couldn't be trusted to
take it seriously. They would skip over it as they would a drool on
the page. Better make it "a smaller proportion of the cases of heart
disease".

In any case, such a use would be otiose in the present example,
because the numbers of men & women are near enough equal that relative
& absolute comparisons amount to the same thing.

So:

Fewer women -- from a third to a half as many -- call themselves
lesbians than men call themselves gay.

By now the parenthesis has become painful, not only in its discordant
syntax but in its interruption of the clause. One could remedy the
first problem by changing the parenthesis to "by two-thirds to
one-half", but that makes the second problem even worse, because the
reader has to stop & figure out what it means. I would be inclined to
remove that information to another sentence, or, indeed, make it

Fewer women call themselves lesbians (x to y percent) than men
call themselves gay (z to w percent).

-- whatever the numbers are.
--
--- Joe Fineman    [e-mail]

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: TRUBRIT
Date: 05 Mar 07 - 10:42 PM

I think Kendall was quoting Churchill (there are things up with which I will not put). Now Churchiil could be described as someone who had a small way with words......

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 01:00 AM

That was Churchill's dismissal of the precious notion that you shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 01:03 AM

Don't think so. It was something he wrote on a memo that apperaed one day and was to be circulated to members in a production factory (?). The memo had been written in a convoluted English, and the author had so twisted the sentence (in order to avoid ending the sentence with a preposition) that the meaning was lost.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 01:06 AM

HOWEVER:

"Ben Zimmer has presented evidence on the alt.usage.english list that this story was not originally attributed to Churchill at all, but to an anonymous official in an article in The Strand magazine. Since Churchill often contributed to The Strand, Zimmer argues, it would certainly have identified him if he had been the official in question. It is not clear how the anecdote came to be attributed to Churchill by Gowers, but it seems to have circulated independently earlier."

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 03:29 AM

That'd be "gradually became"?

I hate "pronounciation" too.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 05:32 AM

Bernard wrote: Whilst I'm at it, has anyone else noticed that words such as 'wool' and 'wall', 'bull' and 'ball', are becoming indistinguishable in the pseudo Southern English 'corporate speak'... an accent that seems to have evolved and doesn't appear to belong to any particular area. The letter 'L' and the letter 'W' have become interchangeable, and are vowels to all intents and purposes!

Or is it just me?


The other thing that irritates me about radio/TV presenters' pronunciation of vowels is using the "ee" sound instead of "oo" - some people say "yee tee" instead of "you too" (OK, this is an approximation of the actual sound they make, which is difficult to render in text, but I hope people know what I mean). Or "Cheeseday" instead of "Tuesday". I assume they somehow think it sounds posher - does anyone know?

Or is it just me?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Schantieman
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 06:54 AM

All of this misuse of the language - as distinct from its development (NOT evolution) - is just part of the general slovenliness and lack of rigour that typifies modern society (horrid phrase).

As a teacher for 26 years (egad!) I have become more and more frustrated at the lack of basic language, arithmetical, conceptual and social skills displayed by my 11 - 18 year old charges.   They have indeed acquired many skills - principally in computer use - that we didn't have at their age - this will certainly be useful - but they don't know how to spell, calculate, thing or blow their effing noses.   It duz my 'ed in!



Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: kendall
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 07:29 AM

When I was in school, any English paper was judged not only on the use of the language, but on spelling as well.(also)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 08:57 AM

The Churchill anecdote - I make no claim to any insider knowledge, and these pithy sayings often get attached to some popular or at least well-known figure. The main point, of course, is that the construction "up with which I will not put" is a particularly effective illustration of the silliness of the "Thou shalt not end a sentence with a preposition" commandment - and by extension, many other prissy notions concerning the English language. Of course, I don't mean to suggest that any such prissy notions are being promoted on this thread; no, sir!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Mooh
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 09:42 AM

Amos...French influence? That's laughable. Not in this part of Canada. If folks were told their use of "yous" came from Quebec they'd stop it before you could blink, such is their prejudice.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 09:59 AM

Mooh:

Well ya never know where that voyageur blood is gonna end up, do you? :D I was just guessing wildly.


But it is still true that Wittgenstein was a ass.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 10:02 AM

Neither do I, memyself. Churchill stories abound. I love 'em, because even if they're not true, they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 11:19 AM

A usage that irks me terribly is the "between-to" combination. As in, "I didn't count the people at the party, but I think there were between twenty to thirty there."

"Between" goes with "and"
   whereas
"From" goes with "to"

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Schantieman
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 11:33 AM

Dave - I think we are kindred spirits.

I too feel almost physical pain when I hear or read such a solecism. Apostrophes (thanks Ms Truss), incorrect participles and other parts of verbs, hanging parentheses etc. etc. .....

A particularly common one seems to be the use of a singular verb with a plural noun: "There was three of them".    Yuk!

And in speech, the substitution of 'f' for 'th' sounds. Simply laziness - probably on the part of whoever taught them to speak. Not that I'm lazy.   Oh no. No me.
(Irony, lesson 3)

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Alec
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 11:58 AM

For what it's worth,here in the U.K. use of the word "youse" is associated with Liverpool.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 12:15 PM

"..Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel."

but he wasn't "a ass".

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 12:20 PM

One that has always puzzled me is the use of the plural "their" associated with a singular verb/noun as in "Each man shall take their weapon apart..." or "Every one came to the meeting with their own agenda". I understand it is an escape from using the PC "his or her" which is really ugly language built on deep misunderstood grammar on the part of radical feminists, but it bugs me when so many people lower their standards, each in their own way! :D


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 12:27 PM

I find that stuff to be ugly and stupid.

"Ms Jones is our chairperson." NO, fer f#ck sake, "Ms Jones is our chairwoman." I still use the terms chairwoman and chairman.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 12:29 PM

Bill:

Wittgenstein was a ass. So there.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Mooh
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 12:46 PM

"My bad", which I hear several times a day from my students, is also perplexing. They say it where and when they would not have said anything previously. The first time I heard it I responded with, "your bad what?", not knowing any better.

I'm sure it comes from somewhere well under my radar.

Peace, Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: the lemonade lady
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 01:56 PM

A pedant, or pædant, is a formalist or precisionist in teaching or scholarship. The corresponding female noun is pedantess. The term comes from the French pédant (1566 in Darme & Hatzfeldster's Dictionnaire général de la langue français) or its source Italian pedante "teacher," schoolmaster.

You never take those heads off, do you?

sal

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 03:47 PM

If the language were the only bloody standards of the English that were declining, I'd settle for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: kendall
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 04:48 PM

What I don't get is, why do we care?
I cringe when I hear the word exit pronounced egg zit
and Luxury pronounced lugg sury.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 04:50 PM

Yeah, Amos....I guess you're right

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 04:59 PM

Shakespeare was a disgrace to the English language. He spells the same word in various ways, and his constant use of double negatives is be deplored! And I hate the way people say "noh" when using the word "know". Any fool can see that there is a "k" at the beginning!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 05:08 PM

Knot that night! He Knever knotices.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scoville
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 05:14 PM

One that has always puzzled me is the use of the plural "their" associated with a singular verb/noun as in "Each man shall take their weapon apart..." or "Every one came to the meeting with their own agenda". I understand it is an escape from using the PC "his or her" which is really ugly language built on deeply misunderstood grammar on the part of radical feminists, but it bugs me when so many people lower their standards, each in their his or her own way!

Well, the "each man" one is just wrong--"each" is singular so it ought to be "his".

"His or her" is tedious to say and is hard to understand when people talk quickly. That doesn't make it correct, of course, only I can understand why people have gotten into the habit of using it that way (especially since generalizing "his" now meets with so much resistance and seems less logical as gender circumscriptions dissolve). I've tried using "his" as one would in Spanish but people now assume when you say it that the group to which you refer is all men (or all women if you use "her"). That and the lack of a formal plural "you" form are sort of shortcomings of English. I really shouldn't use "y'all" in a letter to my senator.

It's certainly more efficient than the invasion of the double negative ("I ain't got no . . ."), which actually requires more words than the proper "I don't have . . . ").

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Nickhere
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 05:55 PM

Scrump - did you hear about the immigrant woman in Australia who left a hospital where she'd been a patient in a state of dreadful anxiety. She'd been told by the doctor on duty that she "could go home to die" ....

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: kendall
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 07:28 PM

I believe Shakespere had an excuse, in that the language wasn't standardized back then. Burns made up words too.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 07:52 PM

If Wittgenstein was an arsehole, Shakespeare was a complete tosser.

to be or f-----g not to be........wots that about then? complete bollocks if you ask me....

what we need is to reclassify our great Englishmen

Arseholes on one side            Complete Tossers on the other

Obviously Tony Blair might straddle both categories ....effortlessly!

But others:-

Duke of Wellington                Neville Chamberlain
Margaret Thatcher                  Morrisey
Oswald Mosley                      Prince Philip
Winston Churchill                  Prince Charles
                                 
well it seems to fair classification to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 06 Mar 07 - 11:31 PM

"I believe Shakespere had an excuse, in that the language wasn't standardized back then."

But the point is that if Shakespeare somehow managed to write some of the finest works in the English language without standardized grammar, spelling, and usage, perhaps standardization of grammar, spelling, and usage, ain't all it's cracked up to be.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 12:03 AM

Along with Randal Cotgrave, a friend who published his dictionary in 1612, Shakespeare and other writers of the time were working toward standardization. Johnson was the big Kahuna in the standardization racket, however, with his publication in the 18th century. Johnson's work had only 40,000 words; that of a predecessor had 48,000, but Johnson disliked and left out 'cant,' as well as scientific-technical and foreign words.

Anyone know how many words are in the current OED? They have taken in the words of Canada and the U. S. A., Australia-New Zealand, etc. including much UK as well as overseas dialect. Much technical and scientific vocabulary as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: katlaughing
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 12:13 AM

One source I saw said, last summer, that it had over 600,000 entries and they add about 1,000 new words per year. Another article, from 2002, said the average person has a vocabulary of about 20,000 words. Seems it is up to Mudcatters and others to use the other 580,000!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 05:49 AM

Does anyone know why the British pronounce "tune" and "Tuesday" with an initial "ch" sound, unlike our American cousins who use the expected "t".

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 07:42 AM

Does anyone know why the British pronounce "tune" and "Tuesday" with an initial "ch" sound, unlike our American cousins who use the expected "t".

Because in the UK, in many words (not all), the long 'u' is pronounced (more or less) 'yoo', but in the US it's pronounced 'oo'. So, 'tune' is pronounced 'tyoon' in the UK, and 'toon' in the US, etc.

As I said, this isn't the case for all words. A word like 'rule' is pronounced 'rool' on both sides of the Atlantic. And there may be US exceptions I'm not aware of, that someone here will be able to supply.

An exception is Norfolk, where (e.g.) 'computer' is pronounced 'compooter'.

That's another thing that's annoying - people who get 'i.e.' and 'e.g.' mixed up. I often see documents with these abbreviations used wrongly.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: clueless don
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 08:33 AM

Regarding "up with which I will not put", we all know that the correct construction is

"...I will not put up with, a**hole!"

(he said, remembering the punchline of an old joke.)

Don

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: folk1e
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 09:29 AM

In the "dim and distant" we traveled little and so many local dielects were created. We tend to mimmic the people who had power and so we have quaint customs like "Queens English". As the people mixed with one another these differing forms of the same language became known as quiloquialisms (pardon my spelling)which vied for popularity at different times and different people. This is not fixed in a stagnent state, much as my teachers would wish it was!
Individual people may be judged by whichever standard you wish and be judged as failing, but a group cannot. Once a group sets a new rule in place it becomes real so that weather I say "Youse dissi'n' me?" or enquire as to your "legitimacy of parentage" you can understand the meaning. That is the purpose of language and if you do understand it, it is succesfull!
Not that I am an expert ...... any more than you lot
BTW Scump "Yee tee" means "you too?" in Geordie ..... (ducks & runs)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 09:34 AM

That's OK, folk1e, I'm not a Geordie myself, but I can get by :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 10:04 AM

I assume you mean dialects, mimic, colloquialism, and whether?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 10:08 AM

It's so nice to see someone sneering!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scoville
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 12:56 PM

Must add the two-second spelling lesson:

"separately" (separate, separation)

"definite"

"February"



I got an email on a professional matter from an MD the other day with "separate" and "separately" misspelled. Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 01:02 PM

Forgive me if I seemed to sneer--I was struck by the irony of getting a lecture on language and its dynamics riddled with errors in language.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 02:05 PM

No doubt. But more to the point, the poster in question exhibited a deeper understanding of the dynamics of language than many on this thread who exhibit superior spelling.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: folk1e
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 02:20 PM

YES .... guilty as charged!
My spelling was, is and probably always will be crap!
(crap .... a word derived from Mr Crapper's invention (the water closet))
;0P      no hard feelings,eah

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 02:32 PM

What the flip is all the fuess about, eh? You think Elnglish is declinin'? Ha! I tell you what is delclinin' around here and that is frendley women, eh? I mean womeon who will, like, say YES. Know'm sayin'? Them kind are harder and harder to find arownd here and it don't have nothin' to do with declinin' starndards of flippin' ENGLISH. I think is has to do with stuff like...the flippin' Wimmens liberiation movement and shit like that. There is a lotta bad atitudes out there right now and it is probally becoz of idiots like Gloria Steinberg and them types. That's my theery and I'm stickin' with it, eh?

It could also be the flippin' French taht are responsable becoz they would flippin' do AWAY with English if they could figger out how to. No foolin'. They are in a giant flippin' conspiracy to destroy the English race and langage. If it wasn't fer Don Cherry and a few otehr curageous men like him, English would be a dyin' langwage in this country. I flippin' kid you not! You can take that to the bank and de-flippin'-posit it, baby!

- Shane

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: RangerSteve
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 03:09 PM

One of the many trade schools that advertise every five minutes on daytime TV has a commercial with the phrase "Hire Education" across the top of the screen. Not a skool that eyed care to go two.

Two things that really bug me: people who claim to have prostrate problems. Does that mean they can't lie down?

And people who talk about Lyme's Disease. (That's an eastern U.S. disease carried by tics. It's fairly common in the northeast and pretty serious). It's LYME disease - from the town of Lyme, Connecticut, where it was first discovered, not named after a guy named Lyme. It bothers me most when I hear doctors get it wrong. I want my doctor to be able to call a disease by its proper name or I don't think I can trust him to treat it properly.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 03:58 PM

Ranger Steve said (inter alia):

One of the many trade schools that advertise every five minutes on daytime TV has a commercial with the phrase "Hire Education" across the top of the screen.

Maybe it's on purpose, to suggest that after attending their establishment you'll get employment. (Actually, now that I wrote that in jest, I think that might really be the purpose.)

And people who talk about Lyme's Disease. (That's an eastern U.S. disease carried by tics. It's fairly common in the northeast and pretty serious). It's LYME disease - from the town of Lyme, Connecticut, where it was first discovered, not named after a guy named Lyme.

That's an example of a wider phenomenon. There's a chain of Italian restaurants called "Bravo". I lost count long ago of the people who suggest, "Let's go to Bravo's." And similarly with other restaurant names.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Becca72
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 04:54 PM

My mother used to like to shop at "Ames's". Drove me batty when she'd say that. The name of the chain of stores, for those who've never heard of them, is (or was...they've mostly gone under) Ames.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 05:30 PM

I wonder, now, if there is some deeper current behind all these critical thoughts aimed at those who abuse the delicate details of form, whether or not the substance of their communications is of weight or interest.

Criticality often comes, for example, from a projection onto others of that which one most fears or dislikes in oneself.

Just a thought...



A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 06:05 PM

Yup. You (the generic "you") are only a generation away from the working class, and you dread the possibility that you or your progeny will make the short slip back down the social heap.

And of course one of the perks of having reached the middle class - to weigh against the insecurity of same - is that it gives you a whole bunch of people to look down on.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: bobad
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 06:51 PM

"a whole bunch of people to look down on."

Shouldn't that be "a whole bunch of people down upon which to look?"

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 07:08 PM

Argh!! My thin veneer of middle-class linguistic respectability has been shattered! Feeling weak ... ain't got no strength ...

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Bert
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 08:29 PM

Then there are all those TV chefs who don't know the difference between 'bit' and 'drop'.

"We'll add a bit of water" - NO YOU WON'T! you'll add a drop of water; unless of course you mean ice.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,Bardan
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 10:45 PM

yez all take this way too seriously. I think it's a way for people to safely feel superior. It wouldn't be PC to feel class superiority anymore, so you do it indirectly by feeling superior about their English. Bit sad in my opinion. I really like hearing different dialects, and I don't mind seeing them transliterated either.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 07 Mar 07 - 10:58 PM

"(crap .... a word derived from Mr Crapper's invention (the water closet))"

Ectually, he improved it, not invented it. And a bloody good thing he did, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 12:10 AM

>>>I wonder, now, <<<

Isn't wonder present tense?

>>if there is some deeper current behind <<

Isn't deeper underer?

>>>all these critical thoughts aimed at those who abuse the delicate details of form, <<<<

whoa

>>>whether or not<<<

is the "or not" part redundant?

>>>the substance of their communications is of weight or interest.<<<

Dude - I was enoying the Clarity of four Hefeweizen - but wait - now it's all cloudy. Whose communciations?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 12:44 AM

It was good enough for Kris Kristofferson, the Rhodes scholar, in "Jesus was a Capricorn:"

'Cos everybody's got to have somebody to look down on.
Who they can feel better than at anytime they please.
Someone doin' somethin' dirty, decent folks can frown on.
If you can't find nobody else, then help yourself to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 01:09 AM

If you can't find nobody else, then help yourself to me

I guess they might as well hang me for that as for the things I actually done.
Tom Horn

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 02:20 AM

No, "down on whom" would be correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: kendall
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 07:21 AM

Becca72, She had A number of quirks in her speech that bugged me.
1. Alls I had to do...(all doesn't need that "s")
2. I went to the Doctors. (There was only one Doctor)

But one of the more humorous statements she used to make, "She went and got herself pregnant." Or, "They took him out and got him drunk." Or, "Now look what you made me do."

She did well in school, but like so many others, she stopped learning the day she graduated. Portland high school was, and is a top quality school.
The one I attened was so sub standard, you could get a letter if you knew what the letter was.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 08:53 AM

"I went to the Doctors. (There was only one Doctor)" -

I can't speak authoritatively about the instance you cite, of course - not having known "She" - but my understanding is that if someone says, "I went to the Doctors [sic]", they (he/she/it) mean "doctor's" - in the possessive - short for "the doctor's office".

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 09:05 AM

Likewise the example of "Ames's" store. The owner's name was presumably Mr or Mrs Ames, and his or her store was "Ames's" store, sometimes abbreviated to "Ames's" for short. Da's wo' I finks any'ah.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Alec
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 09:06 AM

To take arms against a sea of troubles...
The most famous mixed metaphor in the history of the English language?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 09:29 AM

Geeze, if you can't trust Bill Shakespeare, who CAN you trust anymore?
;>)

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Peace
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 10:04 AM

You can trust Frank Sinatra.

"To be or not to be", William Shakespeare

"Shoo be doo be do bee", Frank Sinatra

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 11:38 AM

A whole entire buncha of people down upon whom to look.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 12:12 PM

...I think we might prefer "...upon whom to look down...". Ya think?

In this case the verb is compound -- "to look down upon", in full. And "down upon" seems a bit stretched.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 12:33 PM

I dunno - "down upon whom to look" has a certain ring to it -

How 'bout "upon whom down to look"? Talk about your euphony!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: folk1e
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 07:20 PM

To boldly go where no man has gone before

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 08:32 PM

To boldly look down upon those down upon whom no man has dared look....


A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 08:33 PM

on.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 08:55 PM

(before).

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: folk1e
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 09:01 PM

To, without timerity, gaze earthward over themselves whome under over who negative homosapien has the ...... oh bugger it life is too short!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 09:31 PM

To boldly look down upon those upon whom no man has dared look down on before.

exquisite

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 08 Mar 07 - 09:36 PM

Okay:

To boldly look down upon those whom no man has dared look down on before exquisite -

Exquisite what?

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 06:31 AM

A lot of the grammar rules we learnt at school seem to have changed.

I believe it's now acceptable to wantonly split an infinitive, something we would have a got a b*ll*cking for in English lessons when I was at school.

Likewise, ending a sentence with a preposition seems to be something no longer frowned upon.

I can only assume that these rules were broken so many times that the "grammar police" decided "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" and changed the rules to fit in with the de facto usage of the language.

Languages are always evolving, so I don't think it matters. Go with the flow - life's too short, and other cliches I can't think of right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Alec
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 06:39 AM

To boldly go,where no man has gone before.
A famous example of a split infinitive. There are 'Catters who would argue that if Shatner uses it,then it is de facto correct usage.
(I'm not one of them.)

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Schantieman
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 07:29 AM

The prohibition of split infinitives derives (I seem to remember from somewhere) from the Victorians and Latin.    In Latin it's not possible to split an infinitive coz it's just one word: amare (to love) for example. So someone decided that one shouldn't do it in English either, which is pretty nonsensical really.

So to frequently split an infinitive is probably allowed these days, even if it seems somewhat inelegant. Unlike using a preposition to frequently end a sentence with.

Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 08:20 AM

'I can only assume that these rules were broken so many times that the "grammar police" decided "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" and changed the rules to fit in with the de facto usage of the language.'

Possibly, but that's beside the point - the rules were wrong in the first place.

I'll tell you all a little secret: not everything you were taught in school, even to the tune of a hickory stick, is right. Yes, two plus two does make four. No, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with ending a sentence with a preposition.

"So to frequently split an infinitive is probably allowed these days, even if it seems somewhat inelegant."

It seems inelegant only to those to whom it seems inelegant.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 09:15 AM

The kind of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put, as Churchill allegedly said. :D

In all seriousness, there is a vital difference between grammar which is arbitrary and authoritarian, such as the rule of prepositional endings cited above, and grammar which is critical to full understanding and correct transport of nuance.

Below a certain level of discrimination, it is all, like, I go, "Whatever", ya know? I'm like so going to bend over backwards to make my grammar right--NOT!-- and my friends are all, like, "Right on!".

Meeting the standard of basic intelligent and discriminating communication is far more important than answwering up to nuns with rulers in their hands. Beyond that, it's poetic free-for-all and the passions of the instant, the richer the better.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Scrump
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 10:08 AM

It seems inelegant only to those to whom it seems inelegant.

Or to those it seems inelegant to.

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 10:09 AM

Hmmph! Got me there!

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: Amos
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 10:11 AM

"Language is a process of free creation; its laws and principles are fixed, but the manner in which the principles of generation are used is free and infinitely varied. Even the interpretation and use of words involves a process of free creation."

.... Noam Chomsky

Subject: RE: BS: Declining Standards of English
From: folk1e
Date: 09 Mar 07 - 11:15 AM

"Changing Standards of English" doesn't have quite the same ring to it though does it. I won't be the one to point out the capital letters in this post ...... no not me ;op