BS: English grammar question

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,CrazyEddie
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:57 AM

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.

And that is a rule, up with which i will not put.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Les from Hull
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 08:41 AM

The singular of brethren is brother. As is the singular of brothers.

And as for the old chestnut about not ending sentences with a preposition, I suggest you look up 'phrasal verbs', a problem area for many people learning English as an additional language.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 11:26 AM

I have realised that ages ago a post of mine caused confusion.

A. Some dialects of English use an f sound for unvoiced th, and a v sound for voiced th. This goes back at least to Domesday book. children grown up with this variant cannot hear the differences, and some cannot see that one pair of sounds uses the teeth and lips, and the other the tongue and teeth.
B. Would've is a separate issue, in which the person using "would of" does not realise that this does not make sense, while "would have" does.
C. I omitted "went down the town and got off of the bus" and "can I go toilet?"

And reading on I realise that there are now three new usages which are lost issues, but wind me up no end. "Fascia" for "facia", as in plastic bits on houses fitted by double glazing salesmen. "Gifted" instead of various past tenses of "give". Thought it was an adjective, used as in "he was a gifted guitarist", or possibly "he was gifted with great musicianship", but not "he gifted the school a trophy". And the pronounciation of wort as in figwort, liverwort, lungwort, squinancywort, and especially Saint John's Wort as if it was spelled "wart". Oxford gives "wert" which makes sense as it has the same form as word, world, worth, work, worm, worst, and worthy. I gather that parts of the States use the "wart" form.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 08:47 PM

This Yank has never seen "St. John's Wart [sic]," so there's still hope.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 10:40 PM

It was on his right elbow.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 11:07 AM

I think I can safely assert the people of the US don't even have a pronunciation for St John's wort, because until recently nobody had ever even heard of it.

So when it began to appear in the news, we simply sounded it out and made it rhyme with 'sort,' 'Mort' and 'short'.

I agree with you about 'gifted.' I believe that the form 'He gifted it to the school...' originated with lawyers. In the US, there is a combined estate and gift tax. It's a package deal which prevents the wealthy from avoiding estate taxes by giving away assets right and left when death seems imminent. There are limits on how much one can give away, and how soon before death they can be given.

Lawyers have become so focused on the word gift from 'estate and gift tax' that they started using the form 'gifted' instead of 'gave.'   

If I presented you with a necklace of Czech glass beads, a lawyer would say I gave it to you. But if I gave you $30,000, kept a record and paid tax on it, the lawyer would say I gifted it.

I believe that people sensed that 'gifted' was associated with wealth and prestige, and they copied.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Penny S.
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 07:05 AM

Ahha on the wort. I did check with a Californian of my acquaintance, so I assumed it was common usage, like route (UK root, US rowt) or buoy (UK boy, US booey). It's a bunch of people on both sides of the pond unaware of botanical usage, looking at the end of the word rather than the beginning.

Curiously, on a recent program, a chap (ethnobotanist) teaching how to make remedies out of herbs started out with the wart pronounciation, met a herbal specialist of the older sort who used the wert version, started using wert himself, and then, by the end of the programme had slipped back to wart, very gradually.

And thank you for the background on "gifted". It fits with something I had noticed about the formality of the sort of cases it was used for but had been hard to define (as it was definitely leaking out). Yesterday I noticed someone on the Beeb doing the same thing with another adjective, but have mercifully forgotten which one.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Tangledwood
Date: 11 Jun 10 - 10:48 PM

or buoy (UK boy, US booey).

Whether or not this is different pronunciation in UK and US I don't know, but it is very deliberate in maritime radio communications. I first became aware of it when communicating with an aircraft searching for a missing fishing boat. The pilot's statement that "I have sighted a boy in the water" required quite different responses from the rescue organisation depending upon whether he had sighted rubber or flesh.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 10:15 AM

And "route" is not necessarily "rowt" in the U.S.   

I admit that in my childhood in Minnesota (30s to 40s) I absorbed "rowt", as in a "morning paper rowt". But sometime before my 21st year I had learned that "root" was "right"!

It's largely a geographical distribution. I've seen language maps that break down exactly this pronunciation distinction.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 12 Jun 10 - 11:09 AM

You don't get your kicks on rowt 66.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 11:37 AM

Another question.

How (in UK) did to word presently change meaning (I think in the 18th century) from meaning now to meaning in a short while?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:31 PM

I certainly wouldn't know when, but I can surely imagine "presently" first being thought of as "Now, instantly", then "REALLY quick now," and then "I have it in mind for current execution, and I'll get it done in just a little bit," and pretty soon forgetting the urgency and expanding the now-built-in delay. A sort of gradual widening of the time parameter, forgetting the initial immediacy.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: gnu
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:53 PM

And in modern acronym, RFN, Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: maple_leaf_boy
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 08:56 PM

I'd like to add something about the "th" blend. Some people in N.S.
pronounce just the "t". I've heard some people pronounce "menthol"
for example as "mentaul", instead of the "th" sound. I am guilty of
doing this sometimes myself.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 22 Jun 10 - 04:13 AM

What makes me cringe is when, for example, someone writes in a report:

There are presently 30 people using the service when they mean there are currently.....

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Tangledwood
Date: 22 Jun 10 - 05:07 AM

Pronunciation:/ˈprɛz(ə)ntli/
adverb
1 after a short time; soon:
this will be examined in more detail presently
2 at the present time ; now:
there are presently 1,128 people on the waiting list
Usage
Presently has two meanings. The older, meaning 'now', dates from the 15th century and is the dominant meaning in American English, as in he is presently chair of the committee. The second meaning is' in a while, soon ', and used to be the chief meaning in British English, as in he will see you presently. Nowadays the first meaning is just as common in British English as the second, and just as correct, despite the objections of some traditionalists.


source - Oxforddictionaries.com

Enjoy your cringing. :)

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 22 Jun 10 - 10:26 AM

What makes me cringe is when, for example, someone writes in a report:

There are presently 30 people using the service when they mean there are currently.....

They mean the same thing in the United States. I'm sorry we make you cringe. Time to join the world community and realize different places can use words differently.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: bubblyrat
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 05:37 AM

In the original "Saint" stories by Leslie Charteris, one can often find references to Simon Templar's smoking habits thus ;

" The Saint lighted another cigarette".

       I rather like that,although I fear that most people,especially the young,would use "lit" instead of "lighted".

The cause of some mystification to me currently is the American usage of the word "Momentarily" ,meaning soon, shortly,etc.,as in "I shall be with you momentarily" ( Spok to Kirk in a Star Trek film).Whereas we in Britain use the word to suggest an event of very short duration,as per "The lightning flash illuminated the scene momentarily", although there is a distressing tendency nowadays for British people to spell ( those that can ) lightning as "lightening". But of course,it doesn't really matter,says my girlfriend (who is a teacher !!). Bollocks !!

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 09:02 AM

Bubblyrat said, in part:

The cause of some mystification to me currently is the American usage of the word "Momentarily" ,meaning soon, shortly,etc.,as in "I shall be with you momentarily"

My preferred answer to that is, "Surely I'm entitled to a little bit more time than that!"

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jun 10 - 11:28 AM

I was taught that "lit" referred to fire and "lighted" referred to illumination. Is this not the same across the pond?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Tannywheeler
Date: 24 Jun 10 - 10:41 AM

For the folks who are sad about the casual responses to "Thank You": Hally's response to that was always either "You're entirely welcome", or "You are more than welcome". I find myself using those often. Tw

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Patsy Warren
Date: 29 Jul 10 - 10:17 AM

Teenspeak grammar will always be irritating to some, that is the whole point of it. It sets them apart from the older generation (or old farts) and is a form of rebellion to conform. I was listening to a group of girls on a bus saying 'I'm like this and I was like that and it was just so cool'. This way of talking is quite widespread from state schools and public schools alike so it isn't a class thing either. But I do wish as with other trends it passes as quickly as possible.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Suibhne Astray
Date: 30 Jul 10 - 04:11 AM

What makes me cringe is when, for example...

...people supposedly passionate about Folk Usage & Vernacular Idioms reveal themselves to be a bunch of reactionary pedants hung up on notions of Correctness in a field (i.e. language) which is constantly evolving and determined entirely by Pragmatics. You really should be out there celebrating this stuff as living Folklore, not bemoaning it for its deviancy from some illusury rule.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: mousethief
Date: 30 Jul 10 - 04:25 AM

Teenspeak grammar will always be irritating to some, that is the whole point of it. It sets them apart from the older generation (or old farts) and is a form of rebellion to conform. I was listening to a group of girls on a bus saying 'I'm like this and I was like that and it was just so cool'. This way of talking is quite widespread from state schools and public schools alike so it isn't a class thing either. But I do wish as with other trends it passes as quickly as possible.

The great thing about it is that it evolves so rapidly that very little of it actually gets into normal usage. Words and phrases that were the absolute height of coolness when I was in school are completely unknown now. And so on it goes.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: framus
Date: 24 Oct 10 - 01:37 PM

I've been browsing way back to the subject of dreamed/dreamt, and wondered if anyone knows any other word that ends in mt. And you can't have Gustav Klimt, 'cos he's a proper noun, and anyway he's foreign.

Also wreaked/wrought. My garden railings are not made of wreaked iron.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 24 Oct 10 - 01:54 PM

Undreamt: not yet imagined!

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Oct 10 - 02:05 PM

Unkemt- no, unkempt

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Amos
Date: 24 Oct 10 - 03:37 PM

Looks like we're stumt.


A

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:25 PM

Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life Insurance Company of India.

I wouldn't wonder that their grammar leaves something to be desired.
What is your grammar question?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:46 PM

SPAM!

---

[Spam deleted] -Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 16 Dec 10 - 04:53 PM

No, Jim, they don't sell Spam. Don't think I have eaten any since WW2.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: EBarnacle
Date: 17 Dec 10 - 03:55 PM

"About 6 months ago, when I was reading a novel set in the 30s, I came across "flivver" and I last used the word skiddoo about a month ago when referring to the removal of huskies from Mawson, Antarctica."

That's Ski Doo, a brand of jet ski [the land version of the personal watercraft] and William Saroyan's fabulous story "The Phantom Flivver."

Strip-ed bass

A long standing issue I have had was with the pronunciation of knish. Many pr0nounce it as kunish; I have even heard nish. The correct pronunciation is, of course knish, with both letter pronounced and elided into each other.


"I'd like to add something about the "th" blend. Some people in N.S.
pronounce just the "t". I've heard some people pronounce "menthol"
for example as "mentaul", instead of the "th" sound. I am guilty of
doing this sometimes myself." Clearly a cognitive issue.

Of late [the past couple of years] I have been hearing or perhaps attending to "I and my..." and "me and my..." I thought this was a new aberration until I was reading a book from the early 19th century and found the same thing. Aaaargh.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Slag
Date: 18 Dec 10 - 09:10 AM

Pot Purri!?

Stink, stank, stunk

Think, thank, thunk!

And then there was Dizzy Dean, baseball player and announcer who once commented on an extra-ordinary play (of words?) "He slud into first base!"

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 18 Dec 10 - 06:28 PM

Me and My Shadow, walkin' down the avenue.....



I thinked it was so, but twuzn't

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 18 Dec 10 - 07:20 PM

I have been hearing or perhaps attending to "I and my..." and "me and my..."

There is nothing wrong with either one of those, if the form of the first-person noun fits its function in the sentence.

"I and my brother went downtown" is a perfectly good choice of the form for what is being said. "I and my brother" is(are?) the subject, and thus "I" is called for. Many would prefer the order "My brother and I", but that's not a grammatical distinction as such. Naming the other person first is more a matter of politeness.

"When we got there, a drunk insulted my brother and me." That's fine too. "My brother and me" is the object, not the subject.

One can test these by leaving out the other person:
"I went downtown." ("I" as subject) and
"a drunk insulted me." ("me" as object).

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: EBarnacle
Date: 19 Dec 10 - 10:55 AM

Dave, when I was a kid, I was taught that the objective form, me and my ... or I and my..., was poor grammar. I suspect you were also. Suddenly I and those around me seem to be inundated with it. Sounds clumsy, doesn't it.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 19 Dec 10 - 12:20 PM

I think the preference of 'and I' over 'I and', is just that it avoids consecutive vowels especially in relation to how syllables are concatenated. Normal spoken English would sound like 'An di', whereas in the other case unless each word is deliberately enunciated as two words, it would sound like 'Iand'.

There are similar processes in other languages where word combinations, and changes in spelling exist purely to ease pronunciation.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Grishka
Date: 19 Dec 10 - 12:43 PM

SPB-Cooperator, according to present-day standards of politeness, "I" comes last in any list of persons, in any language I know. "My husband and I" is so-called Queen's English. Of course, like all conventional modesty, this sometimes sounds like hypocrisy, e.g. "My helicopter pilot and I are going to arrive at 8 PM".

"I and my dog like sausages" would seem acceptable, though. "Me and you and a dog named Boo [are] traveling ..." violates the laws of grammar and politeness, but at least it rhymes.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 20 Dec 10 - 07:49 AM

It seems the rules of grammar regarding what is polite or not polite to use is perhaps not as strict as it used to be. All generations of young people I suspect have been criticised by authoriative figures regarding the decline of standards in English grammar. My parents criticised my 60/70's generation who were encouraged to cram everything in quantity rather than quality but compared to my sons generation my parents did not have anything really to worry about. I have never been over confident of using grammar and when using the Royal 'My Husband and I' I was met with stifled giggles.

Now I don't worry or stress about it anymore however I had an occasion to to correct my son on something he said and he looked at me and told me to 'just chill out.'

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: meself
Date: 20 Dec 10 - 01:20 PM

What is the socially-approved way of getting across the concept of "My Husband and I", in the UK?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 20 Dec 10 - 07:31 PM

"My Husband and I"

Isn't that what Mrs Windsor says?

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 05:33 AM

These days I would say 'my partner and I' rather than husband whether I was married or not.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 07:56 AM

GOD, I love grammar pedantry, out of all proportion.

Can someone help settle an argument about 'shrimp'?

Is the collective noun 'shrimp', or can you have '7 shrimps' on your plate?

Dani

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: s&r
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 08:21 AM

The collective noun for shrimp(s) is troup(e). The plural can be either shrimps or shrimp.

Stu

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 10:20 AM

When I was 7 I had my primary school class rolling with laughter when my story was read out by the teacher who drew attention to my use of meeses as plural for mice, all because of Jinx the cat hating those meeeses to pieces.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Stringsinger
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 04:21 PM

The modern member of society behaves as if he/she were shept.

(I retire sheepishly).

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: Stringsinger
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 04:23 PM

After I had stepped out of the intersection, I felt that I had been bept. (At).

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: meself
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 04:43 PM

I'm afraid that should be:

After I had stepped out of the intersection, I felt at whom that I had been bept.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: framus
Date: 21 Dec 10 - 07:50 PM

I still don't understand shrimps and troup(e). Am I missing something?
By the way, didn't shrimp used to have a rather rudish meaning as a verb?
Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: English grammar question
From: s&r
Date: 22 Dec 10 - 03:53 AM

There was a question asking for the collective noun for shrimp. Collective nouns are things like a gaggle of geese broadly meaning a group. The collective for shrimps is troup, sometimes with an 'e' on the end - take your pick. The plural of shrimp is shrimp or shrimps.

There's a vulgar(?)( meaning of shrim as a verb meaning toe sucking (as allegedly David Mellor and Antonia de Sancha some years ago)

Stu