BS: Language Pet Peeves

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jan 21 - 08:13 AM

Reminds me of a week-long biology field course in north Wales I was on when I was at university. I think it was in April 1970. During that whole week there was no sun, no wind, no rain and the temperature hovered within a degree of 7C, day and night. We were supposed to be measuring the effect of the weather on evapotranspiration. We returned to college unenlightened! We did learn quite a bit about mosses and liverworts, however, with the most inspirational teacher I've ever had, so all was not lost.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 15 Jan 21 - 08:03 AM

My favourite weather forecast was a few years ago when it was just cloudy for weeks on end, no rain, no sun, no heat, no cold.
For some reason the radio weather forecaster wasn't available one morning, so the presenter just announced that "Today, the weather will be boring."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 15 Jan 21 - 07:46 AM

I usually find television weather forecasts easier to concentrate on than radio as they are visual. You can see the weather moving across the country, see which direction it is going in (easier than remembering that an easterly wind is coming from the east, not going in an easterly direction).
The only problem is that you have to remember that the design of the map varies according to which channel you are watching. One will use pale green for clear skies and darker green for overcast, while another uses pale green to suggest a cloudy sky, and darker green to mean the sky will be clear.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jan 21 - 06:52 AM

That when was meant to be a with.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jan 21 - 06:51 AM

I don't want to go off at too much of a tangent, but the topic of the public perception of broadcast weather forecasts is quite interesting and has been a matter of concern for forecasters. Here's a link that could be worth a read (you'll have to copy and paste it): https://doi.org/10.1080/00046973.1969.9676566

I'm an amateur member of the Royal Meteorological Society and have been subscribing to their in-house mag for decades. A few years ago there was a discussion of how well the public were able to concentrate on forecasts, and it came up that many people switch on the forecast but have drifted off well before the end. I suppose that we often want to tease out the bits relevant to our own region, but that can seem to be quite an effort when things such as "tomorrow will be dry and bright in the south and east but it will be more unsettled in the north and west." There's a lot to process in that, especially if, like me, you live in the south and west :-) , and by the time the presenter gets to that bit I've probably fallen asleep anyway. I think that the best two communicators on the telly are Susan Powell and Sarah Keith-Lucas, both confident, clear, map-savvy and able to hold the attention for the required two minutes. I struggle with Helen Willetts and body-builder Tomasz Schafernaker. If Mrs Steve asks me what the forecast is if I've listened to either of those two, I realise that I haven't listened properly...

I've posted this before, but my favourite weather forecast ludicrosity was Helen Willetts telling us that "At least last night's rain has washed the humidity out of the air..."

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: G-Force
Date: 15 Jan 21 - 06:36 AM

The occasional slip when speaking is understandable. We can't always think fast enough to get it right. But I hate to see basic errors in writing.

A recent caption on a TV programme talked about 'a vertebrae'!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 15 Jan 21 - 04:25 AM

"the temperature will reach five degrees today but it will feel more like minus one in that breeze,"

I think that is one of the most useful parts of the weather forecast. I don't have to worry about slipping on a frozen puddle right outside my door but I should wrap up in warm clothes if I am going to walk around the playing fields.

I don't mind the chatty form of the weather presenters. Not everything has to be read out in the measured tones of the shipping forecast. I do agree with you, though, on the horrors of "temmricher" and "Febyouerry/Febry".

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jan 21 - 08:18 PM

We have a new weather lady who is prone to pronouncing temperature "temmricher." And I wish weather presenters wouldn't say daft things such as "the temperature will be below where it should be for the time of year," and "the temperature will reach five degrees today but it will feel more like minus one in that breeze," and "the showers will already be moving their way in." And, being the time of year it is, we're starting to get the usual spate of Febyouerries and Febrys. Why can't people just talk proper!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jan 21 - 05:11 PM

I got that from a mate of mine many years ago. You may or may not have noticed that I never use those internet shortenings such as ROTFLMAO, LOL and the like. "In m'humble" avoids my having to type the pretentious IMHO, or, worse, IMNSHO. I suppose that you could accuse "in m'humble" of being pretentious, but it's so daft that I feel that the pretentiousness gets washed away in a tide of self-deprecation. YMMV.


Shit...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 14 Jan 21 - 04:50 PM

I seem to be getting used to "So," now, though I hated it at first.

There are some expressions that go the opposite way for me. I don't mind them at first but grow to dislike them.

I realise that it is one of Steve's favourites and I accept that he has every right to use it wherever and whenever he wants but, the more I see "in m'humble", the more I hate it.

Sorry Steve

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 14 Jan 21 - 03:44 PM

Thanks for the grin, meself/Steve Shaw.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 14 Jan 21 - 02:30 PM

I seem to be getting used to "So," now, though I hated it at first.

But I am still bewildered by people beginning their answer to a question with "Yes-no".

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Jan 21 - 02:05 PM

Or even "So, it really depends on how we manage to suppress the virus over the coming days, going forward". Arrgh!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: mayomick
Date: 14 Jan 21 - 01:35 PM

The word "so" when used needlessly as the first word in reply to a question . As in:
Journalist :"How much longer are we likely to be on lockdown, Dr Holohan"?

De Holohan : "So, it really depends on how we manage to suppress the virus over the coming days"

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 07:27 PM

I stand corrected. -)

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: meself
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 06:46 PM

That should be "hee HER", Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 06:11 PM

Hee hee...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: leeneia
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 04:52 PM

How long has the kid been 6 years old?

Good question, Mrrzy.

I have my own question. The grandparents probably wanted to go to church themselves. What were they supposed to do with the child during the service, leave it at home to play with matches?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 03:25 PM

My peeve wasn't about the grandparents taking the kid to church, which was indeed the complaint. That is why I didn't specify the complaint. Hee her is a) obviously a typo and b)had been explained already.

Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 02:44 PM

I did google the headline. I didn't find anything with that exact headline, but I did find a story about a mother being upset because her child's grandparents, who had been looking after the child for the whole of the summer, had taken the child with them to church.
Was that the complaint you were referring to? If so, why the square brackets, which lead the reader to imagine all kinds of appalling behaviour.
I was taken, and later sent, to church as a child. I don't think it did me any harm although I am no longer a believer (if I ever really was). But as so much of our history, music, literature and so on has been influenced by the church and its beliefs, I appreciated having some knowledge of what that basis consists of.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 02:21 PM

But what DOES "hee her" mean?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 02:18 PM

Ooh typoed hee hee. How rude of me, you are so right. I obviously do these things specifically to upset you.

My use of square brackets to avoid detailing the complaint is standard.

All your other quibbles are with the headline. It did not make sense. That is what peeved me. And you apparently agree with me in that.

You want to see the source, look it up yourself. That is what the google is for.

Again. Why do you quibble with my peeves? And when it is pointed out to you that what you are quibbling with isn't even me, why do you double down instead of apologizing and backing off?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 10:46 AM

"Hee her headline reads Grandparents have been [complaint] my 6-year old behind my back for years!"

1. What does "Hee her" mean?

2. Who is this "her?"

3. What does "[complaint]" in the middle of an alleged headline mean?

4. "have been"??

5. Whose "6-year old [sic]"?

6. Behind WHOSE back?

Tell us where you saw this headline. I'd love to look it up. I have no peeve with the sentence, but, in general, I do have peeves when it comes to obscurantist writing that requires me to do a lot of unnecessary mental processing before I can see the light. It's far more polite to express things in simple, clear language.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 09:37 AM

But it *wasn't* MY sentence. It was the headline that peeved me! So it peeved you too! So why, again, exactly, are you picking on my peeves?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 04:34 AM

Yep, we'd all be genii!

Er...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: BobL
Date: 13 Jan 21 - 02:18 AM

If we all learnt from our mistakes, I'd be a genius by now.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 12 Jan 21 - 07:40 PM

Mrrzy,
I'm not trying to pick a fight - just pointing out:


Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy - PM
Date: 24 Jun 20 - 04:12 PM

..................................

I like being corrected. How else can I learn?


DC

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jan 21 - 06:13 PM

I'm suggesting that you state your case with clarity. It's hard to discuss your peeves with you when you type an incomprehensible sentence (and I recall that you regard yourself as a rather good proofreader. It wouldn't have taken much for you to have reviewed that sentence, would it?)

"My 70-year-old aunt has been telling me for years that I can't bake a decent cake." Perfectly good English in m'humble...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Jan 21 - 04:18 PM

Steve Shaw, I thought my peeves didn't have to be your peeves. Are you starting that up again?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 12 Jan 21 - 12:27 PM

Apart from the fact that your sentence doesn't make much sense, I can't see much wrong with the construction you appear to be complaining about.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Jan 21 - 11:23 AM

Hee her headline reads Grandparents have been [complaint] my 6-year old behind my back for years!

How long had their kid been 6?

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Jan 21 - 04:00 PM

Yeah it worked for me but my whole life happens out loud in my head...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jan 21 - 03:24 PM

I outed once too often there. The spuds were done.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jan 21 - 01:56 PM

Then do what I do and read out the posts out loud in your head.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 11 Jan 21 - 11:02 AM

Yes, they give the definitions of words is more accurate.
And the "Don't call me Shirley" quip only works in the spoken language.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jan 21 - 09:48 AM

If I'd said they give the definitions of words, would that've been all right? And don't call me Shirley...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 11 Jan 21 - 09:41 AM

Steve,
Dictionaries don't pass judgement in the sense that they don't tell you what's right or wrong. It is their job to define words,

Surely, by your reasoning, it is not their job to define words, but to state what definitions are being given (by users) to the words.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: BobL
Date: 11 Jan 21 - 03:00 AM

I'm no polyglot, but other languages fascinate me. English has plenty of Latin plurals, correct and incorrect, but for some reason no Greek, which I understand would be hippopotamoi, octopoi.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 10 Jan 21 - 01:22 PM

I was told that the plurals depend on whether the word is based on Latin, as in fungus/fungi, or Greek as in hippopotamus, meaning 'horse of the river' [hippos = horse; potamos = river], and octopus [okto = eight; pous = foot].
This is confirmed by my Concise Oxford Dictionary.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jan 21 - 12:00 PM

Dictionaries don't pass judgement in the sense that they don't tell you what's right or wrong. It is their job to define words, to include all words that are in common usage and to interpret contexts in which words may be used. Of course, the latter requires judgement, but not in the sense you meant.

As for hippopotami, it's plainly not wrong, but as for how its usage is regarded it all depends on where you look it up. For example, from lexico.com:

"Other words ending in -us show a very varied pattern. Like octopi, the plural hippopotami is now generally taken to be either funny or absurdly pedantic, and the usual plural is hippopotamuses."

We can all indulge in confirmation bias.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Lighter
Date: 10 Jan 21 - 10:57 AM

Dictionaries pass judgment all the time.

First they decide what they think is worth entering.

Then, if they like, they apply such labels as "colloquial," "informal," "slang," "nonstandard," "archaic," "obsolete," "regional," "U.S.," "Brit.," "Austral.," and occasionally "substandard."

"Hippopotami" bears no label.

One label rarely seen is "Not in technical use." That covers things like "virus" used to mean "any illness." No professional epidemiological discussion would use "virus" that way, even though millions of people do and would, because technically it is wrong.

"Hippopotami," presumably, is likewise "not in technical use," though it's a stylistic rather than a terminological issue.

OED accepts without comment "Plural unchanged, hippoppotamus, hippopotami."

"An Account of Several Late Voyages and Discoveries to the South and North" (1694) tells of "Hippopotami" at the Cape of Good Hope.

Among other serious users of "hippopotami" was David Livingstone in 1865.

Sounding funny doesn't make it essentially humorous.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 10 Jan 21 - 07:58 AM

Dictionaries merely reflect usage, Nigel, and they don't pass judgement. Clearly, "hippopotami" is in currency so dictionaries would report it. What dictionaries won't tell you is that you might look a bit of a twit if you use "hippopotami" in anything other than a humorous context, for example, if you were writing a treatise on the biology of, er, hippopotami... I do that fun thing meself, frequently, whenever more than one hippopotamus is on the radar.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 10 Jan 21 - 06:56 AM

Rhymers' licence, Nigel. You'll be singing the praises of octopi, viri and fora next...

Steve, no rhymers' licence required.
I have now extended my search beyond just 'general online dictionaries'.
My Collins Dictionary, and my 'Shorter Oxford' both give the two options for the plural, as do the online entries from those publishers:
Collins Dictionary .com
Oxford learner's dictionary

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jan 21 - 03:07 PM

And I do find the confusion between singulars and plurals to be a very strange phenomena...


Come on, folks, it's Saturday night!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jan 21 - 02:47 PM

Rhymers' licence, Nigel. You'll be singing the praises of octopi, viri and fora next...

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 09 Jan 21 - 01:53 PM

[And, yes, I do know it's hippopotamuses.]
Most online dictionaries (at a quick glance) seem to accept either plural.

Flanders & Swann: "A regular army of hippopotami"!

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 09 Jan 21 - 12:37 PM

If I had seen the correct spelling - riparian - I wouldn't have spent time searching for raparian. I could have bypassed the great grey green greasy Limpopo with its fever trees and jumped straight to the river bank via "hippopotami".

[And, yes, I do know it's hippopotamuses.]

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jan 21 - 12:02 PM

The word used by Hyacinth was riparian.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Mrrzy
Date: 09 Jan 21 - 10:58 AM

I learned that term from Hyacinth ["it's pronounced Bouquet!"] Bucket, on Keeping Up Appearances, for the philistines. Yes, it was deliberately obfuscating. Which I normally eschew. I guessed at the spelling.

But the word Laptopotomy made me think of the great, grey-green greasy Limpopo River, all set about with fever trees. That is a literary reference. Crossed with Ptolemy, which made me think of the Nile.

And so from the rivers we get to the word riparian, which means relating to riverbanks. Or did at some point.

Subject: RE: BS: Language Pet Peeves
From: Jos
Date: 09 Jan 21 - 07:57 AM

I should point out that the illustration showing the book cover spells it "Raparian". The blurb writer must have been writing it on a device using Autocorrect.