BS: English grammar question

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,999
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 09:47 PM

He is taller than me.

That's fine. The subject of the sentence is "He". "Me" is in the object case (predicate) as it should be.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Jeri
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 10:56 PM

Why wouldn't it be "He is taller than I"?

He is
I am

"He is taller than I (am)" versus "He is taller than me (am/is)".

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,999
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 12:37 AM

I'm in North America. Today, people answer "Thank you" with "No problem."

'He is taller than I'. However, I would say 'He is taller than I am' OR 'He is taller than me.'

'He is as tall as I' sounds just a bit put on. However, I'd never even consider correcting someone for saying that just because I'd rather hear 'He is as tall as me.'

The purpose of the spoken language is to communicate. Either will do, but I'd say me, not I.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Tangledwood
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 02:57 AM

I'm in North America. Today, people answer "Thank you" with "No problem."

That's a common response in Australia too. Another one is "too easy".
Oh, OK, I'll make it harder for you next time.

The response to "thank you" I most often came across in US was "sure". I don't know what the correct reply to that should be. Umm, "yes I'm sure I want to say thank you?"

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 10:04 AM

Rowan, you asked:

I've always used the construction "A propos your post...." by virtue of the French origin but usually omitting the accent over the "a". But I find I'm in a diminishing minority, outnumbered by those who insert "of" immediately after it. Why do think that might be?

Why people insert "of"?   Damfino.

I would never think to put an "of" in there, and I haven't been particularly aware of that usage.   On a nonacademic basis, I think of the use of "of" in that connection as a mistake.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Jeri
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 11:31 AM

OK, thanks. I understand current usage trumps historical usage, and it always has been mainly about being understood.

I am the very model of a modern English professor
I'm down with how real people talk and these are things I'm noted for:
Teaching how to get your point across is what I sure can do
And participles go where it sounds comfortable for them to...

I've made it through so far focusing on whether something makes sense or not, then I can think about where it's correct. The whole point of language is communication, and when someone bitches about subject-verb agreement, or anything else all the time, it hinders communication a lot more than a technical mistake. All that to say I agree.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 01:29 PM

"No problem" is by far the most frequent response to "Thank you" here in Dixie. "Sure" may be tied for third with "Don't mention it!" Also occasionally heard is "Any time!"

I can't even remember the last time I heard someone say, "You're welcome," and when I say it, people look askance.

People under 50, anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 02:08 PM

Monique gave the French usage of apropos. T
the term has been in English usage (adjective) since the 17th c., meaning "both relevant and opportune."
It appeared as a preposition in print in 1910; "apropos of."
Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.
Dave O, I tend to agree with you, although some might argue.

In the foreign word section of that dictionary, there are entries that I don't think have entered English in translation.
à propos de rien- apropos of nothing.
à propos de bottes- apropos of boots- used to change the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 02:16 PM

I think that Grammar is Grim...Grimmer than Grammer though are those who tell you that you've spelt Grammer wrong, but the double grimmergrammergrommerts and the ones who tell you you've spelt spelled wrong too.

Of course, the GrimstoneGrammarstones of English Grammar are those who cannot sleep if the apo'strophey' is put in the wrong place...

I like Elizabethan Grammur the beft.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 02:51 PM

What a CAT-a-strophe! (Jimmy Durante)

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Rowan
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 03:14 PM

Among the crowd I encountered in the late 70s (in Oz), a frequent response to "Thank you" was "No River Murrays". This was a Strine version of "No Worries" and the increasing frequency of both seemed a bit of a reaction against the creeping influence of US marketing programs that were teaching people like shop assistants to say "You're welcome" in response to a "Thank you". Personally, I'd more frequently respond to a "Thank you" with "It's my pleasure".

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Mr Red
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:57 AM

"sleeped", "weeped", "keeped", "sweeped"

weeped - poetically certainly.
sweeped - yes - it depends on your particular patois.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 04:45 PM

The check-out people in our supermarket tend to respond to "Thank You" with "Thank You", and customers are likely to respond in like manner. It can go on for quite some time as they bat it back between each other. Especially if you are in the queue behind them.

I dislike the kind of grammarian who imagines there is just one way of saying things and the rest are plain wrong, but I love the ones who help us understand what the variations can tell us about who we are and where we come from.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 09:51 AM

dreamed/dreamt
Both acceptable artistically:
"I dreamt I slept in marble halls"
or
"I dreamed a dream in days gone by"

Cheers

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: EBarnacle
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 01:52 PM

I dreamed a dream the other night,
Lowlands, Lowlands away, my John...

I find it amazing that the Microsoft grammar check finds fault with intensives such as "had had."

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:44 PM

I dreamt that I dwelled in marble halls,
With vassals and serfs at my side, .....

(Ah, those were the days-)


Nigel, dremt is inserted parenthetically in the OED.
I prefer my own creation, drempt. It fits the usual pronunciation on this side (west) of the pond, but so far no one has accepted it to their dictionary.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:55 PM

Surely alternative forms like learned/learnt, dreamed/dreamt, leaned/leant (cont p 94) are so common as to be hardly worth considering in context of this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Amos
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:55 PM

HE is taller than ME is.   ME is taller than his sister am.
WE is taller nor them. Him am tallest of all of us'n's.

Any questions?



A

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:18 PM

I be taller than he be, baint I?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:14 PM

it should be; a question concerning English Grammar?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:17 PM

beep /beeped, but not beep/ bept

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:26 PM

beep/bept - I like it, though I haven't been bept for years.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:33 PM

This was a great series that aired on Public TV in the US a while back. Some of it's a bit dated, but it has a lot of interesting information about how English grammar started to evolve into what it is now. One of the things I find kind of interesting is that English is really a patois of several other languages, and evolved more for the purpose of expediting commerce between peoples who spoke different languages (which no doubt is why it's the preferred language of commerce today)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FtSUPAM-uA&feature=PlayList&p=C31CBDD3AC8C4837&index=0

To have it automatically proceed to next video instead of having to do that manually, click on the words "play all" immediately to the right of "Playlist" over on the right hand side.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Ross Campbell
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 08:48 PM

"We/they are both the same height" avoids the problem (if you think it is a problem).

MtheGM - learned/learnt seems to be the precedent for earned/earnt - as in "Bankers earnt billions in bonuses despite posting losses on the year." - No they didn't, they stole the money!

Ross

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 09:53 PM

Not sure what your point is, Ross ~ grammatical or satirical. Anyhow, looking for analogies [as in the non-existence of 'bept' for beeped', rubricated above], is as sterile as trying to find logic in English spelling {tough, bough, cough, ...} ~ the whole point being that English doesn't work in that logical fashion, so that 'learned/learnt' provides no necessary precedent for non-existent 'earned/earnt'; tho this perhaps anyhow catching on thru misplaced usage?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 05:00 PM

Without checking it in the dictionary (just in case I'm wrong!)
Learned & learnt are two different words.
Learned (prounounced learn'ed) means erudite, and is an adjective "the learned judge"
Learnt means having taken on the knowledge "he learnt his two times table"

Cheers
Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 05:14 PM

After checking in the (Oxford) dictionary, learned/learnt and learned are two different words.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 04:07 PM

The special "learned" represents two words, according to how you pronounce it. One of them can also be spelled (or spelt) "learnt".

It's a great language...

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Mar 10 - 12:58 PM

we prefer intellectual masturbation,take your all hole sex scenes,somewhere else.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Mar 10 - 12:59 PM

or to use two anglo saxon words,which are very apt, Fuck Off

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Apr 10 - 03:13 PM

It would be nice if the PTB would put in a post that says "there was a post deleted from this spot" -- it gets confusing following the flow of the convo otherwise!

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Apr 10 - 05:04 PM

But it makes for quite entertaining reading sometimes.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Apr 10 - 08:06 PM

Can't argue.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 15 Apr 10 - 10:19 AM

To go back to the otiginal question, its a matter of phonetics rather than grammar. 'p' is unvoiced, so it attracts the unvoiced 't'. Similarly the negative prefix 'in' is modified by the consonant that follows it. Illogical, irreligious, imperfect,indelible.
In Yorkshire, this tendency is still more pronounced than in other parts of the country, you will hear 'olt people' referred to, and Jim Laker, the cricket commentator, always referred to batsman David Steele as'Davit Steele'

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 15 Apr 10 - 11:15 AM

Also, even now spelling has now become more regularised, and doesn't follow pronunciation,the phonetic differences still remain. hence from above, sweeped would still be sounded sweept, and beeped as beept.
English grammar and orthography is almost 100% predictable if all the factors are taken into account.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Apr 10 - 04:07 PM

I dreamt I saw Joe Hill last night...



I dreamt that all people will be judged by their character and not the color of their skin...


artisticly dreamed is dreamier to my ear than dreamt.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 15 Apr 10 - 04:51 PM

Donuel, I agree with you about the attractions of "dreamed" versus "dreamt".

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 15 Apr 10 - 09:02 PM

But which is more common. Both are clearly ok.'Dreamed' and 'Drempt'are both used, it would be interesting to see who habitually ueses which, and why.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Rowan
Date: 15 Apr 10 - 09:15 PM

If it was (or I wanted it to be) short and sharp, it's dreamt, but
if it was (or I wanted it to be) long, langourous &/or dreamy, it's dreamed.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 11 May 10 - 07:57 PM

You don't say.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: The Sandman
Date: 12 May 10 - 01:15 PM

If it was (or I wanted it to be) short and sharp, it's dreamt, but
if it was (or I wanted it to be) long, langourous &/or dreamy, it's dreamed.

Cheers, Rowan
that sounds australian

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Rowan
Date: 13 May 10 - 01:07 AM

"Guilty" Your Honour, for that's where I hail from.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 May 10 - 12:34 PM

So would it be out of keeping to use "dreamed" for a nightmare?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 20 May 10 - 05:51 PM

I dreamed a dream, I nightmared a nightmare. Maybe not.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Rowan
Date: 21 May 10 - 12:46 AM

So would it be out of keeping to use "dreamed" for a nightmare?

On the (rather rare) occasions when I was recalling them I always said "I had a nightmare." Using "nightmare" implied, rather strongly I thought, that I was dreaming at the time rather than nocturnally dealing with brumbies. In fact, the only animal that appeared (in recurrent dreams I recall from my adolescence) was a boomer, but that's another story.

Cheers, Rowan

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 06:33 PM

Rowan:
"Guilty" Your Honour, for that's where I hail from.
As this is a discussion on grammar, may I point out that it is considered (by many) that a preposion is not something to end a sentence on.

Cheers
Nigel (tongue most firmly in cheek!)

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Smokey.
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 08:51 PM

Both my grammars were English.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 09:53 PM

As this is a discussion on grammar, may I point out that it is considered (by many) that a preposion is not something to end a sentence on.

Considered what?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 04:19 AM

Another grammar question....
if te singular of children is child, what is the singular of brethren, and how s it derived?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,^&*
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 04:35 AM

Generally, "brethren" is used as the plural of one or more particular senses of "brother" e.g. monk, fellow trade union member, member of certain religious groupings... (See Concise Oxford Dictionary).

It's an archaic plural form, essentially.