GMG Classical Music Forum

The Back Room => The Diner => Topic started by: Cato on February 08, 2009, 05:00:18 PM

Title: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2009, 05:00:18 PM
I have suffered far too long the slings and narrow-mindedness of outrageous morons mangling the English language!   $:)

Now Cato says: "Hold, enough!"  And undammed shall be the comments: let them flood in!

Cato is no doctrinaire scold: he will at times be inconsistent and contradictory in his grammar grumbles, since it is in the nature of languages to be so.  Yet ex cathedra will be his pronouncements!   0:)

My complaints shall arrive in no particular order, so let me just start, and you can see if you agree!

People trying to sound smart by using "I" all the time, even when it means it makes them wrong: the ubiquitous "just between you and I" is moronic.  "Between" is a preposition and therefore needs an object form, not a subject form.  Would you say "That package is for I" or "He stood in front of I" ? 

Then stop using "I" with the word "between" or any other preposition!!!    :P     8)    The script for the movie "Becoming Jane" contained the monstrosity "...by your father and I" at whose author the real Jane would have flung her inkpot, and maybe even that other pot in her chamber!   $:)

East Coasters and people on PBS using "Absolutely" instead of "Yes" drive me to the brink of pantocide!   >:D 
But I'll keep my shirt on!   :o 

People pronouncing the indefinite article "a" as if they were Canadians saying "eh?" make me want to throw bricks at nuns!   0:)  "That is eh very good book."  "This is eh book you must read."  Completely impossible pronunciation!   $:) 

It is the counterpart to "the = thee" being used in front of everything: "thee" for "the" is permissible only before vowels. 

Why are such things happening?  One can blame schools with hemidemisemiliterate teachers leading the ignorant into a perpetual wilderness of pseudo-educated ignorance.  One can blame a relativist society, where everyone is correct, especially in language, since aren't all grammar rules just "opinions" anyway?  Don't grammar rules stand in the way of personal expression and personal creativity?  Aren't grammar rules even perhaps ways to oppress people in the lower classes?   :o

The result of course is the growth of incoherence in private and public discourse, recent examples being past and present occupants of the White House in the last 20 years, Caroline Schlossberg and her infamous 99 "you knows" within 2 minutes of speaking, practically every "movie star" or "personality" jabbering on TV, etc.

Worse is the lack of music in their words: the most recent and risible public example was heard on January 20th in Washington D.C., a "poem" which was merely a concatenation of the most trite and unmusical syllables ever heard in decades. 

The lady's poetic license needs to be revoked!   :o

Another thing that drives Cato nutzoid are people referring to themselves in the 3rd person!    :o

So I will not really be doing that!   0:)

Feel free to list your own pet punctuation or pronunciation peeves: I will probably agree with you!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on February 08, 2009, 05:56:35 PM
QuoteNow Cato says: "Hold, enough!"  And undammed shall be the comments: let them flood in!
You're not supposed to start a sentence with the word "and".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2009, 06:04:07 PM
Quote from: G$ on February 08, 2009, 05:56:35 PM
You're not supposed to start a sentence with the word "and".

I do not follow that rule!   $:)

And neither should you!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Brian on February 08, 2009, 06:04:51 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2009, 06:04:07 PM
I do not follow that rule!   $:)

And neither should you!   0:)
I agree with you!
But I am not to be trusted.  8)
Does this make you rethink your position?  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on February 08, 2009, 06:08:10 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2009, 06:04:07 PM
I do not follow that rule!   $:)

And neither should you!   0:)
Alright, then!
And I won't follow it, either.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2009, 06:09:07 PM
Quote from: Brian on February 08, 2009, 06:04:51 PM
I agree with you!
But I am not to be trusted.  8)
Does this make you rethink your position?  :D

No!  It makes me proud!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2009, 06:12:54 PM
Quote from: G$ on February 08, 2009, 06:08:10 PM
Alright, then!
And I won't follow it, either.  ;)

"Alright" and its genetically suspect cousins "Awright" and "Alot" are not words!   $:)

Please use "all right" and "a lot" instead: and for the latter "much" is preferable.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on February 08, 2009, 06:33:41 PM
How about I write however I want? You're not my teacher, so you can't give me any red marks!  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Coopmv on February 08, 2009, 07:37:28 PM
Perhaps making English the ONLY official language in the US will go a long way in addressing this problem ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: XB-70 Valkyrie on February 08, 2009, 08:03:22 PM
Like, I think like the worst like problem currently facing, like the English language, is like the ungrammatical, nonsensical use of like the word "like". Try listening to any female under the age of 40, and you'll like see like what I'm like talking about. Like, I guess Frank Zappa's "Valley Girl" phenomenon is like to blame. Like. Like. And furthermore, like, like--like like like; like like. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Brian on February 08, 2009, 08:05:49 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2009, 06:12:54 PM
"Alright" and its genetically suspect cousins "Awright" and "Alot" are not words!   $:)

Please use "all right" and "a lot" instead: and for the latter "much" is preferable.   0:)
Hopefully you will notice what's wrong with this sentence!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sarastro on February 08, 2009, 08:20:07 PM
Quote from: XB-70 Valkyrie on February 08, 2009, 08:03:22 PM
Like, I think like the worst like problem currently facing, like the English language, is like the ungrammatical, nonsensical use of like the word "like". Try listening to any female under the age of 40, and you'll like see like what I'm like talking about. Like, I guess Frank Zappa's "Valley Girl" phenomenon is like to blame. Like. Like. And furthermore, like, like--like like like; like like. 

You know, I, like, think like it's like being without a handbag, you know. Like it's like being bare you know, like.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 08, 2009, 08:36:29 PM
Is this "English - United States" or proper English?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: XB-70 Valkyrie on February 08, 2009, 09:20:32 PM
Quote from: mahler10th on February 08, 2009, 08:36:29 PM
Is this "English - United States" or proper English?

Wow, you must be Canadian (too wrapped up in kissing swishy, inbred, royal a55 to realize why your own country has zero identity of its own.). Eh?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 09, 2009, 04:55:38 AM
Quote from: Coopmv on February 08, 2009, 07:37:28 PM
Perhaps making English the ONLY official language in the US will go a long way in addressing this problem ...

Don't think so;  these instances of sloppy grammar/usage have been rampant among US anglophones.  If anything, I find that non-native speakers who have immigrated, are rather more careful with their grammar.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 05:25:57 AM
This ain't no foolin' around...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 05:30:43 AM
Quote from: Brian on February 08, 2009, 08:05:49 PM
Hopefully you will notice what's wrong with this sentence!

I notice many things hopefully!   0:)

I hope you will not do that again!

Concerning "like" and its cousin "go" when the speaker means "say": you should hear the "conversations" in my school among 7th and 8th graders!   :o

Scary, dudes!  Here is a recent comment from one of my middling girls: "I was like, 'well, yeah, okay, but then he goes, like, I dunno, like, and so I go, like..."

AAAAHHHH!!!!   :o

And yes, foreigners are at times better than native speakers!  In fact, some years ago we had a German exchange student visiting us for a semester, when I taught at an all-boy Catholic high school.  Guess who was the best writer in the class and received a top A.P. English score: the German exchange student!  

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 05:33:41 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 05:30:43 AM
I notice many things hopefully!   0:)

I hope you will not do that again!

Concerning "like" and its cousin "go" when the speaker means "say": you should hear the "conversations" in my school among 7th and 8th graders!   :o

Scary, dudes!  Here is a recent comment from one of my middling girls: "I was like, 'well, yeah, okay, but then he goes, like, I dunno, like, and so I go, like..."

AAAAHHHH!!!!   :o

And yes, foreigners are at times better than native speakers!  In fact, some years ago we had a German exchange student visiting us for a semester, when I taught at an all-boy Catholic high school.  Guess who was the best writer in the class and received a top A.P. English score: the German exchange student!  



Will you proofread my writing for me?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 06:00:37 AM
If that could be consoling for Cato, let him be informed that the Romanian language is subject to similar maltreatments, the worst perpetrators being the mass-media.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 06:26:31 AM
Quote from: mn dave on February 09, 2009, 05:33:41 AM
Will you proofread my writing for me?  ;)

Maybe losing that martini will brighten up your writing!   8)

Of course, then how would you brighten up your day in general?   0:)

Florestan: to think that Romanian, a descendant of Latin, should be abused by mass media!  O tempora, o mores!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 06:29:34 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 06:26:31 AM
Maybe losing that martini will brighten up your writing!   8)

I never drink before putting fingers to keyboard, sir!

Well, almost never.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 09, 2009, 06:34:24 AM
Well, hardly ever . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 06:51:31 AM
People trying to sound smart by using "I" all the time, even when it means it makes them wrong.  Yes, misusing the subjective case in place of the objective in an attempt to sound educated is painfully commonplace these days.  How people so ill-educated that they can't even get something as simple (and telling!) as this right can presume to know better than the rest of us about anything is beyond my ken.

East Coasters and people on PBS using "Absolutely" instead of "Yes" drive me to the brink of pantocide! Trivial--doesn't raise my blood pressure at all.

People pronouncing the indefinite article "a" as if they were Canadians saying "eh?" make me want to throw bricks at nuns!   0:)  "That is eh very good book."  "This is eh book you must read."  Completely impossible pronunciation!   $:)  False.  The long "a" is a perfectly acceptable pronunciation.

It is the counterpart to "the = thee" being used in front of everything: "thee" for "the" is permissible only before vowels.  False.  See above.

Why are such things happening?  One can blame schools with hemidemisemiliterate teachers leading the ignorant into a perpetual wilderness of pseudo-educated ignorance.  Yes.  If good grammar were the only casualty, that might be acceptable.  Unfortunately it is only the tip of the iceberg and this situation has put our nation into dire peril.  Even higher education these days is churning out graduates too ignorant to know that they're ignorant!

My own pet peeves about rapidly declining standards of usage symptomatic of cultural decay include the objective/subjective confusion mentioned above and the now epidemic insertion of apostrophes when forming plurals.  Those incapable of distinguishing among possessives, contractions, and plurals can hardly be qualified to hold an opinion about anything.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 06:57:04 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 06:26:31 AM
Florestan: to think that Romanian, a descendant of Latin, should be abused by mass media!  O tempora, o mores!

For many Romanian journalists, Romanian grammar is as exotic an animal as Latin grammar (they're actually very similar)...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 08:00:48 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 06:51:31 AM

People pronouncing the indefinite article "a" as if they were Canadians saying "eh?" make me want to throw bricks at nuns!   0:)  "That is eh very good book."  "This is eh book you must read."  Completely impossible pronunciation!   $:)  False.  The long "a" is a perfectly acceptable pronunciation.

It is the counterpart to "the = thee" being used in front of everything: "thee" for "the" is permissible only before vowels.  False.  See above.


Sorry, I will not and cannot agree.  Sister Mary Claude was not wrong about this!  You can use "eh" to talk about the first letter of the alphabet, otherwise not as a pronunciation for the indefinite article. 

And I don't care if you can find dictionaries which accept it!   :D
Editors of newer dictionaries who have acquiesced to this monstrosity should be drawn and quartered, burned at the stake, and smeared with peanut butter from Georgia factories.   :o

The = thee only before vowels: for its use before consonants, N.B. the penalty above for using "eh."   $:)

Florestan: Our joke in schools has been that the English teachers should be members of the Foreign Language Department!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 08:02:46 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 06:51:31 AM

My own pet peeves about rapidly declining standards of usage symptomatic of cultural decay include the objective/subjective confusion mentioned above and the now epidemic insertion of apostrophes when forming plurals.  Those incapable of distinguishing among possessives, contractions, and plurals can hardly be qualified to hold an opinion about anything.

Amen!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 08:54:29 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 08:00:48 AM
Florestan: Our joke in schools has been that the English teachers should be members of the Foreign Language Department!

Nice one!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 09:37:01 AM
I was just reminded of some more monstrosities plaguing the English-speaking world: gangrenous ogres, usually produced by Bureaucrats in either government or business or (the worst) education to "importantize" their ultimately annoying "work" (i.e. paper-pushing).

I speak of monsters such as "prioritize" (how about "order" or "rank" ?) "incentify" (how about "enthuse"?) and "contextualize",  the latter word meaning "Please bonk the user's casaba with a ball-peen hammer!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 09, 2009, 09:41:21 AM
"pro-active"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 09:47:46 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 09, 2009, 09:41:21 AM
"pro-active"

I hate "pro-active"!

The Catholic clergy and assorted fuzzy religious types have been using "gift" in recent years as a verb!

e.g.

"We have been gifted by the Lord with so many things!"   ???

How about: "The Lord gives us so many gifts!" 

Gifts like rubber mallets to bonk some sense into fuzzy religious types!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 09, 2009, 09:55:05 AM
Quote from: XB-70 Valkyrie on February 08, 2009, 08:03:22 PM
Like, I think like the worst like problem currently facing, like the English language, is like the ungrammatical, nonsensical use of like the word "like". Try listening to any female under the age of 40, and you'll like see like what I'm like talking about. Like, I guess Frank Zappa's "Valley Girl" phenomenon is like to blame. Like. Like. And furthermore, like, like--like like like; like like. 
The worst use of "like" is when someone's, like, "Oh, I was like, 'I hate that song,'" and she was, like, "Oh, I hate it, too." I admit to talking this way myself. I decided it was acceptable when I heard Meryl Streep be, all, "And I was, like..." on TV one morning. I try not to use it, but, I'm, like, "There's a certain on-the-tongue elegance to it," and then I'm, like, "If Meryl Streep can do it..."

And now, I'm all, "I'm not going to go back to see if I need to correct my grammar in that mess I just wrote."

God bless "She said..." and "She thought..."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 09, 2009, 10:00:04 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 06:51:31 AM
East Coasters and people on PBS using "Absolutely" instead of "Yes" drive me to the brink of pantocide! Trivial--doesn't raise my blood pressure at all.

I absolutely say "absolutely" a lot. Absolutely.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 10:03:43 AM
What about "indeed"? Everywhere on GMG: indeed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 09, 2009, 10:04:50 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on February 09, 2009, 10:00:04 AM
I absolutely say "absolutely" a lot. Absolutely.

The President used it recently.

Quote from: Howard KurtzLast Monday, Obama declined to take questions during a photo op with Vermont's governor as the controversy over Tom Daschle, his nominee for health czar, was heating up. Obama brushed off an Associated Press reporter who shouted a question on whether he still supported Daschle with one word: "Absolutely."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 09, 2009, 10:05:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 09:47:46 AM
I hate "pro-active"!

The Catholic clergy and assorted fuzzy religious types have been using "gift" in recent years as a verb!

e.g.

"We have been gifted by the Lord with so many things!"   ???

How about: "The Lord gives us so many gifts!" 

Gifts like rubber mallets to bonk some sense into fuzzy religious types!   0:)

Yeah. I'm like, "Did 'give' die, or what?" when I hear "gift" being used as a verb. It may come from the word "regift," with which we were gifted by Seinfeld.

I have come to hate "disconnect" used as a noun. It started in the DC chattering class (every time I hear the word, I think of Cokie Roberts), and now it's everywhere. I heard three people use it in a meeting on Saturday. It impacts me the way the verb "impact" made me have a disconnect 25 years ago.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 10:05:46 AM
One of the worst atrocities plaguing Romanian is starting a non-conclusive sentence with "deci" (pronounced approximately detch) which means "therefore", as in I think, therefore I am.

For instance:

- What's your name?
- Therefore my name is ...


- What's your stance on this subject?
- Therefore I think that ...


- How old are you?
- Therefore I am 40.



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 10:07:07 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 10:05:46 AM
One of the worst atrocities plaguing Romanian is starting a non-conclusive sentence with "deci" (pronounced approximately detch) which means "therefore", as in I think, therefore I am.

For instance:

- What's your name?
- Therefore my name is ...


- What's your stance on this subject?
- Therefore I think that ...


- How old are you?
- Therefore I am 40.





Romania? WTF?





;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 09, 2009, 10:07:19 AM
Quote from: mn dave on February 09, 2009, 10:03:43 AM
What about "indeed"? Everywhere on GMG: indeed!
I say "indeed" all the time. It makes me feel so gay inside.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 10:07:46 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on February 09, 2009, 10:07:19 AM
I say "indeed" all the time. It makes me feel so gay inside.

That must be it.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 10:08:56 AM
Quote from: mn dave on February 09, 2009, 10:07:07 AM
Romania? WTF?





;)

Just wanted to show English is not alone in being abused by native speakers. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 10:12:27 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 10:08:56 AM
Just wanted to show English is not alone in being abused by native speakers. :)

I'm sure it happens everywhere. Because...people are the same wherever you go.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 09, 2009, 10:14:14 AM
Quote from: mn dave on February 09, 2009, 10:12:27 AM
people are the same wherever you go.

Agreed.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 10:28:01 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on February 09, 2009, 10:07:19 AM
I say "indeed" all the time. It makes me feel so gay inside.

Indeed?

As a teacher of German, I can verify that Deutsch is infamous for its jargon: there are even special courses in "Business German" so that one can learn e.g. the 30 or 40 prepositions which will only be found in business memos!   :o

And then there are the compounds and acronyms! 

Kafka, I used to tell my students, was only possible in German, with his tales of out-of-control bureaucrats!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 10:50:47 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 10:28:01 AM
Kafka, I used to tell my students, was only possible in German, with his tales of out-of-control bureaucrats!
Like that's never, you know, happened here--as if, Gogol, duh!  Whatever.

P.S.  I plead guilty to indeed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 11:00:05 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 10:50:47 AM
Like that's never, you know, happened here--as if, Gogol, duh!  Whatever.

P.S.  I plead guilty to indeed!

I fear that all bureaucrats have a tendency to go out of control!  Is not the only entity growing in employment right now the...government, especially the FedGov?

More stuff coming in to my desk today:

Three words for one: Medical Care Center = Hospital

or Medical Care Outreach Center = Small Hospital
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 11:12:21 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 11:00:05 AM
I fear that all bureaucrats have a tendency to go out of control!  Is not the only entity growing in employment right now the...government, especially the FedGov?

More stuff coming in to my desk today:

Three words for one: Medical Care Center = Hospital

or Medical Care Outreach Center = Small Hospital
Then I trust you do not specify a word count in writing assignments to your classes?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 12:54:10 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 11:12:21 AM
Then I trust you do not specify a word count in writing assignments to your classes?

The padded anorexic is always easy to spot!   $:)

Seen in Atlantan suburbs, when we lived there 2 years ago: "Caution: Traffic Calming Devices Ahead" = Speed Bumps!   :o

In Atlanta they were also known as "Speed Humps", which I always thought was a surefire route to Divorce Court!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 01:26:07 PM
Oh, and by the way:

The following hillbillyism seems to be spreading (my wife heard it on talk shows, and I have caught it on regular TV shows at least twice):

"I graduated high school"  or "I graduated Catholic schools."

NO! NO! NO!  $:)

You might be a graduated cylinder, but you need to graduate from high school, and if you don't use "from" with graduate, you should be sent to sit with the Kindergarten class! 

Yeah, I know, I'm a meany!  Just call me Isotope Feeny!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 09, 2009, 01:35:13 PM
Oh my, what a big load of fuddy duddy, arty farty, namby pamby anal stick-in-the-muds you all are...

Sure is good to be home  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 09, 2009, 01:37:06 PM
Quote from: Episode VI: Return of the Mog on February 09, 2009, 01:35:13 PM
Oh my, what a big load of fuddy duddy, arty farty, namby pamby anal stick-in-the-muds you all are...

Sure is good to be home  ;D

The Mogster.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 09, 2009, 01:57:46 PM
Quote from: mn dave on February 09, 2009, 01:37:06 PM
The Mogster.  8)

I expect i'll be spanked for not hyphenating "arty farty" and all that jazz. Grammar is important, granted, but i'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I feel comfortable enough with the rules to bend them to my will!  ;D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 02:05:24 PM
Quote from: Episode VI: Return of the Mog on February 09, 2009, 01:57:46 PM
I expect i'll be spanked for not hyphenating "arty farty" and all that jazz. Grammar is important, granted, but i'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I feel comfortable enough with the rules to bend them to my will!  ;D



No, you will be censured for using the phrase at all!   $:)

Scatology is always inappoopriate!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 09, 2009, 02:14:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 02:05:24 PM
Scatology is always inappoopriate!   :o

New rule folks. You turd the man.  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 02:29:44 PM
Quote from: Episode VI: Return of the Mog on February 09, 2009, 02:14:21 PM
New rule folks. You tarred the man.  >:D

I am sure you meant "tarred", and if you aren't careful, we'll add "feathered" as well!   :o

Some people have asked me for vocabulary which will not only increase their erudition, but also their paychecks!  To be sure, this is a niche market, and if it were more philosophical, it could be a Nietzsche market.

Anyway, today's word is "apodictic"  (aka apodeictic), meaning that a statement is so obvious, it either does not need to be proven, or is very easily proven. 

So when you show your report on X to your superior, you should say: "You will be happy to know that my conclusions are apodictic!"

If your boss is a Yale man, however, all bets are off!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 09, 2009, 02:32:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 08:00:48 AM
Sorry, I will not and cannot agree.  Sister Mary Claude was not wrong about this!  You can use "eh" to talk about the first letter of the alphabet, otherwise not as a pronunciation for the indefinite article. 

And I don't care if you can find dictionaries which accept it!   :D
Editors of newer dictionaries who have acquiesced to this monstrosity should be drawn and quartered, burned at the stake, and smeared with peanut butter from Georgia factories.   :o

I can certainly find dictionaries. I don't think you mean the acceptance to be a subsidiary clause. Therefore: And I don't care if you can find dictionaries that accept this. Sorry but this misuse of 'which' is one thing that particularly annoys me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 09, 2009, 02:38:29 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 09, 2009, 02:32:50 PM
Sorry but this misuse of 'which' is one thing that particularly annoys me.

Which old which?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 03:43:05 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 09, 2009, 02:32:50 PM
I can certainly find dictionaries. I don't think you mean the acceptance to be a subsidiary clause. Therefore: And I don't care if you can find dictionaries that accept this. Sorry but this misuse of 'which' is one thing that particularly annoys me.

Yes, I do!  "Which" refers to the dictionaries, and opens the subordinate clause "Which accept this."  Not a misuse!   0:)  If "that" is a conjunction, what then is the subject of "accept" ???

A very pure purist would say that "that" should only be used for indirect discourse, and never as a relative pronoun, which (!) is what "that" still is in your version.

But the very pure purists are not around!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 04:17:20 PM
The wicked which!

Sorry, Ben..."arty farty" might be correct among the airy fairies in jolly old, but we couthless colonials call it "artsy fartsy" -- got a thing for plurals, I guess!

Another pet peeve:  using "was" instead of "were" in conditionals, i.e. "If I wasn't a gentleman, I'd tie your tongue in knots."  Obviously the speaker is NOT a gentleman.  If he were a gentleman, he would use the subjunctive case!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 09, 2009, 04:40:00 PM
"Full of scatological rock 'n' roll" . . . let's do The Strain!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 04:17:20 PM


Another pet peeve:  using "was" instead of "were" in conditionals, i.e. "If I wasn't a gentleman, I'd tie your tongue in knots."  Obviously the speaker is NOT a gentleman.  If he were a gentleman, he would use the subjunctive case!

Quite right!  And you hear supposedly educated people unable to use the subjunctive correctly, another failure of English departments across the country.

Teaching the subjunctive to adolescents throughout the years has produced befuddled stares and puddles of drool from many of my students.  My wife claims that they cannot understand such a concept properly, because their brains are still developing.

I am not so sure about that, in spite of the research.  Some students have grasped the idea of contrary-to-fact and future-less-vivid conditions, etc.  My present group of students (Grades 6-8) are the youngest I have had: I will admit that only a minority correctly understand the difference between e.g. "If he was at the party, then he saw my sister there" (A Past True Condition in the Indicative Mood) vs. "If he were at the party, he would see my sister there" (Present Contrary-to-Fact Condition in the Subjunctive Mood).

A quixotic quest!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sarastro on February 09, 2009, 05:01:01 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 09, 2009, 04:17:20 PM
Another pet peeve:  using "was" instead of "were" in conditionals, i.e. "If I wasn't a gentleman, I'd tie your tongue in knots."  Obviously the speaker is NOT a gentleman.  If he were a gentleman, he would use the subjunctive case!

Oh, maybe the speaker is implicitly admitting that he might not be a gentleman. Anyway, when I asked my teacher about the subjunctive mood and if we were going to learn it, she replied that many students did not even know what it was, which meant they would never use it and therefore would never make mistakes. :D

Would anyone kindly explain how to use the construction "but for"? I learned it but have forgotten. "But for the dog, the house would be robbed"? Had I known I would move to an English-speaking country, I would have concentrated on more on grammar. But, like, it's not like too widely spread amongst students, this subjunctive mood, you know.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2009, 05:34:43 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on February 09, 2009, 05:01:01 PM
Oh, maybe the speaker is implicitly admitting that he might not be a gentleman. Anyway, when I asked my teacher about the subjunctive mood and if we were going to learn it, she replied that many students did not even know what it was, which meant they would never use it and therefore would never make mistakes. :D

Would anyone kindly explain how to use the construction "but for"? I learned it but have forgotten. "But for the dog, the house would be robbed"? Had I known I would move to an English-speaking country, I would have concentrated on more on grammar. But, like, it's not like too widely spread amongst students, this subjunctive mood, you know.

That kind of teacher represents the morons against whom I have struggled throughout my career!   $:)

"But for" = If it were not/had not been for...

"If it were not for the (presence of the) dog, the house would be robbed" = We in fact have a dog, and are therefore never robbed.

Or: "If we did not have a dog, the house would be robbed."

Contrary-to-Fact uses the Subjunctive and assumes an unreal opposite to show a potential future.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on February 09, 2009, 06:44:30 PM
This appears all the world like a page (nay, running thread!!) straight out of Vroon's American Record Guide. ;D

But, yes, I sympathize with all the grammar grumbling.

But I'd happily trade a little bad grammar for the complete elimination of fad clichés. Clichés that leach onto the English (American?) language and won't let go. One such is "pushing the envelope". That darling media phrase which became so overused I wanted to pull my hair/teeth/whatever out.

Luckily for my sanity it's on the decline.

Though I wonder what's lurking... :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Brian on February 09, 2009, 06:44:56 PM
Quote from: ' on February 09, 2009, 06:35:43 PM
Was it my teacher, I would find another.'
No grammar grumble would be complete without a post by an apostrophe.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: imperfection on February 09, 2009, 07:27:46 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2009, 05:00:18 PM
I have suffered far too long the slings and narrow-mindedness of outrageous morons mangling the English language!   $:)

Now Cato says: "Hold, enough!"  And undammed shall be the comments: let them flood in!

Cato is no doctrinaire scold: he will at times be inconsistent and contradictory in his grammar grumbles, since it is in the nature of languages to be so.  Yet ex cathedra will be his pronouncements!   0:)

My complaints shall arrive in no particular order, so let me just start, and you can see if you agree!

People trying to sound smart by using "I" all the time, even when it means it makes them wrong: the ubiquitous "just between you and I" is moronic.  "Between" is a preposition and therefore needs an object form, not a subject form.  Would you say "That package is for I" or "He stood in front of I" ? 

Then stop using "I" with the word "between" or any other preposition!!!    :P     8)    The script for the movie "Becoming Jane" contained the monstrosity "...by your father and I" at whose author the real Jane would have flung her inkpot, and maybe even that other pot in her chamber!   $:)

East Coasters and people on PBS using "Absolutely" instead of "Yes" drive me to the brink of pantocide!   >:D 
But I'll keep my shirt on!   :o 

People pronouncing the indefinite article "a" as if they were Canadians saying "eh?" make me want to throw bricks at nuns!   0:)  "That is eh very good book."  "This is eh book you must read."  Completely impossible pronunciation!   $:) 

It is the counterpart to "the = thee" being used in front of everything: "thee" for "the" is permissible only before vowels. 

Why are such things happening?  One can blame schools with hemidemisemiliterate teachers leading the ignorant into a perpetual wilderness of pseudo-educated ignorance.  One can blame a relativist society, where everyone is correct, especially in language, since aren't all grammar rules just "opinions" anyway?  Don't grammar rules stand in the way of personal expression and personal creativity?  Aren't grammar rules even perhaps ways to oppress people in the lower classes?   :o

The result of course is the growth of incoherence in private and public discourse, recent examples being past and present occupants of the White House in the last 20 years, Caroline Schlossberg and her infamous 99 "you knows" within 2 minutes of speaking, practically every "movie star" or "personality" jabbering on TV, etc.

Worse is the lack of music in their words: the most recent and risible public example was heard on January 20th in Washington D.C., a "poem" which was merely a concatenation of the most trite and unmusical syllables ever heard in decades. 

The lady's poetic license needs to be revoked!   :o

Another thing that drives Cato nutzoid are people referring to themselves in the 3rd person!    :o

So I will not really be doing that!   0:)

Feel free to list your own pet punctuation or pronunciation peeves: I will probably agree with you!


(http://www.singlesourcewriting.com/wp-content/sesame-street-elmo-loves-you-print-c12204840.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Coopmv on February 09, 2009, 07:44:55 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 09, 2009, 04:55:38 AM
Don't think so;  these instances of sloppy grammar/usage have been rampant among US anglophones.  If anything, I find that non-native speakers who have immigrated, are rather more careful with their grammar.

That is if they speak English at all ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 09, 2009, 07:49:07 PM
Quote from: Sarastro on February 09, 2009, 05:01:01 PM
Oh, maybe the speaker is implicitly admitting that he might not be a gentleman. Anyway, when I asked my teacher about the subjunctive mood and if we were going to learn it, she replied that many students did not even know what it was, which meant they would never use it and therefore would never make mistakes. :D

Would anyone kindly explain how to use the construction "but for"? I learned it but have forgotten. "But for the dog, the house would be robbed"? Had I known I would move to an English-speaking country, I would have concentrated on more on grammar. But, like, it's not like too widely spread amongst students, this subjunctive mood, you know.
Where are you from?

I prefer to say "If it weren't for the dog..." or "If it hadn't been for the dog..."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 10, 2009, 03:23:49 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on February 09, 2009, 07:49:07 PM
I prefer to say "If it weren't for the dog..." or "If it hadn't been for the dog..."

That's fine. My ear is accustomed also to Had it not been for the dog . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 10, 2009, 03:30:16 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 10, 2009, 03:23:49 AM
That's fine. My ear is accustomed also to Had it not been for the dog . . . .
And to what might the dog's ear be accustomed?  Presuming, of course, that there actually had been a dog, and that said dog were present on the occasion in question?

(We are being paid by the word, aren't we?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Herman on February 10, 2009, 03:39:41 AM
Quote from: donwyn on February 09, 2009, 06:44:30 PM
But I'd happily trade a little bad grammar for the complete elimination of fad clichés. Clichés that leach onto the English (American?) language and won't let go. One such is "pushing the envelope". That darling media phrase which became so overused I wanted to pull my hair/teeth/whatever out.

Luckily for my sanity it's on the decline.

Though I wonder what's lurking... :)

the envelope has already been pushed out by the box, as in: "thinking outside the box" as was clearly demonstrated by the election races last year. While McCain was pushing the envelope  Obama was thinking outside the box.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 10, 2009, 04:09:53 AM
Guardians of English (aka the Unicorn Hunters) at Lake Superior State University in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan publishes a list of abuses every year:

http://www.lssu.edu/banished/current.php

My favorite: "Winner of 5 Nominations!!!"

Orwell would love our era!

Thinking outside the box prevents you from knowing what might lurk inside the box!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 10, 2009, 04:27:02 AM
Quote from: Herman on February 10, 2009, 03:39:41 AM
the envelope has already been pushed out by the box, as in: "thinking outside the box" as was clearly demonstrated by the election races last year. While McCain was pushing the envelope  Obama was thinking outside the box.
Who uses boxes for thinking in the first place?

And if your thinking should happen to fall outside the box, presumably the box is full, so shouldn't you go get another box to put your latest thoughts in?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 10, 2009, 05:01:46 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2009, 04:09:53 AM
Orwell would love our era!

Linguistically speaking, he predicted it fairly accurate...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on February 10, 2009, 05:16:25 AM
Quote from: mn dave on February 09, 2009, 10:03:43 AM
What about "indeed"? Everywhere on GMG: indeed!

That's just me!  I'll tell you how it started: when I was an undergrad my roommate and I started saying it like hella because it was funny.  Hold on I need to infuriate the other posters on this board... it was like you know, like totally awesome, like how cool is it to use a cool word over and over? ;D

To other posters on the thread:
If you are an English teacher, you have plenty of opportunities to teach grammatical lessons even if you teach literature.  If you prefer to not do that and simply view your students' poor grammar as a private joke for you to snicker at, what does that make you exactly?  Not an educator, that's for sure.

I suffer from the same problem that my students do, and that was that we never received formal education in grammar.  It's all the fad to completely skip teaching grammar to race on to less important issues, such as symbolism in literature (btw there is a difference between appreciating common symbols, and thinking that fine literature spells out a secret code, and the true meaning only lies in the code).  Whether it's the fault of English teachers (pre-college level), or administrators making decisions that they force the teachers to, I can't say.  I can say that one of the two, if not both, are incompetent boobs that need to be held accountable for a decline in standards.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 10, 2009, 05:23:26 AM
Rumble in the Grumble!
(Jethro Tull?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 10, 2009, 05:34:58 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 03:43:05 PM
Yes, I do!  "Which" refers to the dictionaries, and opens the subordinate clause "Which accept this."  Not a misuse!   0:)  If "that" is a conjunction, what then is the subject of "accept" ???

A very pure purist would say that "that" should only be used for indirect discourse, and never as a relative pronoun, which (!) is what "that" still is in your version.

But the very pure purists are not around!   $:)
I don't think you quite understand the implications. If you meant there to be a subsidiary clause your sentence means: I don't care if you can find dictionaries - but should you find one then it will accept this. Fortunately Microsoft Word has this right in its grammar checker and generally insists you but a comma before your clause. One useful rule is that if the 'which' clause is removed the sentence must still make sense, indeed it must be a sentence. Failure to leave a meaningful sentence is where most errors occur but in cases like the one we are looking at the meaning can be quite different to what was intended. I'm sure you meant that there are dictionaries that accept the point in question but that there are also others that do not.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 10, 2009, 05:38:57 AM
Quote from: DavidW on February 10, 2009, 05:16:25 AM

To other posters on the thread:
If you are an English teacher, you have plenty of opportunities to teach grammatical lessons even if you teach literature.  If you prefer to not do that and simply view your students' poor grammar as a private joke for you to snicker at, what does that make you exactly?  Not an educator, that's for sure.

I suffer from the same problem that my students do, and that was that we never received formal education in grammar.  It's all the fad to completely skip teaching grammar to race on to less important issues, such as symbolism in literature (btw there is a difference between appreciating common symbols, and thinking that fine literature spells out a secret code, and the true meaning only lies in the code).  Whether it's the fault of English teachers (pre-college level), or administrators making decisions that they force the teachers to, I can't say.  I can say that one of the two, if not both, are incompetent boobs that need to be held accountable for a decline in standards.



Cato's Rule of Education #3: Educational administrators are usually failed teachers, or coaches, who should be horse-whipped and sent to bag groceries at Kroger's.

I have come across too many "English" teachers who do not know grammar on the higher levels, and who lack any creativity in teaching technique, so that they can make grammar interesting: rules and charts will not enthuse students.

You are quite right: grammar can and should be approached by looking at the stories and essays of great stylists.  Instead, too often the teacher worries about pushing a certain political agenda through "interpretation" of the stories, or (more often) just wants to get through the day by going through the motions.

I have seen schools where English teachers relied on A-B-C-D tests, where the students rarely to never wrote anything themselves.   :o

But this was also true for History, Science, and other courses where students should be writing essays and reports.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 10, 2009, 05:44:23 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 10, 2009, 05:34:58 AM
I don't think you quite understand the implications. If you meant there to be a subsidiary clause your sentence means: I don't care if you can find dictionaries - but should you find one then it will accept this. Fortunately Microsoft Word has this right in its grammar checker and generally insists you but a comma before your clause. One useful rule is that if the 'which' clause is removed the sentence must still make sense, indeed it must be a sentence. Failure to leave a meaningful sentence is where most errors occur but in cases like the one we are looking at the meaning can be quite different to what was intended. I'm sure you meant that there are dictionaries that accept the point in question but that there are also others that do not.

Bold I: Yes, I do!   0:)

Bold II: Sure!   0:)

Please review my previous comments on "which" vs. "that".  In German the comma rule is absolute: commas in English in my opinion can be a matter of the musical flow of a sentence, and not an absolute: inconsistencies can sometimes result therefore, but that is because musical flows are not the same!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 10, 2009, 05:52:30 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2009, 05:44:23 AM
Bold I: Yes, I do!   0:)

Bold II: Sure!   0:)

Please review my previous comments on "which" vs. "that".  In German the comma rule is absolute: commas in English in my opinion can be a matter of the musical flow of a sentence, and not an absolute: inconsistencies can sometimes result therefore, but that is because musical flows are not the same!
This is precisely why you should have used 'that' instead of writing as you did:
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 10, 2009, 05:34:58 AM
I don't care if you can find dictionaries - but should you find one then it will accept this.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 10, 2009, 07:31:30 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 10, 2009, 05:52:30 AM
This is precisely why you should have used 'that' instead of writing as you did:

No, I disagree!   $:)  I know that you are talking about the old distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses.  I see my sentence as talking about theoretical - yet specific - dictionaries which might lend support.

But thanks for the discussion!   0:)

Today's Vocabulary building word: persiflage    8)

Trifling, watercooler talk!  Fluffy stuff found on other websites: not here!!!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 10, 2009, 08:07:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2009, 07:31:30 AM
Fluffy stuff found on other websites: not here!!!   0:)

Oh I don't know about that...

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 10, 2009, 08:46:17 AM
Quote from: Episode VI: Return of the Mog on February 10, 2009, 08:07:38 AM
Oh I don't know about that...



Would that be a Persian posting persiflage?   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 10, 2009, 09:12:28 AM
Indeed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 10, 2009, 10:28:59 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2009, 08:46:17 AM
Would that be a Persian posting persiflage?   :o
Nah, just a typical tabby typing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 10, 2009, 02:03:35 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2009, 07:31:30 AM

But thanks for the discussion!   0:)

Today's Vocabulary building word: persiflage    8)

Trifling, watercooler talk!  Fluffy stuff found on other websites: not here!!!   0:)

Splendid. I think we are on the same side, as is the cat!
I have come across airy persiflage.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 10, 2009, 02:10:55 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 10, 2009, 02:03:35 PM
Splendid. I think we are on the same side, as is the cat!
I have come across airy persiflage.
Puts me in mind of a business card:

     Percy Flage
           Airy Fairy
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on February 10, 2009, 05:30:03 PM
Quote from: Herman on February 10, 2009, 03:39:41 AM
the envelope has already been pushed out by the box, as in: "thinking outside the box" as was clearly demonstrated by the election races last year. While McCain was pushing the envelope  Obama was thinking outside the box.

;D

Yes, forget the election. What's important is who won out in the war of clichés.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sarastro on February 10, 2009, 06:33:40 PM
Quote from: DavidW on February 10, 2009, 05:16:25 AM
I suffer

There is not much to suffer. You can always start educating yourself. There is plenty of books on grammar and other opportunities to learn the language in depth. I am jealous to those whose vocabulary is sufficiently rich to produce elegant speech, might the meaning of the speech be fallacious. :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on February 11, 2009, 04:23:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2009, 05:38:57 AM
Cato's Rule of Education #3: Educational administrators are usually failed teachers, or coaches, who should be horse-whipped and sent to bag groceries at Kroger's.

I have come across too many "English" teachers who do not know grammar on the higher levels, and who lack any creativity in teaching technique, so that they can make grammar interesting: rules and charts will not enthuse students.

You are quite right: grammar can and should be approached by looking at the stories and essays of great stylists.  Instead, too often the teacher worries about pushing a certain political agenda through "interpretation" of the stories, or (more often) just wants to get through the day by going through the motions.

I have seen schools where English teachers relied on A-B-C-D tests, where the students rarely to never wrote anything themselves.   :o

But this was also true for History, Science, and other courses where students should be writing essays and reports.

I agree with what you said Cato.  About the tests, many teachers are bound to teach to the EOI exams.  Those exams were meant to bring back standards, but in some cases the reverse happens since the teachers will be judged by their EOI pass rates they sometimes end up with tunnel vision.

As a science teacher, I see what happens when other science courses do not have their students write lab reports.  I have to deal with some of my students writing in flowery prose, and omitting important technical information simply because creative writing is the only type of writing they had prior exposure to (as opposed to technical writing).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on February 11, 2009, 04:27:46 AM
Quote from: Sarastro on February 10, 2009, 06:33:40 PM
There is not much to suffer. You can always start educating yourself.

True, but what you've said still smacks of a lack of common sense.  One must have available time, and my job is a full time occupation.  Are you still a student?  That would explain everything.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2009, 05:33:44 AM
Full-time work takes over.  Then, one learns the art of getting other things done around the elephant in the room.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2009, 06:28:18 AM
Quote from: DavidW on February 11, 2009, 04:23:38 AM
I agree with what you said Cato.  About the tests, many teachers are bound to teach to the EOI exams.  Those exams were meant to bring back standards, but in some cases the reverse happens since the teachers will be judged by their EOI pass rates they sometimes end up with tunnel vision.

As a science teacher, I see what happens when other science courses do not have their students write lab reports.  I have to deal with some of my students writing in flowery prose, and omitting important technical information simply because creative writing is the only type of writing they had prior exposure to (as opposed to technical writing).

Aye!  State tests from education department bureaucrats!  The bane of the age!

Such tests usually have unintended consequences, precisely because they are designed by bureaucrats!

In Germany there is a compromise (or at least this is how it worked some years ago): the teachers design their own graduation tests, and then submit it to the bureaucrats for approval, who usually rubber-stamped it so they could get back to their 3-hour lunches.

I witnessed the following German graduation test in English: students had read during the school year various "dystopian" novels (1984, Fahrenheit 451, etc.).  Part I of the test had the students reading an article from a London newspaper about the future of slum dwellers: no dictionary allowed!   They then were given 2 hours to write an essay comparing and contrasting the article with at least two of the novels they had read.

Part II was an hour question-and-answer session in English about the topic of "futurism" and how and why optimistic views do not seem dominant.

How many of our American seniors could handle such a test?   8)

But we remain optimistic!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2009, 06:32:33 AM
Today's grumble: "There's" used with plurals!   :P

"There's thousands of dollars being wasted..."

NO!   $:)

There are thousands of dollars being wasted...!

Actually make that billions!

Or...trillions!   :o

Word for the day: one of my favorites!

Gadfly - an annoying person who runs around and bothers people about nonsense.  I think there is a Shostakovich work with the name!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2009, 06:45:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2009, 06:32:33 AM
Gadfly - an annoying person who runs around and bothers people about nonsense.  I think there is a Shostakovich work with the name!

Based on the novel Овод, Ovod (metamorphosed into a film) by Ethel Lilian Voynich.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 08:58:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2009, 06:32:33 AM
Word for the day: one of my favorites!

Gadfly - an annoying person who runs around and bothers people about nonsense.  I think there is a Shostakovich work with the name!
Or a person who annoys the self-satisfied by pestering them about things they'd prefer to ignore.  Socrates was a gadfly.  It got him executed, but also made him immortal.  No one would remember him just for his deeds as a warrior in the Peloponnesian War or as a sculptor working on the Parthenon, but they sure remember him for that nasty habit of asking questions and making observations that made hypocrites uncomfortable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 11, 2009, 09:05:11 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2009, 06:32:33 AM

Word for the day: one of my favorites!

Gadfly - an annoying person who runs around and bothers people about nonsense.  I think there is a Shostakovich work with the name!

Begad!
When every one is somebodee (sic), then no one's anybody! (The Gondoliers)

Microsoft do not know that this is correct:
Hark! the herald-angels sing.
Yes, no capital letter after the exclamation! Exclamations and question marks may replace commas, semi-colons and colons, as well as full stops. When they do they are not followed by a capital. This is another grumble because Word tries to alter my typing, wrongly. :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 09:12:08 AM
Yeah, Word's a bitch, always trying to enforce bad grammar.

Good grammar: the stuff that makes speech intelligible and precise or ambiguous as required.  ;)

Bad grammar: those stupid arbitrary normative rules that wacko pedagogue crammed down schools' throats in the 19th Century, like "never end a sentence with a preposition."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on February 11, 2009, 09:50:19 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 09:12:08 AM
Bad grammar: those stupid arbitrary normative rules that wacko pedagogue crammed down schools' throats in the 19th Century, like "never end a sentence with a preposition."

When I was a kid I would irritate my mother with that rule because she would always say "do you want to go with?" ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2009, 10:22:58 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 09:12:08 AM
Yeah, Word's a bitch, always trying to enforce bad grammar.

Good grammar: the stuff that makes speech intelligible and precise or ambiguous as required.  ;)

Bad grammar: those stupid arbitrary normative rules that wacko pedagogue crammed down schools' throats in the 19th Century, like "never end a sentence with a preposition."

Do you know Winston Churchill's famous pronouncement on that rule?

"That's a rule up with which I cannot put!"   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2009, 10:30:29 AM
One of my favorite rules is George Orwell's Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2009, 11:25:49 AM
As a Germanic language, English should be quite allowed to end things with a preposition at times: German often uses prepositions as verbal prefixes.  In a normal sentence the prefix is sent to the end of the sentence.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 11:39:23 AM
Quote from: leggiero on February 11, 2009, 10:30:29 AM
One of my favorite rules is George Orwell's Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
A rule to live by!

That, following Cato's Churchill quote above, reminds me of another Churchillism:

I forget the details, but at a dinner party one of the guests said, "Mr. Churchill, you're fat!"
Churchill replied, "I may be fat, madame, but I can diet if I wish.  You, however, are ugly."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 11, 2009, 11:40:42 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 11:39:23 AM
A rule to live by!

That, following Cato's Churchill quote above, reminds me of another Churchillism:

I forget the details, but at a dinner party one of the guests said, "Mr. Churchill, you're fat!"
Churchill replied, "I may be fat, madame, but I can diet if I wish.  You, however, are ugly."

I thought it was "you're drunk." Or was that Brahms?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 11, 2009, 11:50:31 AM
Quote from: mn dave on February 11, 2009, 11:40:42 AM
I thought it was "you're drunk." Or was that Brahms?

That ones goes something like:

"Mr Churchill, you're drunk!"
"Yes, but you're ugly and i'll be sober in the morning"

;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 11, 2009, 11:57:34 AM
Quote from: Mog: 100% replicant on February 11, 2009, 11:50:31 AM
That ones goes something like:

"Mr Churchill, you're drunk!"
"Yes, but you're ugly and i'll be sober in the morning"

;D

Yep. That's the one. Hasn't this been attributed to Brahms as well?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2009, 12:09:37 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2009, 11:25:49 AM
As a Germanic language, English should be quite allowed to end things with a preposition at times: German often uses prepositions as verbal prefixes.  In a normal sentence the prefix is sent to the end of the sentence.

Some days, it seems you can't throw a brick without hitting a character in Shakespeare saying, "Go to!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 12:11:08 PM
I also like the story of the woman who told him, "Mr. Churchill, if you were my husband, I'd give you poison!"

To which he replied, "If I were your husband, Madame, I would drink it."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2009, 01:35:59 PM
Quote from: Mog: 100% replicant on February 11, 2009, 11:50:31 AM
That ones goes something like:

"Mr Churchill, you're drunk!"
"Yes, but you're ugly and i'll be sober in the morning"

;D

In the W.C. Fields movie It's A Gift a man tells W.C.:  "Aah, you're drunk!"  To which W.C. says: "But you 're crazy, and in the morning I'll be sober, but you'll still be crazy!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 11, 2009, 01:38:15 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2009, 01:35:59 PM
In the W.C. Fields movie It's A Gift a man tells W.C.:  "Aah, you're drunk!"  To which W.C. says: "But you 're crazy, and in the morning I'll be sober, but you'll still be crazy!"

Maybe WC stole it from Brahms.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2009, 03:57:30 PM
Mozart stole from Brahms  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 05:33:37 PM
Jokes involving Brahms put me in mind of the young attorney who said, "Please don't tell my mother I'm a lawyer...she thinks I'm a piano player in a whore house."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sarastro on February 11, 2009, 10:08:19 PM
Quote from: DavidW on February 11, 2009, 04:27:46 AM
True, but what you've said still smacks of a lack of common sense.  One must have available time, and my job is a full time occupation. 

No one argues with that. Though I strongly feel it depends on a person. I know a professor who has just completed her PhD and turned thirty, and by the time she defended her dissertation, she had married, born three children, divorced, learned a new language and on top of that worked full time throughout the entire period. But it's a rare case, I think I wouldn't ever be able to pull such a stunt. :o And definitely not bearing children.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on February 12, 2009, 04:12:19 AM
Quote from: Sarastro on February 11, 2009, 10:08:19 PM
No one argues with that. Though I strongly feel it depends on a person. I know a professor who has just completed her PhD and turned thirty, and by the time she defended her dissertation, she had married, born three children, divorced, learned a new language and on top of that worked full time throughout the entire period. But it's a rare case, I think I wouldn't ever be able to pull such a stunt. :o And definitely not bearing children.

Yeah that's exceedingly rare.  But it's obvious she found the time by taking longer to get there.  Most people graduate between the ages of 26-28 and wouldn't have the time to work and raise a family at the same time.  To put it in perspective, I graduated at the age of 26, that is a four year difference.  Other people are not lazy in comparison to her, she simply took it slower, that is all.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 12, 2009, 07:04:10 AM
Allow me today to place the most mephitic POX    >:D    on morons who curse in public!

In this case freedom of speech ends where my ears begin!   0:)

Word for the day: mephitic.  (Extremely foul-smelling)

As in Mephistopheles!   >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 12, 2009, 07:07:09 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 12, 2009, 07:04:10 AM
Allow me today to place the most mephitic POX    >:D    on morons who curse in public!

In this case freedom of speech ends where my ears begin!   0:)

Word for the day: mephitic.  (Extremely foul-smelling)

As in Mephistopheles!   >:D

Is it desirable to use words no one else uses? Are you really communicating then?

Swearing in public? No. How about at home or on message boards?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 12, 2009, 07:34:05 AM
Quote from: Apollo on February 12, 2009, 07:07:09 AM
Is it desirable to use words no one else uses? Are you really communicating then?

Swearing in public? No. How about at home or on message boards?  ;D

Yes, you are communicating and expanding their vocabulary!   0:)

No!  $:)

Bad enough if it is mental!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 12, 2009, 09:33:45 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2009, 05:33:37 PM
Jokes involving Brahms put me in mind of the young attorney who said, "Please don't tell my mother I'm a lawyer...she thinks I'm a piano player in a whore house."

I know that, but I cant think from where. Please put me out of my misery!

(and no kitty going to the vet to be put-to-sleep jokes!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 12, 2009, 10:03:34 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2009, 11:25:49 AM
As a Germanic language, English should be quite allowed to end things with a preposition at times: German often uses prepositions as verbal prefixes.  In a normal sentence the prefix is sent to the end of the sentence.


According to Fowler, prohibition of ending a sentence with a preposition is not a grammatical rule but a modern superstition.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 12, 2009, 11:27:40 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 12, 2009, 10:03:34 AM
According to Fowler, prohibition of ending a sentence with a preposition is not a grammatical rule but a modern superstition.

I have read that it came from earlier English grammarians trying to "Latinize" the language, but if there are no grammar books where the rule can be found, then it is another myth!

Like the prohibition on splitting infinitives.

e.g. "To boldly go where no man has gone before!"

a proclamation splitting not only the infinitive, but also infinity!    0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on February 12, 2009, 05:44:52 PM
Quote from: Mog: 100% replicant on February 12, 2009, 09:33:45 AM
I know that, but I cant think from where. Please put me out of my misery!

I think it originated with a woman politician. During an impromptu(?) conference with reporters the subject somehow came up about politicians and their unhealthy fondness for double-talking and how it reflected bad on the profession.

Which in return prompted the woman politician to jokingly quip something to the effect: "Don't tell my parents I'm a politician. They think I'm a prostitute." Implying of course there's nothing more lowly than a politician. IIRC it got a hearty laugh. 

Quote(and no kitty going to the vet to be put-to-sleep jokes!)

But couldn't a replicant kitty turn the tables on a vet clinic? ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 12, 2009, 07:42:47 PM
Quote from: Mog: 100% replicant on February 12, 2009, 09:33:45 AM
I know that, but I cant think from where. Please put me out of my misery
I don't know where you first heard it, Ben.  For me I think it was a student skit at Boalt Hall comprising rapid-fire lawyer jokes punctuated by rimshots on a drumkit:
What's the difference between a dead skunk on the road and a dead lawyer on the road?  (pause)  No skidmarks for the lawyer.
Ba-da-boom!
What do you call a hundred lawyers in a deep hole at the bottom of the ocean?  (pause)  A good start.
Ba-da-boom!
And so on.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 13, 2009, 05:02:02 AM
Heard on the radio:

QuoteJust like a child misses their blanket.

The way our tenth-grade English teacher instructed us, there are two errors here.  What is the consensus here? Jail term, $25 fine, or verbal reprimand?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 05:13:01 AM
Just like a child misses their blanket.

If you look attentively at the Who's Online layout you'll notice that

Someone [is] viewing unread replies since their last visit

or that

Someone [is] viewing their messages.

:)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 13, 2009, 05:36:15 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 05:13:01 AM
Just like a child misses their blanket.

If you look attentively at the Who's Online layout you'll notice that

Someone [is] viewing unread replies since their last visit

or that

Someone [is] viewing their messages.

:)

That are right.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 05:41:10 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2009, 05:36:15 AM
That are right.

How come? Should it not be "Someone is viewing his / her messages?"

And should it not be "Those are right?"  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 13, 2009, 05:51:04 AM
 Florestan  06:50:26 AM Viewing Who's Online.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 05:53:38 AM
Quote from: Asmodeus on February 13, 2009, 05:51:04 AM
Florestan  06:50:26 AM Viewing Who's Online.

And your point is... ? :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 05:54:07 AM
It should be "someone is viewing his messages."  Ever since the successful sexist attack on English and the PC hegemony it ushered in, those unwilling to risk attack by ignorant bigots have been handicapped by a number of poor choices, one of which is to use the awkward his/her construction.  Common usage seems to have determined that plural impersonals like their seem less egregiously awkward than such constructions.  And their is sufficiently indeterminate that it should survive assaults on the language as heinously "anthrocentric" by the deranged PETA sorts when the idea occurs to them.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 13, 2009, 05:55:09 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 05:53:38 AM
And your point is... ? :)

I have to have a point to post here?

Damn.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 06:03:55 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 05:54:07 AM
It should be "someone is viewing his messages."  Ever since the successful sexist attack on English and the PC hegemony it ushered in, those unwilling to risk attack by ignorant bigots have been handicapped by a number of poor choices, one of which is to use the awkward his/her construction.  Common usage seems to have determined that plural impersonals like their seem less egregiously awkward than such constructions.  And their is sufficiently indeterminate that it should survive assaults on the language as heinously "anthrocentric" by the deranged PETA sorts when the idea occurs to them.

Thanks. I suspected something of the sort. But should we talk and write politically correct or gramatically correct?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 06:05:10 AM
Quote from: Asmodeus on February 13, 2009, 05:55:09 AM
I have to have a point to post here?

Damn.

Should it not be "Do I have to have a point to post here?"  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 13, 2009, 06:08:16 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 05:41:10 AM
How come?

I mean, right that if I look attentively at the Who's Online layout, I should notice it.  :)

Quote from: AndreiAnd should it not be "Those are right?"  ;D

No, those were both wrong, as you queried (someone is singular, but their is plural). But that quibble of yours is right  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 06:10:37 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 06:03:55 AM
But should we talk and write politically correct or gramatically correct?  ;D
Neither.  We should keep our mouths shut and not presume to think for ourselves but just obey the dictates of those who appoint themselves our masters.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 13, 2009, 06:11:22 AM
Or mistresses.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 13, 2009, 06:11:55 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 06:05:10 AM
Should it not be "Do I have to have a point to post here?"  ;D

It should be whatever the Hell I wrote.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 06:12:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2009, 06:11:22 AM
Or mistresses.
Now you're talking!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 13, 2009, 06:13:38 AM
The mistresses of the sort I should like, don't seem to be appointing themselves, though.

And the self-appointresses, well, I just might pass.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Novi on February 13, 2009, 06:30:09 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 05:54:07 AM
It should be "someone is viewing his messages."  Ever since the successful sexist attack on English and the PC hegemony it ushered in, those unwilling to risk attack by ignorant bigots have been handicapped by a number of poor choices, one of which is to use the awkward his/her construction.  Common usage seems to have determined that plural impersonals like their seem less egregiously awkward than such constructions.  And their is sufficiently indeterminate that it should survive assaults on the language as heinously "anthrocentric" by the deranged PETA sorts when the idea occurs to them.

I recently filled in a form that had three categories for 'gender': male, female, and transgender. As far as I recall, this was the first time I'd come across this option :).

Re: the above - I agree that PETA is deranged, but don't have a problem with recognising the intrinsic biases underlying the English language and don't consider this recognition an example of 'PC hegemony' $:) <--PCPC? hehe
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 07:53:13 AM
Quote from: Novi on February 13, 2009, 06:30:09 AM
...recognising the intrinsic biases underlying the English language....
Are there "intrinsic [gender] biases underlying the English language?"  Assuming that one discerns a bias in the language, as you obviously have been taught to do, how are you to determine whether the bias, if intrinsic at all, is intrinsic to the language or intrinsic to the point of view of the discerner?  It seems to me that the language itself is gender-neutral.  If one is determined to project gender-bias onto the language, then one could just as easily claim that using his, he, and him as non-gender-specific personal pronouns indicates an "intrinsic bias" against males, since the specifically masculine pronouns share double duty with the non-gender-specific ones, suggesting that masculinity is not a sufficiently valuable personal characteristic to merit its own distinct set of pronouns akin to those femininity enjoys.

Language shapes thought, culture, achievement.  The success of the English-speaking peoples and their gifts to the world arguably stem from a characteristic relationship to the phenomenal world that is embedded in the language.  One of the most apparent distinguishing characteristics of English, especially compared to its European cousins both Latin and Germanic, is the streamlined and flexible grammar--an evolutionary development that may well have much to do with the fecundity of ideas sprouting in minds relatively unfettered by the constraints of rigid, cumbersome grammars.  PC proscriptions of language use might well prove regressive, rather than progressive as their advocates imagine.

Addendum:  On further thought, it strikes me as extraordinarily short-sighted and ironic to attack English speakers and their language as intrinsically sexist when no other culture has done so much to advance the rights of women. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on February 13, 2009, 09:22:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2009, 02:18:10 PM
But not afraid:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Novi on February 13, 2009, 10:29:37 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 07:53:13 AM
Are there "intrinsic [gender] biases underlying the English language?"  Assuming that one discerns a bias in the language, as you obviously have been taught to do, how are you to determine whether the bias, if intrinsic at all, is intrinsic to the language or intrinsic to the point of view of the discerner?  It seems to me that the language itself is gender-neutral.  If one is determined to project gender-bias onto the language, then one could just as easily claim that using his, he, and him as non-gender-specific personal pronouns indicates an "intrinsic bias" against males, since the specifically masculine pronouns share double duty with the non-gender-specific ones, suggesting that masculinity is not a sufficiently valuable personal characteristic to merit its own distinct set of pronouns akin to those femininity enjoys.


Hmm, you're right - lazy posting on my part. I was thinking (at a superficial level) of usage at specific points in time which refer to the male by default - all that spokesman v. spokesperson business - and personally don't have a problem with these changes :). 

Quote
One of the most apparent distinguishing characteristics of English, especially compared to its European cousins both Latin and Germanic, is the streamlined and flexible grammar--an evolutionary development that may well have much to do with the fecundity of ideas sprouting in minds relatively unfettered by the constraints of rigid, cumbersome grammars. 

Where does that leave continental philosophy? >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 13, 2009, 10:42:09 AM
What a relief, that none of the world's women ever need fear a man-eating shark!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on February 13, 2009, 10:49:01 AM
I recall seeing a shop in Los Angeles that proclaimed it stocked, 'Clothes for ALL sexes.'

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Solitary Wanderer on February 13, 2009, 10:50:40 AM
I, too, find people saying 'Absolutely!' instead of 'Yes' irritating.

Also, I don't know if it happens in North America or Britian, but here in New Zealand and Australia there is an annoying habit of saying 'Yeah, no' when agreeing with someone.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 10:58:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2009, 06:08:16 AM
I mean, right that if I look attentively at the Who's Online layout, I should notice it.  :)

No, those were both wrong, as you queried (someone is singular, but their is plural). But that quibble of yours is right  8)

Looks like a comedy of errors. :)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 11:01:29 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 06:10:37 AM
We should keep our mouths shut and not presume to think for ourselves but just obey the dictates of those who appoint themselves our masters.

;D

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2009, 06:11:22 AM
Or mistresses.

Spoken like a man, Karl!  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 13, 2009, 12:01:31 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 07:53:13 AM
  PC proscriptions of language use might well prove regressive, rather than progressive as their advocates imagine.

Addendum:  On further thought, it strikes me as extraordinarily short-sighted and ironic to attack English speakers and their language as intrinsically sexist when no other culture has done so much to advance the rights of women. 


Amen!   0:)

There are reasons why English is the language of the Declaration of Independence, rather than Chinese or Sanskrit or any other, and one of them is the British Enlightenment developing the best of the Western Tradition, which began in one sense with the Athenian revolt against the dictator Isagoras and his Spartan allies.  The average people put their lives on the line for political freedom: the aristocrat Cleisthenes, whom Isagoras had exiled, was recalled by the people.  Cleisthenes realized that this unique (at the time) sacrifice had to be rewarded, and so he put into place the foundations of the Athenian Democracy.  The American Revolution can be seen as a distant echo of those Athenians booting out tyranny.

On indefinite pronouns: I have nothing against the plural "they" being used for indefinites.  "Somebody called for you."  "What did they want?"

And political correctness must always be at odds with basic notions of freedom of speech.  I recall decades ago, when "women's libbers" began complaining about "chairman" and "mankind" as excluding women.  The words never struck me as being or intending an attack against women!  One understood them in context as including women, especially "mankind", just like one understands the sound "current" could also be "currant" or the name Leslie/Lesley could be male or female.  What was the problem?

We now have monstrosities like the extremely doubleplusugly "Chairperson" and "Madame Chairperson."  :o

To which the only response can be: "I told ya!  I ain't a madame!  I'm a concierge!"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 13, 2009, 12:27:19 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2009, 05:02:02 AM
Heard on the radio:

QuoteJust like a child misses their blanket.

No one minds the preposition like used as a conjunction here?  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 13, 2009, 12:30:24 PM
Quote from: Novi on February 13, 2009, 10:29:37 AM
Where does that leave continental philosophy? >:D
In the dust.  Deeds, not words, my friend.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 13, 2009, 12:31:52 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 13, 2009, 12:27:19 PM
No one minds the preposition like used as a conjunction here?  0:)

I think he wanted to say I just like a child [who] misses their blanket.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 15, 2009, 02:25:06 AM
Today's Grumble: Adjective Abuse!   $:)

Part I!

My wife (an assistant principal) heard one of the 20-something teachers at her school say the following with no obvious embarrassment: "That movie was a lot funner 'n' that Batman movie."

Yes, "funner", not funnier, "funner" spoken by a supposed teacher of the next generation of functional illiterates coming through our schools.    >:(

And I am sure the teacher would have written "alot" instead of "a lot."    :o

Actually, the misuse of more and most with monosyllabic adjectives also comes to mind here!  In general, most monosyllabic adjectives (and 2-syllable ones) should form their comparative and superlative degrees with -er/-ier and -st/-est.

I hear things like: "Her sunburn is more red than his."  "Redder" would be preferable.  "More red" is musically clumsy to my ear.

People look at me in confusion about the 2-syllable adjectives: "Aren't you supposed to say 'more' or 'most' with them?"  I quote one of the great writers of English at such moments:

"How do you like to go up in a swing,
             Up in the air so blue?
Oh, I do think it the pleasantest thing
             Ever a child can do!"

Robert Louis Stevenson

There are always exceptions: "more loyal" is more euphonious than "loyaler."   8)

And even though "rickety" is 3 syllables..."That car is the ricketiest bucket of bolts I've ever been in!"

And - in conclusion - even though "fun" is one syllable, "more fun" beats "funner" every time!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 15, 2009, 03:27:25 AM
At first read, I thought the rule for forming comparative adjectives based on syllable count was one of the goofiest things I'd heard...but the more I consider it, the more apt it seems.  The purpose of such usage rules to describe practice--not to put the language and its speakers into prescriptive straitjackets--and this it seems to do rather well.  As with most rules there must doubtless be exceptions, though none come quickly to mind...perhaps because I'm struggling to think of more 3- and even 4-syllable adjectives with a comparative form ending in -er.

And I suspect the same rule applies equally well to superlatives.  It's the best!

And now I'm going to have my morning oatmeal with dried fruit.  It's the scrumdiddliunchiest!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 15, 2009, 07:13:19 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 15, 2009, 03:27:25 AM
At first read, I thought the rule for forming comparative adjectives based on syllable count was one of the goofiest things I'd heard...but the more I consider it, the more apt it seems.  The purpose of such usage rules to describe practice--not to put the language and its speakers into prescriptive straitjackets--and this it seems to do rather well.  As with most rules there must doubtless be exceptions, though none come quickly to mind...perhaps because I'm struggling to think of more 3- and even 4-syllable adjectives with a comparative form ending in -er.

And I suspect the same rule applies equally well to superlatives.  It's the best!

And now I'm going to have my morning oatmeal with dried fruit.  It's the scrumdiddliunchiest!

Not bad!  Parallel in sound to rickety is "persnickety" and I have heard things like "Our child is the persnicketiest eater!"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 16, 2009, 05:58:15 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 13, 2009, 12:01:31 PM


We now have monstrosities like the extremely doubleplusugly "Chairperson" and "Madame Chairperson."  :o

Shouldn't it be "Chairperoffspring"?  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 16, 2009, 06:11:43 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 16, 2009, 05:58:15 AM
Shouldn't it be "Chairperoffspring"?  :D

You're right!   :o    Or maybe "Chairbeing" ?

Today's grumble comes from the radio, where my wife was listening to an oldies station, and on came the very terrible song "Horse With No Name: with the incredibly ungrammatical line:

" In the desert, you can remember your name, 'cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain."  (Sic and Sick!)   $:)

LSD explains what the line means, but not the grammar of a rational mind! 

Any other bad grammar candidates from songs? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 16, 2009, 06:20:30 AM
How did this slip through?


Quote from: donwyn on February 09, 2009, 06:44:30 PM
..."pushing the envelope". That darling media phrase which became so overused I wanted to pull my hair/teeth/whatever out.

Luckily for my sanity it's on the decline.


I'm so sorry to hear this!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 16, 2009, 06:26:05 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 16, 2009, 06:11:43 AM
You're right!   :o    Or maybe "Chairbeing" ?

Today's grumble comes from the radio, where my wife was listening to an oldies station, and on came the very terrible song "Horse With No Name: with the incredibly ungrammatical line:

" In the desert, you can remember your name, 'cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain."  (Sic and Sick!)   $:)

LSD explains what the line means, but not the grammar of a rational mind!

Or it could be authentically degraded grammar from the prairies . . . .

Quote from: CatoAny other bad grammar candidates from songs?

Back in the deeps of GMG Time I must already have pointed out one of my pet grammatical quarrels with Sir Paul, the duplicate preposition which 007 is sent to eliminate in Live and Let Die:

. . . this ever-changing world in which we live in . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 16, 2009, 06:30:39 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 16, 2009, 05:58:15 AM
Shouldn't it be "Chairperoffspring"?  :D
ROFL.

Although true political correctness suggests that the very idea of a chair-man-woman-person-or-perprogeny ought be verboten on at least two counts:

(1) The idea of anyone having any particular authority or role in relation to others is an affront to the egalitarian notions of equality which we, as the elitist arbiters of truth and justice, demand that everyone worship by shutting up and obeying our dictates!

(2) Intrinsic species-centrism must be abolished, thus any references that might be construed as perpetuating the unjustly privileged status of humans must be stricken; instead of chair-anything, only the neutral and PC term "being" may be used.

Edit: Ah!  I see Cato has anticipated me.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 16, 2009, 06:33:30 AM
Quote from: sul G on February 16, 2009, 06:20:30 AM
How did this slip through?

"Luckily for my sanity it's on the decline."
I'm so sorry to hear this!

Wocka! Wocka!   8)


This is a case where the brain skips the grammar rule ("it" should refer to "sanity" the last noun) and connects it to the obvious meaning in context ("it" = the phrase "pushing the envelope").

Sometimes however, the context is not always so obvious, so we should follow that rule about the last noun connecting to a pronoun, especially a vague "it."

I have received a claim (it will remain anonymous) that bad grammar is part of the low-class charm of pop music!  Hmmm!  
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 16, 2009, 06:34:26 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 16, 2009, 06:33:30 AM
...bad grammar is part of the low-class charm of pop music!  Hmmm!  
Well it ain't necessarily so.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 16, 2009, 06:38:23 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 16, 2009, 06:11:43 AM

Any other bad grammar candidates from songs? 
I don't have the exact wording to hand but there is one modern hymn (or religious song if you prefer) that proclaims that Jesus will knock all rulers off of their thrones. Where the possessive 'of' comes from I cannot imagine. There seems to be no logic for it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 16, 2009, 10:36:06 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 16, 2009, 06:26:05 AM
Or it could be authentically degraded grammar from the prairies . . . .

Back in the deeps of GMG Time I must already have pointed out one of my pet grammatical quarrels with Sir Paul, the duplicate preposition which 007 is sent to eliminate in Live and Let Die:

. . . this ever-changing world in which we live in . . . .
Wasn't he singing "world in which we're living"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 16, 2009, 11:01:47 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on February 16, 2009, 10:36:06 AM
Wasn't he singing "world in which we're living"?

Nay. Doesn't sound like it, and the duplicate preposition is how it's always been printed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 16, 2009, 11:46:33 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 16, 2009, 11:01:47 AM
Nay. Doesn't sound like it, and the duplicate preposition is how it's always been printed.

That cinches it: The solution of "we're livin' " is charitable. But given the sloppy pronunciation of Sir Paul...   8)

Certainly he is not the only one in that boat: there is a reason why there is a website called "Misheard Lyrics."   $:)

"Off of" is heard everywhere, even from supposedly educated people.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 16, 2009, 11:53:26 AM
Lyrics were never McCartney's strong point.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 16, 2009, 02:08:58 PM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 16, 2009, 11:53:26 AM
Lyrics were never McCartney's strong point.

Neither is music!   :o

But he was strong in "cuteness:" I believe he won the "Cutest Beatle Contest" every time!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 16, 2009, 02:17:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 16, 2009, 02:08:58 PM
Neither is music!   :o

Don't go there. We will fight.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 16, 2009, 02:21:57 PM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 16, 2009, 02:17:50 PM
Don't go there. We will fight.  ;D

Tee-hee!  ;D

Well, he did tolerably well so much of the time.  One cannot but admire the sturdy minimalism of:

Why don't we do it in the road?
No one will be watching us.


"Grinning a grin," though, sounds poor to me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 16, 2009, 02:28:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 16, 2009, 11:46:33 AM
That cinches it: The solution of "we're livin' " is charitable. But given the sloppy pronunciation of Sir Paul...   8)

Certainly he is not the only one in that boat: there is a reason why there is a website called "Misheard Lyrics."   $:)
I had to listen to that song a lot in 1979 (at work, in an ad agency, can't remember why). I guess I just had to have it say "in which we're livin'" if I were to make it through another day (no, not "Another Day," "Live or Let Die").
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 16, 2009, 03:05:34 PM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on February 16, 2009, 02:28:34 PM
I had to listen to that song a lot in 1979 (at work, in an ad agency, can't remember why). I guess I just had to have it say "in which we're livin'" if I were to make it through another day (no, not "Another Day," "Live or Let Die").

Was that "agency" in Guantanamo?   $:)

What annoys me here on this subtopic is that many songs could be grammatically fixed with no problem:

Example: The very annoying Alanis Morissette and her "What If God WAS One of Us?"  (Subjunctive "were" works perfectly musically.)

Actually, Alanis Morissette should be fixed!   0:) 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 16, 2009, 03:09:09 PM
I don't think that was Morissette, was it?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 16, 2009, 03:18:26 PM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 16, 2009, 03:09:09 PM
I don't think that was Morissette, was it?

Well, when I remembered the line, and then checked it on Google, her name came up as the singer.  But another "Googling" also brought up somebody named Joan Osborne.

Both stand accused!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 16, 2009, 03:36:56 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 16, 2009, 03:18:26 PM
Well, when I remembered the line, and then checked it on Google, her name came up as the singer.  But another "Googling" also brought up somebody named Joan Osborne.

Both stand accused!   $:)

Yep. Joan Osborne. That's who had the hit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 16, 2009, 03:41:55 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 16, 2009, 03:05:34 PM
Example: The very annoying Alanis Morissette and her "What If God WAS One of Us?"  (Subjunctive "were" works perfectly musically.)

Actually, a lot of fiction authors do this too.  :-\

You can't pick on pop music though. It ain't cool to sing like a square, yo.  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 16, 2009, 03:56:07 PM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 16, 2009, 03:41:55 PM
Actually, a lot of fiction authors do this too.  :-\

You can't pick on pop music though. It ain't cool to sing like a square, yo.  >:D

I wrote earlier that bad grammar is part of its "low-class charm."  A true musica populi I suppose!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 16, 2009, 04:07:38 PM
Anyway, ought to be the world in which we live . . . the world in which we're living still rings a little colloquial.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 16, 2009, 04:08:29 PM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 16, 2009, 03:41:55 PM
It ain't cool to sing like a square, yo.  >:D

The Pav made 'em melt, you know.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 17, 2009, 10:15:28 AM
Yesterday we drove 100 miles through the center of Ohio and counted 8 falcons on patrol at the edge of the highway!  We saw another one this morning right here in a suburban neighborhood of Columbus (Metro Pop. c. 1 million).

Tercel is the official name of a male falcon, coming from Latin for one-third: there was a belief that only 1/3 of the species at any given time was male.

Another good word struck my eyes today: blogobore!   :o

Anybody know a blogobore?   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on February 17, 2009, 05:01:49 PM
Quote from: donwyn on February 09, 2009, 06:44:30 PM
Luckily for my sanity it's on the decline.

Quote from: sul G on February 16, 2009, 06:20:30 AM
How did this slip through?

I'm so sorry to hear this!

I misspoke - I should have said "it's" gone altogether.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 17, 2009, 05:14:41 PM
Cato

QuoteIt is the counterpart to "the = thee" being used in front of everything: "thee" for "the" is permissible only before vowels.

Thee also seems appropriate sometimes when you're speaking slowly, the being such a short sound to leave hanging in the air.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 18, 2009, 06:36:50 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 17, 2009, 05:14:41 PM


Thee also seems appropriate sometimes when you're speaking slowly, the being such a short sound to leave hanging in the air.


Sean is talking about the mispronunciation of "the" as "Thee" before consonants instead of vowels.

I have heard people use "Thee" when they are trying to emphasize something: e.g. That is thee best book I have ever read.

Not wanting to tergiversate,  0:)   I am not sure I should accept it, although I understand the impulse behind it.

Better to recompose the music of the statement in such cases: "That is the best book I have ever read!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 18, 2009, 06:51:11 AM
Even when speaking slowly, it is possible to use the (avec schwa), and simply not give the definite article the same long duration as everything else.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 18, 2009, 09:56:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 18, 2009, 06:51:11 AM
Even when speaking slowly, it is possible to use the (avec schwa)...

Mahler would say 'Schwangvoll'...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 18, 2009, 10:33:55 AM
Quote from: sul G on February 18, 2009, 09:56:37 AM
Mahler would say 'Schwangvoll'...

I do believe Mahler said "schwungvoll" because "schwangvoll" comes close to meaning something like "full of pregnancy" !   :o

Of course, Mahler's works are full of ideas pregnant with meaning!   0:)

But not this time!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 18, 2009, 12:43:14 PM
Another grumble for today:  8)

The tendency to shorten words to monosyllabic mumbles and guttural grunts is annoying me more than ever!

"App" for application.  "Mum" for chrysanthemum.  "Tatt" for tattoo, and by the way...speaking of our piratesque Generation X...

Don't get me started on the pierced and tattooed members of our society, who are pierced and tattooed either because they are  in dire need of attention, even the negative attention of disgust and repulsion, or because they are so dissatisfied with themselves that they buy the delusion that attacking their bodies in this way will make them attractive somehow!   $:)

I immediately walk out of stores and restaurants as soon as I see that I might have to deal with some pierced or painted emetic.    8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 18, 2009, 03:25:20 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 18, 2009, 12:43:14 PM
Don't get me started on the pierced and tattooed members of our society, who are pierced and tattooed either because they are  in dire need of attention, even the negative attention of disgust and repulsion, or because they are so dissatisfied with themselves that they buy the delusion that attacking their bodies in this way will make them attractive somehow!   $:)

I don't see the accumilation of body mods as any different to other costly hobbies (music included) - both involve paying for something to gratify yourself with. Even supposedly anti-materialist Buddhist monks often have tattoos to keep them from getting bored with life 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 18, 2009, 04:09:43 PM
In my culture, self-mutilation is a cry for help, a sign of a soul in torment.  That this has become fashionable among the young shows just how far from sanity our values have strayed.  I can tolerate it in some circumstances, but not on employees of an establishment serving food.  I lose my appetite at the sight of metal studs and rings puncturing the flesh of innocent faces.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 18, 2009, 04:31:23 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 18, 2009, 04:09:43 PM
In my culture, self-mutilation is a cry for help, a sign of a soul in torment.  That this has become fashionable among the young shows just how far from sanity our values have strayed.  I can tolerate it in some circumstances, but not on employees of an establishment serving food.  I lose my appetite at the sight of metal studs and rings puncturing the flesh of innocent faces.
I know someone around our age (I assume you haven't been a teenager in some time, either) who insists not only upon getting tattoos and piercings, but also on whipping out photos of said mutilations when he's somewhere he can't whip out the actual location(s) of those mutilations. I poured part of a cup of coffee on his hand and his picture when he showed one to me in a coffee shop. I couldn't believe it.

I think it was you who brought it up earlier, how some people, when they can't get positive attention, will settle for the other kind. I wasn't even gonna give him that.

And I am not a conservative.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 18, 2009, 04:33:53 PM
You seem to have an unusually inflexible definition of both what constitutes self-abuse and to equate some tattoos and piercings with lapsed values is IMO incorrect. Your calling it "mutilation" already hints that you are uninterested in understanding any other viewpoint, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 18, 2009, 04:59:35 PM
Quote from: Lethe on February 18, 2009, 04:33:53 PM
You seem to have an unusually inflexible definition of both what constitutes self-abuse and to equate some tattoos and piercings with lapsed values is IMO incorrect. Your calling it "mutilation" already hints that you are uninterested in understanding any other viewpoint, though.

Psychiatrists have identified one reason for piercings/tattooings: the person gets hooked on the endorphins involved from the pain.  I listened to an interview with a tattooed 20-something, who said he became depressed when the tattoo was finished, and started constantly worrying and wondering when he would be able to afford another, and where it would go!   :o

It is no different from 40-somethings tinkering with plastic surgery: dissatisfaction with one's looks so great that they spend thousands and risk surgical complications, just like their lower-class counterparts risk hepatitis, chronic infections, AIDS, and long-term disfigurement for the "cool tattoo"!

And the odds are good that the general public will end up paying for most of these self-inflicted health problems!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 18, 2009, 05:27:14 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 18, 2009, 04:59:35 PM
Psychiatrists have identified one reason for piercings/tattooings: the person gets hooked on the endorphins involved from the pain.  I listened to an interview with a tattooed 20-something, who said he became depressed when the tattoo was finished, and started constantly worrying and wondering when he would be able to afford another, and where it would go!   :o

So essentially you can't distinguish between people in the first category, and people in the second? ;)

(http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/1500/95866266dm4.jpg) (http://imageshack.us) (http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/6667/60648754wu7.jpg) (http://imageshack.us) (http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/26/92853445qx0.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

(http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/313/17047666jx7.jpg) (http://imageshack.us) (http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/5189/14687961yq2.jpg) (http://imageshack.us) (http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/3595/82330157yq0.jpg) (http://imageshack.us)

Quote from: Cato on February 18, 2009, 04:59:35 PM
It is no different from 40-somethings tinkering with plastic surgery: dissatisfaction with one's looks so great that they spend thousands and risk surgical complications, just like their lower-class counterparts risk hepatitis, chronic infections, AIDS, and long-term disfigurement for the "cool tattoo"!

Yes, because everybody who has a tattoo gets AIDS(!). We are taking this kind of ad-absurdum, aren't we? :D

Quote from: Cato on February 18, 2009, 04:59:35 PM
And the odds are good that the general public will end up paying for most of these self-inflicted health problems!   $:)

This sounds a lot like wishful thinking. "These people look strange, I wish bad things on them!"

Seriously, people find ways to be extreme in every area of life, and the extremists tend to be a minority. As a result, while someone with a few piercings can be made an easy target by some pissed off individuals, people who do even more egregious things (health-wise, and "morality"-wise) have no such problems.

While I don't have any interest in body modifications - and my closest friends don't either - from my experience people with body modifications tend to be normal on the most part. I.e., they care about their health and won't go to backstreet parlours to have anything done to them. Even the most drunk and drugged up young people generally seem to be smart enough to realised the health problems a bad practitioner can cause.

Edit: Anyway, apologies if I come across as obstinate in these posts, this has been simmering for a while. GMG can be infuriating at times. On one day the root cause of the collapse of civilisation is some impending ethnic infiltration/invasion of the west, and the next day it is somebody who wants to pierce their scrotum.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 19, 2009, 05:27:05 AM
Ad absurdum indeed!   ;D

Read carefully!  I wrote that the tattooed and pierced risk such diseases, not that there was a guarantee.  Certainly chronic infections are the biggest and most likely result.

Nobody said this is causing the Untergang des Abendlandes!   :o

I and others said we find it personally revolting, and that it is symptomatic of a "Look At Me!" kulcher.   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 19, 2009, 06:21:55 AM
ONLY THE ENGLISH COULD HAVE INVENTED THIS LANGUAGE

We'll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes,
But the plural of ox becomes oxen, not oxes.
One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,
Yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice,
Yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.

If the plural of man is always called men,
Then shouldn't the plural of pan be called pen?
If I speak of my foot and show you my feet,
And I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,
Why shouldn't the plural of booth be called beeth?

Then one may be that, and three would be those,
Yet hat in the plural would never be hose,
And the plural of cat is cats, not cose.
We speak of a brother and also of brethren,
But though we say mother, we never say methren.
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
But imagine the feminine: she, shis and shim!

Let's face it - English is a crazy language.
There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger;
neither apple nor pine in pineapple.
English muffins weren't invented in England ..
We take English for granted, but if we explore its paradoxes,
we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square,
and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.

And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing,
grocers don't groce and hammers don't ham?
Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend.
If you have a bunch of odds and ends
and get rid of all but one of them, what do you call it?

If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught?
If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?
Sometimes I think all the folks who grew up speaking English
should be committed to an asylum for the verbally insane.

In what other language do people recite at a play and play at a recital?
We ship by truck but send cargo by ship.
We have noses that run and feet that smell.
We park in a driveway and drive in a parkway.
And how can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same,
while a wise man and a wise guy are opposites?

You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language
in which your house can burn up as it burns
down, in which you fill in a form by filling it out,
and in which an alarm goes off by going on.

And, in closing, if Father is Pop, how come Mother's not Mop?

I would like to add that if people from Poland are called poles then
people from Holland should be holes and the Germans, germs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 19, 2009, 06:55:12 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 19, 2009, 06:21:55 AM
ONLY THE ENGLISH COULD HAVE INVENTED THIS LANGUAGE

Dave, you get an A+ for posting that!

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Soooooooooooooooooooooo true!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 19, 2009, 07:13:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 19, 2009, 06:55:12 AM
Dave, you get an A+ for posting that!

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Soooooooooooooooooooooo true!

I got it from a guy who got it in his email.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 19, 2009, 07:16:58 AM
Quote from: Lethe on February 18, 2009, 04:33:53 PM
You seem to have an unusually inflexible definition of both what constitutes self-abuse and to equate some tattoos and piercings with lapsed values is IMO incorrect. Your calling it "mutilation" already hints that you are uninterested in understanding any other viewpoint, though.
I'm not sure that the post to which you're responding contains any evidence of the comparative flexibility of "my" definition of "what constitutes self-abuse."  In fact, it made no reference to the concept of self-abuse whatsoever.  It did, however, characterize "piercing" as mutilation--a term to which you also object and on the basis of which you mistakenly infer a closed mind.

Just so we can get our terms straight, let's not take my word for the meaning of the word:
Quote from: The American Heritage Medical DictionaryMutilation: Disfigurement or injury by removal or destruction of a conspicuous or essential part of the body.
That rending one's flesh to insert conspicuous chunks of metal is a form of mutilation is true by definition.  Being uncomfortable with that term and preferring to call it by some innocuous term like "body adornment" is simply double-speak--and that indicates the kind of prejudice that simply refuses to look squarely at the facts lest cognitive dissonance ruffle happily self-satisfied feathers.

The capacity of most humans to live with cognitive dissonance is amazing (albeit usually aided by liberal ingestion of alcohol and other mind-altering substances):  Consider those who object to scarification and other culturally prescribed forms of bodily mutilation practiced by other societies, yet who condone similar practices that are contrary to cultural norms in our own society.  Our species' endless capacity for self-delusion and self-justification is a wonder indeed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 19, 2009, 07:24:51 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 19, 2009, 07:16:58 AM
 That rending one's flesh to insert conspicuous chunks of metal is a form of mutilation is true by definition.

Surely only if it disfigures (which is eye of the beholder stuff) or causes injury. According to the definition you supply, that is. If one doesn't consider oneself disfigured or injured, why should one feel mutilated?

I speak as one whose taste doesn't extend to body piercings but with no issue with those who do. I'm tempted to make the pun that those with the more Victorian views on this thread ought to ponder the Prince Albert, but maybe I should steer clear of that issue...  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 19, 2009, 08:56:59 AM
Quote from: sul G on February 19, 2009, 07:24:51 AM
Surely only if it disfigures (which is eye of the beholder stuff) or causes injury. According to the definition you supply, that is. If one doesn't consider oneself disfigured or injured, why should one feel mutilated?

I speak as one whose taste doesn't extend to body piercings but with no issue with those who do. I'm tempted to make the pun that those with the more Victorian views on this thread ought to ponder the Prince Albert, but maybe I should steer clear of that issue...  ;D


I hope somebody let him out of that can!   :o

The poem is on target of course: I think George Carlin used some of those lines in his early 1960's routines, before the routines became cruder.

I have been asked about the difference between tergiversate, which I used earlier in a response, and vacillate.

The former means constantly switching opinions and beliefs on a specific subject.  "Vacillate" means one is not very strong in holding an opinion, and might be thinking of switching, or maybe not!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 19, 2009, 09:35:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 19, 2009, 08:56:59 AM
I have been asked about the difference between tergiversate, which I used earlier in a response, and vacillate.

The former means constantly switching opinions and beliefs on a specific subject. 

Ermmm.... not quite. It means to engage in tergiversation (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tergiversation). :)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 19, 2009, 10:02:58 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 19, 2009, 09:35:38 AM
Ermmm.... not quite. It means to engage in tergiversation (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tergiversation). :)



Another reason to avoid Internet dictionaries!  8)

I recall William F. Buckley using the word as a noun decades ago while he was describing a politician: "flip-flopping" is perhaps less elegant, but punchier!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 19, 2009, 10:31:02 AM
Quote from: sul G on February 19, 2009, 07:24:51 AM
Surely only if it disfigures (which is eye of the beholder stuff) or causes injury. According to the definition you supply, that is. If one doesn't consider oneself disfigured or injured, why should one feel mutilated?

Whether a practitioner feels disfigured or mutilated is beside the point, is it not?  Otherwise you find yourself in the unenviable position of trying to explain why stealing a little old lady's handbag is not theft if the purse-snatcher doesn't feel that it is.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 19, 2009, 01:09:13 PM
No, clearly they are not the same. The theft is done to a third party - it is what she feels that counts first and foremost. The 'mutilation', as you'd have it, is done to oneself, and only the party it is done to can determined whether they feel disfigured/injured and therefore, by your definition, mutilated.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 19, 2009, 02:36:54 PM
My goodness.  Theft has nothing to do with what the victim feels--at least not in the US, nor in other Common Law jurisdictions (unless something drastic has occurred in the past couple of decades!).  It is the taking of another's property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property without his consent.

Nor does the fact of mutilation have anything to do with feelings or intent--no more than whether it's raining out, or if the sky is blue.  Tearing holes in perfectly good skin to make orifices where nature doesn't is mutilation regardless of whether we approve or not.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 19, 2009, 03:02:25 PM
Not according to the definition of mutilation you provided, it isn't. Or if we are to go by this new definition - mutilation is the removal of good tissue when nature doesn't do so - then getting your hair cut or shaving are also mutilation.

And as far as the theft question goes, you're right of course, legally (though if the victim for some reason doesn't feel that they are a victim we get into other irrelevant byways). But that isn't the issue: you compared piercing (something non criminal one might to choose to do to oneself) to theft (something criminal one does - or hopefully doesn't - to others). The two don't seem to me to be at all comparable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 19, 2009, 03:05:14 PM
All that said, I can't believe that I've got involved in a thread defending piercing - I who only a few weeks ago was saddened by my daughter's wish to get her ears done! I don't think that this wish was 'a cry for help [from] a soul in torment'. I'll have to ask her in the morning.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 19, 2009, 04:43:22 PM
Quote from: sul G on February 19, 2009, 03:02:25 PM
Not according to the definition of mutilation you provided, it isn't. Or if we are to go by this new definition - mutilation is the removal of good tissue when nature doesn't do so - then getting your hair cut or shaving are also mutilation.
Wrong.  I've not shifted ground and the definition I provided most certainly does apply.  Look again:
QuoteMutilation: Disfigurement or injury by removal or destruction of a conspicuous or essential part of the body.
Removing part of the body--the skin--especially in a place as conspicuous as a person's face, and then further calling attention to it by inserting one or more garish chunks of metal, fits this medical definition quite well.  Haircuts don't remotely qualify.  As for the notion of disfigurement, even if we exclude the objective standard of nature's perfection with only so many orifices in the human body and only in certain locations, and grant you the "eye of the beholder" standard you seek, then by our cultural standard as beholders it is still a disfigurement of the body--mutilation.

Quote from: sul G on February 19, 2009, 03:02:25 PMAnd as far as the theft question goes, you're right of course, legally (though if the victim for some reason doesn't feel that they are a victim we get into other irrelevant byways). But that isn't the issue: you compared piercing (something non criminal one might to choose to do to oneself) to theft (something criminal one does - or hopefully doesn't - to others). The two don't seem to me to be at all comparable.
You are not reading very carefully at all.  I did not compare piercing to theft.  You claimed that whether the victim felt mutilated or not decides the issue.  I used theft as an example to illustrate the untenability of your claim.  Theft is theft, regardless of whether the thief feels comfortable about calling it that.  I could have used any similar example:  A pitched ball swung at and missed is a strike, regardless of how the batter feels about it.

Finally, I doubt that your daughter's ear piercing is a cry for help--though if it were I wouldn't count on her telling you even if she knew!  On the face of it I'd say it's a normal teenaged expression of the desire to fit in, as well as to undergo a rite of passage they associate with growing up.  From a feminist point of view, of course, it's an abomination stemming from dominant males mutilation of their female chattel to display gaudy symbols of great disposable wealth--in other words, a legacy of ancient lunk-headed sexism using women as display pieces in lieu of whipping out their penises and measuring!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 19, 2009, 05:24:36 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 19, 2009, 04:43:22 PM
Wrong.  I've not shifted ground and the definition I provided most certainly does apply. 

But you provided two definitions: the dictionary one (mutilation = disfigurement and injury) and your own (mutilation = removal of good tissue nature doesn't remove). These aren't the same thing.

QuoteRemoving part of the body--the skin--especially in a place as conspicuous as a person's face, and then further calling attention to it by inserting one or more garish chunks of metal, fits this medical definition quite well.  Haircuts don't remotely qualify. 

Only as far as the injury clause of the first definition goes. A haircut could, however, be disfiguring (the other clause of definition one). And it fits your second definition (unnatural removal of good tissue) perfectly.

QuoteAs for the notion of disfigurement, even if we exclude the objective standard of nature's perfection with only so many orifices in the human body and only in certain locations,

...as we have to for the 'haircut' reason just mentioned - because nature's perfection can't only be limited to earlobe, tongues and so on; your natural hair 'style' is equally perfect too...

Quoteand grant you the "eye of the beholder" standard you seek, then by our cultural standard as beholders it is still a disfigurement of the body--mutilation.

Aha. I was waiting to see when cultural standards came into it. That's a different issue - those with piercings would claim, I expect, that they have different cultural standards to you, and shouldn't have to conform to the cultural standards of those who have to look at them.

QuoteYou are not reading very carefully at all.  I did not compare piercing to theft.  You claimed that whether the victim felt mutilated or not decides the issue.  I used theft as an example to illustrate the untenability of your claim.  Theft is theft, regardless of whether the thief feels comfortable about calling it that.  I could have used any similar example:  A pitched ball swung at and missed is a strike, regardless of how the batter feels about it.

No - because the baseball analogy and the theft analogy are either/or situations. But if 'mutilation' is to fit to your dictionary definition, and if the subject is not in medical harm (=injured), then we are left with the issue of disfigurement. And that, as we've said - and as you've 'granted' - is in the eye of the beholder. IOW, not an either/or situation.

QuoteFinally, I doubt that your daughter's ear piercing is a cry for help--though if it were I wouldn't count on her telling you even if she knew! 

No, of course it isn't! If you knew her - she's only little - you'd know how ridiculous the idea is.  ;D I mentioned her piercing wish only because you stated earlier that 'In my culture, self-mutilation is a cry for help, a sign of a soul in torment.' And I thought it best to suggest that this is not always the case; that in fact, it probably is only the case rather rarely.

EDIT - but enough - I left the forum originally because of the ridiculousness of finding myself arguing about issues I didn't really care about. I can't believe that so soon after returning I've got myself involved in a difference of opinions about body piercing of all things, for goodness sake!!  :o So let's call it quits on this one, if that's OK. I'm not bothered enough to worry too much either way!  :) :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 19, 2009, 06:25:35 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 19, 2009, 07:16:58 AM
I'm not sure that the post to which you're responding contains any evidence of the comparative flexibility of "my" definition of "what constitutes self-abuse."  In fact, it made no reference to the concept of self-abuse whatsoever.  It did, however, characterize "piercing" as mutilation--a term to which you also object and on the basis of which you mistakenly infer a closed mind.

Just so we can get our terms straight, let's not take my word for the meaning of the word:  That rending one's flesh to insert conspicuous chunks of metal is a form of mutilation is true by definition.  Being uncomfortable with that term and preferring to call it by some innocuous term like "body adornment" is simply double-speak--and that indicates the kind of prejudice that simply refuses to look squarely at the facts lest cognitive dissonance ruffle happily self-satisfied feathers.

The capacity of most humans to live with cognitive dissonance is amazing (albeit usually aided by liberal ingestion of alcohol and other mind-altering substances):  Consider those who object to scarification and other culturally prescribed forms of bodily mutilation practiced by other societies, yet who condone similar practices that are contrary to cultural norms in our own society.  Our species' endless capacity for self-delusion and self-justification is a wonder indeed!

You say that I play with words, but you are using a term most commonly used to describe an accidental or involuntary action on person resulting in considerable traumatic damage (such as being assaulted, or from being mentally imbalanced and cutting skin in a haphazard manner) often in an uncaring fashion or on the spur of the moment to describe body modifications... The opposite attitude is the case for most people being tattooed or pierced, certainly those who use it responsibly - they tend to consider and plan it for a while before. If they don't plan it well, then that is their problem, and something that people must get used to in a free society. It also happens with poor investments ruining families. Using the same term to describe slashing arms with a stanley knife or having a picture of a flower added to a persons skin feels excessively combative to me.

Are these "cultural norms" you mention referring to Christianity and its concept of treating the body as a temple? Where I live people who claim to believe in that religion (much less practitioners) are becoming a minority, and some others water it down considerably. Non-practitioners pick and choose what they think is best from its influence on society until the second half of the 20th century, and I think that is a decent way of going about things - not denying its importance, but not adhering to something you do not believe. Given that culture is constantly in flux I am not sure how something relatively harmless when carried out properly and which has the ability to make a person feel happier (however much this may not apply to the moral majority) can have such negative weight given to it, to the extent that it is implied that people who do it are mentally deficient.

As an example of how somebody less affected by that teaching might think, I see a body not as a "perfect" object, but something functional. If a person has a disfiguring scar, a tattoo can conceal or offset it, if somebody is heavily into some kind of "lifestyle", then to modify it to enhance their experience of that shouldn't be a problem either. Any other attitude reminds me of religions bedroom snooping, that too often makes claims of things being morally wrong and dangerous.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 19, 2009, 10:47:09 PM
Good God! A page-long controversy of moral and legal philosophy to discuss tattooing and piercing! I can't believe my eyes. Those lads and lasses who look like deep-jungle savages couldn't care less about what others think about them. Much as I think they are mentally deranged, I also believe this is really a non-issue. If civilization will collapse, the guilt of the well-clothed, neat, freshly shaved and hair-cut politicians and academics will be much greater than that of those nose-pierced, head-tattooed crackpots.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 20, 2009, 04:55:42 AM
Good grief is more like it.  Piercings and such ain't worth the ink (or electrons  ;) ), but I have felt that trying to encourage others to read and write more carefully and think more clearly is particularly pertinent to the topic of this thread.  Look at the post immediately preceding yours, for instance, putting words into my mouth, projecting the writer's prejudices into my statements, playing Humpty Dumpty with the meaning of words, and ironically accusing me of some sort of moral fascism when it's bloody obvious who here is unwilling to tolerate opinions different from her own.  Surely we can do better...especially in cases like that one in which the writer's tone suggests that none of that was intended.

Wouldn't it be nice if all people were sufficiently tolerant to allow others to have different points of view?  If they could direct their efforts toward understanding rather than attacking?  And if they cannot restrain themselves from attacking, then at least refrain from attacking the person rather than the viewpoint?  (Reasonable self-defense excepted, of course.  ;) )

Lethe, you are mistaken on several counts.  I never said (neither explicitly nor by implication) that you "played with words."  You made an unjustified attack suggesting I'm intolerant because I used the word "mutilation" to describe piercing.  I provided a neutral definition of the term from a respected medical dictionary to help sort out confusion over its meaning in this contextual application (which definition has been stripped out of the passage quoted in your post--the forum software does that unless you override it).

People's freedom to embed objects in their faces--whether due to boredom, misguided notions of beautification, adolescent longing to fit in with the "cool" kids, or any other reason, and regardless of how "responsibly" or well-planned the operation may be--has nothing to do with the meaning of the term "mutilation."  You are certainly right to recognize the hyperbolic thrust in my use of the term, and you're free to regard that as "excessively combative" if you wish--but from my perspective it was a rather mild yet pithy and accurate characterization, and your own response here seems a much better example of "excessive combativeness."

Your views about Christianity seem a bit odd to express in this context, suggesting an axe to grind...yet I understand your point of view, admire the associative leap you've made, and think that discussing the role of Christianity in shaping American mores might make for an enlightening discussion.  (But note that such discussions have been tried in numerous threads here at GMG and they always seem to devolve into attacks on the beliefs anti-Christian bigots imagine other members hold, as well as attacks on the members themselves.)

Finally, I hesitated before using the word "perfect" (elsewhere, I suppose, since I don't see it in the quoted passage) since I imagined it would be misunderstood, yet thought the intended meaning should be clear in the context--at least, to those familiar with usage of the term to indicate something whole and complete, without flaws, bearing all the essential characteristics of a thing of its type.  A perfect child, for instance, is one born with four fingers and a thumb on each of two opposing hands and so forth.  It is not a moral judgment, but a description.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 20, 2009, 05:00:49 AM
I'll give what you said some thought, and I'm sorry that we can't seem to find some middle ground on the matter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 07:07:23 AM
Till the stars fall from the sky
For you and I.


Happens all the time in pop music;  I just think that Jim Morrison makes it a bit louder in this instance  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 20, 2009, 07:07:56 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 20, 2009, 07:07:23 AM
Till the stars fall from the sky
For you and I.


Happens all the time in pop music;  I just think that Jim Morrison makes it a bit louder in this instance  8)

He had to rhyme "sky".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 07:11:50 AM
Folks before could both walk and chew gum rhyme and write grammatically.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 20, 2009, 07:13:24 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 20, 2009, 07:11:50 AM
Folks before could both walk and chew gum rhyme and write grammatically.

Oh, reeeeeeeally???  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 07:13:57 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 20, 2009, 07:13:24 AM
Oh, reeeeeeeally???  ;D

Does I . . . astonish you?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 20, 2009, 07:17:38 AM
A Romanian soccer coach boasting about his achievements:

The team was rescued from going to the second league by us together with me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 07:19:50 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 20, 2009, 07:17:38 AM
A Romanian soccer coach boasting about his achievements:

The team was rescued by us together with me.

Hah!  Must have translated literally.  The Russian for for you and me is something much like for us together with you.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 20, 2009, 07:20:07 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 20, 2009, 07:07:23 AM
Till the stars fall from the sky
For you and I.


Happens all the time in pop music;  I just think that Jim Morrison makes it a bit louder in this instance  8)

One of the worst and clumsiest pop songs ever!   8)

David Ross wrote about the "perfect child" and reminded me of the old debate about absolute adjectives: in the American Constitution, written by men who knew the language well, there is of course the famous phrase:

"...in order to form a more perfect union..."

If something is perfect, how can it be "more perfect" ?   :o

What were the "Framers of the Constitution" thinking here?  Is it a mistake?

I was once chastised innumerable decades ago by a teacher for using the word "deadest" in a composition.   0:)

"That's the deadest body I've ever seen!" said the detective.   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 07:21:37 AM
Och, aye, degrees of perfection.

The way I was taught, I still cringe at "more unique."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 20, 2009, 07:22:13 AM
(http://chrisstubbs.com/images/Wikipedia-lolcat.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 07:24:18 AM
Can izz not!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 20, 2009, 07:27:53 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 20, 2009, 07:19:50 AM
Hah!  Must have translated literally. 

No, he said it in Romanian (noi impreuna cu mine, literally us together with me) and in our language it's a ridiculous pleonasm, since us already implies me. :)

More true quotes from Romanian soccer players:

I didn't weep but I had tears flowing from my eyes.

A man is a human being.

It's all the fault of max-media

(After a match lost 1-3): Had we not received three goals, we could have won the match.

:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 07:28:56 AM
Oops, Andrei!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 20, 2009, 07:30:50 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 20, 2009, 07:20:07 AM
"...in order to form a more perfect union..."

If something is perfect, how can it be "more perfect" ?   :o

What were the "Framers of the Constitution" thinking here?  Is it a mistake?
I've always read that as a simpler way of saying "in order to form a union more closely resembling the standard of perfection that we cannot articulate clearly, nor whose particulars we may define to the satisfaction of all, but which we generally have little problem recognizing when we see it."  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 20, 2009, 07:39:38 AM
Footballers, eh? These courtesy of QI:

Well, Clive, it's all about the two Ms - movement and positioning.

He dribbles a lot and the opposition don't like it - you can see it all over their faces.

Goalkeepers aren't born today until they're in their late twenties or early thirties.

The Germans only have one player under 22, and he's 23.

If someone in the crowd spits at you, you just have to swallow it.

I wouldn't be surprised if this game went all the way to the finish.

We didn't underestimate them - they were just a lot better than we thought.

He's started anticipating what's going to happen before it's even happened.

If I had a blank piece of paper there'd be five names on it.

I don't think there's anyone bigger or smaller than Maradona.

I never make predictions and I never will.

Aston Villa are seventh in the league. That's almost as high as you can get without being one of the top six..

Chile have three options: they could win or they could lose.

Don't ask me what a typical Brazilian is because I don't know what a typical Brazilian is. But Romario was a typical Brazilian.

We don't want our players to be monks. We want them to be better football players because a monk doesn't play football at this level.

We must have had 99% of the match. It was the other 3% that cost us.

You're on your own out there with ten mates.

and so on - there's more where that came from. Worth pointing out that Kevin Keegan is responsible for many more than his fair share of these.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 20, 2009, 07:43:46 AM
 :)

A late Romanian maverick politician: My destiny has been marked by fate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 20, 2009, 08:02:14 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 20, 2009, 07:43:46 AM
:)

A late Romanian maverick politician: My destiny has been marked by fate.

And not by grammar!

Concerning the overuse of "I" as a prepositional object: I believe this stems from people again trying to sound more educated, and of course they end up being wrong.

"Just between you and I..."   BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!  10,000 VOLTS!   >:D

"Just between you and me..."

Visiting the haunts of the illiterati, I often hear e.g. "Me 'n' him went dow' there las' night..."

"He and I" is apparently too much to hope for in such cases!   :o

And then you have the mangling of verbs in broad daylight: "They must've went there last night." BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! 10,000 VOLTS!   >:D

"They must have gone there last night!"   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 20, 2009, 08:07:12 AM
Man, I'm glad I know all this stuff. However, don't be afraid to correct me if I ever screw up. Only fools get offended when they're corrected.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 20, 2009, 08:09:02 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 20, 2009, 08:07:12 AM
Man, I'm glad I know all this stuff. However, don't be afraid to correct me if I ever screw up.

Would that be correction Cato-style?

QuoteBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!  10,000 VOLTS!   >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 08:13:29 AM
Quote from: RegIf you really wanted to join the PFJ, you'd have to really hate the Romans.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 20, 2009, 08:41:56 AM
Oh Really?   0:)

Release the voltage!   >:D

As a Latin teacher (among other things), I must ask how anyone could really hate the Romans!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 20, 2009, 08:45:45 AM
The Cato-nater.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 08:50:26 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 20, 2009, 08:07:12 AM
Man, I'm glad I know all this stuff.

There's always other stuff to learn. And that is an occasion for gladness, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 20, 2009, 08:51:04 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 20, 2009, 08:07:12 AM
Man, I'm glad I know all this stuff. However, don't be afraid to correct me if I ever screw up. Only fools get offended when they're corrected.
Amen!  (The gates of heaven open and a chorus of angels sings.)
                                    (http://thefamilybiz.org/ezboard/emoticons/choir.gif)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 20, 2009, 08:52:00 AM
Quote from: Maciek on February 20, 2009, 08:41:13 AM
Wow! I feel so modern (or is it old-fashioned?? probably the latter ;D). I went last year! (There Will Be Blood)

Last year? Shouldn't that be There Was Blood? j/k  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on February 20, 2009, 09:02:10 PM
How about the word (term?) "email"?

When we write to someone electronically we say "I sent him an email".

But when we write to someone using paper (a letter) we don't say "I sent him a mail". We say "I sent him a letter".

So when emailing someone shouldn't it be "I sent him an e-letter (eletter)"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2009, 04:13:05 AM
Quote from: donwyn on February 20, 2009, 09:02:10 PM
How about the word (term?) "email"?

When we write to someone electronically we say "I sent him an email".

But when we write to someone using paper (a letter) we don't say "I sent him a mail". We say "I sent him a letter".

So when emailing someone shouldn't it be "I sent him an e-letter (eletter)"?

You have spotted another case where English has become inconsistent!  But this horse has galloped far away from the barn!

This has spread into German as well, where "E-mail" has been adopted as a feminine word, and so one can " eine E-mail schreiben."  In the early days of the Internet (10-12 years ago) I used "e-Brief" in German (e-letter) as you suggested, but the bias in German is that using English shows sophistication and sets a "cool" generation apart from the old fogies.  My German correspondents always told me "Nobody uses 'e-Brief,' everybody uses 'E-Mail'." 

I will still insist on using the hyphen, however, for the word "e-mail."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 21, 2009, 04:46:04 AM
I tend both to use the hyphen, and to resist using e-mail as the unit (I sent him an e-mail message).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 21, 2009, 04:47:50 AM
But then, to be sure, it was a long time before I assented to We're going out for a beer. (I still hold the line at cup of coffee.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 21, 2009, 05:04:13 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 20, 2009, 07:21:37 AM...I still cringe at "more unique."
Aye.  On the other hand, it's useful in letting us know right away that the speaker is an idiot.  It's handy that way, like the nearly ubiquitous use of "surreal" to mean...well, I'm not sure what they think they mean by it.  (Fun?  Thrilling?  Unusual?  Unique?)  

(http://thefamilybiz.org/ezboard/emoticons/torquemada.gif)

As for "email", I've no objection to using it as a noun to distinguish electronic mail from snail, and care not at all whether it's hyphenated or the "E" is printed in upper or lower case.  Rapid coinage, assimilation, and acceptance of new vocabulary is one of the English language's greatest strengths (along with a streamlined and flexible grammar), a corollary (perhaps even the cause?) of the cultural open-mindedness and pragmatism that have guided native speakers in learning and exploring new things at least since the time when Sir Francis Bacon invented science.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 21, 2009, 06:12:51 AM
In our house we use the computer to send messages. An email is information written on the back of a used envelope, such as "Gone to the shop for some milk".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2009, 06:13:17 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 21, 2009, 04:47:50 AM
But then, to be sure, it was a long time before I assented to We're going out for a beer. (I still hold the line at cup of coffee.)

I drink neither, but will gladly head for any pop machine with Diet Dr. Pepper, which is why Arby's here in Columbus has become one of my favorite restaurants!   8)

Except I cannot eat much there: a 99% vegetarian in a roast beef joint has few choices!   $:)

Today's word is "hydrate" because of an incident in my school yesterday.  Two little first-grade girls ran past me and as they disappeared around the corner I heard a Munchkin voice saying:

"I must stay hydrated!"    :o    :o    :o

Disbelieving my ears, I turned around and headed around the corner, and there they were at a water fountain.

"Who said that they must stay hydrated?"
"She did," says the taller girl.
"And why must you stay hydrated?" I asked.
"Because I don't want to be dehydrated!" said the Munchkin with just a little disgust at needing to explain something so obvious to a pathetically dimwitted adult.
"Were you ever dehydrated?"
"Yes, when I had strep throat!  It was awful!  SO!  That's why I always want to stay hydrated!"  Unsaid at the end, but heavily implied by the tone of her voice, were the words "you dummy!"

The future of America!  Watch out for these 21st-century women: they are hydrated and ready to rule!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 21, 2009, 06:32:07 AM
This, too, strikes me as an example of the admirable flexibility of the language in accommodating and expressing new concepts.  Granted, hydrated has been used traditionally only as the past tense of the verb hydrate.  Using it as an adjective (akin to surprised or gobsmacked) seems inoffensive to me and is an encouraging indicator of increasing awareness of the virture of drinking adequate water...and, if you really want to split hairs, be reminded that our physical beings are mostly water, after all.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 21, 2009, 06:41:25 AM
Hydrated munchkins . . . what a wonderful world!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2009, 01:34:23 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 21, 2009, 06:41:25 AM
Hydrated munchkins . . . what a wonderful world!

And you have should have seen them!  They were bona fide members of the Lollipop Guild and the Lullaby League!   0:)

Speaking of Oz, I will admit to not knowing until the mid '90's that the Australians slangily call their home country Oz.

Apparently the sibilants in the word "Aussie" deteriorated to a "z" sound, and led one to the conclusion that an "Ozzie" must come from "Oz."

But where did Harriet come from?   :o


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 21, 2009, 02:11:25 PM
So you know now what Strine is?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2009, 02:41:49 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 21, 2009, 02:11:25 PM
So you know now what Strine is?  ;)

Hoot mon!   8)

Once I stood in the main train station of Rome, the real Rome, not that punk town in New York state.

In front of me stands a 40-something American couple, complete with cameras around the neck, and in front of them stands an Australian.  I know he is an Australian because he is dressed in khakis, has the traditional Australian slouch hat with half the brim buttoned up, and has a kangaroo on a leash and a koala bear on his shoulder.  (Well, okay...)

He is speaking in the most Aussie accent imaginable to a woman, who is apparently his wife.  The American couple is overhearing the Aussies' conversation and the husband eventually blurts out:

"Hi there!  I couldn't help overhearing.  What part of England do you come from?"

At which question the Australian husband turns around as if he had just smelled the most mephitic rodent, curls up part of his mouth and nose as his gorge riseth, and snarls:

"OWSTRIYA!"

To which the American said in confusion, and in a very low voice: "Oh!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on February 21, 2009, 03:38:57 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 21, 2009, 05:04:13 AM
Aye.  On the other hand, it's useful in letting us know right away that the speaker is an idiot.  It's handy that way, like the nearly ubiquitous use of "surreal" to mean...well, I'm not sure what they think they mean by it.  (Fun?  Thrilling?  Unusual?  Unique?)

Awsum.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 22, 2009, 07:16:09 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 21, 2009, 02:41:49 PM
Hoot mon!   8)

Once I stood in the main train station of Rome, the real Rome, not that punk town in New York state.

In front of me stands a 40-something American couple, complete with cameras around the neck, and in front of them stands an Australian.  I know he is an Australian because he is dressed in khakis, has the traditional Australian slouch hat with half the brim buttoned up, and has a kangaroo on a leash and a koala bear on his shoulder.  (Well, okay...)

He is speaking in the most Aussie accent imaginable to a woman, who is apparently his wife.  The American couple is overhearing the Aussies' conversation and the husband eventually blurts out:

"Hi there!  I couldn't help overhearing.  What part of England do you come from?"

At which question the Australian husband turns around as if he had just smelled the most mephitic rodent, curls up part of his mouth and nose as his gorge riseth, and snarls:

"OWSTRIYA!"

To which the American said in confusion, and in a very low voice: "Oh!"

Tangential Story: we had meetings with parents on Thursday, and our Math teacher came up to me with a question.  A father had a "really strange accent" like he is "from France or something".

No, I explained, for the father, complete with a Scottish last name, is from Australia!  aka "OWSTRIYA!"

But France???    :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 22, 2009, 10:52:56 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 22, 2009, 07:16:09 AM
Tangential Story: we had meetings with parents on Thursday, and our Math teacher came up to me with a question.  A father had a "really strange accent" like he is "from France or something".

No, I explained, for the father, complete with a Scottish last name, is from Australia!  aka "OWSTRIYA!"

But France???    :o

Isn't "France" the epitome of a foreign land in the streets of America? I remember watching a youtube recording featuring people interviewed in the streets about the next country which is going to be attacked by the USA. France got the prize of a scaring percentage of ladies and gentlemen and guess what? Asked to locate it on the map, they pointed to...

...yep, OWSTRIYA!

Delendam esse Gallia!  :D

(BTW, that Kuehnelt-Leddihn quote is a gem.  8) )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 23, 2009, 05:25:57 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 22, 2009, 10:52:56 PM
Isn't "France" the epitome of a foreign land in the streets of America? I remember watching a youtube recording featuring people interviewed in the streets about the next country which is going to be attacked by the USA. France got the prize of a scaring percentage of ladies and gentlemen and guess what? Asked to locate it on the map, they pointed to...

...yep, OWSTRIYA!

Delendam esse Gallia!  :D

(BTW, that Kuehnelt-Leddihn quote is a gem.  8) )

The TV show Saturday Night Live had a skit called the Coneheads, which featured outer space aliens with huge coneheads trying to fit into American life.  They explained their strange heads and accents by saying that they were "from France."   :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 23, 2009, 05:31:08 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 23, 2009, 05:25:57 AM
The TV show Saturday Night Live had a skit called the Coneheads, which featured outer space aliens with huge coneheads trying to fit into American life.  They explained their strange heads and accents by saying that they were "from France."   :o

At least they weren't "from France or something". :)

La Fayette and Tuffin de La Rouerie must be rolling in their graves...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 24, 2009, 09:26:25 AM
Today's Grumble: Trite Phrases found on TV shows...or in real life!   :o

My wife (too often) watches crime shows like CSI, Law and Order, etc. which seem to concentrate on the previously unimaginable national problem of murderous millionaires.   $:)

I find especially grating more and more: "I'm sorry for your loss."  If this has any basis in reality, it should not!

And then the other trite phrase: "With all due respect..." which means an insult is coming.  This is often heard on "24" right before Jack Bauer puts some hoity-toity bureaucrat or corrupt politician in his place! 

"Corrupt politician" may be redundant given the tax cheats in the news these days.

Feel free to add phrases of similar nails-on-the-blackboard nature!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2009, 04:11:09 AM
A question came up today about 2-syllable adjectives in the comparative and superlative degrees.

e.g. "trickier" vs. "more tricky"  or "clumsier" vs. "more clumsy."

In such cases the music in the one word is preferable to the clumsier music found in "more clumsy."  Certainly the illiterati are using "more" and "most" more and more, if not most and most!   :o

For words like "naive" one would go with "more naive."

Earlier, however, I quoted Robert Louis Stevenson's poem The Swing where he is not averse in a verse to using "pleasantest."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2009, 08:46:19 AM
And while I am grumbling, there is something that drives me crazy when it is advertised on TeeVee!

Some drug spelled "Humira."

Except that the narrator never pronounces an "i" after the "m"!!!   >:D

One hears in fact two pronunciations in the commercial: One is "Humayra"  and the other is more like a short "e" as in "Humerra".

Never does one hear a proper long "i" as in Hu-my-ra.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 25, 2009, 08:46:56 AM
We're all on fire for Humira!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 25, 2009, 09:11:59 AM
Grumbling is not an attractive trait, don't ya know...

;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2009, 10:19:56 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 25, 2009, 09:11:59 AM
Grumbling is not an attractive trait, don't ya know...

;)

NO, but so cathartic!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 25, 2009, 11:16:00 AM
Here's one of my favorites:

"I replied back to them."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 25, 2009, 11:36:42 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 25, 2009, 11:16:00 AM
Here's one of my favorites:

"I replied back to them."
Yes, and  the following are also cringeworthy:
At this moment in time
From here on in

Of course it could be (?)
At this moment in space, or
From here on out

Writing is a good method for removing tautologies. It teaches you to eliminate all unnecessary words.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on February 25, 2009, 11:46:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 22, 2009, 07:16:09 AM
No, I explained, for the father, complete with a Scottish last name, is from Australia!  aka "OWSTRIYA!"
But France???    :o

Ah, that can be tricky, trying to guess nationality from the name (not the accent). I've been reading a book on the Franco-Prussian War; the French Marshall, commanding the Army of Alsace, was named Pat MacMahon.  ;D

Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nut-job on February 25, 2009, 11:53:25 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 25, 2009, 11:36:42 AM
Yes, and  the following are also cringeworthy:
At this moment in time
From here on in

Of course it could be (?)
At this moment in space, or
From here on out

"At this moment in time" is a variant of "at this point in time," which may not be high poetry, but which has some descriptive value since a "point" in time suggests a more sharply defined moment, equivalent to "at this precise moment."  I have no idea what "from here on in" means or whether it is better or worse than "from here on out."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2009, 12:26:09 PM
Quote from: nut-job on February 25, 2009, 11:53:25 AM
"At this moment in time" is a variant of "at this point in time," which may not be high poetry, but which has some descriptive value since a "point" in time suggests a more sharply defined moment, equivalent to "at this precise moment."  I have no idea what "from here on in" means or whether it is better or worse than "from here on out."


At this point in time = Now.  "Right now" could also be used.  "At that moment" could be used to emphasize a past event: using "precise" seems like overkill.

It has been a bureaucratic tic to use 4 and 5 words, rather than one, either to sound important or to send up a smoke-screen.

One should always eschew obfuscation!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 25, 2009, 01:21:08 PM
Not a grammar grumble but something I hear more and more often in common speech:

Prefacing remarks with the qualifier "honestly" always sets my BS detector off, i.e. "I honestly don't know what happened to the petty cash."  Using it implies that one's other statements are not honest, thus it's an admission that the speaker is a liar, and thus nothing they say should be trusted--especially the things they want you to believe so badly that they'll risk complete loss of all credibility by qualifying their statement with "honestly."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 25, 2009, 01:27:31 PM
Shampoo and hair colour are my personal pet peeves!

Firstly, I am not surprised that other brands do not contain Polyceramitium or [insert your own made-up compound here] as they did not invent it and could not add it to their own product even if they wanted to! I'm looking at you Pantenne!

And here's a wonderfully ill-conceived sentence from another shampoo advertisement:

"Unlike other brands shampoo x holds in the colour for longer"

Ok then! So other brands don't hold in the colour....for longer. Longer than? I think we need to refer to the international standardised measure of hair-colour-keeping-in, perhaps  ::)

[Sorry - I just had to vent somewhere!]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on February 25, 2009, 01:28:31 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 25, 2009, 01:21:08 PM
Not a grammar grumble but something I hear more and more often in common speech:

Prefacing remarks with the qualifier "honestly" always sets my BS detector off, i.e. "I honestly don't know what happened to the petty cash."  Using it implies that one's other statements are not honest, thus it's an admission that the speaker is a liar, and thus nothing they say should be trusted--especially the things they want you to believe so badly that they'll risk complete loss of all credibility by qualifying their statement with "honestly."

OK David, you can breath now!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2009, 02:02:33 PM
Quote from: Mog: 100% replicant on February 25, 2009, 01:27:31 PM
Shampoo and hair colour are my personal pet peeves!

Firstly, I am not surprised that other brands do not contain Polyceramitium or [insert your own made-up compound here] as they did not invent it and could not add it to their own product even if they wanted to! I'm looking at you Pantenne!

And here's a wonderfully ill-conceived sentence from another shampoo advertisement:

"Unlike other brands shampoo x holds in the colour for longer"

Ok then! So other brands don't hold in the colour....for longer. Longer than? I think we need to refer to the international standardised measure of hair-colour-keeping-in, perhaps  ::)

[Sorry - I just had to vent somewhere!]

The comparative degree without a comparison is always the province of scalawags and carpetbaggers!

Private schools are notorious in this: e.g. a school which shall remain nameless states: "Our students have higher academic achievements in all subject areas!"

First, "subject area" is another example of educationalese using two words for one ("subjects").

But "higher" than whose achievements?  The word has no comparison: higher than that of public schools, or other private schools, or LaVerne and Shirley's Basement Kiddie Care?   8)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 27, 2009, 05:27:04 AM
Not strictly a grammatical grumble, I suppose . . . from "The Cage":

Quote from: Peter GabrielAnd I cry out, 'John, please help me!'
But he does not even want to try to speak.

". . . does not even want to try to" . . . has always sounded clunky to these ol' ears.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 27, 2009, 05:36:10 AM
Orwellian Language Alert: The FedGov announces it will not "nationalize" banks.

It then buys controlling shares in CitiBank, c. 40%   :o

Maybe "nationalization" is defined as 50.1%!!!   0:)

Speaking of politicians and trite phrases, I am truly tired of all the "fighting" going on!

"Fighting for Working Families"  "Fighting for Better Jobs"  blah blah blah

Exactly how are you "fighting" when you are eating at 5-star restaurants at the udders of taxpayers, when you ride around D.C. in limos, etc. etc. etc.?

Show me the bruises at least!

Trite Phrase from Sports: "He stepped up and did a really great job in the second inning/second half/second quarter etc."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 27, 2009, 09:58:32 AM
English question! A friend asked me this and I didn't know the answer. Can "it scarcely matches" mean both of the following, or just one?

It rarely matches (acknowledging positives)
It hardly matches (dismissive, implying it never matches)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 27, 2009, 10:02:48 AM
Quote from: Lethe on February 27, 2009, 09:58:32 AM
English question! A friend asked me this and I didn't know the answer. Can "it scarcely matches" mean both of the following, or just one?

It rarely matches (acknowledging positives)
It hardly matches (dismissive, implying it never matches)

I would go with the second meaning: "scarcely" as a synonym for "rarely" is a real stretch.

e.g. "He scarcely attends concerts."   ???

No, better would be: "He rarely/ hardly ever/practically never attends concerts."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 27, 2009, 10:04:56 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 27, 2009, 10:02:48 AM
I would go with the second meaning: "scarcely" as a synonym for "rarely" is a real stretch.

e.g. "He scarcely attends concerts."   ???

No, better would be: "He rarely/ hardly ever/practically never attends concerts."

Agreed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 27, 2009, 10:07:33 AM
Better yet:  seldom.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 27, 2009, 10:08:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 27, 2009, 10:02:48 AM
I would go with the second meaning: "scarcely" as a synonym for "rarely" is a real stretch.

e.g. "He scarcely attends concerts."   ???

No, better would be: "He rarely/ hardly ever/practically never attends concerts."

Thanks! I guess I got confused by the different meaning when used in phrases like "the items were scarce"...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 27, 2009, 10:11:33 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 27, 2009, 10:07:33 AM
Better yet:  seldom.

Agreed.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 27, 2009, 11:02:52 AM
Quote from: Lethe on February 27, 2009, 10:08:31 AM
Thanks! I guess I got confused by the different meaning when used in phrases like "the items were scarce"...

Yes, in that case "rare" would be a synonym.

Seldom reminds me of the monstrosity "seldomly."

I once saw in a novel by late American writer John Gardner the word "sillily" which was one of the silliest things I had ever read!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on February 27, 2009, 11:10:08 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 27, 2009, 11:02:52 AM
Yes, in that case "rare" would be a synonym.

Seldom reminds me of the monstrosity "seldomly."

I once saw in a novel by late American writer John Gardner the word "sillily" which was one of the silliest things I had ever read!   8)

I don't think there's such a thing as a perfect writer, is there?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on February 28, 2009, 12:01:46 AM
I will join in; but you need to hold onto the fact that I am fairly badly dyslexic. Despite it however, I have my standards.

Not grammar, but an abuse of language and concepts.

Phineas Fogg exotically flavoured crisps; these have a strapline of, 'Just arrived'.

Just arrived into the shop? Just arrived into my shopping basket?

What phooey; as though, because they may have such far flung flavours as cummin in them, they are somehow journeying further than the standard flavour Milton Keynes products.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 28, 2009, 04:40:05 AM
Quote from: knight on February 28, 2009, 12:01:46 AM
I will join in; but you need to hold onto the fact that I am fairly badly dyslexic. Despite it however, I have my standards.

Not grammar, but an abuse of language and concepts.

Phineas Fogg exotically flavoured crisps; these have a strapline of, 'Just arrived'.

Just arrived into the shop? Just arrived into my shopping basket?

What phooey; as though, because they may have such far flung flavours as cummin in them, they are somehow journeying further than the standard flavour Milton Keynes products.

Mike

They could always have used: "New!"  "Improved!"

But everyone uses those words for ancient brands trying to seem 21st century!  So the marketing geniuses making $75,000 a year come up with "Just Arrived!"

My 7th Graders have more creativity!   :o    And they will work for free samples of any food product!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 28, 2009, 07:35:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 28, 2009, 04:40:05 AM
They could always have used: "New!"  "Improved!"

We've now got some chocolate bars and nut mixes for sale at the museum shop (folks do ask from time to time if we've got some kind of candy or other).  They're from a local-ish cottage industry, and rather pricey (what with musum-shop mark-up) . . . hey, if folks are in the shop, chances are they're fairly willing to support the museum.

Last night I found an info sheet for the candy, and one of the bullet-points was:

They are museum quality.

This set off my hype detector, so I said to Bill (the manager), "I have a technical question.  Just what is 'museum-quality candy'?"  Bill came through, piling hype upon hype with, "The very best candy that money can buy."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 28, 2009, 08:03:20 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 28, 2009, 07:35:52 AM
We've now got some chocolate bars and nut mixes for sale at the museum shop (folks do ask from time to time if we've got some kind of candy or other).  They're from a local-ish cottage industry, and rather pricey (what with musum-shop mark-up) . . . hey, if folks are in the shop, chances are they're fairly willing to support the museum.

Last night I found an info sheet for the candy, and one of the bullet-points was:

They are museum quality.

This set off my hype detector, so I said to Bill (the manager), "I have a technical question.  Just what is 'museum-quality candy'?"  Bill came through, piling hype upon hype with, "The very best candy that money can buy."

Wow!  If that's true, it must mean your museum has all kinds of Thomas Kinkade paintings!!!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 28, 2009, 08:21:08 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 28, 2009, 07:35:52 AM
Last night I found an info sheet for the candy, and one of the bullet-points was:

They are museum quality.

100 years old? :'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 28, 2009, 08:26:25 AM
For the Napoleon exhibit, we had tins of sugar-free mints.  My deadpan joke to a number of customers was, These are sugarless mints historically accurate to the Napoleonic era.

Had a few of them going with it, too.  Luckily, we don't have any snake-oil for sale in the shop . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on February 28, 2009, 08:31:02 AM
Damn, I could do with some of that. Though only if it's museum quality.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dancing Divertimentian on February 28, 2009, 09:49:46 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on February 25, 2009, 11:16:00 AM
Here's one of my favorites:

"I replied back to them."

Another one that makes me cringe is:

"Where are you located at?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 28, 2009, 10:52:25 AM
Quote from: donwyn on February 28, 2009, 09:49:46 AM
Another one that makes me cringe is:

"Where are you located at?"

Dude, I'm where it's at!   8)

This might be a sort of reverse Germanicism: in German "wo" asks for position, but "woher" or "wo...her" asks about motion from, and "wohin" or "wo...hin" asks about motion to where.  (The old "whither" and "whence" are related.)

Woher/Wo kommst du her?  = Where are you coming from?

Wohin/Wo gehst du hin?  = Where are you going (to)?

Wo bist du? = Where are you?  and possibly by a phenomenon known in linguistics as attraction, the other two questions in English create an impulse to place something at the end.  Therefore "at" is plopped at the end. In German, however, as far as I know, there seems to be no impulse to add anything equivalent to the English "at."  So "attraction" has no effect there.

On the other hand, it might just be emphasis. 


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 28, 2009, 11:24:18 AM
And if they don't like Karl's chocolate, maybe they can return it back to him.  Does the store open at 9:00 a.m. in the morning?  How long has Karl worked there for?  
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 01, 2009, 04:08:32 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 28, 2009, 11:24:18 AM
And if they don't like Karl's chocolate, maybe they can return it back to him.  Does the store open at 9:00 a.m. in the morning?  How long has Karl worked there for?  

Oh!  Wise guy!   $:)

In today's sermon I hear the priest say: "Thousands of years ago, in ancient times..."

Picky picky picky!  Maybe he was thinking of what to say next, and just threw in that last phrase for a split second of thought-time!

Last night, at a benefit dinner, I heard a fairly wealthy lawyer say with a shake of his head: "...and that was one of the most stupidest things that ever happened to me..."   :o

To be sure, this was spoken after 4 quickly quaffed bottles of imported beer.   8)
Title: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: Cato on March 02, 2009, 10:24:00 AM
Here is a mistake I often hear: "I could care less..." and it often comes from supposedly educated people.

"I could not care less" is correct, meaning that you have reached the bottom of being able to care about something.

If you could care less about something, then you still have some level (10% or so?) of caring above zero.
Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: Lethevich on March 02, 2009, 10:32:10 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 02, 2009, 10:24:00 AM
Here is a mistake I often hear: "I could care less..." and it often comes from supposedly educated people.

"I could not care less" is correct, meaning that you have reached the bottom of being able to care about something.

If you could care less about something, then you still have some level (10% or so?) of caring above zero.

The strange thing about this is that it seems to have become "official" in US English. I keep seeing it over and over in presumably proof-read articles from major organisations...
Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: Cato on March 02, 2009, 11:02:01 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 02, 2009, 10:32:10 AM
The strange thing about this is that it seems to have become "official" in US English. I keep seeing it over and over in presumably proof-read articles from major organisations...

The Triumph of the Illiterati!  Similar in acceptance - except by Cato!  >:(  - is the phrase "There is..." followed by a plural!   :o

"There's many reasons why the economy blah blah blah..." was spoken by a government official yesterday.

No, moron!  "There are many reasons why the economy..."

Of course, this comes from a government that...well, you know!   0:)
Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 02, 2009, 11:10:11 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 02, 2009, 10:32:10 AM
The strange thing about this is that it seems to have become "official" in US English.

No. No, it's not.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 03, 2009, 12:20:10 AM
With regard to emphasis, 'really really' has become so pervasive that we must now say 'really really really really' to emphasize that something is real.  :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 03, 2009, 12:21:29 AM
I'm not sure that's really true. Not really really, anyway.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sydney Grew on March 03, 2009, 01:13:27 AM
The most hideous of the many hideous expressions current in northern America is "leverage" used as a verb!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 03, 2009, 04:52:07 AM
Quote from: Sydney Grew on March 03, 2009, 01:13:27 AM
The most hideous of the many hideous expressions current in northern America is "leverage" used as a verb!


My dictionaries from even 20 years ago - surprisingly - do list this use as a verb: I would have at least added the note that it is "business slang/jargon."

Concerning "really really": is that a phrase from a movie or a Saturday Night Live skit?  Sometimes such things get picked up and are passed around like typhoid fever!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 03, 2009, 05:04:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 03, 2009, 04:52:07 AM


Concerning "really really": is that a phrase from a movie or a Saturday Night Live skit?  Sometimes such things get picked up and are passed around like typhoid fever!



A quick Googling found a website claiming that "really really" came from a moronic 20-something movie called Zoolander.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 03, 2009, 05:11:58 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 03, 2009, 04:52:07 AM
My dictionaries from even 20 years ago - surprisingly - do list this use as a verb: I would have at least added the note that it is "business slang/jargon."

I am not surprised.  And, after all, commerce is one historical driver of the language's expansion.

In all events, the practice of verbing nouns has a pedigree reaching back at the least to Shakespeare.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 03, 2009, 06:32:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 03, 2009, 05:11:58 AM
I am not surprised.  And, after all, commerce is one historical driver of the language's expansion.

In all events, the practice of verbing nouns has a pedigree reaching back at the least to Shakespeare.
At least.  This flexibility is one of the strengths our language shares with Chinese.  And the rapid conceptual expansion due to its innate flexibility, streamlined grammar, and ready assimilation of foreign words, contributes substantially to the technological and commercial success enjoyed by English-speaking peoples.  "Leverage" as a verb meaning "to apply the principle of leverage" (itself an abstraction based on concrete use of a lever) in subject areas other than mechanical physics makes a fine illustration of the process.

Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: Jay F on March 03, 2009, 07:14:41 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 02, 2009, 10:24:00 AM
Here is a mistake I often hear: "I could care less..." and it often comes from supposedly educated people.

"I could not care less" is correct, meaning that you have reached the bottom of being able to care about something.

If you could care less about something, then you still have some level (10% or so?) of caring above zero.
Very well explained. I hope I remember this.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on March 03, 2009, 07:17:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 03, 2009, 05:04:52 AM
A quick Googling found a website claiming that "really really" came from a moronic 20-something movie called Zoolander.
I would have thought it was Valspeak (often spelled phonetically: "rilly, rilly").
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on March 03, 2009, 09:28:59 AM
The ratio of grumbling about to praising of the use of language is becoming perversely skewed. I demand more grumbling!  $:)

In a recent battery commercial: "...for more longer-lasting batteries"  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 03, 2009, 10:19:03 AM
Quote from: RepliCat on March 03, 2009, 09:28:59 AM
The ratio of grumbling about to praising of the use of language is becoming perversely skewed. I demand more grumbling!  $:)

In a recent battery commercial: "...for more longer-lasting batteries"  ::)

Okay, when one uses more to modify the noun, but the noun is preceded by a comparative adjective, you have a choice: either slow down between the two, or use "and."

Example: "I would like more, tastier apples."  or "I would like more and tastier apples."

Third solution: "I would like more apples that are tastier."

A solution for the commercial: "For even/much/better longer-lasting batteries, buy..."

Here in my grade school I hear monstrosities like: "That videogame's a lot more funner..."   :o 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 04, 2009, 01:23:02 AM
William Hazlitt's On the Ignorance of the Learned has as motto some lines from a poem, the last lines of which read:

Yet he that is but able to express
No sense at all in several languages,
Will pass for learneder than he that's known
To speak the strongest reason in his own.



Learneder?  :)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 04, 2009, 03:59:44 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 04, 2009, 01:23:02 AM
William Hazlitt's On the Ignorance of the Learned has as motto some lines from a poem, the last lines of which read:

Yet he that is but able to express
No sense at all in several languages,
Will pass for learneder than he that's known
To speak the strongest reason in his own.



Learneder?  :)



Wocka Wocka!   :D

Well, why not? 

Eons ago, when I was in college, I happened to be passing by the office of a professor of...(cue the sinister music)... Education!   :o

You should know that Education professors are considered the dumpster divers of academia, and not without reason!  So the good professor sees me and shouts: "Hey!  You would know this!" and he struggles to rise with a copy of a 2,000 page dictionary in his lap.

Such was Cato's reputation back then for omniscience, or at least polymathy, that even professors knocked on his brain's door for information!   8)

The good professor says: "We're trying to write invitations for the department's (i.e. the Education department's) cocktail party next week, and nobody knows how to spell hors d'oeuvres !" 

I revealed to him that the word was French, yielded to the temptation to make rude comments against the French, at which we both laughed heartily, spelled it for him, and retained the incident for future use as evidence against Departments of Edumbcation.

In America can you get a Ph.D. without any foreign languages in your background!
  :(

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 04, 2009, 04:43:27 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 04, 2009, 03:59:44 AM
Edumbcation.

Nice one.  :D

Quote from: Cato on March 04, 2009, 03:59:44 AM
In America can you get a Ph.D. without any foreign languages in your background!
  :(

I once asked an American girl (Californian, if I recall correctly) whether she spoke other languages than English. She replied: Why should I?  ;D

Slightly off-topic --- or maybe not --- I remember overhearing in Florence, Italy another American girl's complaint that her hotel room did not have a TV set. Coming to Florence to watch TV --- that is the top of tourism, methinks. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 04, 2009, 10:55:52 AM
I get very irritated by the qualification of the word, 'unique', as in, almost unique, very nearly unique. It is either unique, or the word is irrelevant.

The great unwashed have an annoying way of using the word, 'pacific', when they mean, 'specific.'

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 04, 2009, 11:04:16 AM
I'm never sure if that isn't just mispronunciation, though, Mike - or, more specifically (  ;D ) the lazy can't-be-arsed British tongue which can't be bothered with the effort to articulate 'it's specific', so turning it into 'it's pacific'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 04, 2009, 11:16:21 AM
It might be that, but neither word is likely to be in the lexicon of, 'The Sun'. So it would not surprise me if the word has been substituted rather than merely distorted.

I used to work with an accountant working for my government department and between us we would have day long interviews with other accountants. I would try not to cringe while he dropped expressions into the encounter such as...."We was wanting to ask you some questions." or, "I can't never get a handle on that."

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 04, 2009, 11:27:42 AM
Why don't they wash in the Pacific?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 04, 2009, 11:36:30 AM
They might if they knew where it was.

I once flew to Corsica from the UK. One girl, from Birmingham, was surprised everyone spoke a furrin language. She also wore two watches, because, one of them was broken.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on March 04, 2009, 12:01:04 PM
I encountered a real humdinger just now - a packet of crisps displaying the slogan "made with real ingredients".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 04, 2009, 12:03:46 PM
That certainly does ding the hum!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 04, 2009, 12:07:50 PM
Quote from: Lethe on March 04, 2009, 12:01:04 PM
I encountered a real humdinger just now - a packet of crisps displaying the slogan "made with real ingredients".

Brilliant. I remember a DIY expert on TV once claiming he was going to make, 'almost something out of nothing.' Even God did not catch onto that trick.

Mike
Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: Bulldog on March 04, 2009, 02:52:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 02, 2009, 10:24:00 AM
Here is a mistake I often hear: "I could care less..." and it often comes from supposedly educated people.

"I could not care less" is correct, meaning that you have reached the bottom of being able to care about something.

If you could care less about something, then you still have some level (10% or so?) of caring above zero.

Mistake or not, "could care less" is commonly used.  Most important, it represents understood communication.
Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: Bulldog on March 04, 2009, 03:20:30 PM
Quote from: ' on March 04, 2009, 02:55:57 PM
That is undeniable, as is the fact that it also communicates something that the speaker may not wish to convey.'



What might that be?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 04, 2009, 10:16:46 PM
Quote from: knight on March 04, 2009, 11:36:30 AM
I once flew to Corsica from the UK. One girl, from Birmingham, was surprised everyone spoke a furrin language. She also wore two watches, because, one of them was broken.

:D :D :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 05, 2009, 03:52:49 AM
"Made with real ingredients" of course is an attempt to verify that nothing in the package is foaming with poisons.

"All Natural" is a big "buzz" word these days for food: I have even seen stickers saying so on bananas, to make sure you do not bite into one of those plastic ones! 

"Organic" drives me nutzoid: of course apples or carrots are "organic" !!!

And sorry to inform the aging hippies out there: poisons are also "real," "organic," and even "natural."   :o

And unless you have chemistry and physics from another universe in play, even the most virulent man-made chemicals are "natural" in essence, but that is a hair we do not need to stew over.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 05, 2009, 05:32:01 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 05, 2009, 03:52:49 AM
"Organic" drives me nutzoid: of course apples or carrots are "organic" !!!

Don't know if it's any improvement, but in the Romance languages, the term is "biological"  8)
Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: sul G on March 05, 2009, 05:33:46 AM
Quote from: Bulldog on March 04, 2009, 02:52:34 PM
Mistake or not, "could care less" is commonly used.  Most important, it represents understood communication.

Except that it doesn't make a smooth translation across the Atlantic - I don't think I've ever heard a Brit use the phrase ('I couldn't care less' is universal here, I think). So, though we might all know what you mean by it, it's impossible to hear it without thinking, quite simply, 'that doesn't make sense, you know' (well, that's my reaction in any case). IOW, it's a phrase which carries more baggage than its user might think.
Title: Re: Why, yes, I guess I could care less!
Post by: karlhenning on March 05, 2009, 05:37:21 AM
Quote from: sul G on March 05, 2009, 05:33:46 AM
Except that it doesn't make a smooth translation across the Atlantic - I don't think I've ever heard a Brit use the phrase ('I couldn't care less' is universal here, I think). So, though we might all know what you mean by it, it's impossible to hear it without thinking, quite simply, 'that doesn't make sense, you know' (well, that's my reaction in any case). IOW, it's a phrase which carries more baggage than its user might think.

Gives one pause.  For some what are barking mad, may appear fairly normal most of the time, and it can be these little linguistic slips which tip yer off.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 05, 2009, 05:46:42 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 05, 2009, 05:32:01 AM
Don't know if it's any improvement, but in the Romance languages, the term is "biological"  8)

Yes, and in Germany a "Bio-Laden" is a "health-food store" i.e. no pesticides ever used, the cucumbers were sung to, the tomatoes and melons were kissed and tucked in every night, and there's a joke growing here which we will avoid!   8)

On "could care less/could not care less" - The relativists want us to ignore such grammar mistakes, since, after all, something comprehensible is in fact communicated, and anyway, rules are just ways for oppressors to stifle people's expression and to make judgments about them!   $:)

Judgments like: "What a moron!"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 05, 2009, 05:54:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 05, 2009, 05:46:42 AM
On "could care less/could not care less" - The relativists want us to ignore such grammar mistakes, since, after all, something comprehensible is in fact communicated, and anyway, rules are just ways for oppressors to stifle people's expression and to make judgments about them!   $:)

Judgments like: "What a moron!"   0:)

In that sense, such uses of language serve a valuable function!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 05, 2009, 05:59:28 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 05, 2009, 05:46:42 AM
The relativists want us to ignore such grammar mistakes, since, after all, something comprehensible is in fact communicated, and anyway, rules are just ways for oppressors to stifle people's expression and to make judgments about them!   $:)

The brand-new issued Romanian Ortographical Dictionary lists, alongside the right variant, several which are incorrect and brands them "accepted variant", (translation: this is the way some people --- usually illiterate or uncultured --- write or pronounce them).  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 06, 2009, 03:38:51 AM
One of my 7th Graders, in an attempt to spell the word "tragedy" for his translation from Latin, came up with the word "trageditty", and I thought that was a splendid word to describe certain operas!   8)

Things by Puccini perhaps?   :o

Or that German guy, Dick Wagner?   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 06, 2009, 04:37:39 AM
Lovely little neologism, that! (trageditty)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 06, 2009, 05:24:38 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 06, 2009, 04:37:39 AM
Lovely little neologism, that! (trageditty)
Sounds apt to describe commercial jingles relating the dire consequences of using the wrong deodorant:

Alas my underarms
Were stained with sweat--
The boss didn't like my presentation
Or was it...my perspiration!

No more job
Woe is me
If only I'd used
New improved Sweat Free®
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 06, 2009, 10:14:14 AM
While contemplating the moronic lifestyles of many Californians and my junior-high students, who expect Life to smile upon them and drop raisins into their tender mouths without any labor or even the slightest effort on their part, a word from Ancient Greek came back to me, which I often Anglicized for my students.

καθαδυπαθέω = to squander your life in luxury and immoral living

"Cathadypathy" therefore may be the main disease of our day!    >:D

The practioner thereof being the "cathadypathist."   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 06, 2009, 10:28:03 AM
Questing for Cathadypathogens . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Save the G, Save the Have/Has
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2009, 04:24:41 AM
A certain high-rankin' politician has been drivin' your Grumbler Cato nutzoid on various levels, one of them bein' the Orwellian language employed, so far successfully, in callin' 3 trillion in tax hikes either "fairness" or actually "tax cuts." 

But let us not become too political!   0:)

Somethin' else is drivin' Cato nutzoid, and that is the refusal of more and more Americans, e.g. this politician and certain members of the faculty of Cato's school, to say the final G on the -ing endings.   $:) 

I suspect this is his way of showin' linguistically that he is just a member of the lower classes, a true man o' the peepul.  My fellow faculty members have no such excuse!   $:)

On this grumble is the related death of "have" and "has" with the present perfect progressive.

e.g. "We been lookin' at ways to help all Americans pay more taxes."   8)

"I was tellin' the 8th Grade they been slackin' off this past week."  A quote from a 60-year old flower child.  :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Save the G, Save the Have/Has
Post by: Benji on March 09, 2009, 04:39:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 09, 2009, 04:24:41 AM
Somethin' else is drivin' Cato nutzoid, and that is the refusal of more and more Americans, e.g. this politician and certain members of the faculty of Cato's school, to say the final G on the -ing endings.   $:) 

I'm guilty of this, but it's just a function of my accent and upbringin'.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Save the G, Save the Have/Has
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2009, 05:19:46 AM
Quote from: RepliCat on March 09, 2009, 04:39:49 AM
I'm guilty of this, but it's just a function of my accent and upbringin'.  ;)

Thank you for confessin', uh, confessing!   8)

Go and sin no more!   0:)

Related to the lack of "have" and "has" with the present perfect progressive is the use of the wrong past participle!   :o

Recently I heard: "Yep, that company was ran into the ground!"   :o

"Those cookies were all ate up by the junior high."    $:)

Anybody else hear such monstrosities?



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 09, 2009, 05:22:57 AM
Do you hang out with hillbillies, or something?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2009, 05:24:44 AM
Oof.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2009, 05:35:02 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 09, 2009, 05:22:57 AM
Do you hang out with hillbillies, or something?  ;D

Ohio has been invaded by Kentuckians and Tennesseans throughout the last decades, and so yes, you do too often hear "briarhoppers" opining on God, the Universe, cheese, etc. when you are out in public.

"Briarhopper" being a rough term of affection, of course!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2009, 05:37:28 AM
Greg Incognito's thread was the occasion for remembering a Cat Stevens cover:

QuoteIf I can meet 'em, I can get 'em,
But as yet I haven't met 'em,
That's how I'm in the state I'm in . . . .

File that under Dumb Tautologies in Pop-dom.

I'm in a state.
– What state are you in?
I'm in the state I'm in.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 09, 2009, 05:40:50 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 09, 2009, 05:37:28 AM
Greg Incognito's thread was the occasion for remembering a Cat Stevens cover:

File that under Dumb Tautologies in Pop-dom.

I'm in a state.
– What state are you in?
I'm in the state I'm in.


I think lyrics play by different rules. Like repetition and what sounds good for the song.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2009, 05:44:49 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 09, 2009, 05:40:50 AM
I think lyrics play by different rules. Like repetition and what sounds good for the song.

To an extent, yes.  I don't think the rules are utterly different, but one makes allowances.  There's never really any musical necessity for junk words.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 09, 2009, 05:48:20 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 09, 2009, 05:44:49 AM
To an extent, yes.  I don't think the rules are utterly different, but one makes allowances.  There's never really any musical necessity for junk words.

This staaaaaaaaaaaate. This state that I'm iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin. I'm in it, this staaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaate. That I'm iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin.

:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2009, 05:51:19 AM
You writin' a opry, feller?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 09, 2009, 05:52:09 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 09, 2009, 05:51:19 AM
You writin' a opry, feller?

That would be fun.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2009, 12:13:58 PM
Quote from: on cbs.comHe has campaigned for Sen. John McCain in 2008.

No, no, no.  The present perfect here is no good as of 1 Jan 09.

Faugh!  A major news website!

It has got to be cast in the simple past now: He campaigned for Sen. John McCain in 2008.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on March 09, 2009, 12:52:18 PM
Aye.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2009, 12:58:56 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 09, 2009, 12:13:58 PM
No, no, no.  The present perfect here is no good as of 1 Jan 09.

Faugh!  A major news website!

It has got to be cast in the simple past now: He campaigned for Sen. John McCain in 2008.

The illiterati are everywhere and have infiltrated areas one would hope are still pristine!  But no: one can no longer trust "better" newspapers to have good grammar or style as one of their missions!

I used to send my students of History to find articles in 1920's newspapers, or even ones from the 19th century, and then had them compare those to our sorry examples of contemporary journalism.  And our complaint goes beyond the simple sycophantic proskinesis which the media performs nowadays before the hemidemisemi-Lincoln wannabe of the White House.  

Even their flattery is flat!   $:)  And when it isn't, it's laughable!   8)

"How far have we fallen?!"   :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2009, 03:39:54 AM
Under the idea that, once one starts grumbling about a problem, one's ears will suddenly hear more examples of that problem, we can file this incident from last night:

At a craft store where my wife has deposited our life's savings, she was politely chatting with the more than plump, bearded, lisping 20-something cashier about the vicissitudes of life these days, like the plague of bicephalous deer in Franklin County, when suddenly I heard:

"There was this woman that just buyed a whole bunch of frames..."

My mind echoed instantly: "Buyed???  Buyed??? BUYED???"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on March 10, 2009, 04:36:11 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 10, 2009, 03:39:54 AM
"There was this woman that just buyed a whole bunch of frames..."

My mind echoed instantly: "Buyed???  Buyed??? BUYED???"

So that's not one you can abuyed?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2009, 05:05:56 AM
Quote from: RepliCat on March 10, 2009, 04:36:11 AM
So that's not one you can abuyed?  ;)

Wocka Wocka!  And on top of that, I can't afford a Ford either!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2009, 05:12:36 AM
Lord love a duck.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 10, 2009, 05:23:43 AM
Just heard on radio, during a talk about football:

It's useless to make a comparison between Fergusson [pause] Fergusson is different.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2009, 05:28:25 AM
Well, between you, Andrei, I see nothing wrong with that  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 10, 2009, 05:35:17 AM
Both me don't, but still thought it was funner.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2009, 06:38:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 10, 2009, 05:12:36 AM
Lord love a duck.

I saw that movie!  c. 1967?  One of the worst ever, except for Tuesday Weld in those sweaters!   :o

A girl named Tuesday!  Reminds one of G.K. Chesterton's The Man Who Was Thursday!

Of course, The Addams Family had the daughter named Wednesday!

Don't get me started on people who give their children weird names!   $:)

Karl: Where is that picture from?  East Germany?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2009, 06:49:10 AM
Outside the Fenway entrance of the MFA.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2009, 08:44:25 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 10, 2009, 06:49:10 AM
Outside the Fenway entrance of the MFA.

Aha!  Is that the "monster" wall of legend?

Concerning "between" and "I" one must reiterate that "I" is always wrong with prepositions: "Just between you and me..."  The affected illiterati, who use "I" here in an attempt to sound very correct, end up of course sounding like schnooks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 10, 2009, 09:57:39 AM
It is interesting that language development is mostly driven by the illiterate. How often do we see new words invented by those unaware that a perfectly good word exists already!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on March 10, 2009, 10:13:46 AM
"Continuity IRA Shot Dead Officer"

Even when forced to limit a headline to 5 words, this reads strangely...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2009, 02:46:39 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on March 10, 2009, 09:57:39 AM
It is interesting that language development is mostly driven by the illiterate. How often do we see new words invented by those unaware that a perfectly good word exists already!

I would change that to "deterioration" of course!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2009, 05:31:19 PM
To paraphrase Jeeves: There is no place where verbs do not matter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2009, 05:49:02 PM
Quote from: ' on March 10, 2009, 05:43:55 PM
What Einstein said,
it does disturb,
how matter
can become a verb.'

Hah!

It's ancient usage, though, you know.

Somewhere I read a story that Sir Thomas More talked someone out of committing suicide by discussing the difference in grammar between nothing matters and nothing chatters.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 12, 2009, 05:24:36 AM
My son the mathematician asked me yesterday if "exponent" could be a verb!   ??? 

With the accent on the "-nent" !   :o

The answer is no, but he explained that while on a flight from the West Coast, the stewardess announced: "We can exponent our departure if you stay seated..."

She repeated the mistake later: "You can exponent your deplaning by not standing in the aisle until..."

She of course meant the airline-jargon word "expedite."   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 12, 2009, 05:56:22 AM
Malapropisms certainly are exponing these days!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 12, 2009, 06:01:00 AM
Here at work, some people say, "You minus this and plus that."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 12, 2009, 08:09:24 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 12, 2009, 06:01:00 AM
Here at work, some people say, "You minus this and plus that."

Oy!  We hear that from younger kids in the Fifth Grade and below: do you have 10-year olds working there?  Child labor used to be banned!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 12, 2009, 08:17:22 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 12, 2009, 08:09:24 AM
Oy!  We hear that from younger kids in the Fifth Grade and below: do you have 10-year olds working there?  Child labor used to be banned!

Ha. No these are adults.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 12, 2009, 08:25:55 AM
That's all happening because our children isn't learning anymore and are being taken hostile by illiterates posing as teachers, professors or presidents.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 12, 2009, 08:34:19 AM
I wonder what it's doing to me, being around all this "dumb".  :'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 12, 2009, 08:47:50 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 12, 2009, 08:34:19 AM
I wonder what it's doing to me, being around all this "dumb".  :'(

It takes strength to swim against the current: one would hope that the civilized would raise the uncivilized (not to imply that people who use bad grammar are grutning, rug-wearing, Goths, but...) to a higher level.  That has always been the hope.  And it has worked in some cases throughout History.

Unfortunately, History also shows the opposite: witness the decline of civilization after 400 A.D. in Western Europe with the barbarian invasions.

Or the chaos occurring in certain areas today, where civilization is on the run, and the barbarians are in charge.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 13, 2009, 04:41:22 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 10, 2009, 03:39:54 AMAt a craft store where my wife has deposited our life's savings...
Love it!

Quote from: Cato on March 12, 2009, 08:47:50 AM...the chaos occurring in certain areas today, where civilization is on the run, and the barbarians are in charge.
Business as usual?  Not sure that civilization is much of a blessing.  Arts aside I favor agrarian societies.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 13, 2009, 05:26:46 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 13, 2009, 04:41:22 AM
Love it!
Business as usual?  Not sure that civilization is much of a blessing.  Arts aside I favor agrarian societies.

You are a true Jeffersonian!

Today our English teacher came to me in a quandary, complete with mag wheels and a 7-speed transmission!   :o

Here is the sentence she was asking about:

"The student wrote an essay about England during Victorian times."

The question: What does the prepositional phrase "during Victorian times" modify?

She said: "essay."  Some of our best students were insisting: "England."

Cato was called upon to settle the matter!   $:)

Point: Students!  The essay is not written during Victorian times.  The best I could do for the teacher was to say that in one sense, both prepositional phrases in a diagram would appear under "essay," so that in a very indirect fashion it modified "essay."  Otherwise, no.

But it was nice to see everyone worrying about such details of grammar!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 13, 2009, 05:41:05 AM
It can be such a wholesome worry  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 13, 2009, 05:45:39 AM
I like a good essay.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 13, 2009, 06:16:57 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 13, 2009, 05:26:46 AM
You are a true Jeffersonian!
Yes, in many respects.  I live in farm country by choice.  Common sense is relatively plentiful here, but catastrophically scarce in the predominantly artificial environments where most are born and bred these days. 

 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on March 13, 2009, 07:35:14 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 13, 2009, 05:26:46 AM
She said: "essay."  Some of our best students were insisting: "England."

Diagram this sentence: "She's an English teacher?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 13, 2009, 08:25:07 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on March 13, 2009, 07:35:14 AM
Diagram this sentence: "She's an English teacher?"

Yes, I know, but at least she asked!   8).

I have known worse ones!  One was a very nice lady at a high school, who gave me the blankest of expressions, when I asked her whether she taught the subjunctive in first or second semester to sophomores, since I would be dealing with the subjunctive in German II.

"Do you mean 'subjects'?"
"No, the subjunctive, the mood for contrary-to-fact conditions."

(Crickets, crickets, crickets)

"We do not use that term in English."
"Well, subjunctive is an English word," I said tactfully.  "Maybe your text calls it the 'conditional' or something similar."

(Crickets, crickets, crickets)

"Some other terms are 'optative' and 'conjunctive.'  For example, 'I wish he would go away'  or 'If he went away, I would be happy.'  The verbs 'went' and 'would' are subjunctive."
"Hmm.  In English we say 'went' is past tense.  And 'would' is future tense."

This was pronounced with an air of authority.  I explained that I was a born American, and not a Kraut who was misunderstanding English.  Then I added:

"No, actually 'went' is a present subjunctive, and so is 'would be'.  Or at least some books might call 'would be' a future subjunctive, but it is not the same as the indicative 'will.' "

(Crickets, crickets, crickets)

"No, that is not in our curriculum," she said finally, ending the conversation, and for years afterward she avoided any contact with me.
$:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 13, 2009, 08:54:52 AM
Cato--I admire your service as a teacher in public K-12 education.  I believe our nation is in desperate need of competent teachers qualified both by mastery of subject matter and by pedagogical aptitude.  My experience, however, indicates that conditions in most districts discourage the best candidates from pursuing teaching careers and encourage those who at best aspire to mediocrity.  The story you just related seems not at all surprising but rather sadly normal in the public schools.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 13, 2009, 09:26:40 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 13, 2009, 08:54:52 AM
Cato--I admire your service as a teacher in public K-12 education.  I believe our nation is in desperate need of competent teachers qualified both by mastery of subject matter and by pedagogical aptitude.  My experience, however, indicates that conditions in most districts discourage the best candidates from pursuing teaching careers and encourage those who at best aspire to mediocrity.  The story you just related seems not at all surprising but rather sadly normal in the public schools.

Well, the above incident happened in a Catholic high school, a supposedly "high-powered" one!   8)

I have taught in public schools for several years, and your comments are on target for the places I experienced, even going back to the 70's!  Corruption was also a problem in one public school and in one Catholic 7-12 school: grades were fixed in the main offices in both, fraudulent claims were made to the College Board in the latter, pupil-teacher ratios were rigged by adding in non-teaching personnel in both, etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 13, 2009, 09:47:08 AM
Okay Master Cato,

When does the comma go inside the quotation mark and when does it not?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 13, 2009, 11:28:24 AM
(* shudders *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 13, 2009, 11:40:31 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 13, 2009, 11:28:24 AM
(* shudders *)

Why dost thou shudder?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 13, 2009, 11:51:40 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 13, 2009, 08:54:52 AM
. . . The story you just related seems not at all surprising but rather sadly normal in the public schools.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 13, 2009, 12:02:12 PM
http://grammartips.homestead.com/inside.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 13, 2009, 01:20:33 PM
Quote from: ' on March 13, 2009, 12:35:28 PM
General rules are a matter of local custom, like Big Endian/Little Endian. American rules include some "exceptions". '



I keep everything inside, mainly because I write fiction and it's a habit. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 13, 2009, 06:50:27 PM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 13, 2009, 01:20:33 PM
I keep everything inside, mainly because I write fiction and it's a habit. :)

Welllll....the rule says to put everything inside, but there are times when I have broken it, depending on the look or what I might be using the quotes for.

Example: How would you define the word "peripatetic"?

I do not like the quotes including the question mark, since it seems to interfere with the concentration on the word itself.

But I suppose a purist would insist on: How would you define the word "peripatetic?"

It just does not "look" right to me!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 14, 2009, 04:01:43 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 13, 2009, 06:50:27 PM
But I suppose a purist would insist on: How would you define the word "peripatetic?"

But this is plain wrong. There is no such word as peripatetic?. The question mark belongs to the sentence, not to the word itself.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 14, 2009, 04:39:58 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 14, 2009, 04:01:43 AM
But this is plain wrong. There is no such word as peripatetic?. The question mark belongs to the sentence, not to the word itself.  ;D

Amen!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 14, 2009, 05:27:40 AM
If you're quoting a single letter or word in a sentence, I can see keeping the comma or period out of there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 14, 2009, 05:30:43 AM
Quote from: ' on March 14, 2009, 04:49:09 AM
To say "the rule" is not accurate in a couple of ways. First, there are many different guides, and they vary in different ways, big and small. For example, among the many general differences between American and British guides is the tendency of British publications to favor putting end punctuation after the quotation marks, although you see this less in British newspapers.

There are many other rules about quotation marks and punctuation. The most exciting are those that focus narrowly on properly uniting quotation marks with colons and semicolons in different situations. They are as thrilling as a Raymond Chandler novel. Brace yourself: Many don't turn out the way you expect them to, but we have to learn to accept that this is how it is with maverick semicolons.

Not one who follows the Chicago Manual. Purists are pretty useless anyway, goobermenschen.

You are guided by good instincts.

'


Thanks for the comments!  I do not have a copy of the Chicago Manual, so maybe I should invest: it sounds sensible.

On punctuation: I tend to use it idiosyncratically (and, I hope, not idiotically!) as "musical instructions" of how fast to "play" the sentence.  

On semicolons: is there a case for eliminating the thing?  I have used it so rarely that I wonder how many consider it necessary.


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 14, 2009, 05:36:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 14, 2009, 05:30:43 AM
Thanks for the comments!  I do not have a copy of the Chicago Manual, so maybe I should invest: it sounds sensible.

On punctuation: I tend to use it idiosyncratically (and, I hope, not idiotically!) as "musical instructions" of how fast to "play" the sentence.  

On semicolons: is there a case for eliminating the thing?  I have used it so rarely that I wonder how many consider it necessary.




I use semicolons to divide two closely related sentences; I do it all the time.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 14, 2009, 06:24:34 AM
Thanks again for the comments!

On scholarly articles and punctuation: have you noticed how the titles of such things almost invariably have colons?  The field does not matter!  From Aesthetics to Zoology, practically every title will have a colon!

Of course, maybe the authors think a colon will help the reader to digest everything better!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on March 14, 2009, 08:04:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 13, 2009, 06:50:27 PM
Welllll....the rule says to put everything inside, but there are times when I have broken it, depending on the look or what I might be using the quotes for.

Example: How would you define the word "peripatetic"?

I do not like the quotes including the question mark, since it seems to interfere with the concentration on the word itself.

But I suppose a purist would insist on: How would you define the word "peripatetic?"

It just does not "look" right to me!   $:)
I was taught that it goes outside the quotation mark in this example.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 14, 2009, 08:07:13 AM
The copy editor can put it wherever they want. nyuk nyuk nyuk  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 14, 2009, 08:15:18 AM
Quote from: ' on March 14, 2009, 06:41:25 AM
A niggling n.b.

Many style guides (most?) would have you capitalize what follows a colon if it is an independent clause.'

That is a rule I do not follow!    8)   

And copy editors!   :o

I chose the quotation mark example because my brother was taught at the University of Oklahoma that ALL quotation marks always go outside other punctuation marks!  He was apparently mentally seared, branded, imprinted, and otherwise brainwashed by this idea, since he complains about it in my writings!

But...consider the source of his brain damage!   0:)

Changing topics...

Friday's Wall Street Journal has a letter-to-the-editor about a manager at the WSJ, who banned the word "upcoming" from appearing in the paper.  He considered it redundant.  When it appeared after his warning came out, he sent another memo which said: "If I see 'upcoming' in the paper one more time, I will be downcoming and someone will be outgoing."   :o

(p. A10 from Ted Stanton of Houston)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 14, 2009, 08:17:34 AM
Quote from: ' on March 14, 2009, 06:41:25 AM
A niggling n.b.

Many style guides (most?) would have you capitalize what follows a colon if it is an independent clause.'

Makes sense to me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 14, 2009, 08:35:47 AM
An addition to the Wall Street Journal issue mentioned above (Friday's issue, March 13th):

The WSJ manager was named Barney Kilgore!  Great Name!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 14, 2009, 01:43:21 PM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 14, 2009, 05:36:18 AM
I use semicolons to divide two closely related sentences; I do it all the time.
This is what semicolons are for - likewise colons. As neither is a stop, no capital is required.
Rules in England seem to differ from those in the US. The general rule for quotations here is that punctuation only goes inside the quotation marks if they are part of the quotation. In my view this the most logical approach.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 14, 2009, 01:46:48 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on March 14, 2009, 01:43:21 PM
This is what semicolons are for - likewise colons. As neither is a stop, no capital is required.
Rules in England seem to differ from those in the US. The general rule for quotations here is that punctuation only goes inside the quotation marks if they are part of the quotation. In my view this the most logical approach.

"But you still put a comma here," he said.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on March 14, 2009, 02:10:13 PM
Quote from: ' on March 14, 2009, 08:27:31 AM
I would be curious to know the source.'
School, a million years ago. I've never heard of it being any other way until this thread.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 15, 2009, 01:19:13 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 14, 2009, 01:46:48 PM
"But you still put a comma here," he said.
Precisely - the comma terminates the spoken sentence and is part of the quotation. On the other hand: 'Put your rubbish in this bin', the sign read, unless there actually is a comma on the sign!
Actually, in the latter case, I would always write : the sign read 'Put the full stop outside, please'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 16, 2009, 10:24:26 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on March 15, 2009, 01:19:13 AM
Precisely - the comma terminates the spoken sentence and is part of the quotation. On the other hand: 'Put your rubbish in this bin', the sign read, unless there actually is a comma on the sign!
Actually, in the latter case, I would always write : the sign read 'Put the full stop outside, please'.

I can accept that!

Orwellian language alert: the Catholic diocese of Cleveland announced the closing of over 10% of its parishes, and called the event "an occasion for joy" because it would lead to a better diocese.   :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nut-job on March 16, 2009, 10:25:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 16, 2009, 10:24:26 AM
I can accept that!

Orwellian language alert: the Catholic diocese of Cleveland announced the closing of over 10% of its parishes, and called the event "an occasion for joy" because it would lead to a better diocese.   :o

The real reason for joy, 10% fewer child molesters.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 16, 2009, 10:29:59 AM
Not a grammar grumble, per se, but . . .

One makes allowances for typos, no problem.  But when it's in the subject header, so that as the thread generates replies . . . and you see forty iterations of accesible and muscial . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 16, 2009, 10:49:26 AM
Quote from: nut-job on March 16, 2009, 10:25:39 AM
The real reason for joy, 10% fewer child molesters.


$:)  "Personal foul!  Unsportsmanlike conduct!"   $:)

Karl: I keep hoping one of the moderators will fix those problems!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bhodges on March 16, 2009, 11:07:44 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 16, 2009, 10:49:26 AM
Karl: I keep hoping one of the moderators will fix those problems!

*[waves magic wand]*

Voila!

0:)

--Bruce
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 16, 2009, 11:10:28 AM
O thrice-worthy waver of the wand!  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: LESS is not FEWER!!!
Post by: Cato on March 16, 2009, 04:54:13 PM
Okay, I just saw an ad about some so-called "energy drink" (Orwellian Language Alert: Energy Drink = Sugar Water) with "Less Calories."

AARRGGGHHH!

If you cannot count it singly, you want "less."  e.g. This puddle has less mud than that one.

vs.

This drink has fewer calories than that one.  The drink therefore must have less energy than that one.

This distinction is mangled daily by all sorts of people, with politicians being the worst offenders: "Less taxes for the bottom 95%!"

(Believe that, and then see me for a great deal on land in Nova Scotia!)   8)

(Grumble (Morons!) grumble grumble!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 16, 2009, 04:56:02 PM
Yeah, that's a tricky one sometimes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 16, 2009, 06:22:22 PM
The Daily Mangle
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: LESS is not FEWER!!!
Post by: knight66 on March 16, 2009, 11:18:08 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 16, 2009, 04:54:13 PM
Okay, I just saw an ad about some so-called "energy drink" (Orwellian Language Alert: Energy Drink = Sugar Water) with "Less Calories."

AARRGGGHHH!

If you cannot count it singly, you want "less."  e.g. This puddle has less mud than that one.

vs.

This drink has fewer calories than that one.  The drink therefore must have less energy than that one.

This distinction is mangled daily by all sorts of people, with politicians being the worst offenders: "Less taxes for the bottom 95%!"
(Believe that, and then see me for a great deal on land in Nova Scotia!)   8)

(Grumble (Morons!) grumble grumble!)

Could you clarify here? I assume you mean the politician should say, 'Less tax...' rather than, 'Fewer taxes....' The latter has an altogether different meaning.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: LESS is not FEWER!!!
Post by: Cato on March 17, 2009, 04:05:20 AM
Quote from: knight on March 16, 2009, 11:18:08 PM
Could you clarify here? I assume you mean the politician should say, 'Less tax...' rather than, 'Fewer taxes....' The latter has an altogether different meaning.

Mike

It is the politician (a local one) who needs to clarify, because you are quite right!  Either he is guilty of incompetence, or deliberate obfuscation.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 17, 2009, 04:51:56 AM
Newspeak alert! (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1162384/EU-bans-use-Miss-Mrs-sportsmen-statesmen-claims-sexist.html)  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 17, 2009, 05:11:21 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 17, 2009, 04:51:56 AM
dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1162384/EU-bans-use-Miss-Mrs-sportsmen-statesmen-claims-sexist

Our era is beyond satire!  We live in a satire!

Allow me to address a question on the other topic about English and double negatives.

Some are illiterate: "That won't do no good."   :o

But this is quite fine: "He is not inexperienced."  This allows one to say that the experience-level of the person is a slight step away from being "experienced."

"He is not unintelligent."   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 17, 2009, 05:25:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 17, 2009, 05:11:21 AM
Our era is beyond satire!  We live in a satire!

That is nothing, actually! The EU has regulations for the curvature of bananas and the length of flowers' stalks...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 17, 2009, 05:26:37 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 17, 2009, 04:51:56 AM
Newspeak alert! (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1162384/EU-bans-use-Miss-Mrs-sportsmen-statesmen-claims-sexist.html)  :o
Neither the titles nor their use is sexist.  Sexism is an attitude, these days apparent in those who deny real differences between genders just as much as in those who imagine false differences, and the essence of which is prejudging individuals as embodiments of stereotypical attributes of various classes (in this case, gender) to which they may belong, i.e. female, blonde, tattooed, gum-chewing, high-heeled, bejeweled, Hispanic, attorney.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: 20-somethings! Oy!
Post by: Cato on March 18, 2009, 06:37:28 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 17, 2009, 05:26:37 AM
Neither the titles nor their use is sexist.  Sexism is an attitude, these days apparent in those who deny real differences between genders just as much as in those who imagine false differences, and the essence of which is prejudging individuals as embodiments of stereotypical attributes of various classes (in this case, gender) to which they may belong, i.e. female, blonde, tattooed, gum-chewing, high-heeled, bejeweled, Hispanic, attorney.

Amen!   0:)

And speaking of saints...

Every day our 20-something principal   ???   reads a mini-biography of a saint over the P.A.  (I politely term many of these hagiographical exercises "pious fictions."   0:)  )

The man means well, but...

Today he reads the students a life of "Saint Sy Rule."

Sy might rule until his wife Esther comes back home.  Otherwise...

There is no such saint in Heaven or elsewhere, but listed among The Elect might be a certain Saint Cyril of Alexandria.

Oy!  More evidence why nobody under 35 should be allowed to become a principal.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 18, 2009, 06:53:01 AM
A twenty-something principal?  Good God!  He must have started teaching at puberty to have gained the classroom experience qualifying him for the position.  Or maybe he's effing brilliant (although Saint Sy Rule suggests otherwise)...?

Hmmm...young, inexperienced, not brilliant (but not un-intelligent, either), and has good intentions...what next?  President?  (Or would the almost-real-world administrative experience in his present job make him overqualified for the position?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 18, 2009, 08:35:32 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 18, 2009, 06:53:01 AM
A twenty-something principal?  Good God!  He must have started teaching at puberty to have gained the classroom experience qualifying him for the position.  Or maybe he's effing brilliant (although Saint Sy Rule suggests otherwise)...?

Hmmm...young, inexperienced, not brilliant (but not un-intelligent, either), and has good intentions...what next?  President?  (Or would the almost-real-world administrative experience in his present job make him overqualified for the position?)

The danger of a democracy is that it receives the government it deserves. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 18, 2009, 08:41:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 18, 2009, 08:35:32 AM
The danger of a democracy is that it receives the government it deserves. 
A sense of humor is essential if we are not to go mad.  And a sense that life is about personal spiritual growth--rather than progressive secular perfection--is essential if we are not to be mad (as in red-faced perpetually pissed-off apoplectically angry!--which, of course, is a form of madness in both senses of the word).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:01:01 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 17, 2009, 05:25:39 AM
That is nothing, actually! The EU has regulations for the curvature of bananas and the length of flowers' stalks...

Most of these infamous bonkers Euro-regulations are made up by the Eurosceptic press to scare/wind up a gullible public that likes nothing more than a good harrumph. The banana one is such a myth.  ::)

http://www.youtube.com/v/1_-jx5xTutU
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 18, 2009, 10:04:15 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 18, 2009, 08:35:32 AM
The danger end of a democracy is that when it receives the government it deserves. 

Fixed.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 18, 2009, 10:09:30 AM
Quote from: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:01:01 AM
Most of these infamous bonkers Euro-regulations are made up by the Eurosceptic press to scare/wind up a gullible public that likes nothing more than a good harrumph. The banana one is such a myth.  ::)

Commission Regulation (EC) 2257/94: bananas must be "free from malformation or abnormal curvature," though Class 1 bananas can have "slight defects of shape" and Class 2 bananas can have full "defects of shape."

(emphasis mine)




Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:19:11 AM
1) What's wrong with that? All sounds pretty sensible.

and

2) as the clip points out, the current EU definition is identical to the previous ones in individual member states (including Britain) and to that used by the UN and the OECD. The fuss is made because a) it is the EU, which we are all supposed to hate and b) it is bananas. Bananas are inherently funny.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 18, 2009, 10:27:11 AM
Quote from: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:19:11 AM
What's wrong with that?

Define "abnormal curvature" and "defect-free shape" of bananas.

It boggles the mind, besides being morally outrageous, that those bureaucrats in Bruxelles spend tax-payers' money to produce such monstrosities as trying to force nature in their narrow-minded standards and regulations.

I don't hate the EU idea as it was conceived by its Founding Fathers, i. e. Jean Monet, Alcide de Gasperi, Robert Schuman and the likes. But what we have now is a supranational bureaucracy which is not accountable to anyone except themselves --- the very contrary of the original intention.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:31:32 AM
See point 2 above. What boggles my mind is the keenness to see flaws where one wants to see them but to ignore precisely the same flaws where one doesn't. Like the UK press with this banana issue - kicking up a fuss because it comes 'from Brussels Eurocrats' where they never did when the same regulations came from London.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kullervo on March 18, 2009, 10:36:36 AM
I have a reserve of my ire set aside for people who use "indicate" for "said" (as in "This person indicated to me that I was an idiot"), or "utilize" where "use" would be more apt.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 18, 2009, 10:38:25 AM
Quote from: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:31:32 AM
See point 2 above. What boggles my mind is the keenness to see flaws where one wants to see them but to ignore precisely the same flaws where one doesn't. Like the UK press with this banana issue - kicking up a fuss because it comes 'from Brussels Eurocrats' where they never did when the same regulations came from London.

I can assure you that in my own country there was absolutely no regulation regarding the curvature of bananas --- or of any other fruit or vegetable --- prior to EU issuing one, our national cohort of narrow-minded bureaucrats notwithstanding.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:44:22 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 18, 2009, 10:38:25 AM
I can assure you that in my own country there was absolutely no regulation regarding the curvature of bananas --- or of any other fruit or vegetable --- prior to EU issuing one, our cohort of narrow-minded bureaucrats notwithstanding.

Well, that's fine - we had them here, in the country which leads the world in Euro myth-making, that's my point. Does this banana-curvature-regulation issue seriously affect the quality of the bananas you're getting now that you're afflicted with it? Do you miss the old triple corkscrew ones?  ;D  ;)

(I'm joking, obviously - I just think that far too much fuss is made out of these issues, especially when, as shown, most of the more outrageous front-page splash regulations don't exist in the form pretended or already existed prior to the EU)

:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 18, 2009, 10:44:59 AM
Quote from: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:31:32 AM
See point 2 above. What boggles my mind is the keenness to see flaws where one wants to see them but to ignore precisely the same flaws where one doesn't. Like the UK press with this banana issue - kicking up a fuss because it comes 'from Brussels Eurocrats' where they never did when the same regulations came from London.

There should be a fuss over both!

These things exist because, with bureaucrats, the old adage "idleness is the devil's workshop" is magnified 10X.  They come up with such things to justify their existence, when in fact they should be fired, publicly buggy-whipped, and sent to pick up trash along the highways.   8)

Corey: you are right!  "Utilize" and "indicate" are preciosities heard more and more from the morons, who are trying to puff up their wrens' feathers into peacock-plumage.   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:48:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 18, 2009, 10:44:59 AM
There should be a fuss over both!

Both, or neither. But not only over one - that's my point.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 18, 2009, 10:52:12 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 18, 2009, 10:44:59 AM
There should be a fuss over both!

Or (possibly) a grumble.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 18, 2009, 10:53:54 AM
Quote from: sul G on March 18, 2009, 10:44:22 AM
I just think that far too much fuss is made out of these issues

No fuss would be made if these regulations did not exist in the first place, right? If the idea is "let EU (or UK or whatever) bureaucrats make what regulations they want, that's their job and nobody's going to comply with them anyway" then the function of government, the concept of law and the civil duty are, in long run, subverted and distorted. There are numerous examples in history of political regimes that started playing with small and often risible issues and gradually grew to full-fledge tyranny, precisely because of the attitude described above.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 18, 2009, 11:20:19 AM
It's a matter, perhaps, of fussing to the right degree, and targeting the fuss aright.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Hypovehiculate
Post by: Cato on March 19, 2009, 06:07:25 PM
James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal, while offering a report on how Sen. Dodd and the White House are trying to get their stories straight on why they both approved bonuses for AIG executives weeks if not months ago, and now pretend they had no idea this was happening, uses the term "hypovehiculate" to describe how the White House now finds Dodd expendable.

i.e. hypovehiculate = to throw someone under the bus/tank/truck   :o

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123747200979984843.html  "The Devil Made Me Do It"  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 19, 2009, 06:55:53 PM
Please don't mention Dodd.  He, personally, bears at least as much responsibility for the financial mess we're in as any other public official, and yet hardly a day goes by when this hypocritical scumbag isn't on TV pointing the finger anywhere but where the blame rightfully belongs.  Just thinking about him puts me at risk for a stroke.

There are no punishments in Bosch's Hell heinous enough for retributive justice against such foul betrayers of the public trust...but literally throwing him under a bus--say on the Capitol Mall--and then dragging his sorry ass all the way back to his irate constituents in Connecticut might make a good start.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2009, 03:26:51 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 19, 2009, 06:55:53 PM
Please don't mention Dodd.  He, personally, bears at least as much responsibility for the financial mess we're in as any other public official, and yet hardly a day goes by when this hypocritical scumbag isn't on TV pointing the finger anywhere but where the blame rightfully belongs.  Just thinking about him puts me at risk for a stroke.

There are no punishments in Bosch's Hell heinous enough for retributive justice against such foul betrayers of the public trust...but literally throwing him under a bus--say on the Capitol Mall--and then dragging his sorry ass all the way back to his irate constituents in Connecticut might make a good start.

"Here we go a-hypovehiculating..."

(Needs some work!)   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on March 22, 2009, 12:12:07 AM
Did youse guys mention "dude" yet?

My 1905 dictionary define dude as, basically Oscar Wilde...and when i saw that, I was like..."don't call me dude, fag." :o

When did "dude" change from Oscar Wilde to surfer guy?

And how can you convince ANYONE that it matters?  Their (just testing you)they're just going to call you dude anyway.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on March 22, 2009, 12:16:50 AM
IT'S ALL GOOD

every time I hear this i want to gut punch the person and say, "you're right, I feel so much better now. thank you for enlightening me that it was a GOOD thing i did."

I think this phrase originated at a backyard picnic concerning the FOOD. NOT an excuse for you not to take a stand on anything.

TOODLES!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 22, 2009, 04:38:40 AM
Many good grumbles there, Snyprr!   8)

"Dudde" is Medieval English for a cloak, and became a slang word for clothes, i.e. "duds."  This is possibly the origin for "dude" in the 19th century, as Easterners wearing "fancy duds" were easily spotted in the West, and were mocked as "duded" (dressed) as inexperienced newcomers.

One source indicates the word is picked up by African-Americans in the early 1900's and stripped of negative connotations, becoming a synonym for "man" or "guy" then.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and the Bill and Ted movies of the 1980's make the term a national tic!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 22, 2009, 05:06:02 AM
I don't know about the origins and history of the word in American slang, but when I was a child in Texas and Arizona it was a disparaging term heard mostly in Hollywood Westerns that was a virtual synonym for "urban male from the Eastern U.S."  Derivation from "duds" seems a likely story.  By the late '60s "dude" was in common use among the California youth culture (including surfers) as the masculine counterpart of "chick."

Thus it has been part of my vocabulary since the '50s and I use it unabashedly today, though rarely among those not of my generation (or near to it), and almost always with a wry undertone signaling (a) that we're not as young as we once were, (b) that sometimes we enjoy acting as if we were, or (c) that we should have learned something during the past four decades!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on March 22, 2009, 08:22:57 AM
and "chick" comes from "shiksa"?

for me, dude is like n***** in derrogotationality. It's like calling your spouse b**** (in that terms of endearment way- roll of eyes). How sweet.

and the "yo boy" talk of ANY kind.  There's a movie called White Boyz? about some, sorry, no other term for it, wh****** living in Iowa.  It is so dead on and infuriating- Iowa boys talking like dey be down wit da homiez in da hood.  One day they go to the house of their black friend, and his mother asks the main charac. if he comes from New orleans because of his accent, and he says, no, jus livin in the hood...arrfff ::)

Another thing that bugs me is the tendency of said group to also appropriate their granny's "church sayings" and use them as if that is all it takes to be "spiritual"...what I call the "I KNOW that's right" syndrome.

then: "I'm jus gettin my ______ on"

then: when people say "oh reeeaaally?" in that faux snooty "Hamptons" accent. corollary to "dahhh-ling"

and: "go" for speak, as mentioned...extremely annoying

personally, I overuse "huh" as a sign of "who bout that?"

and yes: putting "izzle" at the end of a word. :-X

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 09:35:49 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 18, 2009, 10:27:11 AM
Define "abnormal curvature" and "defect-free shape" of bananas.

It boggles the mind, besides being morally outrageous, that those bureaucrats in Bruxelles spend tax-payers' money to produce such monstrosities as trying to force nature in their narrow-minded standards and regulations.

I don't hate the EU idea as it was conceived by its Founding Fathers, i. e. Jean Monet, Alcide de Gasperi, Robert Schuman and the likes. But what we have now is a supranational bureaucracy which is not accountable to anyone except themselves --- the very contrary of the original intention.

It takes a very small mind to be "boggled" by something so innocuous. 

I looked up the regulation you cite is mainly concerned with requiring bananas to be free of fungal contamination, insect contamination, not rotted, not contaminated by foreign matter, not smashed, stem still intact, etc.  This is the sort of regulation which is necessary to facilitate trade and keep the food supply safe.  The part about abnormal curvature sound silly, until a food market in Germany orders bananas from one of the pseudo-medieval backwaters that are being admitted to the EU these days and received an unsellable shipment of deformed produce.  It is safe to assume that the US department of agriculture has similarly silly sounding regulations for produce.  It is the reason that buying food is safe and reliable in developed counties and gambling with your life elsewhere. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 22, 2009, 10:08:37 AM
Quote from: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 09:35:49 AM
The part about abnormal curvature sound silly, until a food market in Germany orders bananas from one of the pseudo-medieval backwaters that are being admitted to the EU these days and received an unsellable shipment of deformed produce. 

Hogwash.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 11:09:43 AM
Quote from: Florestan on March 22, 2009, 10:08:37 AM
Hogwash.

What you use to clean bananas in your neck of the woods?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 22, 2009, 12:41:03 PM
Quote from: snyprrr on March 22, 2009, 08:22:57 AM
and "chick" comes from "shiksa"?

for me, dude is like n***** in derrogotationality. It's like calling your spouse b**** (in that terms of endearment way- roll of eyes). How sweet.

and the "yo boy" talk of ANY kind.  There's a movie called White Boyz? about some, sorry, no other term for it, wh****** living in Iowa.  It is so dead on and infuriating- Iowa boys talking like dey be down wit da homiez in da hood.  One day they go to the house of their black friend, and his mother asks the main charac. if he comes from New orleans because of his accent, and he says, no, jus livin in the hood...arrfff ::)

Another thing that bugs me is the tendency of said group to also appropriate their granny's "church sayings" and use them as if that is all it takes to be "spiritual"...what I call the "I KNOW that's right" syndrome.

then: "I'm jus gettin my ______ on"

then: when people say "oh reeeaaally?" in that faux snooty "Hamptons" accent. corollary to "dahhh-ling"

and: "go" for speak, as mentioned...extremely annoying

personally, I overuse "huh" as a sign of "who bout that?"

and yes: putting "izzle" at the end of a word. :-X
What are you?  12 years old?  This entire post is a suitable topic for this thread.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 22, 2009, 12:43:58 PM
Quote from: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 09:35:49 AM
It takes a very small mind to be "boggled" by something so innocuous. 

I looked up the regulation you cite is mainly concerned with requiring bananas to be free of fungal contamination, insect contamination, not rotted, not contaminated by foreign matter, not smashed, stem still intact, etc.  This is the sort of regulation which is necessary to facilitate trade and keep the food supply safe.  The part about abnormal curvature sound silly, until a food market in Germany orders bananas from one of the pseudo-medieval backwaters that are being admitted to the EU these days and received an unsellable shipment of deformed produce.  It is safe to assume that the US department of agriculture has similarly silly sounding regulations for produce.  It is the reason that buying food is safe and reliable in developed counties and gambling with your life elsewhere. 
Sounds generally correct, to me, except for the part about countries in banana-producing climes being admitted to the EU.  Has that actually happened?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 01:23:06 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 22, 2009, 12:43:58 PM
Sounds generally correct, to me, except for the part about countries in banana-producing climes being admitted to the EU.  Has that actually happened?

Bananas are grown in territories of European states, such as the Azores, a territory of Portugal, for instance.

Here's the text of the regulation:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31994R2257:EN:HTML

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 22, 2009, 01:44:22 PM
Quote from: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 01:23:06 PM
Bananas are grown in territories of European states, such as the Azores, a territory of Portugal, for instance.
Duh! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 23, 2009, 01:07:11 AM
Quote from: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 01:23:06 PM
Here's the text of the regulation:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31994R2257:EN:HTML

The following gem is particularly brilliant:

III. SIZING

Sizing is determined by:

- the length of the edible pulp of the fruit, expressed in centimetres and measured along the convex face from the blossom end to the base of the peduncle,

- the grade, i.e. the measurement, in millimetres, of the thickness of a transverse section of the fruit between the lateral faces and the middle, perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis.

The reference fruit for measurement of the length and grade is:

- the median finger on the outer row of the hand,

- the finger next to the cut sectioning the hand, on the outer row of the cluster.

The minimum length permitted is 14 cm and the minimum grade permitted is 27 mm.



Translation: if nature doesn't conform to EU regulations, give it a finger!  ;D



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 23, 2009, 04:00:30 AM
Quote from: nut-job on March 22, 2009, 09:35:49 AM
It takes a very small mind to be "boggled" by something so innocuous. 

I don't know.  I don't think lack of mental capacity is necessarily allied to bogglement.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on March 23, 2009, 07:25:31 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 22, 2009, 12:41:03 PM
  12 years old? 

a-ha! You too, sir, are guilty of using phrases as sentences! 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on March 23, 2009, 08:22:10 PM
how do I separate my reply from the "blue" quote?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 23, 2009, 08:27:34 PM
Quote from: Florestan on March 23, 2009, 01:07:11 AM
Sizing is determined by:

- the length of the edible pulp of the fruit, expressed in centimetres and measured along the convex face from the blossom end to the base of the peduncle,

- the grade, i.e. the measurement, in millimetres, of the thickness of a transverse section of the fruit between the lateral faces and the middle, perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis.

The reference fruit for measurement of the length and grade is:

- the median finger on the outer row of the hand,

- the finger next to the cut sectioning the hand, on the outer row of the cluster.

The minimum length permitted is 14 cm and the minimum grade permitted is 27 mm. [/b]

So are these EU sizing regulations suggesting that it's true what "they" say about the size of a man's hands?  And BTW--14 cm maximum?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 24, 2009, 04:27:35 AM
Quote from: snyprrr on March 23, 2009, 08:22:10 PM
how do I separate my reply from the "blue" quote?

Make sure your reply is after the "end-quote" indicator.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 24, 2009, 04:30:15 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 24, 2009, 04:27:35 AM
Make sure your reply is after the "end-quote" indicator.

I.e., after this bit of code:

[/quote]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 24, 2009, 08:56:41 AM
Did I catch a new piece of jargon? Something about short-stemming? Is this because short-stemmed roses are half the price of long-stemmed ones?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 24, 2009, 11:02:24 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on March 24, 2009, 08:56:41 AM
Did I catch a new piece of jargon? Something about short-stemming? Is this because short-stemmed roses are half the price of long-stemmed ones?

"Short-stemming" from what I can tell is a term from quarry blasting for a fuse that is not long enough in a sequence of blasts.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kullervo on March 24, 2009, 11:05:30 AM
I've posted it once before, but it seems apt for this thread:

Common Errors in English (http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nut-job on March 24, 2009, 11:05:50 AM
I'm just outraged to learn that in Europe, short an abnormally curved bananas are apparently lined up and shot by a firing squad, or worse.  It's an abomination!   :'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 24, 2009, 11:13:46 AM
Quote from: Corey on March 24, 2009, 11:05:30 AM
I've posted it once before, but it seems apt for this thread:

Common Errors in English (http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors)
Looks comprehensive!  I checked only one entry, to see how this source dealt with a common error the nature of which still escapes some posters here, even after one or two clear and accurate explanations appeared elsewhere on this thread:

QuoteONLY:
Writers often inadvertently create confusion by placing "only" incorrectly in a sentence. It should go immediately before the word or phrase it modifies. "I lost my only shirt" means that I had but one to begin with. "I lost only my shirt" means I didn't lose anything else. "Only I lost my shirt" means that I was the only person in my group to lose a shirt. Strictly speaking, "I only lost my shirt" should mean I didn't destroy it or have it stolen—I just lost it; but in common speech this is usually understood as being identical with "I lost only my shirt." Scrutinize your uses of "only" to make sure you are not creating unwanted ambiguities.
They got that one right.  Let's hope it's not the only one.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Just Say No To Drug
Post by: Cato on March 27, 2009, 03:15:49 PM
A local TV reporter today regaled the audience, who usually just want to know if it will rain or snow or not, with a story about a robbery, during which the "victim was drug down the stairs to the basement and tied up."

"Drug" as the past tense of "drag" is no doubt a monster born by attraction from the German word tragen (carry), whose past tense is indeed formed with a "u", i.e. trug, in areas populated by the descendants of refugees from the Kaiser, Bismarck, or the constant smell of fermentation.   $:)

I also heard the word "boughten" today from a school principal, who said his school "hasn't boughten new textbooks yet."    ???

Vox clamans in deserto...   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Just Say No To Drug
Post by: Benji on March 27, 2009, 03:28:16 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2009, 03:15:49 PM
I also heard the word "boughten" today from a school principal, who said his school "hasn't boughten new textbooks yet."    ???


Boughten zee noo textbuuks from Ikea?  ;D

(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/muppet/images/thumb/f/f8/Swedishchef2.JPG/300px-Swedishchef2.JPG)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 27, 2009, 03:30:38 PM
"Snuck" instead of "sneaked" has become so common that it's probably entered the dictionaries by now, or will soon.  There are probably other examples.  They grate on our ears, but we must remember that our language is living and in flux.  Text messaging will probably accelerate some changes, don't you think?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on March 27, 2009, 03:50:50 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 27, 2009, 03:30:38 PM
Text messaging will probably accelerate some changes, don't you think?
idk
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on March 27, 2009, 04:06:09 PM
Quote from: Gay Cuban Communist on March 27, 2009, 03:50:50 PM
idk
hcs
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 27, 2009, 04:07:53 PM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on March 27, 2009, 04:06:09 PM
hcs
wtf
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on March 27, 2009, 04:11:35 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 27, 2009, 04:07:53 PM
wtf

lol
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on March 27, 2009, 04:12:50 PM
Quote from: Benji on March 27, 2009, 04:11:35 PM
lol
stfu
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 28, 2009, 04:34:25 AM
Quote from: Gay Cuban Communist on March 27, 2009, 03:50:50 PM
idk

Decades ago in the '70's, before tech gadgets were ubiquitous, a teacher came to me: it was early in the year and she was correcting her first History tests from a Freshman group, and several papers had "DK" as the "answer" for various questions.

What was "DK" supposed to mean? she asked in exasperation.

I deduced - and feared - it meant "Don't Know."   :o

So even then the plague was present!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 28, 2009, 04:51:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 28, 2009, 04:34:25 AM
Decades ago in the '70's, before tech gadgets were ubiquitous, a teacher came to me....
Cato!  You're an antique!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on March 28, 2009, 05:29:20 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 28, 2009, 04:34:25 AM
Decades ago in the '70's, before tech gadgets were ubiquitous, a teacher came to me: it was early in the year and she was correcting her first History tests from a Freshman group, and several papers had "DK" as the "answer" for various questions.

What was "DK" supposed to mean? she asked in exasperation.

I deduced - and feared - it meant "Don't Know."   :o

So even then the plague was present!   8)
interesting... i wonder why it went from "dk" to "idk", though... why add a letter?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on March 28, 2009, 06:10:08 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 27, 2009, 04:07:53 PM
wtf
hoo can say
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 28, 2009, 07:21:12 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 28, 2009, 04:51:25 AM
Cato!  You're an antique!

Aye!  And have been for some time, which means I  am becoming ever more valuable as well as voluble!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on March 31, 2009, 10:36:50 AM
I have a good one:

"You and me, both."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 01, 2009, 04:11:04 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on March 31, 2009, 10:36:50 AM
I have a good one:

"You and me, both."

Well, I suppose we could be charitable and call it an "emphatic colloquialism."   $:)

We are not known, however, for being too charitable in things grammatical!

And yes, that is the imperial plural!   0:)

The word "We" was also involved in a TV news report here yesterday, which contained the most shameless Orwellian "klanguage" with no trace of irony:

(An approximate quote)

"We have to look at ways of enhancing the city's revenues, and so we are reviewing various options concerning the sources of income for the city."

i.e. we are scurrying around looking for new ways to create taxes and raise old ones.  This from a politician connected to a certain party recently infamous for raising taxes and going on a spending spree, not necessarily in that order!   0:)
Title: Re: Passive Voice vs Active Voice
Post by: Cato on April 05, 2009, 03:58:02 PM
An Associated Press Headline: "Obama Adviser Paid Millions as Hedge Fund Director"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090404/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_financial_disclosures

SO ...how many millions received checks from the hedge fund directed by Lawrence Summers?

Hmmm...sounds like good practice for present-day policy, passing out checks using other people's money!   0:)

But as one reads, one sees that the man was paid millions, which also seems to be a crime these days!  $:)

Headlines should not be shortened by people who failed to pay attention in English class!


Title: Re: Passive Voice vs Active Voice
Post by: Jay F on April 05, 2009, 04:49:19 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 05, 2009, 03:58:02 PM
An Associated Press Headline: "Obama Adviser Paid Millions as Hedge Fund Director"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090404/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_financial_disclosures

SO ...how many millions received checks from the hedge fund directed by Lawrence Summers?

Hmmm...sounds like good practice for present-day policy, passing out checks using other people's money!   0:)

But as one reads, one sees that the man was paid millions, which also seems to be a crime these days!  $:)

Headlines should not be shortened by people who failed to pay attention in English class!




Should've said "made millions."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2009, 10:11:30 AM
Redundant Verbiage Alert in some things I have read today, the products of the educational bureaucrats    :P    of my diocese! 

Agree or Disagree:

"The parish faith community in co-operation with the school faith community co-operates with surrounding parish and school faith communities."

I was about to reach for my revolver by the end of that monstrosity!    $:)

A bureaucrat was paid to write that!!!   :o

A sensible statement would be: "The parish and school co-operate with other parishes and schools."

"Faith community" is another preciosity from people who think they are being broad-minded, but are also paid by the word to produce bloated surveys.

Any examples of such nonsense from other areas? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Perplexing Preposition Problem
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2009, 03:33:54 PM
Quote:

"I think you're judging on the British people with your outdated morals."

This is another aspect of our illiterate and possibly Hunnish age   :o  Too many people are unable to handle the simplest phrases without adding mistakes in an attempt to...what?  Sound smarter than they are?  Sound cool?

Maybe if you start judging on people, they'll be putting the beat down on you!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 06, 2009, 03:41:28 PM
Could be Louisiana colloquial . . . part of the same syndrome observed when, towards the end of a presidential contest, the g's get dropped from the ends of present participles.  If you're too careful of your speech, you're being insincere!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2009, 03:49:38 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2009, 03:41:28 PM
Could be Louisiana colloquial . . . part of the same syndrome observed when, towards the end of a presidential contest, the g's get dropped from the ends of present participlesIf you're too careful of your speech, you're being insincere!

Aye, now you're talkin' !   0:)    Millionaire politicians walkin' 'n' gabbin' 'n' actin' like they're reg'lar folk!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 08, 2009, 02:11:09 PM
Maciek (in another topic) had a comment about English using "me" rather than "I" when people refer to themselves.

"Who did that?"  "Not me!"  (= "Me did that" literally, rather than the correct "Not I" which few people would say.)

"Who's there?"  "It's me."  Again, few would say: "It is I," especially in America, mainly because it sounds...British!   :o      :D

What this might mean, self-reference in the objective/accusative case, about the collective linguistic unconscious is highly debatable!

It might also mean something about self-reverence, the disease of our day!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on April 08, 2009, 02:44:35 PM
Me agree.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 09, 2009, 04:11:51 AM
Me likey ← heard in New York  0:) ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 09, 2009, 04:45:16 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 09, 2009, 04:11:51 AM
Me likey ← heard in New York  0:) ;)

That explains quite a bit!   8)

Local sports broadcaster yesterday was describing a baseball player "diving down" for a ground ball.

Exactly how one would "dive up" was not explained!   :o

At least boxing was not involved with the "diving down" comment!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on April 09, 2009, 06:52:21 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 09, 2009, 04:45:16 AM
That explains quite a bit!   8)

Local sports broadcaster yesterday was describing a baseball player "diving down" for a ground ball.

Exactly how one would "dive up" was not explained!   :o

At least boxing was not involved with the "diving down" comment!   $:)

I've been hearing people talk about "doubling down" in the last year or two, though not in any sense having to do with a game of blackjack (21).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 07:14:17 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on April 09, 2009, 06:52:21 AM
I've been hearing people talk about "doubling down" in the last year or two, though not in any sense having to do with a game of blackjack (21).
An excellent metaphor for increasing the stakes in an already doubtful situation, risking throwing good money after bad.  Applied frequently these days in reference to a political agenda that has our masters in government claiming they'll solve an economic crisis stemming from excessive bad debts by legislating massive increases in taxpayer indebtedness.  True that we're a nation of risk-takers; but successful risk-takers don't bet unless the odds of success and the risk/reward ratio look favorable.

I know!  We may be broke and in debt but let's double down by maxing out our credit cards to buy lottery tickets! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on April 09, 2009, 09:23:12 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 07:14:17 AM
An excellent metaphor for increasing the stakes in an already doubtful situation, risking throwing good money after bad.  Applied frequently these days in reference to a political agenda that has our masters in government claiming they'll solve an economic crisis stemming from excessive bad debts by legislating massive increases in taxpayer indebtedness.  True that we're a nation of risk-takers; but successful risk-takers don't bet unless the odds of success and the risk/reward ratio look favorable.

I know!  We may be broke and in debt but let's double down by maxing out our credit cards to buy lottery tickets! 
You just can't pass up an opportunity to turn things political, can you?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 09:43:24 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on April 09, 2009, 09:23:12 AM
You just can't pass up an opportunity to turn things political, can you?
Good grief!  You just can't pass up an opportunity to take exception to my posts and try to pick a fight, can you?  You are the one whose post about "doubling down" invited explanation of its recent usage in a political context.  And I don't recall you taking such exception to others' posts with a political edge to them, including several previous posts on this very thread.  What's behind this persistent needling?  What did I ever do to you?  Were you here in the past under a different name, or are you one of those knee-jerk liberal partisan bigots who populate CMG and think that everyone who doesn't agree with every aspect of your world view must be a hateful Republican ideologue deserving censure?  Inquiring minds want to know.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on April 09, 2009, 10:51:14 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 09:43:24 AM
Good grief!  You just can't pass up an opportunity to take exception to my posts and try to pick a fight, can you?  You are the one whose post about "doubling down" invited explanation of its recent usage in a political context.  And I don't recall you taking such exception to others' posts with a political edge to them, including several previous posts on this very thread.  What's behind this persistent needling?  What did I ever do to you?  Were you here in the past under a different name, or are you one of those knee-jerk liberal partisan bigots who populate CMG and think that everyone who doesn't agree with every aspect of your world view must be a hateful Republican ideologue deserving censure?  Inquiring minds want to know.  ;)

Of course, every liberal must be "knee-jerk" and a "partisan bigot."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on April 09, 2009, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 09:43:24 AM
Good grief!  You just can't pass up an opportunity to take exception to my posts and try to pick a fight, can you?  You are the one whose post about "doubling down" invited explanation of its recent usage in a political context.

Actually, I didn't need an explanation of "doubling down." I know what it means and, believe it or not, didn't wonder how it might be used in a sentence, political or otherwise.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 09, 2009, 11:02:53 AM
In 10th grade we were taught that like — as in like a rat out of an aqueduct, not as in I like traffic lights, but only when they're green — is a preposition, not a conjunction, and that we should shun such constructions (as abound in the pop song literature) as like I knew you would.

Opinions?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mark G. Simon on April 09, 2009, 11:20:25 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 09:43:24 AM
  Were you here in the past under a different name, or are you one of those knee-jerk liberal partisan bigots who populate CMG and think that everyone who doesn't agree with every aspect of your world view must be a hateful Republican ideologue deserving censure?  Inquiring minds want to know.  ;)

I don't know what CMG you're talking about, but the one I'm familiar with is populated chiefly by vassals of the loudmouths of the conservative media who haven't had a thought in years that wasn't vetted by Limbaugh first under penalty of having to make a public apology.  Who can explain such people?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 11:23:33 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on April 09, 2009, 10:51:14 AM
Of course, every liberal must be "knee-jerk" and a "partisan bigot."
Hardly.  You're doing it again.  

Quote from: nicht schleppend on April 09, 2009, 10:57:19 AM
Actually, I didn't need an explanation of "doubling down." I know what it means and, believe it or not, didn't wonder how it might be used in a sentence, political or otherwise.
And again.

If you won't come clean about whatever has your knickers in a twist and makes you think I deserve your petty efforts to "put me in my place," then will you please get over it and stop behaving like a snotty brat spoiling for a fight?  Don't you realize that with each additional such post the picture you're presenting of yourself grows less and less flattering?  Enough, already.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 11:54:55 AM
Quote from: Mark G. Simon on April 09, 2009, 11:20:25 AM
I don't know what CMG you're talking about, but the one I'm familiar with is populated chiefly by vassals of the loudmouths of the conservative media who haven't had a thought in years that wasn't vetted by Limbaugh first under penalty of having to make a public apology.  Who can explain such people?
Among the two or three conservatives who post there I've never seen any cite Limbaugh, and I cannot think of anyone who otherwise fits your description.  On the other hand, there are 4 or 5 frequent posters who fit the description I offered and several other avowed liberals who do not.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mark G. Simon on April 09, 2009, 12:38:29 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 11:54:55 AM
Among the two or three conservatives who post there I've never seen any cite Limbaugh, and I cannot think of anyone who otherwise fits your description.  On the other hand, there are 4 or 5 frequent posters who fit the description I offered and several other avowed liberals who do not.

You obviously never learned to count. The place breeds conservative lunies like shit breeds flies. And of course they don't cite Limbaugh. They just take whatever he says as The Truth and proceed from there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on April 09, 2009, 01:11:32 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 09, 2009, 11:54:55 AM
Among the two or three conservatives who post there I've never seen any cite Limbaugh, and I cannot think of anyone who otherwise fits your description.  On the other hand, there are 4 or 5 frequent posters who fit the description I offered and several other avowed liberals who do not.

You cannot see it David because conservatism is a mental illness.  It is so overwhelmingly incontrovertible that any decent person hold mainstream liberal values that understandably enlightened people get frustrated.  Rush mentioned it in the morning talking points memo we all get (which you must have missed somehow)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mark G. Simon on April 09, 2009, 01:19:25 PM
I knew it! I knew it!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 09, 2009, 04:24:16 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 09, 2009, 11:02:53 AM
In 10th grade we were taught that like — as in like a rat out of an aqueduct, not as in I like traffic lights, but only when they're green — is a preposition, not a conjunction, and that we should shun such constructions (as abound in the pop song literature) as like I knew you would.

Opinions?

One source says that purist 19th-century grammarians were wrangling over the question of whether "like" can be considered a preposition.  "Like" used "conjunctively" has been around for 600 years, with purists shaking their fists at something "firmly established."

Concerning conservatism being proof of mental illness: one would need to prove therefore that e.g. Milton Friedman, James Burnham, Albert Jay Nock, Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Cardinal Mindszenty, Rev. Richard Wurmbrand, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Russell Kirk, and a host of others, who opposed leftism/socialism/communism and believed that the individual should be left alone as much as possible from government interference, and that therefore government should be as small as possible to protect the individual's freedom and dignity, were all dysfunctional and delusional.

Such proof will be very difficult to find!  One also wonders how mentally unstable the authors of the Federalist Papers were, who would all be quite properly appalled by the grotesque Brobdingagian monolith known as the U.S. Government, now set to swallow more productivity of the individual than ever before.

As a Catholic school teacher, I can attest that I am not a member of the overtaxed rich: I am a member of the overtaxed lower-middle class.   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on April 09, 2009, 05:49:28 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 09, 2009, 04:24:16 PM


Concerning conservatism being proof of mental illness: one would need to prove therefore that e.g. Milton Friedman, James Burnham, Albert Jay Nock, Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Cardinal Mindszenty, Rev. Richard Wurmbrand, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Russell Kirk, and a host of others, who opposed leftism/socialism/communism and believed that the individual should be left alone as much as possible from government interference, and that therefore government should be as small as possible to protect the individual's freedom and dignity, were all dysfunctional and delusional.



conservative concepts of freedom, individual rights and limited government are simply ruses by the white patriarchal power structure to protect the status quo and continue its subjegation of the poor, women and people of color. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 10, 2009, 01:11:09 AM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 09, 2009, 05:49:28 PM
conservative concepts of freedom, individual rights and limited government are simply ruses by the white patriarchal power structure to protect the status quo and continue its subjegation of the poor, women and people of color. 

I assume you're being ironic, just as in the other post. You can't be serious.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 10, 2009, 02:11:17 AM
Gents, This is primarily a thread about language and its uses. Obviously the cultural background and connections are integral; but let's avoid personalised argument, political or otherwise. The possibilities of bloodletting prompted by disagreements over language and grammar give more than enough scope for even the most combatate.

Remember what happened as a result of that iota!

Thank you.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 10, 2009, 04:36:34 AM
Amen!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mark G. Simon on April 10, 2009, 05:03:16 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 10, 2009, 01:11:09 AM
I assume you're being ironic, just as in the other post. You can't be serious.

BWV is the master of deadpan humor. His fame in this regard is worldwide. In China (or is it Japan) some people really believe that Elliott Carter has repented of his modernist ways, thanks to him.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 10, 2009, 05:34:10 AM
You mean — he hasn't?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 10, 2009, 05:37:19 AM
And then, amusingly, note lower left corner:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 10, 2009, 05:48:55 AM
Karl: That is free enterprise at its Big-Brother spookiest!

When somebody a few weeks placed a topic about "adultery with the boss' wife" here, my computer suddenly showed a Google ad about a site for "cheaters," including one catering to adulterous Catholics!   :o   

An oxymoron to be sure!   $:)  (Emphasis on the "moron" part!)

Somehow it "knew" my computer was in a Catholic school?!  It never came back, perhaps my school's blocking software needed to "learn" what was happening.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 10, 2009, 05:58:06 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 10, 2009, 05:48:55 AM
Karl: That is free enterprise at its Big-Brother spookiest!

When somebody a few weeks placed a topic about "adultery with the boss' wife" here, my computer suddenly showed a Google ad about a site for "cheaters," including one catering to adulterous Catholics!   :o   

An oxymoron to be sure!   $:)  (Emphasis on the "moron" part!)

Somehow it "knew" my computer was in a Catholic school?!  It never came back, perhaps my school's blocking software needed to "learn" what was happening.
Speaking of which, did you catch the discussion on the Lehrer News Hour last night about plans to create a national database for medical records?  It was good to note that at least some of the participants were hip to the enormous potential for abuse that would cause.  Personally I think that all forms of malware distribution, including tracking cookies, should be punishable by death or worse--forced attendance at an Andre Rieu concert, perhaps?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 10, 2009, 05:58:42 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 10, 2009, 05:58:06 AM
--forced attendance at an Andre Rieu concert, perhaps?

Brutal!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 07:53:47 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 10, 2009, 05:37:19 AM
And then, amusingly, note lower left corner:

How Annoying Is It When People Don't Know Which Letters They Should, And Shouldn't, Begin With A Capital Letter?!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 10, 2009, 07:57:24 AM
Quote from: Benji on April 10, 2009, 07:53:47 AM
How Annoying Is It When People Don't Know Which Letters They Should, And Shouldn't, Begin With A Capital Letter?!
1 on a scale of 10?  On a par with not knowing when to write out numbers and when to use numerals....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kullervo on April 10, 2009, 08:07:36 AM
Quote from: Benji on April 10, 2009, 07:53:47 AM
How Annoying Is It When People Don't Know Which Letters They Should, And Shouldn't, Begin With A Capital Letter?!

I've noticed that on several internet sites. It's strange because it actually requires more effort than the correct usage, whereas most grammar mistakes are due to sheer laziness. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on April 10, 2009, 08:29:45 AM
Quote from: Benji on April 10, 2009, 07:53:47 AM
How Annoying Is It When People Don't Know Which Letters They Should, And Shouldn't, Begin With A Capital Letter?!
Don't You Mean "Words"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 10, 2009, 09:14:45 AM
Grumble # 372:  people Who write "Letters" When They mean "Words?"  (Imagine the rising inflection now epidemic among the nation's youth and even catching on among those old enough to know better than to end statements with the inflection signifying a question.  Grumble #373.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on April 10, 2009, 09:17:40 AM
Grumble 374: People who grumble.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mark G. Simon on April 10, 2009, 09:33:52 AM
People who say "The thing about it is, is that....."

I've heard so many otherwise educated people say this, with absolute certainty of its grammatical correctness. At first I thought it was a hesitation on the speaker's part, but when I corrected this person, a librarian of all things, she thought about it and said "no, that's correct. That's how it's supposed to be".

Diagram that sentence, lady.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 09:54:55 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on April 10, 2009, 08:29:45 AM
Don't You Mean "Words"?

Yes, indeed. I was in such a rage that I completely forgot myself! I am ashamed and will pray for Cato's mercy.  ;D

Quote from: DavidRoss on April 10, 2009, 09:14:45 AM
Grumble # 372:  people Who write "Letters" When They mean "Words?"  (Imagine the rising inflection now epidemic among the nation's youth and even catching on among those old enough to know better than to end statements with the inflection signifying a question.  Grumble #373.)

Ah, shush!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 10, 2009, 09:56:50 AM
Quote from: Mark G. Simon on April 10, 2009, 09:33:52 AM
People who say "The thing about it is, is that....."

I've heard so many otherwise educated people say this, with absolute certainty of its grammatical correctness. At first I thought it was a hesitation on the speaker's part, but when I corrected this person, a librarian of all things, she thought about it and said "no, that's correct. That's how it's supposed to be".

Diagram that sentence, lady.

Superfluous is!  Garn!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 10, 2009, 09:57:26 AM
Quote from: Benji on April 10, 2009, 09:54:55 AM
Yes, indeed. I was in such a rage that I completely forgot myself!

Lesson:  Keep your cool.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kullervo on April 10, 2009, 09:59:16 AM
Lisa: Just lay still.
Linguo: Lie still.
Lisa: I knew that. Just testing.
Linguo: Sentence fragment.
Lisa: "Sentence fragment," is also a sentence fragment!
Linguo: *glances from side to side* Must conserve battery power. *shuts down*
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on April 10, 2009, 10:00:34 AM
I can't stand it when cats ask, "I can has cheeseburger?" God, it drive me nuts.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 10, 2009, 10:01:39 AM
Make catburgers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 10:02:06 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 10, 2009, 09:57:26 AM
Lesson:  Keep your cool.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/03_02/cleeseDM2803_228x344.jpg

But it makes me...SO.......MAD!  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 10:02:38 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 10, 2009, 10:01:39 AM
Make catburgers.

Careful now...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on April 10, 2009, 10:04:32 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on April 10, 2009, 10:00:34 AM
I can't stand it when cats ask, "I can has cheeseburger?" God, it drive me nuts.

"I can haz cheezeburger?"

Don't clean it up on behalf of the thread! It is now an accepted meme and must be respected accordingly.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on April 10, 2009, 10:05:08 AM
Quote from: Benji on April 10, 2009, 10:04:32 AM
"I can haz cheezeburger?"

Don't clean it up on behalf of the thread! It is now an accepted meme and must be respected accordingly.  8)

:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 13, 2009, 11:05:31 AM
Intrepid reporter Joe Queenan from the East Coast has filed an Orwellian Language update: apparently the new Administration's refusal to refer to the War On Terror as the "War On Terror" has had some effects"

An excerpt:

Quote"A Taliban spokesman reached in Pakistan said that the new phrasing was being implemented as a way of eliminating the negative associations triggered by more graphic terminology. "The term 'beheading' has a quasi-medieval undertone that we're trying to get away from," he explained. "The term 'cephalic attrition' brings the Taliban into the 21st century. It's not that we disapprove of beheadings; it's just that the word no longer meshes with the zeitgeist of the era. This is the same reason we have replaced the term 'jihad' with 'booka-bonga-bippo,' which has a more zesty, urban, youthful, 'now' feel. When you're recruiting teenagers to your movement, you don't want them to feel that going on jihad won't leave any time for youthful hijinks."

And this:
QuoteCentral Asia is not the only place where the coarse terminology of the past is being phased out. In Darfur, the words "ethnic cleansing" are no longer in use, either by rebels nor by the government itself. Instead, the practice of targeting a particular tribe or sect or ethnic group for extinction is being called "unconditional demographic redeployment." In much the same spirit, the archaic term "genocide" -- so broad and vague as to be meaningless -- has now been supplanted by "maximum-intensity racial profiling."

"We've got problems here, sure, just like any other society," explains a high-ranking Sudanese official. "But we're not talking about Armenia 1915. We're not talking about the Holocaust. The Eurocentric term 'genocide' gives people the wrong idea. And it really hurts tourism."

:o  or  :D

See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123958305263912309.html



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on April 13, 2009, 02:22:42 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 13, 2009, 11:05:31 AM
Intrepid reporter Joe Queenan from the East Coast has filed an Orwellian Language update: apparently the new Administration's refusal to refer to the War On Terror as the "War On Terror" has had some effects"


Nothing orwellian, it just was a stupid name and a stupid idea that started with the "war on poverty" and "war on drugs".  Wars ought to be something that are actually wars - with a defined enemy and goals for victory.  Realistically, terror (or terrorism to be more precise) is not going away.  Moreover, the war on terror is a conflict with only certain terror groups, last I checked we never engaged the Tamil Tigers or the Basque Separatists
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 13, 2009, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 13, 2009, 02:22:42 PM
Nothing orwellian, it just was a stupid name and a stupid idea that started with the "war on poverty" and "war on drugs".  Wars ought to be something that are actually wars - with a defined enemy and goals for victory.  Realistically, terror (or terrorism to be more precise) is not going away.  Moreover, the war on terror is a conflict with only certain terror groups, last I checked we never engaged the Tamil Tigers or the Basque Separatists

An excerpt from a recent hearing in Congress concerning bureaucratese:

QuoteMR. MORRELL:  I've never received such a directive.  I think the White House and OMB for that matter have been very clear about this as well, that they have never issued such a directive.   

                I think they've explained that perhaps somebody within OMB may have been a little overexuberant and done so.  But I can just tell you, I'm the one who speaks publicly about these matters.  And I have never been told which words to use or not to use.  So I don't think there's anything to the story.   

                Q     You still use the phrase.   

                MR. MORRELL:  I think I have used it.  I think I have.  I don't avoid it.  I don't seek it out.  If it's appropriate, I'll use it.  I could be wrong, but I think the president has used it.  But, so I don't -- I was surprised to see that story, as well, because I know of no directive prohibiting the use of that term.   

                Q     What's your preferred nomenclature?   

                MR. MORRELL:  I don't really have one.  I mean, I don't think a whole lot about it.  I think that we are involved in global operations to protect the homeland and the American people.  And a large part of that is going after terrorists, seeking them out, wherever they are, wherever they're plotting, wherever they are training to launch attacks against us.   

                So -- 

                Q     (Off mike) -- GWOT, global war on terror, lumps together an entire -- you know, the entire Muslim faith and an entire region.   

                Do you see that as a concern?   

                MR. MORRELL:  Well, I don't think there's anything in that term that identifies any particular faith or ethnicity.  I mean, there are terrorists of all faiths, of all colors, of all races and ethnicities. And so perhaps a better -- another way to refer to it would be, you know, a campaign against extremists who wish to do us harm.   

                I mean, there's a variety of ways to describe this.  But I don't -- the point is, there has been no mandate from anybody as to how we should talk about this.   

                Q     How do you feel about overseas contingency -- 

                MR. MORRELL:  I think that is -- that is -- the new way of referring to war spending is that overseas contingency -- it's still new to me, so let me get it right -- overseas contingency operations budget.   

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4385

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 13, 2009, 11:20:48 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 13, 2009, 02:22:42 PM
Moreover, the war on terror is a conflict with only certain terror groups, last I checked we never engaged the Tamil Tigers or the Basque Separatists

Because they never targeted US or US interests.
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 22, 2009, 06:25:45 PM
I have noticed throughout recent years a small, but growing, group of people talking through their noses and squeezing certain words with ugly pronunciations.  A local radio advertisement has a voice using such "diction" to push a restaurant.

Examples:

"Food" ends up sounding more like "fewd" i.e. like "feud" but without the "Y" sound.  "You" sounds more like "Yew".

"New" and many other words are pronounced with the nose basically closed.

I thought Ohio was immune from these mispronunciations, whose main practitioner, as far as I knew, was my stuffy, arrogant, evil sister-in-law in California, although a few denizens of PBS use it as well!  :o    But we have been invaded apparently!

Has anyone else noticed such strange variations?
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 03:47:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 22, 2009, 06:25:45 PM
I have noticed throughout recent years a small, but growing, group of people talking through their noses and squeezing certain words with ugly pronunciations.  A local radio advertisement has a voice using such "diction" to push a restaurant.

Examples:

"Food" ends up sounding more like "fewd" i.e. like "feud" but without the "Y" sound.  "You" sounds more like "Yew".

"New" and many other words are pronounced with the nose basically closed.

I thought Ohio was immune from these mispronunciations, whose main practitioner, as far as I knew, was my stuffy, arrogant, evil sister-in-law in California, although a few denizens of PBS use it as well!  :o    But we have been invaded apparently!

Has anyone else noticed such strange variations?

Other annoying pronunciations: "IN-surance"  "FY-nance"  rather than in-SUR-ance and fi-NANCE with a short "i": these were always heard as Southern hillbillyisms here in Ohio, but now you can hear them on national television.
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Novi on April 23, 2009, 03:56:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 22, 2009, 06:25:45 PM
I have noticed throughout recent years a small, but growing, group of people talking through their noses and squeezing certain words with ugly pronunciations.  A local radio advertisement has a voice using such "diction" to push a restaurant.

Examples:

"Food" ends up sounding more like "fewd" i.e. like "feud" but without the "Y" sound.  "You" sounds more like "Yew".

"New" and many other words are pronounced with the nose basically closed.

I thought Ohio was immune from these mispronunciations, whose main practitioner, as far as I knew, was my stuffy, arrogant, evil sister-in-law in California, although a few denizens of PBS use it as well!  :o    But we have been invaded apparently!

Has anyone else noticed such strange variations?

That also sounds like a nasty Australian accent :P.
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 05:13:35 AM
Quote from: Novi on April 23, 2009, 03:56:52 AM
That also sounds like a nasty Australian accent :P.

Possibly the tragic result of watching a Crocodile Dundee movie marathon!   :o
Title: "French Forget They Smoked Alot"
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 11:51:50 AM
See anything wrong with the title?   $:)

"Alot" is  NOT a word, but a headline circulating through Internet news and newspapers has this monstrosity, which I have been decapitating for decades in my classes.

But it seems to grow back in multiple units every time I chop it off!   :o

Add this to other slurry demons   >:D   like "gotta," "gonna," "lotta,"  and "dunno"  (No, that has nothing to with Rilke's Elegies).

Although The Dunno Elegies could be a satirical epitaph for our post-literate era!   0:)
Title: Re: "French Forget They Smoked Alot"
Post by: karlhenning on April 23, 2009, 11:56:34 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2009, 11:51:50 AM
"Alot" is  NOT a word, but a headline circulating through Internet news and newspapers has this monstrosity

Nooooo!!!!!
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: karlhenning on April 23, 2009, 11:57:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2009, 03:47:16 AM
Other annoying pronunciations: "IN-surance"  "FY-nance"  rather than in-SUR-ance and fi-NANCE with a short "i": these were always heard as Southern hillbillyisms here in Ohio, but now you can hear them on national television.

I sometimes wonder if Britons grate their teeth when they hear us Americans say inventory . . . .
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 12:03:48 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 23, 2009, 11:57:51 AM
I sometimes wonder if Britons grate their teeth when they hear us Americans say inventory . . . .

Hugh Laurie of House fame says getting our accent right is a torture for him.
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 12:15:01 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2009, 03:47:16 AM
Other annoying pronunciations: "IN-surance"  "FY-nance"  rather than in-SUR-ance and fi-NANCE with a short "i": these were always heard as Southern hillbillyisms here in Ohio, but now you can hear them on national television.

In proper (southern) english the accent is always on the first syllable
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: karlhenning on April 23, 2009, 12:16:27 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2009, 12:03:48 PM
Hugh Laurie of House fame says getting our accent right is a torture for him.

In Dead Again, Branagh sweated getting "southern California" right, and purists may quibble, but the result doesn't get in my ears' way.

For Derek Jacobi's character, though, they had to resort to the "he went to school in England as a boy" gambit  0:) $:)
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: karlhenning on April 23, 2009, 12:16:56 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 12:15:01 PM
In proper (southern) english the accent is always on the first syllable

It's the Finnic heritage, I see.
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 12:29:59 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 12:15:01 PM
In proper (southern) english the accent is always on the first syllable

"Proper southern English" is an impossibility, beyond oxymoronic!   :o 

The southern accent likes to emphasize the first syllable so that the rest of the word can be slurred into incomprehensibility!   :D
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 12:37:38 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2009, 12:29:59 PM


The southern accent likes to emphasize the first syllable so that the rest of the word can be slurred into incomprehensibility!   :D

That's why we talk slower

But Southern accents is much preferable to Midwest or Northeastern accents which are grating and hard to bear

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: sul G on April 23, 2009, 12:43:04 PM
Isn't 'proper' southern English what they speak in the south of England, though? To be strictly accurate.
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 02:40:29 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 12:37:38 PM
That's why we talk slower

But Southern accents is much preferable to Midwest or Northeastern accents which are grating and hard to bear



Oh they is, is they?   :o

Check your History book, Reb!  Who won the Civil War anyway?    ;D

As to Southern England, I have never been there: is it not called Wales?   0:)
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: DavidRoss on April 23, 2009, 03:01:37 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 12:37:38 PM
That's why we talk slower

But Southern accents is much preferable to Midwest or Northeastern accents which are grating and hard to bear
Shouldn't that be "Southern accents is better'n...?"

Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2009, 02:40:29 PM
Oh they is, is they?   :o
Yes, Cato--that grating nasality you complained about earlier is Midwestern--just ask MNDave about it.  ;)
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 04:21:34 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on April 23, 2009, 03:01:37 PM
Shouldn't that be "Southern accents is better'n...?"
Yes, Cato--that grating nasality you complained about earlier is Midwestern--just ask MNDave about it.  ;)

I'll dew that, yew betcha!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 05:20:07 PM
First, Southern English came from Southern England

QuoteSouthern dialects substantially originated from immigrants from the British Isles who moved to the South in the 17th and 18th centuries. The South was predominantly settled by immigrants from the West Country[citation needed] in the southwest of England, the dialects of which have similarities to the Southern US dialects. Settlement also included large numbers of Protestants from Ulster, Ireland, and from Scotland. During the migration south and west, the settlers encountered the French immigrants of New France (from which Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and western Tennessee originated), and the French accent itself fused into the British and Irish accents. The modern Southern dialects were born.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English)

Second, y'all can take the Yankee test here:

http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/yankeetest.html (http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/yankeetest.html)

I passed:

Quote85% Dixie.  Do you still use Confederate money?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2009, 05:57:12 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 05:20:07 PM
First, Southern English came from Southern England
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_American_English)

Second, y'all can take the Yankee test here:

http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/yankeetest.html (http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/yankeetest.html)

I passed:


We expected nothing less!   :D
Title: Re: "French Forget They Smoked Alot"
Post by: Florestan on April 23, 2009, 11:50:16 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2009, 11:51:50 AM
Although The Dunno Elegies could be a satirical epitaph for our post-literate era!   0:)

The Dunno Illegies, rather.  :)
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Ten thumbs on April 25, 2009, 01:30:04 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on April 23, 2009, 12:15:01 PM
In proper (southern) english the accent is always on the first syllable

Wherever these people come from they clearly do not understand what doubled consonants are for.
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2009, 05:06:10 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on April 25, 2009, 01:30:04 PM
Wherever these people come from they clearly do not understand what doubled consonants are for.

Or even single ones!  When I taught for a short while in Atlanta, Georgia, the students informed me they were learning "La' in" in my classroom, as if they were the limiest of limeys!   :o

So far this infection has not spread to my Ohio students!   0:)
Title: Re: Strange Nasal Pronunciations
Post by: karlhenning on April 27, 2009, 05:07:33 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on April 25, 2009, 01:30:04 PM
Wherever these people come from they clearly do not understand what doubled consonants are for.

Bananna!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble/Ads on lower left
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2009, 05:11:56 AM
My computer shows an ad at the bottom of the page from Google about "learning other accents."

Interesting - and slightly scary - the way Google "knows" what this topic is about!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on April 27, 2009, 09:34:10 AM
Something I have noticed regularly occuring in news interviews:

Saying "as I said" when you in fact have not said the thing previously. It appears to be used by flustered people to try to gain the "upper hand".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2009, 10:11:11 AM
Quote from: Lethe on April 27, 2009, 09:34:10 AM
Something I have noticed regularly occuring in news interviews:

Saying "as I said" when you in fact have not said the thing previously. It appears to be used by flustered people to try to gain the "upper hand".

You are quite right!  The other similar thing that frosts my windshield is the tired phrase "the fact that" when e.g. the duplicitous taxitician speaking is asserting an opinion based more on fantasy than fact.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 30, 2009, 01:59:58 PM
TTT

Cato must be engaged in the ever-renewed struggle against brain-mush grammar.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on April 30, 2009, 04:31:30 PM
QuoteSouthern American English (SAE) is the most widely recognized regional dialect of American English, but as most of its speakers know, widespread recognition is a mixed blessing. SAE is also the regional dialect that is most negatively evaluated. ...
its users can anticipate at least polite (and often not so polite) condescension to their speech by non-Southerners. In spite of its low status outside of the South and of standardizing forces such as interregional migration and universal education that threaten many minority languages and dialects, SAE continues to persist.

Some Features of Southern American English


...

"I'm fixin to eat breakfast" means that I intend to eat breakfast in the next little while
Some of the grammatical differences between SAE and other varieties are well known. For example, most Americans immediately recognize you-all and yall as distinctively Southern second person pronouns, and many would know that fixin to, as in "I'm fixin to eat breakfast," is Southern as well. The latter represents a modification of the English auxiliary system that enables Southerners to encode an aspectual distinction grammatically that must be encoded lexically elsewhere: "I'm fixin to eat breakfast" means that I intend to eat breakfast in the next little while.
Other grammatical features are less widely known but are no less important. SAE also modifies the English auxiliary system by allowing for the use of more than one modal in a verb phrase. For instance, for most Southerners "I might could leave work early today" is a grammatically acceptable sentence. It translates roughly as "I might be able to leave work early," but might could conveys a greater sense of tentativeness than might be able does. The use of multiple modals provides Southerners with a politeness strategy not available in other regional dialects. Although no generally agreed upon list of acceptable multiple modals exists, the first modal in the sequence must be might or may, while the second is usually could, can, would, will,should, or oughta. In addition, SAE allows at least one triple modal option (might shouldoughta) and permits useta to precede a modal as well (e.g., "I useta could do that").

All three of these grammatical features remain robust in SAE, and migrants to the South from other parts of the country often appropriate both yall and fixin to. Multiple modals, on the other hand, are typically used only by native Southerners. Most of the phonological features of SAE are also typically used only by natives.

...


The linguistic impact that the new arrivals from outside the South will have is not yet clear, but some trends are already becoming apparent. In Texas and Oklahoma and in many metropolitan areas around the South, some national linguistic trends such as the merger of the vowels in caught and cot (both sound like the latter) are emerging, and in several of the larger metropolitan areas (e.g., Dallas-Fort Worth and Memphis) some traditional Southern vowel features such as the distinctive pronunciation of the vowel in words like way are beginning to wane. Even as these developments take hold in metropolitan areas, however, traditional grammatical features such as yall and fixin to are spreading to non-Southerners migrating to the region. While the long-term linguistic consequences of the new developments are impossible to predict, it is apparent that SAE is continuing to evolve -- just as it has over the last century and a half. The extent to which the results of that evolution yield something that is recognizably "Southern" remains to be seen

http://www.pbs.org/speak/seatosea/americanvarieties/southern/sounds/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on May 01, 2009, 09:20:57 AM
Ever notice how nobody says "there are" anymore?

There's two pieces of pie left...
There's four things I have to do....

etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 01, 2009, 09:28:03 AM
Nobody?  I beg to differ. (Besides, there are never two pieces of pie left!)

How about "there're?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 01, 2009, 09:43:39 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on May 01, 2009, 09:28:03 AM
How about "there're?"

And two different schools of enunciation.  There are those who preserve a flutter of a vestigial vowel, so that the result is a little suggestive of Don's avatar.

And there are those who practically drop the vowel in the verb, and as a result the r in there is a little elongated, à la finnois.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2009, 10:09:57 AM
Quote from: The Six on May 01, 2009, 09:20:57 AM
Ever notice how nobody says "there are" anymore?

There's two pieces of pie left...
There's four things I have to do....

etc.

Yes, I have noticed it, and have been quite properly grumbling about it for some time!   :D

"There are" seems practically dead for plurals these days.  David Ross and Karl Henning are correct about "there're" which I  heard much more often in the good old days than today!  To be sure, when talking faster, the "are" became much less pronounced, but was still there.

The onslaught of the illiterati and their dominance in our Ausonian Age will probably prevent "there are" from ever coming back, except among the few trying to preserve civilization.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on May 02, 2009, 08:42:48 AM
If I had to choose I would do so rather than make choices, which seems to be the current vogue.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 04, 2009, 05:20:49 AM
With evidence growing about global cooling it seems the global warming crowd is changing the vocabulary, according to a New York Times article.

"Global warming" is out: "Climate change" is in, which allows the extremists to blame humans for global cooling/warming/tepidizing/etc., even though sunspot activity and volcanic activity are most probably the direct causes.

Since nobody wants to breathe dirty air or drink dirty water, returning to an emphasis on not polluting is also advised.

"Environmentalist" is out: "Conservationist" is in.

See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/us/politics/02enviro.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/us/politics/02enviro.html)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 04, 2009, 07:20:20 AM
Global tepidizing!  Is that where audiences don't boo?  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 04, 2009, 09:13:52 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 04, 2009, 07:20:20 AM
Global tepidizing!  Is that where audiences don't boo?  8)

Could be!  And we know what Jesus said about being lukewarm!   0:)

(It was less than pretty!)   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 04, 2009, 10:11:46 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 04, 2009, 09:13:52 AM
Could be!  And we know what Jesus said about being lukewarm!   0:)

Yes . . . Dostoyevsky quoted it as an epigram for one of his novels . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 04, 2009, 10:29:17 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 04, 2009, 10:11:46 AM
Yes . . . Dostoyevsky quoted it as an epigram for one of his novels . . . .

Did you read it in Russian?

ZB

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 04, 2009, 11:23:28 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 04, 2009, 10:29:17 AM
Did you read it in Russian?

ZB

No, but I ought.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble - EEmediately (?)
Post by: Cato on May 05, 2009, 08:49:21 AM
Today's grumble concerns the mispronunciation of the short "i" in "immediate" !

I have been noticing this for too many years: yesterday some bureaucrat on TV selling Swine Flu Panic Buttons demanded that we rush to a doctor "EEmediately" if we think we are coming down with this porcine disease.

I suspect the mispronouncers seem to think this emphasizes the urgency of their otherwise highly dubious commands.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 05, 2009, 08:53:06 AM
Maybe it's a computer utility: eMediately
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 05, 2009, 10:08:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 05, 2009, 08:53:06 AM
Maybe it's a computer utility: eMediately

Wocka Wocka!   8)   But actually, somebody probably has a license for "eMediately" somewhere!

The 90's were big for "e-" prefixes.  My brother's business partner once proposed setting up a website for the "ePsychic" to deliver cheap prophecies to people for $3.95.  I always thought that had possibilities, until Miss Cleo went to jail!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 05, 2009, 10:37:02 AM
Did they pitch Miss Cleo into the slammer?

I foresaw that . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Let's Use the Proper Past Participles!
Post by: Cato on May 08, 2009, 12:55:22 PM
Over the past few days, I have heard things e.g.:

"He's ran those tests already."   :o

"I thought I had already drank a can of pop."   ::)

"I shouldn't' 'a'  ate so much."   >:(

"Yeah, they got beat real bad."   >:D

Correct Answers: run, drunk, eaten, and were beaten really badly !!!  (Okay, "got" is colloquially acceptable.)

And these monsters were mouthed by parents and faculty members at my school, not the students!   $:)

Anybody else hear similar gorgons of grammar?

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Let's Use the Proper Past Participles!
Post by: DavidRoss on May 08, 2009, 01:22:02 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 08, 2009, 12:55:22 PM
Anybody else hear similar gorgons of grammar?
Constantly.  Civilization (a questionable idea to begin with) is doomed. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 08, 2009, 02:23:41 PM
In some circles, it is tragically unhip to be heard speaking in correctly conjugated verbs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Frumaster on May 08, 2009, 02:39:38 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 08, 2009, 02:23:41 PM
In some circles, it is tragically unhip to be heard speaking in correctly conjugated verbs.

Yes, but of course we are labeled as bigots for recognizing it or criticizing it.  We live in an age of liberal equivalency, baby.  Everything that is upside down and degenerate is actually preferred now.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Let's Use the Proper Past Participles!
Post by: Egebedieff on May 08, 2009, 02:50:12 PM
Quote from: Cato then DavidRoss on May 08, 2009, 01:22:02 PM
Cato: Anybody else hear similar gorgons of grammar?

DavidRoss: Constantly.  Civilization (a questionable idea to begin with) is doomed. 

A spotted gorgon:

"The only positive aspect to the collapse of our civilization is that i won't have to listen to this type of idiotic arguments ever again."

The congressman for our gerrymandered district has phone robots that dial us up for telephone Town Halls. Wednesday night we heard a citizen say "Like most people my age, I'm 27 years old." Her sentence didn't end there, but her nervous thought-gathering pause was long enough to make us think so.'

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Frumaster on May 08, 2009, 02:53:38 PM
Ok guys, I need some help.   I'm writing 5 page essay, and I'd appreciate your input.  Is this a legitimate introductory paragraph? Should I add more peripheral information (do you know what the hell I'm talking about)....

David A. Bell's concept of total war is contingent on numerous distinctions, some subtle and others not so subtle.  The point he tries to make often treads a fine line, but that is not to say it lacks ultimate credibility.  Three main periods are examined in the book, ranging from approximately 1750 to 1815: the Age of Enlightenment, the French Revolution, and the Napoleonic era.  'Total war' may seem like a misnomer when referring to such a broad span of time and events.  There is no single, all-encompassing front for Bell, nor would he have been justified in pinning all responsibilities a neatly confined episode.  Rather, he argues that extreme evolutions in ideologies and war practices coalesced so quickly as to constitute The First Total War.  Without in any way diminishing the other contributions, Bell suggests that 'modern attitudes towards war' most heavily rest on the legacy of Enlightenment ideals.  Some of the Enlightenment's grandiose ideas ceased to be primary motivators of war after the French Revolution, but the very nature of war remained permanently transfixed by them.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Frumaster on May 08, 2009, 03:37:18 PM
Quote from: ' on May 08, 2009, 03:26:37 PM
Not clear exactly what "distinctions" refers to in the first sentence, and I can't tell whether you address them in this paragraph, esp. which are subtle and which are not. If those distinctions are described here, be explicit, if not, and if they are important, that information might be worth adding (otherwise, eliminate or at least move it out of the lead sentence).

Second sentence lets us know that he has a point that treads a fine line, but not what that point is. Third sentence would be stronger in active voice, especially if this has something to do with the point you refer to in sentence 2. The fine line seems like another loose thread.

Ok, I agree.  I'll try to connect them together with another sentence or two.

Quote from: ' on May 08, 2009, 03:26:37 PM
Fourth sentence has a dangling modifier and is missing a preposition. Seventh sentence seems to say something central to his thesis -- is this his point?

So perhaps making your connections explicit, eliminating any loose threads you don't intend to develop, and moving up the stuff about the Enlightenment (if it is the point) would allow you to set up the context with the information that is here.'


What is the dangling modifer? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 08, 2009, 03:53:22 PM
Quote from: Frumaster on May 08, 2009, 03:37:18 PM


What is the dangling modifer? 


Your Fourth Sentence:

'Total war' may seem like a misnomer when referring to such a broad span of time and events.

Who is doing the referring?  In theory, the last noun is modified by the participle, so how does a misnomer refer to anything?  Is "Total war" doing the referring?

Probably better: ...when one refers to...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Frumaster on May 08, 2009, 05:33:37 PM
Thanks a lot guys.  How's this?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Frumaster on May 08, 2009, 06:42:38 PM
Quote from: ' on May 08, 2009, 06:14:35 PM
This  is stronger and better integrated. The transition sentence " In his search for the ..." is especially effective. I have a couple of comments:

I find myself wanting some detail that explains the role that Enlightenment ideals play in the modern attitudes toward war. We know that you find aspects of the Enlightenment as grandiose and that they ceased to be prime motivators for making war after the French Revolution, but I can't tell what is of particular interest to Bell.

I don't know who your audience is, so it is hard to know how strictly it should follow grammar and usage conventions. Ever since Woodstock, it has been acceptable to let modifiers dangle, but for strict academic writing, you may lose a point. Likewise, the use of "while" in academic writing is reserved for its temporal meaning; "although" would be safer. If your reader is really hip to the Chicago Manual of Style jive, dazzle them with an endash rather than a hyphen in "military–civilian."' 

Thanks again!  The rest of the paper is written, I was just looking for a more effective intro.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 09, 2009, 01:52:25 AM
Quote from: Frumaster on May 08, 2009, 06:42:38 PM
Thanks again!  The rest of the paper is written, I was just looking for a more effective intro.  The 'grandiose ideals' are really explored further in the paper....maybe this will act as a suspense builder!    Or maybe not, but I've made my final revisions for now.    You folks don't joke around here, do you  ;D

Cato especially never jokes around!   0:)

And I wondered if you are using in the opening sentence  "contingent" in the sense of "depends" ?  "Contingent" means "likely to happen" or "likely to apply, but perhaps not."

If however you mean "depends" then use "depends."   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Punctuation as Musical Direction
Post by: Cato on May 09, 2009, 02:06:01 AM
While working on a secret project, I penned the following piece of practically perfect prose:   :o

"But then he wondered if in fact somehow John had listened to everything!"

"Practically perfect," but not yet perfect!   $:)

I am always worried about the musical flow of the words in my writing, just like I worry about my meager bank account's monetary flow to Washington, all $37.15 of it, but that is another story!   8)

"But then he wondered if in fact somehow John had listened to everything!"

The monosyllables in the middle were put there to show the "Wait a minute!" moment in the wondering, but something was missing.

"But then he wondered if, in fact, somehow, John had listened to everything!"

The 3 commas make things clearer, and place emphasis on the mystery around the word "somehow" by slowing the pace down and making "somehow" the center of the sentence.

A small point, or comma actually   0:), but I thought it illustrated my - sometimes - idiosyncratic use of punctuation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Punctuation as Musical Direction
Post by: Jay F on May 09, 2009, 04:40:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 09, 2009, 02:06:01 AM
While working on a secret project, I penned the following piece of practically perfect prose:   :o

"But then he wondered if in fact somehow John had listened to everything!"

"Practically perfect," but not yet perfect!   $:)

I am always worried about the musical flow of the words in my writing, just like I worry about my meager bank account's monetary flow to Washington, all $37.15 of it, but that is another story!   8)

"But then he wondered if in fact somehow John had listened to everything!"

The monosyllables in the middle were put there to show the "Wait a minute!" moment in the wondering, but something was missing.

"But then he wondered if, in fact, somehow, John had listened to everything!"

The 3 commas make things clearer, and place emphasis on the mystery around the word "somehow" by slowing the pace down and making "somehow" the center of the sentence.

A small point, or comma actually   0:), but I thought it illustrated my - sometimes - idiosyncratic use of punctuation.
Do you really need both "in fact" and "somehow"? If I were writing this sentence, I think I might leave one out, probably "somehow," perhaps saving it for further clarification in the next sentence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Punctuation as Musical Direction
Post by: Cato on May 09, 2009, 06:01:26 AM
Quote from: ' on May 09, 2009, 05:19:48 AM
Or you could perhaps move "somehow" closer to the verb:

"But then he wondered if, in fact, John had somehow listened to everything!"

But, if you think about it for a second, not having those words in succession, esp. with the commas, would destroy the pacing that I think Cato is specifically after. It's analogous to how the dominant is prolonged at various levels of musical architecture to prolong the resolution. I think of an example by Ives (nothing special about that, because examples abound, but Ives is always closest at hand and ear for me) taken from Vachel Lindsay: "Gen'l William Booth Enters into Heaven."

Lindsay's original:

"Yet in an instant all that blear review
Marched on spotless, clad in raiment new."

Which Ives punctuates much like Cato did, but giving a lot of space to the comma pauses.

"Yet,      in an instant,      all that blear..."

This sets up and prolongs the tension before to add a sense of release to the steady march Ives settles into for the next line. Ives does this sort of setup all over the place, often as a foil for the delivery a march or a hymn esp. at a recapitulation (end of Ives Second Symphony is a good example). More importantly, this is all rooted in the how Western tonality works, and not surprisingly, such a handling of musical expectation is all deeply and intimately intertwined with how expectations work in language. A writer who is sensitive to that relationship can give pulse to his or her writing.'


Thank you, Mr. Apostrophe!   You have described my reasoning exactly!!!  As you have written, the "pacing" leading to the "somehow" is most important. 

Excellent example with the Ives also!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble/Complete Words!!!
Post by: Cato on May 13, 2009, 06:42:11 PM
My wife was watching "Law and Order" (aka Murderous Millionaires) and I heard the following pile of monosyllables:

"She had to go for a psych e-val 'cause she went off her meds."

Also heard: "She had gave..."  "She done..."  spoken by characters who were supposed to be at least somewhat educated ( e.g. a taxation bureaucrat).

I REALLY hate the monstrosity "meds."   :o

This is the first time I had ever heard "e-val" for "evaluation."

Apparently for the TV writers: "Monosyllables Rule!"   8)

Ironically, "monosyllable" is not monosyllabic!   0:)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on May 13, 2009, 06:45:11 PM
Dude, it's TV.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on May 13, 2009, 07:22:25 PM
So this Texan goes to Harvard and walking on campus approaches a group of students and asks, "hey, y'all know where's the library at?"

one student sticks his nose up in the air and replies, "At Harvard we do not end sentences with prepositions"

"OK, so where's the library at, asshole?" replies the Texan
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 13, 2009, 11:33:53 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 08, 2009, 02:23:41 PM
In some circles, it is tragically unhip to be heard speaking in correctly conjugated verbs.

You're quite right. In a not so distant future, any correct speech will be called Historically Informed Pronunciation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble/Complete Words!!!
Post by: Ten thumbs on May 14, 2009, 01:27:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 13, 2009, 06:42:11 PM


Ironically, "monosyllable" is not monosyllabic!   0:)

Why not simply call one a 'mon'? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 14, 2009, 03:56:45 AM
In Jamaica, they do . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on May 14, 2009, 02:04:07 PM
This isn't a grammar problem - it's just silly :P I heard this on the news yesterday:

"I'll take responsibility, but it's not all my fault"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 14, 2009, 02:17:19 PM
Quote from: Lethe on May 14, 2009, 02:04:07 PM
This isn't a grammar problem - it's just silly :P I heard this on the news yesterday:

"I'll take responsibility, but it's not all my fault"

That's nearly up there with, "I would do anything for love, but I won't do that."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 14, 2009, 02:18:12 PM
And I am not at all surprised that that is one of those "Songs by Jim Steinman" marvels of wordcraft.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 15, 2009, 05:23:02 AM
Quote from: Lethe on May 14, 2009, 02:04:07 PM
This isn't a grammar problem - it's just silly :P I heard this on the news yesterday:

"I'll take responsibility, but it's not all my fault"

Must have been said by a Yale man!   8)

Today's outrage from a local newspaper telling of 5th Graders jogging for a Chinese charity after learning about Asia:
"The charity run culminates Asian studies for them on Saturday."   :o    ???

Even if you assume that "in" was inadvertently left out after "culminate," the sentence still is ridiculous.

I think such bad grammar should "culminate" and terminate the reporter responsible!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Papageno on May 15, 2009, 05:20:19 PM
"There's a lot of people there" instead of There are -.  I hear it all the time, it makes my skin crawl.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 15, 2009, 05:59:09 PM
Quote from: Papageno on May 15, 2009, 05:20:19 PM
"There's a lot of people there" instead of There are -.  I hear it all the time, it makes my skin crawl.

I also find the perpetual singular simply lazy and sloppy.

Now it is a matter of hoping for an influx of pride and energy in how one speaks among a majority of people to effect a change!   8)

Mr. Apostrophe wrote:
QuoteThis is the way some of our presidents "apologize." They say they are sorry and fob that off as an apology, but they accept no responsibility and admit to making no mistakes or to any wrongdoing. It's an "I didn't do it" covered in a thin candy shell.'

Amen!   0:)  Orwell would have a love-hate relationship with the political speech of our era! 

Some of course do not apologize, but keep twisting words and false, ignorant claims around until there is no way out but to hope the public is not paying attention, or that their attention span is ruled by AADD (Adult Attention Deficit Disorder).

http://reformedpastor.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/catholic-cardinals-smack-pelosi-on-abortion/ (http://reformedpastor.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/catholic-cardinals-smack-pelosi-on-abortion/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 17, 2009, 03:50:06 PM
My son was watching a hockey game and a reporter says to the goalie: "The other team is very young: how will you expose their youth?"   :o

The comment seemed almost obscene, until one realizes the reporter meant "exploit" their youth!

My son remarked: "What do you expect?  He's a hockey reporter!"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 18, 2009, 03:44:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 17, 2009, 03:50:06 PM
My son remarked: "What do you expect?  He's a hockey reporter!"   0:)

The acorn does not roll far from the tree.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 20, 2009, 02:29:30 AM
I think the Grumble should be pinned  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 20, 2009, 03:42:56 AM
Quote from: ' on May 20, 2009, 02:37:07 AM"Who would of thought?"'
One of the more common means of signaling brain death these days. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 20, 2009, 09:25:45 AM
Quote from: ' on May 20, 2009, 02:37:07 AM
A former employer spent lots of money on a full-page ad in the NY Times. A third of the space was taken up with the words "Who would of thought?"'

I have seen the verbifying of "of" in novels, where one wonders if the author is sending a signal about the speaker's intelligence, or did the writer fall prey to plebeian-speak?

Using pronouns for possessives ("You age, they car") is found in dialect, although I have been told that some primitive languages allow it.

"Primitive" in the sense that such languages have small vocabularies, e.g. pronouns but no possessives.

English, however, is not supposed to sound primitive!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 20, 2009, 09:29:30 AM
Earlier this week I heard Diana Rigg speak the line "Me, Emma" in a 1966 episode of The Avengers
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 20, 2009, 09:37:15 AM
Quote from: Papageno on May 15, 2009, 05:20:19 PM
"There's a lot of people there" instead of There are -.  I hear it all the time, it makes my skin crawl.
Isn't "a lot" singular?  There are many people here, but there is a lot of people there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 20, 2009, 11:20:21 AM
We need a ruling:

"thusly": a real word?

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 20, 2009, 11:54:09 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 20, 2009, 11:20:21 AM
We need a ruling:

"thusly": a real word?

8)

No!  Not a real word: it is an over-correction.  Thus is already an adverb and needs no -ly ending.

David Ross wrote: "Isn't "a lot" singular?  There are many people here, but there is a lot of people there."

And yes: "Lot" is a collective singular, although the phenomenon of "last-word attraction" is at work in your example, i.e. "people" forcing itself as the subject, even though "lot" is the subject, and "people" the object of the preposition "of."

I have tricked my (weaker) students with the following example:

The steaks my father is grilling, and that my mother says (has/have) too much fat, (is/are) very expensive.

Interesting results at times, with some students insisting on "has" while correctly choosing "are" at the end.  Others insist on singular verbs for both spots.


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 20, 2009, 11:59:34 AM
I just read thusly in a movie review . . . and it sounded desperately wrong, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't prejudiced by the textual environment  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 20, 2009, 01:15:45 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 20, 2009, 11:54:09 AM
I have tricked my (weaker) students with the following example:

The steaks my father is grilling, and that my mother says (has/have) too much fat, (is/are) very expensive.

Interesting results at times, with some students insisting on "has" while correctly choosing "are" at the end.  Others insist on singular verbs for both spots.
You want "have" and "are," don't you?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 20, 2009, 01:27:34 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 20, 2009, 11:59:34 AM
I just read thusly in a movie review . . . and it sounded desperately wrong, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't prejudiced by the textual environment  8)
Cato is right (as usual).  "Thus" suffices.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 20, 2009, 01:57:38 PM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on May 20, 2009, 01:15:45 PM
You want "have" and "are," don't you?

Yes, the plural is correct in both cases!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 22, 2009, 04:19:14 AM
Not a grammar grumble at all, but linguistic ingenuity: I have a 7th-Grade boy, barely cracking 4' 10'', with a piercing soprano voice, both contrary to a last name indicating the toughest Viking heritage, who is running for Student Council President 2009-2010.

His slogan: "Think BIG, Vote small!"   8)

And he thinks he is indeed the biggest rooster around!  Napoleon complex extraordinaire!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 04:20:52 AM
Oh, I've got to watch Ian Holm as Napoleon in Time Bandits again soon!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Papageno on May 22, 2009, 04:39:12 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 20, 2009, 11:54:09 AM
No!  Not a real word: it is an over-correction.  Thus is already an adverb and needs no -ly ending.

But
(http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/1044/picture1bei.jpg)
Interesting...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 22, 2009, 04:42:47 AM
But, in that example, the 'unadorned' thus works perfectly suitably.

What was the source, Pap? (And at least sensibly, it is marked informal.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Papageno on May 22, 2009, 04:59:46 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 22, 2009, 04:42:47 AM
But, in that example, the 'unadorned' thus works perfectly suitably.

What was the source, Pap? (And at least sensibly, it is marked informal.)

Pap!?  That reminds of Pappy, or Pop... My god, my posts make you look at me like an old man.
Oxford Dictionary
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 22, 2009, 05:10:29 AM
Quote from: Papageno on May 22, 2009, 04:59:46 AM
Pap!?  That reminds of Pappy, or Pop... My god, my posts make you look at me like an old man.
Oxford Dictionary

The Random House College Dictionary states: "Since thus is an adverb, thusly is avoided by careful speakers as a grammatical tautology."

Marvelous explanation!   $:)

Another source says that "thusly" was coined by 19th-century British writers to mock lower-class speakers who were trying to sound educated.  (No specific writer was mentioned, however.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 22, 2009, 05:25:18 AM
An old goof that's been making a comeback lately: "effect" used when the writer means "affect."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 22, 2009, 10:37:15 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on May 22, 2009, 05:25:18 AM
An old goof that's been making a comeback lately: "effect" used when the writer means "affect."

I have heard teachers say they have given up on that one!   >:D

Cato is nothing if not Quixotic, and refuses to surrender to the windmills of the Illiterati Conspiracy.

One mnemonic device I have taught: "An effect is a result."

That has helped some students throughout the years to keep them straight.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on May 22, 2009, 01:29:55 PM
Quote from: Lethe on May 14, 2009, 02:04:07 PM
This isn't a grammar problem - it's just silly :P I heard this on the news yesterday:

"I'll take responsibility, but it's not all my fault"

Would that have been a politician?

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on May 22, 2009, 01:38:37 PM
Yip, no other human thinks like that (although I suppose corporate staff are similar). Sadly he wasn't frontbench so I can't remember a name ;_;
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on May 22, 2009, 01:54:15 PM
You remember the names of our frontbench! My hat off to you....especially as we will shortly experience the Labour version night of the long knives. Then you will have to start to remember all the new ones. The average minister lasts 10 months in the job.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 24, 2009, 05:11:30 AM
I like you signature, Cato!  :D
(although i don't watch that show anymore)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 24, 2009, 05:39:17 AM
Quote from: Bahamut on May 24, 2009, 05:11:30 AM
I like your signature, Cato!  :D
(although i don't watch that show anymore)

This is the last year for King of the Hill despite good ratings.  Its subtle satire is often very poignant.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 24, 2009, 05:48:38 AM
Do you mean last year of reruns? (because i thought they stopped making new episodes a long time ago)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 24, 2009, 07:29:50 AM
Quote from: Bahamut on May 24, 2009, 05:48:38 AM
Do you mean last year of reruns? (because i thought they stopped making new episodes a long time ago)

Well, not a long time ago, just last year!

The team behind the series has a new show coming out called "The Goode Family" which will apparently satirize politically correct radical enviro/vegan types.   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 26, 2009, 08:41:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 22, 2009, 04:19:14 AM
Not a grammar grumble at all, but linguistic ingenuity: I have a 7th-Grade boy, barely cracking 4' 10'', with a piercing soprano voice, both contrary to a last name indicating the toughest Viking heritage, who is running for Student Council President 2009-2010.

His slogan: "Think BIG, Vote small!"   8)

And he thinks he is indeed the biggest rooster around!  Napoleon complex extraordinaire!   0:)

Results of the election show that The Little Rooster is now BMOC!   8)

And one of the tiniest, squeakiest hens in the roost, will be his Secretary!   :o

Both candidates defying the usual expectation that tall candidates have an edge!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 27, 2009, 06:37:32 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 26, 2009, 08:41:07 AM
Results of the election show that The Little Rooster is now BMOC!   8)

And one of the tiniest, squeakiest hens in the roost, will be his Secretary!   :o

Both candidates defying the usual expectation that tall candidates have an edge!

I used BMOC yesterday to one of my 20-something colleagues while we were talking about the new Student Council regime, and he had no idea what it meant!   :o

Too bad!  One of the funniest skits on Saturday Night Live without Steve Martin had John Belushi as Samurai BMOC!

And just to be sure: BMOC = Big Man On Campus.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 28, 2009, 04:32:30 AM
Today's grumble comes from a TV ad for a car dealership (Hyundai).

The words "WHO'S DEAL IS THE BEST?" come roaring out at you!   :o

Yes, the ad agency is illiterate!  But apparently the dealer didn't notice either!   ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 04:37:16 AM
That's one I've noticed quite often of late.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 28, 2009, 04:50:27 AM
I hear the annoying "sooner than later" on TV a lot (which reminds me that I had a nun in 7th grade who insisted that we say "television," not "TV," and
"telephone" rather than "phone," even if we were using it as a verb [which led me to choose the verb "call" instead]). I suppose it's the way to say "sooner rather than later" ASAP, though I've never liked "sooner rather than later" much, either. Oh, and I always pronounce "ASAP" as a two-syllable word, never pronouncing it as the four letters.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 04:54:00 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on May 28, 2009, 04:50:27 AM
. . . a nun in 7th grade who insisted that we say "television," not "TV," and "telephone" rather than "phone" . . . .

I hope she insisted on the unabbreviated violoncello, too!  8)

Quote from: n. schl.. . . Oh, and I always pronounce "ASAP" as a two-syllable word, never pronouncing it as the four letters.

I always tell out the four letters, but, live and let live, says I.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 28, 2009, 06:02:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 28, 2009, 04:32:30 AM
The words "WHO'S DEAL IS THE BEST?" come roaring out at you!   :o

Reminds of the days when I was in school (class 3 or something), when the class monitor used to pick up a pencil or some other piece of stationery found lying on the floor, hold it high above his or her head so that everyone could have a clear view of the object and ask, "Who is this pencil?" :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 06:13:26 AM
Quote from: opus67 on May 28, 2009, 06:02:35 AM
Reminds of the days when I was in school (class 3 or something), when the class monitor used to pick up a pencil or some other piece of stationery found lying on the floor, hold it high above his or her head so that everyone could have a clear view of the object and ask, "Who is this pencil?" :D

Delightfully tangential . . . one of the composers I worked with in Charlottesville was Walter Ross, and one of his amusing pastimes was, he wanted to be able to speak at least one phrase in as many languages as possible.  For simplicity, might as well be the same phrase.  And since communication is not the goal of this project, it needn't be a particularly useful phrase.

So one day, Walter comes up to me and say, "I hear you're studying Japanese?"

"Yes, that's right."

"Boku wa empitsu desu."

"I beg your pardon?"

"Did you understand what I said?"

"Well, if I did, then you just told me that you are a pencil."

"Yes, that's right!" . . .

Edit :: typo
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 28, 2009, 06:31:49 AM
I was always fond of learning at least two phrases, both quite useful in different ways:

"The little dog listens to the fish,"

and, "Two cold beers, please."

A common error that aggravates me somewhat is the insertion of apostrophes in plurals, as seen on this site quite often in the plural of "CD," which appears more frequently as "CD's" than not.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 28, 2009, 08:30:47 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on May 28, 2009, 06:31:49 AMA common error that aggravates me somewhat is the insertion of apostrophes in plurals, as seen on this site quite often in the plural of "CD," which appears more frequently as "CD's" than not.

Same here. I don't even get the logic behind that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 28, 2009, 08:34:27 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on May 28, 2009, 06:31:49 AM
I was always fond of learning at least two phrases, both quite useful in different ways:

"The little dog listens to the fish,"

and, "Two cold beers, please."

As an English-speaker who has tried . . . I should be most interested in hearing your gamest efforts in Tallinn to order a beer in Estonian  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 28, 2009, 09:19:39 AM
Quote from: opus67 on May 28, 2009, 06:02:35 AM
Reminds of the days when I was in school (class 3 or something), when the class monitor used to pick up a pencil or some other piece of stationery found lying on the floor, hold it high above his or her head so that everyone could have a clear view of the object and ask, "Who is this pencil?" :D

As a teacher with some iron in his irony, I have been known to ask in a similar fashion with an unsigned quiz or test in my hand:

"Who belongs to this?"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on May 29, 2009, 09:00:20 AM
"Spiffy" or "spiffing"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 09:06:38 AM
Oojah-cum-spiff
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on May 29, 2009, 09:08:19 AM
I always hear "spiffy", but one person I know says "spiffing".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 29, 2009, 09:09:44 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on May 29, 2009, 09:08:19 AM
I always hear "spiffy", but one person I know says "spiffing".

I've never heard the latter.

But, I don't run with the pack, either . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 29, 2009, 11:44:10 AM
My sources indicate "spiffing" as an adjective is something found in England.  Americans say "spiffy" and so that must be right, since we bailed the British out of two wars!   $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on May 29, 2009, 11:44:50 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 29, 2009, 11:44:10 AM
My sources indicate "spiffing" as an adjective is something found in England.  Americans say "spiffy" and so that must be right, since we bailed the British out of two wars!   $:)



Thanks, teach.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on May 29, 2009, 01:37:46 PM
"With an SPF 30 your getting just 3% of sun, with an SPF 50 your getting just 2%, so there is really very little difference you get beyond 30 SPF." (http://www.wrbl.com/rbl/news/local/article/summer_sunscreen_myths_busted/74467/)

Even I suck less than this ;_:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 29, 2009, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: Lethe on May 29, 2009, 01:37:46 PM
"With an SPF 30 your getting just 3% of sun, with an SPF 50 your getting just 2%, so there is really very little difference you get beyond 30 SPF." (http://www.wrbl.com/rbl/news/local/article/summer_sunscreen_myths_busted/74467/)

Even I suck less than this ;_:

The reporter's name is "Ashley."  That is a partial explanation!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on May 30, 2009, 02:21:57 AM
'Spiffing' is indeed English, but not contemporary, probably not used colloquially since just after the second of those two wars you kindly bailed us out of. Mind you, we did much to give you the gift of life; so it is still only a partial return on he outlay.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 30, 2009, 04:51:14 AM
Dat's a spiffing good spliff, mon!

(http://www.picturesofbobmarley.com/pictures/smoking-spliff-1973.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 30, 2009, 10:57:24 AM
What do we need "bemuse" or "bemused" for? Aren't "amuse" and "amused" sufficient?

I just read this sentence on another forum: "I still have one that never fails to bemuse me." I thought "amuse" would have worked better. Then I decided I didn't know why we have "bemuse" at all.

Anyone?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on May 30, 2009, 11:06:12 AM
Bemused implies an additional puzzlement (I have always felt, in its instances of usage, anyway).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 30, 2009, 11:08:50 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on May 30, 2009, 10:57:24 AM
I just read this sentence on another forum: "I still have one that never fails to bemuse me."

This amusing use of the word bemuses me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 30, 2009, 01:50:34 PM
Quote from: Lethe on May 30, 2009, 11:06:12 AM
Bemused implies an additional puzzlement (I have always felt, in its instances of usage, anyway).
Yep.  Bemused = bewildered, amused = entertained.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 31, 2009, 07:19:03 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 24, 2009, 07:29:50 AM
Well, not a long time ago, just last year!

The team behind the series has a new show coming out called "The Goode Family" which will apparently satirize politically correct radical enviro/vegan types.   8)
I saw the previews. At first, I thought it was seriously politically correct, and not a satire, but not that you say it is, I'm relieved.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 05, 2009, 09:28:58 AM
Have we already run from whence they came through the gauntlet?

Is it genuinely as bad a redundancy as I feel it to be?  0:)

There seems to be a colloquial resonance to it, and I ran into it today in a column discussing the current "mashup mode" of news reportage here in the States:

Quote from: Howard KurtzThere have always been serious news outlets and those that traffic in entertainment and gossip. The difference now is that so many are in mashup mode, sprinkling their nutritious fare with gooey treats, lest readers and viewers change the channel or click away in search of sweeter stuff.

In that context, I'm happy to yield Kurtz some grammatical leeway.

I couldn't possibly use it myself, however  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: When is a Stamp a "Meter" ???
Post by: Cato on June 06, 2009, 04:49:51 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 05, 2009, 09:28:58 AM
Have we already run from whence they came through the gauntlet?

Is it genuinely as bad a redundancy as I feel it to be?  0:)


Yes, it is a bad redundancy, and the fight against adding "from" goes back several hundred years.  "Whence" already has "from" in its meaning (parallel with "woher" in German).

Word Grumble, courtesy of the United States Post Office:

This morning I went to the "Automated Teller Machine" at the Post Office to mail an envelope: 13.6 ounces.  The machine says: "Do you just want to buy the stamp?" or do I want any other additional services?  I push the button that says "Just Buy the Stamp."  Out comes a stamp with the exact price on it.

I then get a warning that because the envelope is 13.6 ounces, it breaks the "13 ounce Rule," which means that I have to hand deliver it to an employee at the counter!  I hate dealing with employees at the counter, which is why I went in at 7:00 A.M. to by-pass such an ordeal!

So I went back after the counter opened, handed the clerk the envelope, and said with a sigh: "This breaks the 13 ounce rule by .6!"

Clerk: "Oh, you can just drop it in the slot because it's not stamped."

I: "Yes, it is stamped.  I bought it at the machine."

Clerk: "That's not a stamp.  That's a meter." (Sic!)  ???

I (just slightly, but politely, annoyed): "But the machine called it a stamp!"

Clerk: "Yeah, I don't know why they do that.  But that's a meter.  If you put a real stamp on it, then you gotta give it to me.  But yeah, that's a meter, not a stamp." 

I stomped out...   :o

...and wondered again about the semiotics of civilizational collapse!  Of course, there is the whole nonsensical notion that if I really am an evil terrorist mailing an envelope smeared with plastic explosives or cyanide or something really lethal, like CheezWhiz, that I am so stupid that I will use over 13 ounces of the stuff, rather than 12.9!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on June 06, 2009, 05:42:19 AM
2009's Internet Induced Phrase of the Year, "epic fail," an epic failure, linguistically speaking. I'm sorry, but verb does not noun.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=epic%20fail
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on June 06, 2009, 06:15:38 AM
The many and diverse contemporary uses of 'fail' are the shizzle, my nizzle! 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 06, 2009, 09:23:09 AM
Quote from: nicht schleppend on June 06, 2009, 05:42:19 AM
2009's Internet Induced Phrase of the Year, "epic fail," an epic failure, linguistically speaking. I'm sorry, but verb does not noun.
Some verbs do.  Stamp.  Smile.  Laugh.  Play.

"Epic" used in almost any context save the discussion of literature, especially when used other than as a noun, strongly suggests that the speaker/writer is less than fully conscious and probably an adolescent male who's played more than a few video games too many.

Yes, I know that's a prejudice.  We all have prejudices, formed without conscious intent.  The challenge is to recognize them and not let them determine our judgments about persons or even classes of persons.  Now I ask you:  is there anyone who uses "epic" in that way who does not fit that description?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 08, 2009, 10:19:58 AM
Every now and then, one company will buy up all the ad boards at the Park St 'T' stop. 9 times out of 10, that of itself is rather a nuisance of saturation.  On top of that, though, the current boards are missing apostrophes, entirely (where two or three are necessary).

Not my business, they ain't gettin'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Dr. Dread on June 08, 2009, 10:20:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 08, 2009, 10:19:58 AM
Every now and then, one company will buy up all the ad boards at the Park St 'T' stop. 9 times out of 10, that of itself is rather a nuisance of saturation.  On top of that, though, the current boards are missing apostrophes, entirely (where two or three are necessary).

Not my business, they ain't gettin'.

Apostrophes are sooo 20th Century...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 08, 2009, 02:17:41 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on June 08, 2009, 10:20:54 AM
Apostrophes are sooo 20th Century...

...which must mean the Apocalypse is nigh!   :o

Today my wife was watching a talk show where someone complained about nouns being used as verbs: since the show, of course, came out of Hollywood, the complaint was about a person who said his girlfriend was trying "Actressing" for a career.   :o

How that differed from "Acting" was unclear!   :o  Maybe you "act" in some productions, and you "actress" in others.  ???

Maybe when an actress "actresses," she simply stands sideways and breathes, like Raquel Welch used to do.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 08, 2009, 03:00:35 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 08, 2009, 02:17:41 PM
...which must mean the Apocalypse is nigh!   :o

Today my wife was watching a talk show where someone complained about nouns being used as verbs: since the show, of course, came out of Hollywood, the complaint was about a person who said his girlfriend was trying "Actressing" for a career.   :o

How that differed from "Acting" was unclear!   :o  Maybe you "act" in some productions, and you "actress" in others.  ???

Maybe when an actress "actresses," she simply stands sideways and breathes, like Raquel Welch used to do.   0:)
That would explain the "actoring" of several contemporary heartthrobs.  I think you must have hit the nail on the head with this one, Cato--making the terms rather useful in distinguishing "acting"--the art of embodying a character in one's person--from "actoring" and "actressing"--mere posing as an actor.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 08, 2009, 04:10:31 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on June 08, 2009, 03:00:35 PM
That would explain the "actoring" of several contemporary heartthrobs.  I think you must have hit the nail on the head with this one, Cato--making the terms rather useful in distinguishing "acting"--the art of embodying a character in one's person--from "actoring" and "actressing"--mere posing as an actor.

Any nominees?   $:)

Ben Affleck immediately comes to mind!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on June 08, 2009, 04:15:22 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on June 06, 2009, 09:23:09 AM
Some verbs do.  Stamp.  Smile.  Laugh.  Play.

"Epic" used in almost any context save the discussion of literature, especially when used other than as a noun, strongly suggests that the speaker/writer is less than fully conscious and probably an adolescent male who's played more than a few video games too many.

Yes, I know that's a prejudice.  We all have prejudices, formed without conscious intent.  The challenge is to recognize them and not let them determine our judgments about persons or even classes of persons.  Now I ask you:  is there anyone who uses "epic" in that way who does not fit that description?  ;)
Yeah, for me- I hear it all the time. For me, it's almost like a sacred word, so to hear people so much kind of ruins it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 08, 2009, 04:51:40 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 08, 2009, 04:10:31 PM
Any nominees?   $:)

Ben Affleck immediately comes to mind!   8)
That's the guy!  Followed closely by Leonardo diCaprio. And then, judging from the glimpses I get in TV ads, there must be a host of "actoring" professionals nipping at their heels. 

And we used to think Tony Curtis was bad!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 08, 2009, 04:58:25 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on June 08, 2009, 04:51:40 PM
And we used to think Tony Curtis was bad!

No bottom to that trend . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Off-Topic Bad Actor/Great Actor
Post by: Cato on June 08, 2009, 06:24:51 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on June 08, 2009, 04:51:40 PM
That's the guy!  Followed closely by Leonardo diCaprio. And then, judging from the glimpses I get in TV ads, there must be a host of "actoring" professionals nipping at their heels. 

And we used to think Tony Curtis was bad!

I do believe the correct form is Leonardo di Crappio.   0:)

On the opposite, non-heartthrob, under-appreciated real actor list: Steve Zahn, who can do wild cartoon voices (Runt the Pig in Disney's Chicken Little), dark comedy (Sunshine Cleaning), and drama (Werner Herzog's Rescue Dawn): most impressive was Zahn's uncanny portrayal of Robert Duvall's Lonesome Dove character - 30 years younger - in Comanche Moon.  Zahn channels the character perfectly: head wobbles, intonations, gestures, everything is perfectly done in accordance with the Duvall character seen first in Lonesome Dove.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on June 08, 2009, 07:30:39 PM
Have I posted this? If so, my apologies for the repeat.

An email I got from Sylvan Learning Centers (a company which tutors students in school subjects and for standardized tests) included this:
QuoteCongradulations!

Eek!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 08, 2009, 07:50:07 PM
Quote from: owlice on June 08, 2009, 07:30:39 PM
Have I posted this? If so, my apologies for the repeat.

An email I got from Sylvan Learning Centers (a company which tutors students in school subjects and for standardized tests) included this:
Eek!
Oh, my!  Should it not have said, "Congradulations, Gratuate!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 09, 2009, 03:35:56 AM
Quote from: owlice on June 08, 2009, 07:30:39 PM
Have I posted this? If so, my apologies for the repeat.

An email I got from Sylvan Learning Centers (a company which tutors students in school subjects and for standardized tests) included this:

Congradulations!


Eek!



Eek is right!  It seems we have the blind leading the sightless most of the time: I attended a meeting of supposed English teachers last week, where I heard monstrosities e.g. "If I was you..."   :o   "...should 'a' went..."    :o    :o    and one that makes me want to throw a brick at somebody   "...did it on accident..."   :o    :o    :o

Aargh!    >:D

To correct them gently, I was able to use all three phrases - in corrected form -  in an extended commentary.  Maybe they took the hint!


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 09, 2009, 05:03:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 09, 2009, 03:35:56 AM
Eek is right!  It seems we have the blind leading the sightless most of the time: I attended a meeting of supposed English teachers last week, where I heard monstrosities e.g. "If I was you..."   :o   "...should 'a' went..."    :o    :o    and one that makes me want to throw a brick at somebody   "...did it on accident..."   :o    :o    :o

Aargh!    >:D

To correct them gently, I was able to use all three phrases - in corrected form -  in an extended commentary.  Maybe they took the hint!

An interjection, in case anyone is still reading this thread who does not understand why some of us are so nit-picky:

Language is the medium for rational thought.  If one's language is muddled and imprecise, one's thought must be likewise muddled and imprecise, leading to error:  beliefs based on falsehood and faulty understanding.  People's actions are guided by their beliefs; if these beliefs are faulty, then people's actions entail unintended consequences, often contrary to the desired results.  At the personal level, this results in confusion, failure, frustration, unhappiness, regret, and so on.  At the group level, when large numbers of people act on faulty beliefs, the entire society suffers the consequences. 

So language and the grammar that determines the logical content of statements, not only matter, but matter more than anything else taught in our schools.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 09, 2009, 06:02:31 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on June 09, 2009, 05:03:25 AM
An interjection, in case anyone is still reading this thread who does not understand why some of us are so nit-picky:

Language is the medium for rational thought.  If one's language is muddled and imprecise, one's thought must be likewise muddled and imprecise, leading to error:  beliefs based on falsehood and faulty understanding.  People's actions are guided by their beliefs; if these beliefs are faulty, then people's actions entail unintended consequences, often contrary to the desired results.  At the personal level, this results in confusion, failure, frustration, unhappiness, regret, and so on.  At the group level, when large numbers of people act on faulty beliefs, the entire society suffers the consequences. 

So language and the grammar that determines the logical content of statements, not only matter, but matter more than anything else taught in our schools.

Amen!   0:)

For a look at the latest Orwellian (ab)use of language by government, and how the media-sheep do not think logically about what is being claimed, (or just maybe do not want to think logically about what is being claimed) see:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124451592762396883.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124451592762396883.html)

An excerpt:

Quote"The expression 'create or save,' which has been used regularly by the President and his economic team, is an act of political genius," writes Mr. Mankiw. "You can measure how many jobs are created between two points in time. But there is no way to measure how many jobs are saved. Even if things get much, much worse, the President can say that there would have been 4 million fewer jobs without the stimulus."

Mr. Obama's comments yesterday are a perfect illustration of just such a claim. In the months since Congress approved the stimulus, our economy has lost nearly 1.6 million jobs and unemployment has hit 9.4%. Invoke the magic words, however, and -- presto! -- you have the president claiming he has "saved or created" 150,000 jobs. It all makes for a much nicer spin, and helps you forget this is the same team that only a few months ago promised us that passing the stimulus would prevent unemployment from rising over 8%."

(My emphasis above)

"Act of political genius" should be changed to "act of duplicitous arrogance."   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 09, 2009, 06:24:14 AM
"Jobs created or saved" reminds me of the absence of tigers roaming midtown Manhattan "proving" that brushing with Crest® keeps tigers away.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 09, 2009, 06:26:50 AM
So much for plans to try any other toothpaste!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 12, 2009, 09:13:47 AM
As to this (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,164.msg319412.html#msg319412) . . . weird question, and I'm not sure where the impulse to ask this critical question comes from . . . but is &al. correctly used if it's just one other person?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 12, 2009, 06:16:44 PM
Quote from: ' on June 12, 2009, 02:43:19 PM
I have never seen a style that said so, and least in academic writing.

If there are two authors, both are named in all citations throughout.

If there are three, all three are listed on first citation (e.g., Howard, Fine, & Howard, 1948), after which only the first author is named and the rest are referred to as et al. (e.g., Howard et al., 1948).

I'll stop here.'


Right!  Et al is short for et alii (and others), so you would need at least 2: Mister Apostrophe is correct for the academic journals.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 12, 2009, 07:42:53 PM
Women are Outperforming Men in Universities
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on June 13, 2009, 04:41:58 AM
My employers were recently involved in a disagreement with the in-house media folk. As part of a campaign to encourage people to use their computers to maintain business records, they wanted to use a photo of a man clutching a laptop to his breast and the caption was to be, 'It is a great place to keep all your stuff up to date.'

My boss went into battle and the caption was altered and the word, 'stuff' removed.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 13, 2009, 04:57:11 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 12, 2009, 06:16:44 PM
Right!  Et al is short for et alii (and others), so you would need at least 2: Mister Apostrophe is correct for the academic journals.

Urrah, I guessed that I was wrong!

I was lazy, of course; I just didn't know (nor could I be trounbled to investigate) who the second performer was . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on June 13, 2009, 04:59:43 AM
:: readies the wet noodle ::
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 18, 2009, 01:10:34 PM
Having seen it much too often in national examinations he has recently corrected, Cato hereby bans, eliminates, eradicates, and otherwise flamdoodles the moronic word "Majorly" and sentences anyone who uses it to be burned at the stake, drawn and quartered, and painfully disintegrated atom by atom!   $:)

A list of the ways to misspell most of the words in the English language, as gleaned from the examinations I have corrected for the last 7 days from high schools from every part of America, would take up too many terabytes.

But some are just incredible:

"opoin" = opinion

"distastation" = devastation (or so we believe)

"dafinnitly" = definitely

"throught" = throughout

"survile" = survival (again, we think: "servile" did not work in context)

Thousands more are possible: on top of this is the ILLEGIBLE and execrable "handwriting" we struggled with daily: "handwriting" should be replaced by "paw-smearing" to be fair to the term!  But this is the whirlwind reaped by moron teachers and parents who have been telling me "throught" the years that "Oh, yeah, but with computers, who cares?"

Recent research shows how wrong these morons are: legible flowing penmanship is connected to faster reading and deeper comprehension, since it builds a discipline of attention to detail at an early age. 

Okay, enough grumbling for today!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on June 18, 2009, 01:21:27 PM
Cato, might I inquire as to what national examinations you were grading? (I hope this is not too personal a question; if so, please ignore!)

Having a 15-year-old makes me aware of the importance (real or imagined) of standardized tests, and he currently awaits results for two AP exams (US Government and Computer Science) and three SAT II tests (Latin, US History, and English Literature). I assure you he did not use the word "majorly" in any of these!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on June 18, 2009, 01:23:09 PM
I've always had terrible handwriting. I've come to think of the computer as a kind of calligraphic prostheses. I don;t type very well, either, but at least the word processing software gives me the chance to correct and revise.

One word I've seen coming into vogue among kids is "funner" as the comparative form of "fun." This is wrong, of course, but there will come a time when it will not be. Indeed, I can think of no logical reason why the "er" comparative should not be applied to such a basic word.

When it comes to comparatives, English has always been an inconsistent cross between German, which uses "er" in all cases, and French, which uses "more" in all cases. Germans would say "intelligenter" where we would say more intelligent, and the French would say "plus comique" where we woud say "funnier." I feel sorry for people who have to learn English as a second language.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on June 19, 2009, 08:33:51 AM
Quote from: ' on June 18, 2009, 07:07:56 PM
My composition, counterpoint, and orchestration teacher often used the word wronger. I think of him when I use it.'

I presume this means wronger than right, as opposed to righter than wrong.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 19, 2009, 01:53:10 PM
Joe Barron is quite correct about the problems in the comparison of adjectives.  When all else fails, blame it on French!   8)

Ironic use of incorrect forms to make a point is allowed in Cato's grammar book!   0:)

But not if the speaker is thinking the form is correct!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 19, 2009, 02:31:25 PM
Quote from: ' on June 19, 2009, 02:06:29 PM
Just the plain old Merriam-Webster brand comparative adjective. Wrongest is the superlative.

"It would be wrong to speed, but wronger to speed in a stolen car."'

That depends on your frame of reference (as do most things, nicht wahr?): if running from the law in an effort to avoid capture, then from the car thief's perspective it would be wrong not to speed.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on June 19, 2009, 03:03:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 19, 2009, 01:53:10 PM
Joe Barron is quite correct about the problems in the comparison of adjectives.  When all else fails, blame it on French!   8)

Ironic use of incorrect forms to make a point is allowed in Cato's grammar book!   0:)

But not if the speaker is thinking the form is correct!

Could we be any ironcer?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: Cato on June 22, 2009, 09:36:02 AM
Today's grumble comes from an all too true incident at a Verizon store populated by 20-somethings, who did not pay attention in school, but were told they are all winners instead of wieners, and who now labor for minimum wage under the delusion that they are all "high-tech" experts, when in reality all they have to do is put batteries in cell phones.

So...a few days ago my wife bought a recharger for our cell phones at this store.  When she opened the package, it bore the aroma of having been bought and returned: nothing inside seemed packed properly.

The recharger of course failed to charge or recharge anything except for our bank account.

So...today I am charged    :o    with the duty of returning the thing and dealing with the above 20-somethings.  I walk in and am greeted by a "phonily"  :o    merry 20-something male with a 40-pound sack of French fries hanging over his belt:

"Hi!  How ya doin' t'day?"
I : "Not too well, actually.  Where do I return defective merchandise?"
He: "Return what?"
I: (believing I used too many syllables to communicate: also possible is that he is practically deafer than my dead great-grandfather because of too many Norwegian Gruesome Slasher Death Rock Riots): "Stuff that doesn't work."
He: "Oh, uh, let's see.  Tyler over there is free right now." 

Of course: it had to be a Tyler, one of the worst possible names to hang around a manchild's neck!

Tyler is another plump but obsequious 20-something:

Tyler: "Hey!  What can we do for ya?"
I: "I would like to return this defective phone charger.  My wife bought it a few days ago.  It was disconcerting because it obviously had already been returned because it is defective."
Tyler: (long pause - I do talk a little fast) "It was disconnected?"
I: "No, I said receiving this was disconcerting."
Tyler: (looking at the charger in confusion) "Uh, so, uh, do you mean it doesn't work?"
I: "Right, it doesn't work, and somebody here knew it and put it back out for sale.  That's why it was disconcerting!  (spoken slowly).  Your store has wasted our time!"

So Tyler, I assume, learned a new word today!   0:)

Yes, the new charger does work nicely!   $:)

Mystery question: What kind of Disconcerting Music do you hear at a Disconcert?   :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: DavidRoss on June 22, 2009, 09:43:08 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 22, 2009, 09:36:02 AM
Today's grumble comes from an all too true incident at a Verizon store populated by 20-somethings, who did not pay attention in school, but were told they are all winners instead of wieners, and who now labor for minimum wage under the delusion that they are all "high-tech" experts, when in reality all they have to do is put batteries in cell phones.
;D  ;D

Is that like laboring under the delusion that they are experts on politics and economics because they have a strong feeling that they're right about how things are and ought to be--and that's confirmed by the websites and cable channels and entertainers that tell them what to think?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on June 22, 2009, 09:51:14 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 22, 2009, 09:36:02 AM
Mystery question: What kind of Disconcerting Music do you hear at a Disconcert?   :o

It is something written by a decomposer.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 22, 2009, 09:56:33 AM
Quote from: opus106 on June 22, 2009, 09:51:14 AM
It is something written by a decomposer.
Like Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead?  (Wonder how he feels about it now...?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 22, 2009, 10:29:16 AM
So, uh, did you mean it doesn't work?  ;D ::) 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on June 22, 2009, 12:38:36 PM
Ding ding ding ding!! We have a winner!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 22, 2009, 06:26:47 PM
Quote from: owlice on June 22, 2009, 12:38:36 PM
Ding ding ding ding!! We have a winner!!


Amen!   0:)

Mr. Apostrophe wins a Poynter Sisters/BeeGees/Donna Summer CD!!!   :o

If we were giving anything away, which...we are not doing.   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on June 22, 2009, 07:06:44 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 22, 2009, 06:26:47 PM

Amen!   0:)

Mr. Apostrophe wins a Poynter Sisters/BeeGees/Donna Summer CD!!!   :o

If we were giving anything away, which...we are not doing.   8)

I now have the Pointer Sisters' I'm So Excited playing on the radio in my head.... gee, thanks a lot!!



:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on June 26, 2009, 09:54:10 AM
I love how bureaucrats feel that they can escape any scandal without blame simply by using the horrible phrase "in retrospect".

The child is now dead, their life is in retrospect, it's not as if a living child is being hurt right now - stop talking about the past and leave us alone to pretend to make some changes to the system! $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 26, 2009, 11:18:48 AM
Quote from: Lethe on June 26, 2009, 09:54:10 AM
I love how bureaucrats feel that they can escape any scandal without blame simply by using the horrible phrase "in retrospect".

The child is now dead, their life is in retrospect, it's not as if a living child is being hurt right now - stop talking about the past and leave us alone to pretend to make some changes to the system! $:)
Ted Kennedy's drunk driving felony manslaughter of Mary Jo Kopechne, his leaving the scene of the accident without calling for assistance, his failure to report it to the authorities, and his wrist-slap two-month suspended sentence (issued in a closed hearing) due to his political clout and his family's wealth, in retrospect, could probably have been handled better.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 26, 2009, 11:50:09 AM
Quote from: Steven SpielbergJust as there will never be another Fred Astaire or Chuck Berry or Elvis Presley, there will never be anyone comparable to Michael Jackson. His talent, his wonderment and his mystery make him legend.

Not quite sure about that final encomium, but his talent, wonderment and mystery have certainly made Spielberg forget the value of the indefinite article . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: Cato on June 29, 2009, 08:13:52 AM
A quote from the Washington Post today from an article about a Supreme Court decision about reverse discrimination:

"The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when there is no evidence it was intentional."

(My Emphasis above)

See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/29/AR2009062901608_pf.html

So the implication is that lawyers can still prove discrimination with no evidence thereof !!!   :o   It is just "harder" to do so!

Can lawyers prove discrimination when there is no evidence that it was unintentional?   ???

Should lawyers be allowed to prove anything with no evidence?   $:)  (Cato is taking the word "no" in its absolute meaning: no evidence of any kind!)

Welcome to Cloud KafkaLand!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 29, 2009, 08:47:04 AM
Hah!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on July 02, 2009, 01:55:12 PM
Re discrimination. I have read the link. I but am aware of such issues in the UK. There can be discrimination that is not intentional.

Example, it was ruled that for a theatre to supply the same number of toilet cubicles for females, as cubicles plus urinals for males was sex discrimination, as women took longer to get through 'the system'.

Thus the frequent queues right out of a female toilet at the interval and the comparative lack of queues for the men's toilets.

There was nothing deliberate about the discrimination, no evidence of deliberate discrimination, but it was proved. It seemed a fair judgement to me.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on July 03, 2009, 06:18:25 AM
Fuzzy words used to legitimise even more fuzzy businesses - solution:

Vivenet - The Internet Solutions Company.
Providing quality products with professional service.

Dial-up, dsl, web design & hosting, networks, POS, server & email hosting, VoIP telephone service & installation & maintenance solutions.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: Scarpia on July 03, 2009, 12:30:45 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 22, 2009, 09:36:02 AM
Today's grumble comes from an all too true incident at a Verizon store populated by 20-somethings, who did not pay attention in school, but were told they are all winners instead of wieners, and who now labor for minimum wage under the delusion that they are all "high-tech" experts, when in reality all they have to do is put batteries in cell phones.

So...a few days ago my wife bought a recharger for our cell phones at this store.  When she opened the package, it bore the aroma of having been bought and returned: nothing inside seemed packed properly.

The recharger of course failed to charge or recharge anything except for our bank account.

So...today I am charged    :o    with the duty of returning the thing and dealing with the above 20-somethings.  I walk in and am greeted by a "phonily"  :o    merry 20-something male with a 40-pound sack of French fries hanging over his belt:

"Hi!  How ya doin' t'day?"
I : "Not too well, actually.  Where do I return defective merchandise?"
He: "Return what?"
I: (believing I used too many syllables to communicate: also possible is that he is practically deafer than my dead great-grandfather because of too many Norwegian Gruesome Slasher Death Rock Riots): "Stuff that doesn't work."
He: "Oh, uh, let's see.  Tyler over there is free right now."  

Of course: it had to be a Tyler, one of the worst possible names to hang around a manchild's neck!

Tyler is another plump but obsequious 20-something:

Tyler: "Hey!  What can we do for ya?"
I: "I would like to return this defective phone charger.  My wife bought it a few days ago.  It was disconcerting because it obviously had already been returned because it is defective."
Tyler: (long pause - I do talk a little fast) "It was disconnected?"
I: "No, I said receiving this was disconcerting."
Tyler: (looking at the charger in confusion) "Uh, so, uh, do you mean it doesn't work?"
I: "Right, it doesn't work, and somebody here knew it and put it back out for sale.  That's why it was disconcerting!  (spoken slowly).  Your store has wasted our time!"

So Tyler, I assume, learned a new word today!   0:)

Yes, the new charger does work nicely!   $:)

Mystery question: What kind of Disconcerting Music do you hear at a Disconcert?   :o

What disconcerts me is that you do not appreciate how rude you were in this encounter.  Tyler did not show up at an advanced English seminar trying to pass himself off as an intellectual, he was working at a phone store and trying to be helpful despite his limited vocabulary.  Your priority was trying to make him feel stupid for not understanding a word you used.  Despite that, he had the decency to honor your request.  Bravo for Tyler!  Too bad we can't find his twitter account and read his account of the encounter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: DavidRoss on July 03, 2009, 02:15:58 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on July 03, 2009, 12:30:45 PM
What disconcerts me is that you do not appreciate how rude you were in this encounter.  Tyler did not show up at an advanced English seminar trying to pass himself off as an intellectual, he was working at a phone store and trying to be helpful despite his limited vocabulary.  Your priority was trying to make him feel stupid for not understanding a word you used.  Despite that, he had the decency to honor your request.  Bravo for Tyler!  Too bad we can't find his twitter account and read his account of the encounter.
Rather than behaving rudely it sounds to me as if Cato behaved politely and patiently.  I do love the irony, however, of your presuming to give tips on manners to others.  FYI, as "nut-job" your posts were markedly more civil in tone.  Could it be that Scarpia's persona rubs off on you when you post under his name?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: greg on July 03, 2009, 04:06:39 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on July 03, 2009, 02:15:58 PM
Rather than behaving rudely it sounds to me as if Cato behaved politely and patiently.  I do love the irony, however, of your presuming to give tips on manners to others.  FYI, as "nut-job" your posts were markedly more civil in tone.  Could it be that Scarpia's persona rubs off on you when you post under his name?

Reminds me of Iago.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: Cato on July 03, 2009, 05:58:30 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on July 03, 2009, 02:15:58 PM
Rather than behaving rudely it sounds to me as if Cato behaved politely and patiently.  I do love the irony, however, of your presuming to give tips on manners to others.  FYI, as "nut-job" your posts were markedly more civil in tone.  Could it be that Scarpia's persona rubs off on you when you post under his name?


(My emphasis)

Thank you: yes, my tone continued to be one that he was mishearing, and not really misunderstanding or ignorant.    8)

I NEVER have a "priority" of making people "feel stupid" since that would prove nothing: "disconcerted" I do not consider a word found only in "Advanced English seminars" since it appeared in my 8th-Graders vocabulary lists.  The word is also considered part of a basic ESL vocabulary of 3,000 words. 

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 03, 2009, 06:13:29 PM
QuoteCATO: "disconcerted" I do not consider a word found only in "Advanced English seminars" since it appeared in my 8th-Graders vocabulary lists.  The word is also considered part of a basic ESL vocabulary of 3,000 words.

I empathise completely with Cato.  But the story has two points:

A]  Cato is able to communicate effectively at 'normal' or elevated levels.  The 'Phone' guy can't.
B]  The 'Phone' guy can fix mobile phones.  Cato can't.

Karma Police  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on July 03, 2009, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: John on July 03, 2009, 06:13:29 PM
B]  The 'Phone' guy can fix mobile phones.  Cato can't.
Correction.  The phone guy is authorized by store management to exchange a defective battery charger for a new one that works.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Broken Disconcert
Post by: karlhenning on July 03, 2009, 06:42:54 PM
He may also be authorized to restock the battery charger on the shelf whether it is operable or not  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 03, 2009, 06:49:56 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on July 03, 2009, 06:40:04 PM
Correction.  The phone guy is authorized by store management to exchange a defective battery charger for a new one that works.  8)

And cato isn't.
Title: Re: Cato's Broken Disconcert
Post by: Scarpia on July 03, 2009, 11:01:33 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 03, 2009, 06:42:54 PM
He may also be authorized to restock the battery charger on the shelf whether it is operable or not  ;D

I wonder what fraction of parts returned to the store as defective are actually perfectly fine.
Title: Re: Cato's Broken Disconcert
Post by: karlhenning on July 04, 2009, 04:34:32 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on July 03, 2009, 11:01:33 PM
I wonder what fraction of parts returned to the store as defective are actually perfectly fine.

Not 1/1.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on July 04, 2009, 04:38:58 AM
Quote from: John on July 03, 2009, 06:49:56 PM
My features after listening to Wagner.

I see we have at least one thing in common!  ;D 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on July 04, 2009, 05:09:08 AM
Who knew? (Apart from Cato must have known, I mean.) Title of this jazz classic (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,27.msg328099.html#msg328099) is a reference to Latin grammar.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on July 04, 2009, 05:56:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 04, 2009, 05:09:08 AM
Who knew? (Apart from Cato must have known, I mean.) Title of this jazz classic (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,27.msg328099.html#msg328099) is a reference to Latin grammar.
As in "magnus ah um."

Goodbye Pork Pie Hat is, for me, the most beautiful, haunting, bittersweet tune ever written. 

http://www.youtube.com/v/MS7obQ7XNt4&feature=related
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wanderer on July 04, 2009, 05:57:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 18, 2009, 01:10:34 PM
"throught" = throughout

Or maybe throat?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: Scarpia on July 04, 2009, 09:04:21 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 03, 2009, 05:58:30 PM
(My emphasis)

Thank you: yes, my tone continued to be one that he was mishearing, and not really misunderstanding or ignorant.    8)

I NEVER have a "priority" of making people "feel stupid" since that would prove nothing: "disconcerted" I do not consider a word found only in "Advanced English seminars" since it appeared in my 8th-Graders vocabulary lists.  The word is also considered part of a basic ESL vocabulary of 3,000 words. 

Sorry if I misjudged, it is hard to tell what you tone was in this encounter.  Perhaps I mistakenly attributed the sarcasm of your recounting the encounter to the encounter itself.

I did not mean to imply that "disconcerted" is a particularly obscure word.  Just that it would be more justified to dress down a person who was making a pretense of being learned than a poor sap just trying to get through the day working in customer service.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: Cato on July 04, 2009, 02:37:30 PM
Quote from: ' on July 04, 2009, 01:27:30 PM
FWIW, I couldn't tell how much of the tone Cato used was to entertain and engage us and how much he might have used on the store clerk. I don't know him well enough to decide one way or the other.  When I read it though, I thought of a former coworker who would ask for 1.1 pound of sliced cheese as a test for the kid at the deli. Then he would come in the next day and happily complain to us all about how dumb the poor guy was.'

(My emphasis)

Aye, there's the rub, or the roob, as they say in Aberdeen!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 04, 2009, 03:18:27 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 04, 2009, 02:37:30 PM
(My emphasis)

Aye, there's the rub, or the roob, as they say in Aberdeen!   0:)

Whit?
Folk in Aberdeen say "Edmund Roobra?"  That sounds more like a North East English pronunciation.  I think in Aberdeen (Scotland) if they said "Edmund Rubra" to you, you'd be pulling out your fists thinking they'd said something rude.   :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Disconcerted by Disconcerting
Post by: karlhenning on July 04, 2009, 04:10:20 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 04, 2009, 02:37:30 PM
(My emphasis)

Aye, there's the rub, or the roob, as they say in Aberdeen!   0:)

Aye, only there's some won't be entertained.

Thread duty:

QuoteStay Awake
Take a Break
For Safety Sake
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 04, 2009, 04:53:25 PM
Quote from: John on July 04, 2009, 03:18:27 PM
Whit?
Folk in Aberdeen say "Edmund Roobra?"  That sounds more like a North East English pronunciation.  I think in Aberdeen (Scotland) if they said "Edmund Rubra" to you, you'd be pulling out your fists thinking they'd said something rude.   :-\

Every rube in northeast England will no doubt agree!   :D 

And from Karl Henning:

"Stay Awake
Take a Break
For Safety Sake"

Our tax dollars at work on the road and in the schools!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sydney Grew on July 04, 2009, 05:32:49 PM
Why we wonder do the labouring classes of northern America feel the obligation to say "swell" when they really mean "good"? What numinous fear is it that holds them back from the Real Thing?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on July 04, 2009, 06:10:11 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 04, 2009, 04:53:25 PM
Our tax dollars at work on the road and in the schools!   $:)

I'm grumbling for want of for safety's sake.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble - Swell, A severe case scenario
Post by: John Copeland on July 04, 2009, 06:39:00 PM
"Swell" has a nice rising to it.  
But, it is a silly word because nothing is swelling at all.
John:  "Here's that $100 I owe you."  
A Cato the Elder Student: "Swell!"

Swell?  What, in fact, is swelling?  The $100 I just handed over to Catos student?  The air?  A large crustescean in the students belly after dinner at the local sushi bar where he discussed the latin for fish?  Is it the students mind, is that what is swelling in this scenario?  And what has the function of swelling has to do with the hundered dollars?  At the end of the day, nothing is swell, not even $100.    :(

Well.  Next time I give someone a hundred dollars, they might say "Dandelions" or "Trumpetscrews" - it's real-time meaning and impact will be the same as "Swell."

Still, I like "Swell."  It has a sincerity about it. :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on July 05, 2009, 12:35:17 AM
Swell is underrated. Groovy has also nosedived in popularity despite being far more recent. I think 'cool' killed it off :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on July 05, 2009, 07:11:13 AM
Swell is an odd word.  In old war movies you will see soldiers refer to their heroic commanding officer as "a swell guy."  By the 60's 6 year olds were routinely referring to their favorite marble as "swell."  Now it is normally only used if you want to seem deliberately archaic or quaint.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 05, 2009, 06:07:18 PM
Quote from: ' on July 05, 2009, 07:33:36 AM
Or in those '40s and '50s movies, spoken by adolescents, following closely on the heels of the word "Gee." (an interesting word in itself -- a euphemism, Jesus->gee-whiz->Cheez-Whiz!)'


>:D   The Devil's Fromage!   >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 05, 2009, 11:32:28 PM
Quote from: ' on July 05, 2009, 02:46:10 AM
"...That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

This --- and indeed the whole rest of it --- is a poem in prose,compared with the "style" of contemporary political documents. ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 06, 2009, 03:17:33 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 05, 2009, 11:32:28 PM
This --- and indeed the whole rest of it --- is a poem in prose,compared with the "style" of contemporary political documents. ;D

Cheez, that sure is swell!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Style And Idiocy
Post by: Cato on July 06, 2009, 06:02:28 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 05, 2009, 11:32:28 PM
This --- and indeed the whole rest of it --- is a poem in prose,compared with the "style" of contemporary political documents. ;D

Many thanks for the comment!

"Style" in writing (and in speaking) by American politicians began fading away after Theodore Roosevelt!  Franklin Roosevelt also had his moments of course, but does anyone read e.g. the books of Nixon or Carter or Billy Jeff Clinton to find great examples of style?   :o

Hopping down the punny trail:

We recently saw new signs in an adjoining suburb warning us of a "Speed Bump" ahead.  Here in Ohio's central city that is the proper term.

But this reminded us of Atlanta, Georgia, USA, where similar signs could be found: one area had signs calling them "Traffic Calming Devices," which is beyond satire: maybe the bureaucrats get paid by the word.   8)

Worse, however, was another area with signs saying "Speed Hump" which I always thought was a one-way ticket to a divorce court!   $:)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on July 06, 2009, 06:07:10 AM
Traffic Calming Devices !! Probably, my Heedless Watermelon could use one of those . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Style And Idiocy
Post by: DavidRoss on July 06, 2009, 06:10:56 AM
re. "Traffic Calming Devices"

Stun gun, svp.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Style And Idiocy
Post by: Florestan on July 06, 2009, 06:34:54 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 06, 2009, 06:02:28 AM
does anyone read e.g. the books of Nixon or Carter or Billy Jeff Clinton to find great examples of style?   :o

Did they write books?  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Style And Idiocy
Post by: karlhenning on July 06, 2009, 06:42:11 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 06, 2009, 06:34:54 AM
Did they write books?  :o

Nixon is the author listed for titles such as Leaders, Beyond Peace, Seize the Moment, In the Arena, and of course, his Memoirs.

Carter, listed for Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, and We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land: A Plan That Will Work.

Clinton, Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World and an autobiography.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Style And Idiocy
Post by: Florestan on July 06, 2009, 06:50:56 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 06, 2009, 06:42:11 AM
Nixon is the author listed for titles such as Leaders, Beyond Peace, Seize the Moment, In the Arena, and of course, his Memoirs.

Carter, listed for Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, and We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land: A Plan That Will Work.

Clinton, Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World and an autobiography.

Many thanks. The titles themselves speak volumes... I especially like Carter's second and Clinton's first. :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Style And Idiocy
Post by: karlhenning on July 06, 2009, 07:01:36 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 06, 2009, 06:50:56 AM
Many thanks. The titles themselves speak volumes...

;)

(Fair disclosure: I haven't read any of them.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Style And Idiocy
Post by: Florestan on July 06, 2009, 07:13:51 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 06, 2009, 07:01:36 AM
;)

(Fair disclosure: I haven't read any of them.)

If I needed a good Science Fiction book I wouldn't turn to Jimmy Carter, that's for sure.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on July 06, 2009, 08:00:31 AM
OTOH, if Carter wrote a book speculating on how Mozart supposedly didn't write his own music . . . that one, I'd read.

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 06, 2009, 08:59:47 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 06, 2009, 08:00:31 AM
OTOH, if Carter wrote a book speculating on how Mozart supposedly didn't write his own music . . . that one, I'd read.

8)

Wait!  Doesn't everyone know already that Mozart was actually Moe Zart, part-time baker and full-time stooge for the notorious Viennese parvenu and whipped-cream thief Ludwig Leiserlauter aka Lewd Louie aka Lou the 'Lude aka Louis the Wig aka Lou da Dude Wit' 'tude?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 07, 2009, 07:18:09 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on July 05, 2009, 07:11:13 AM
Swell is an odd word.  In old war movies you will see soldiers refer to their heroic commanding officer as "a swell guy."  By the 60's 6 year olds were routinely referring to their favorite marble as "swell."  Now it is normally only used if you want to seem deliberately archaic or quaint.


A famous toy company in the 1950's had this slogan:  "You can tell it's Mattel: it's swell!"

And then there is "swell" as a noun, meaning a rich person, or at least stylishly dressed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU3robyaNAY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU3robyaNAY)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 07, 2009, 07:20:13 AM
Laurel and Hardy movies are awash with "swell."   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 07, 2009, 07:43:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 07, 2009, 07:18:09 AM
A famous toy company in the 1950's had this slogan:  "You can tell it's Mattel: it's swell!"

And then there is "swell" as a noun, meaning a rich person, or at least stylishly dressed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU3robyaNAY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YU3robyaNAY)




Fred Astaire was nearly 50 when he made Easter Parade.

John is quite right: usually "swell" is said in Laurel and Hardy comedies with great sarcasm.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 29, 2009, 08:47:32 AM
Cato has a little time - and Internet access - to return and grumble about something he has heard and seen in the past weeks!   $:)

I have not heard the following, since I left Georgia 3 years ago, and ceased stopping at gas stations on I-75 in Dalton, but that the speaker was from the South, and not a native Ohioan, was obvious from his accent:

Cashier: "So are you going to the State Fair?"
Southerner: "Ah might should, since we're here already, but gotta ask the waf fust."

Actually, he pronounced "might" as "mat" with a hint of a "yu" sound after the "a".  (And "waf" = "wife" and "fust" = "first.")

This curiosity comes from the mistake of equating "might" with "maybe" which replacement makes the idea clearer.

"Maybe" equaling "perhaps" obviously comes from the verb "may be."  In the good ol' days, we were taught the specific difference between "may" and "might" that today seems moribund.

"He may visit his grandmother today."  (The odds are above 50% that he will pop into Grandma's house for some pop.)

"He might visit his grandmother today." (The odds are less than 50% that he will pop into Grandma's house, and if he doesn't, she will take him out of the will!)   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on July 29, 2009, 08:59:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 29, 2009, 08:47:32 AM
Cato has a little time - and Internet access - to return and grumble about something he has heard and seen in the past weeks!   $:)

Just as I was wondering where all the grumbling had gone... :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 29, 2009, 01:16:02 PM
Cato, I suspect that this construction is an old one, likely retained in certain pockets in Appalachia and possibly other relatively remote areas. I think the construction is becoming better known/spreading (sorry!); there is a writer who has used it, but I cannot think of the author's name at the moment.

Will research later; am curious now!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on July 29, 2009, 01:21:15 PM
I used to post on another music board years back and even there people were particularly interested in issues in English- and I've been also for many years, something to do with the importance of expression, and music as a language no doubt.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 29, 2009, 01:27:21 PM
My quick look summary: this is a "double modal" which some theorize is not really a double modal, but one modal (the first one, "might") acting instead as an adverb.

Now I really have to get out of here; back later!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 29, 2009, 01:37:13 PM
From Wikipedia, this interesting tidbit: "Double modals also occur in the closely related Germanic language Scots." And Appalachia had a lot of "Scotch-Irish" settlers; these would likely have been from Ulster, which is one area in which Scots was spoken.

This is really interesting to me. I think it's an old construction, a holdover from immigrants to the area, as other constructions one might hear in Appalachia are. The above bolsters that notion.

And now, yes, I really really AM leaving!

(ET correct typo; had "here" instead of "hear."  :o)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 29, 2009, 02:01:42 PM
Quote from: owlice on July 29, 2009, 01:37:13 PM
From Wikipedia, this interesting tidbit: "Double modals also occur in the closely related Germanic language Scots." And Appalachia had a lot of "Scotch-Irish" settlers; these would likely have been from Ulster, which is one area in which Scots was spoken.

This is really interesting to me. I think it's an old construction, a holdover from immigrants to the area, as other constructions one might here in Appalachia are. The above bolsters that notion.

And now, yes, I really really AM leaving!

Aye.
There is another 'american-ism' which I reckon isn't used nearly as much today.  Here is the word in action...
"Aww, shucks granny, I didn't expect you to be on top of Granpa."
Shucks is a great word.  Must come from 'shocks' ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 29, 2009, 03:43:51 PM
Not from shocks. Etymology is unknown; one popular theory is that it is a combination of the injection that refers to excrement and an even ruder interjection that ends in "uck." This ignores the earlier use of "shuck" and "shucks."

When one strips an ear of corn, one is shucking it, and the refuse was referred to as "shucks." Oysters and clams are also shucked. I'm thinking this word is not used in Great Britain, hmm? That makes sense, corn being from the New World. So... I'm wondering now if perhaps "shuck" came from an Indian word; wouldn't that make sense?

A source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=shuck

One still shucks corn, clams, and oysters. Oh, and peas, too. I don't know of anything else off the top of my head that one would shuck. Well, I can think of things that one might shuck, but they are not things one would usually use that word for, I think. Does one shuck mussels, for example? I don't eat them (well, I did once, and shouldn't have, but it was in France and everyone was speaking French, so the word "shuck" never came up. But I digress.), so don't know.

And yes, it's still used! Maybe not often, but I heard it last week from someone I work with.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 29, 2009, 04:06:58 PM
Quote from: owlice on July 29, 2009, 03:43:51 PM
Not from shocks. Etymology is unknown; one popular theory is that it is a combination of the injection that refers to excrement and an even ruder interjection that ends in "uck." This ignores the earlier use of "shuck" and "shucks."

When one strips an ear of corn, one is shucking it, and the refuse was referred to as "shucks." Oysters and clams are also shucked. I'm thinking this word is not used in Great Britain, hmm? That makes sense, corn being from the New World. So... I'm wondering now if perhaps "shuck" came from an Indian word; wouldn't that make sense?

A source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=shuck

One still shucks corn, clams, and oysters. Oh, and peas, too. I don't know of anything else off the top of my head that one would shuck. Well, I can think of things that one might shuck, but they are not things one would usually use that word for, I think. Does one shuck mussels, for example? I don't eat them (well, I did once, and shouldn't have, but it was in France and everyone was speaking French, so the word "shuck" never came up. But I digress.), so don't know.

And yes, it's still used! Maybe not often, but I heard it last week from someone I work with.

Aww, shucks owlice, what a great response.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 29, 2009, 04:09:37 PM
Shucks, John; nice of you to say so. :-)

Back to double modals (which I'd never heard of before today, though I'm sure I've heard them!):

HA! From here: http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=20001120

"The use of the double modal is definitely not "illiterate," but rather typical of regional dialect. "

And:

"Double modals are quite common in Northern English (that's England English) and Scots. The settlement patterns of people of Scottish ancestry in the southern U.S. might would account for the concentration of the usage there."

And this:

"Other examples of Southern Highland grammatical forms which have their origin in Scotch-Irish or Scottish English include the so-called "positive" anymore ("He works at the Tyson plant anymore"), "existential'' they for there ("They was [i.e., there were] three boys hurt in the wreck"), double modal auxiliaries (e.g., might could), and a special use of the preposition till which indicates manner rather than time ("He puts it in the index till [i.e., so that] you can find it"). The existence of these forms in Ozarks English does not mean, of course, that dialects in the American Southern Highlands are like some earlier form of Scottish English, since the many other features in Ozarks English are American innovations or can be traced back to other British regional dialects. It does, however, suggest that the dialects of Scotch-Irish immigrants had a particularly strong influence on those grammatical features which are more or less unique to dialects in the Southern Highlands. "

is from http://thelibrary.org/lochist/periodicals/ozarkswatch/ow803j.htm
(Emphasis mine.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: Joe Barron on July 29, 2009, 04:45:27 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 29, 2009, 08:13:52 AM
A quote from the Washington Post today from an article about a Supreme Court decision about reverse discrimination:

"The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when there is no evidence it was intentional."

(My Emphasis above)

See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/29/AR2009062901608_pf.html

So the implication is that lawyers can still prove discrimination with no evidence thereof !!!   :o   It is just "harder" to do so!


No, Cato, the operative word here is intentional. Hiring practices may appear discriminatory when a particular test results a large number of white candidates at the top and a large number of applicants of color at the bottom, but a plaintiff must now prove that the person administering the test purposefully skewed it to eliminate the applicants of color. Ethnic disparities alone --- that is, statistics --- cannot prove discrimination. As a result, proving discrimination becomes harder because it is harder to argue from intent, which is often hidden, than from results, which are there for all to see. There's nothing grammatically wrong, or even semantically wrong, with the sentence you are objecting to. It's perfectly understandable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: Cato on July 29, 2009, 05:43:47 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on July 29, 2009, 04:45:27 PM
No, Cato, the operative word here is intentional. Hiring practices may appear discriminatory when a particular test results a large number of white candidates at the top and a large number of applicants of color at the bottom, but a plaintiff must now prove that the person administering the test purposefully skewed it to eliminate the applicants of color. Ethnic disparities alone --- that is, statistics --- cannot prove discrimination. As a result, proving discrimination becomes harder because it is harder to argue from intent, which is often hidden, than from results, which are there for all to see. There's nothing grammatically wrong, or even semantically wrong, with the sentence you are objecting to. It's perfectly understandable.

No, the sentence does not mean what the author wants.  Your interpretation is very nice and understandable, because you know what he wants to say.

It should say:

"The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when it is intentional."

"No evidence" of intent is exactly that: "no evidence."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: Joe Barron on July 29, 2009, 06:00:23 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 29, 2009, 05:43:47 PM
No, the sentence does not mean what the author wants.  Your interpretation is very nice and understandable, because you know what he wants to say.

It should say:

"The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when it is intentional."

"No evidence" of intent is exactly that: "no evidence."


I disagree. "To prove discrimination when it is intentional" is redundant, since, by the court's definition, discrimination cannot be unintentional. One needs evidence of intent. Perhaps best would be to say, "One cannot prove discrimination unless one can prove intent." Thus, we remove degrees of difficulty.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: MishaK on July 29, 2009, 06:10:53 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 29, 2009, 05:43:47 PM
No, the sentence does not mean what the author wants.  Your interpretation is very nice and understandable, because you know what he wants to say.

It should say:

"The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when it is intentional."

"No evidence" of intent is exactly that: "no evidence."

Cato, you got it completely backwards. The sentence says that it will be harder to prove discrimination in the absence of evidence of discriminatory intent. I.e. the ruling has turned a question of discrimination in fact to a question of discriminatory intent, which is a mens rea issue which is notoriously hard to prove.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on July 29, 2009, 06:13:21 PM
When speaking English, it is recognised that the Scots CAN and sometimes DO speak better 'proper' English than the English do.  To find out for yourself, look at the phonetics of the word 'poor'.

pʊər
poor


Have someone from England say "I am poor," it would sound more like "I'm pooah," or whatever regional dialect comes into force.
A Scot saying the same thing is more likely to say "A'm poor."  The "I'm" part loses, but ther "poor" wins it every time.   ;D  ;D

:-\

:-\
And what a silly post I am making here.  Why did I bother?  I'm not even sure if I have wealth of spirit enough to pull myself back from making this pointless post for those who pronounce 'poor' correctly (be they from Scotland, Denver or Tokyo) for it occupies no recognisable place in Catos Grammar Grumble and does not follow in a recognisable sequential fashion from the last post by O Mensch.  Pah! And now I don't even know what I'm talking about.   >:(

::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: Florestan on July 30, 2009, 12:42:55 AM
Quote
"The ruling could alter employment practices nationwide and make it harder to prove discrimination when there is no evidence it was intentional."

I'm with Cato on this one. The above sentence is completely nonsensical. If there is no evidence of intent, then there is no discrimination, period, because, as Joe Barron aptly noticed, there is no such thing as unintentional discrimination. Something for which there is no evidence is not "harder to prove", it is "impossible to prove".


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: MishaK on July 30, 2009, 04:22:15 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 30, 2009, 12:42:55 AM
I'm with Cato on this one. The above sentence is completely nonsensical. If there is no evidence of intent, then there is no discrimination, period, because, as Joe Barron aptly noticed, there is no such thing as unintentional discrimination. Something for which there is no evidence is not "harder to prove", it is "impossible to prove".

That's incorrect, Florestan. Discrimination may be the result of inherent bias in e.g. testing methodology which the makers of the test took for granted without questioning and without noticing the inherent bias, or worse, because certain standards and actions which are de facto discriminatory have been considered so normal that the bias against the minority is not even noticed by the majority. Prejudice and bias are unconscious factors that have nothing to do with intent. Intent is a much stronger mental state than doing something inadvertently. Yet the results of inadvertent discrimination can be just as harmful. Again, the original sentence spoke not of an absence of proof of discrimination, it spoke of an absence of proof of intent.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Harder to Prosecute???
Post by: Florestan on July 30, 2009, 04:50:00 AM
Quote from: O Mensch on July 30, 2009, 04:22:15 AM
That's incorrect, Florestan. Discrimination may be the result of inherent bias in e.g. testing methodology which the makers of the test took for granted without questioning and without noticing the inherent bias, or worse, because certain standards and actions which are de facto discriminatory have been considered so normal that the bias against the minority is not even noticed by the majority.

I'd appreciate it if you could provide examples for the highlighted part.

Quote from: O Mensch on July 30, 2009, 04:22:15 AM
Again, the original sentence spoke not of an absence of proof of discrimination, it spoke of an absence of proof of intent.

Precisely. The very concept of "unintentional discrimination" is highly questionable. If I refuse to hire John Doe because he's black, this is clearly intentional discrimination. But if I refuse to hire him because he's not qualified for the job, I can still be sued for discrimination, albeit unintentional, because the whole methodology by which I decided he's not apt is unconsciously biased and discriminatory, or so they say?? I'm sorry, but it doesn't make any sense to me.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 30, 2009, 04:52:01 AM
',

I'd seen that article, which resulted in a comment I made here (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,10977.msg339143.html#msg339143).

I'd like to see something more than a speculation by a linguist who hasn't studied this at all, though! :)

There are a lot of odd little constructions in various pockets; there are a number of them on the eastern shore of Maryland and other parts of the Delmarva peninsula, for example, or were, anyway, when I was growing up. (I would expect there would be many fewer of them now.) Many of these odd constructions can be traced back to a construction that arose either from another language or earlier English usage. The one Cato pointed out sounds like one such older construction to me; Appalachia came immediately to mind. (And dang; just now looking at a map, I see I-75 cuts right through Appalachia.)

Interesting info here: http://linguistlist.org/issues/5/5-241.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 30, 2009, 04:53:17 AM
:: pops popcorn ::

:: pulls up a chair to watch the other discussion ::
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MishaK on July 30, 2009, 05:04:27 AM
Florestan,

I take it you were never on the receiving end of a discriminatory society or ever had to prove intent. Good for you. I don't want to derail this thread any further. This is on grammar. The sentence Cato cited had no grammatical issues. Cato's and your issue is clearly with based on a misunderstanding of the entire phenomenon of discrimination as well as the concept of mens rea in law. If you want to discuss this in more depth, I suggest you start a new topic. Though, seeing the intellectual level of this forum in recent days, I have little hope that much good will come of it.

PS: You may want to try this to help you understand unconscious bias: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 30, 2009, 05:31:31 AM
Quote from: O Mensch on July 30, 2009, 05:04:27 AM
Florestan,

I take it you were never on the receiving end of a discriminatory society or ever had to prove intent. Good for you. I don't want to derail this thread any further. This is on grammar. The sentence Cato cited had no grammatical issues. Cato's and your issue is clearly with based on a misunderstanding of the entire phenomenon of discrimination as well as the concept of mens rea in law. If you want to discuss this in more depth, I suggest you start a new topic. Though, seeing the intellectual level of this forum in recent days, I have little hope that much good will come of it.



Why this thinly veiled ad hominem, I don't know. All I did was asking you to provide examples of testing methodologies, standards and actions that are inherently biased and discriminatory --- and I'm still waiting. I'm sure Cato will not mind a little off topic on his thread.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MishaK on July 30, 2009, 06:03:10 AM
 ::)

It wasn't a 'veiled ad hominem' against you. Just a statement of disappointment with how political topics get debated around here. I really think this is off topic here.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on July 30, 2009, 07:33:39 AM
',

Well, how annoying! My apologies; I apparently don't know how to create an inline link, either!!  :(

I've fixed it; the post is here: http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,10977.msg339143.html#msg339143

Just the comment about double modals possibly being not double modals, is all; wrote that after I'd read the article to which you'd pointed.

:: offers ' a chair and some popcorn ::
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 30, 2009, 08:24:06 AM
Quote from: owlice on July 29, 2009, 01:27:21 PM
My quick look summary: this is a "double modal" which some theorize is not really a double modal, but one modal (the first one, "might") acting instead as an adverb.

Now I really have to get out of here; back later!

Right!  I don't agree with the double modal interpretation.   0:)

O Mensch wrote to Florestan:

"This is on grammar. The sentence Cato cited had no grammatical issues. Cato's and your issue is clearly with based on a misunderstanding of the entire phenomenon of discrimination as well as the concept of mens rea in law."

(My emphasis)

The Law often depends on grammar, which is one basis for thinking properly. 

One of the problems of proving racial discrimination is that it borders on thought crime, unless there is some sort of evidence, even indirect or symbolic.   

One could claim that the man who puts his house up for sale a few days after Afro-Americans moved in next door is a racist.  The evidence being the for-sale sign.  If he shows you, however, the transfer order from his company sending him to North Dakota, dated coincidentally 3 days after his new neighbors appeared, your evidence fades away.

To continue: if you on the other hand find his transfer request dated the day after the neighbors showed up, then that could be evidence of racism.

Or maybe not: perhaps he simply decided he wanted to move to Bismarck!   :o 

Again, no evidence = no evidence, not "little" or "hard-to-find" or difficult-to-prove" evidence, which is most probably what the reporter meant.  Imputing racism ipso facto because of skin color leads us to Orwellian thought crime.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on July 30, 2009, 08:32:48 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 30, 2009, 08:24:06 AM
Right!  I don't agree with the double modal interpretation.   0:)

I keep "double modal" and "double-jointed" in the same folder  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MishaK on July 30, 2009, 09:12:21 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 30, 2009, 08:24:06 AM
Right!  I don't agree with the double modal interpretation.   0:)

O Mensch wrote to Florestan:

"This is on grammar. The sentence Cato cited had no grammatical issues. Cato's and your issue is clearly with based on a misunderstanding of the entire phenomenon of discrimination as well as the concept of mens rea in law."

(My emphasis)

The Law often depends on grammar, which is one basis for thinking properly. 

One of the problems of proving racial discrimination is that it borders on thought crime, unless there is some sort of evidence, even indirect or symbolic.   

One could claim that the man who puts his house up for sale a few days after Afro-Americans moved in next door is a racist.  The evidence being the for-sale sign.  If he shows you, however, the transfer order from his company sending him to North Dakota, dated coincidentally 3 days after his new neighbors appeared, your evidence fades away.

To continue: if you on the other hand find his transfer request dated the day after the neighbors showed up, then that could be evidence of racism.

Or maybe not: perhaps he simply decided he wanted to move to Bismarck!   :o 

Again, no evidence = no evidence, not "little" or "hard-to-find" or difficult-to-prove" evidence, which is most probably what the reporter meant.  Imputing racism ipso facto because of skin color leads us to Orwellian thought crime.

No, Cato. No evidence of intent does not mean no evidence of discriminatory effect. There can be policies and practices that were not intended to be discriminatory by their makers, but ended up having a vastly discriminatory effect because certain unconscious biases were not taken into account. It is much easier to prove the discriminatory effect than it is to prove intent, and that doesn't make it a 'thought crime'. E.g. when you have a test that is meant to test mental aptitude, but all the examples are unconsciously taken from a white cultural milieu that could be completely foreign to a non-white, then that will throw off your results and discriminate against otherwise qualified non-whites even if the intent wasn't to discriminate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: EWWWW!
Post by: Cato on September 03, 2009, 04:00:49 AM
On my list of Grumbles compiled during the last weeks is pronunciation!

You have maybe been noticing the invasion of the Bug-Ugly Syllable "eww" where it does not belong, replacing a clean "oo" sound.  Here in practically perfect Ohio, this is most disconcerting!   :o

I have no problem with "eww" (pronounced by squeezing the nose slightly shut to keep out odiously odiferous aromas) as an 8-year old girl's expression of disgust when she sees a bug or an 8-year old boy.

But I have been hearing local TV people and others pronouncing words e.g. "food" as is it were "lewd" or "feud" but without the "Y" sound after "F", which is the grade I would give this pronunciation!

"You" is becoming "yeww" with puckered sinuses,

Perhaps this is the result of too much PBS viewing, where such mis-speaking is rampant!   0:)  Or perhaps it is the result of all those people leaving California, where this nasty sound originated as part of the snooty Valley Girl patois, where a wrinkled nose of disgust was the proper response to everything that was not found at The GAP.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: EWWWW!
Post by: Egebedieff on September 03, 2009, 05:05:59 AM
But there is something to be said for the survival of unhomogenized regionalisms.

How do they pronounce orthoepy in Ohio?
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: EWWWW!
Post by: karlhenning on September 03, 2009, 05:12:50 AM
Quote from: ' on September 03, 2009, 05:05:59 AM
But there is something to be said for the survival of unhomogenized regionalisms.

Something, yet not everything.

(And a friend of mine has opened for Todd Rundgren, yes.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: EWWWW!
Post by: Cato on September 03, 2009, 06:50:35 AM
Quote from: ' on September 03, 2009, 05:05:59 AM
But there is something to be said for the survival of unhomogenized regionalisms.

How do they pronounce orthoepy in Ohio?
'

With a short "e" and no hidden "W" between the "o" and the "e" !   0:)

Let us now grumble about something linguistiic, which however will take us into the realm of semiotics and then to grumbling about the decline of western civilization.

Near my neighborhood is a large billboard with an ad from Nationwide Children's Hospital.  Yes, the Nationwide that "is on your side" runs the place, and has a nice nationally recognized reputation for its care.

In the largest type possible for a billboard are 3 words, the last all upper-case:




I hesitate to disgust the gentle readership here, but...





...it says: "We Know SNOT!"    >:(

No doubt Nationwide hired an absolute advertising genius to come up with this, and no doubt other managerial geniuses approved the ad!

The idiocy, the moronic crudity of this ad speaks for itself.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: EWWWW!
Post by: Cato on September 03, 2009, 07:16:40 AM
Quote from: ' on September 03, 2009, 07:06:25 AM
Did you really mean that hyphen?
'

Yes, with "upper-case" used an adjective the hyphen is correct.

The word "letters" is understood.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: EWWWW!
Post by: Egebedieff on September 03, 2009, 07:33:12 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 03, 2009, 07:16:40 AM
Yes, with "upper-case" used an adjective the hyphen is correct.

The word "letters" is understood.
As long as you are certain. There are other conventions, such as Merriam-Webster's, for the use of uppercase or lowercase as an adjective that would make it one word. Likewise, there are other conventions, such as Garner's and others, that would not place a hyphen in a phrasal adjective unless the phrasal adjective precedes the noun, where, as Garner says, its primary purpose is to prevent miscues. But there are many conventions that I might not be aware of.'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble:Hyphens and Lowphens
Post by: Cato on September 03, 2009, 08:44:24 AM
Quote from: ' on September 03, 2009, 07:33:12 AM
As long as you are certain. There are other conventions, such as Merriam-Webster's, for the use of uppercase or lowercase as an adjective that would make it one word. Likewise, there are other conventions, such as Garner's and others, that would not place a hyphen in a phrasal adjective unless the phrasal adjective precedes the noun, where, as Garner says, its primary purpose is to prevent miscues.
But there are many conventions that I might not be aware of.
'

Right: I think "upper-case" is just easier to read.

"The upper case uses large letters."

vs. 

"Is that supposed to be an upper-case letter?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble:Hyphens and Lowphens
Post by: Egebedieff on September 03, 2009, 09:33:48 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 03, 2009, 08:44:24 AM
Right: I think "upper-case" is just easier to read.

"The upper case uses large letters."

vs. 

"Is that supposed to be an upper-case letter?"

We are each free to do what pleases us when it comes to such matters.
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2009, 01:57:06 AM
Grumble-worthy? (http://henningmusick.blogspot.com/2009/09/let-us-edu-tain-you.html)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on September 09, 2009, 03:22:45 AM
Ha! I tend not to hyphenate the words I make up.

[Added edit]

I was curious as to whether Garner (Modern American Usage) addresses this. From his entry on -worthy: "As in the preceding examples [seaworthy vessel, crashworthy minivan, creditworthy loan applicant], the form is almost always closed up with its root, not hyphenated. Only a few newfangled -worthy terms [an article-worthy celebrity] have hyphens."

Gloatworthy?

(I would hyphenate ewww-worthy.)
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 09, 2009, 09:03:28 AM
Quote from: ' on September 09, 2009, 03:22:45 AM
Ha! I tend not to hyphenate the words I make up.

[Added edit]

I was curious as to whether Garner (Modern American Usage) addresses this. From his entry on -worthy: "As in the preceding examples [seaworthy vessel, crashworthy minivan, creditworthy loan applicant], the form is almost always closed up with its root, not hyphenated. Only a few newfangled -worthy terms [an article-worthy celebrity] have hyphens."

Gloatworthy?

(I would hyphenate ewww-worthy.)

In journalism style, it's an evolutionary continuum. When new constructions arise, they are intiially hyphenated, then run together as they become more common. Here at the paper, we used to make "fund raiser" two words, with "fund-raising" hypehented as an adjective (as in "fund-raising goals"), but separate as a noun ("she is in charge of fund raising'). Now we just say fundraiser and fundraising in all cases. We follow AP style, and they take a while to catch up. I'm still waiting to be able to write "stormwater runoff" with no hyphens. In cases like this, though, it's not a question of right or wrong. It's a question of consistency.

BTW, I think it was Robert MacNeil, in his PBS series on the American language, who pointed out that Phildelphia was the  most important single city in the development of what we think of as the American accent, since it was the first city in the British empire in which people pronunced the r's as the ends of words, saying, e.g., water instead of Wat-ah. I wasn't too clear on the reason, but I think it had to do with the large German population here in the 18th century.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 10, 2009, 09:15:57 AM
I would be interested in how Germans would have influenced the -er pronunciation, since German has an "r" at the uvula, which would seem to be closer to the "waddah" pronunciation.

But in linguistics many things are possible: why you hear an "-r" added to a final "-a"  (JFK's (in)famous pronunciation of "Cuba" as "Cuber" is another mystery!

Today's grumble: hard to believe, but the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal printed the monstrosity "a ways to go last week!   :o

We might have a way to go, before we find Burger King, but there is no way that we would have a ways to go!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 10, 2009, 10:40:30 AM
Any of you fellows want to look over a novelette/novella?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 10, 2009, 10:40:58 AM
Is it creepy?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 10, 2009, 10:42:13 AM
Gosh, I hope so.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 10, 2009, 10:45:08 AM
Well, it's not my thing, then.  Pity, for normally, I should like to be of service to you by looking the work over.  I don't do creepy, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 10, 2009, 10:45:52 AM
That's cool.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Szykneij on September 11, 2009, 02:31:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 10, 2009, 09:15:57 AM
But in linguistics many things are possible: why you hear an "-r" added to a final "-a"  (JFK's (in)famous pronunciation of "Cuba" as "Cuber" is another mystery!

That's what you get with a heavy Boston accent -- a's get added er's, and er's get switched to a's. When I worked in a cover band, the MC would announce "and now a song by Aniter Bake-ah:.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 11, 2009, 03:49:09 AM
Thanks for arrrr the responses!   ???


Today's Grumble: Slang frum da 'hood on TV News!

Intrepid 20-something reporter Blondie Bubblehead on the local CBS station was reporting on the latest crackhead shooting.  30-something News Anchor Bubbles Blondiehead asks her (and I am not making this up, except for the names):

"So, Blondie, what's goin' down there?"

"Bubbles, a drug deal of some kind went down here, and it went down real bad: 3 guys shot..." etc.

Rule: Blondies from the 'burbs should not try to sound like they are from "da 'hood."   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 11, 2009, 03:59:19 AM
One of my favorite 'cultural artifacts' along these lines, is a bowdlerized line in the version of a Steve Miller song favored by a local radio station (apparently committed with Mr Miller's cooperation), wherein (we know) he does not want "to get caught up in any of that funky kicks goin' down in the city."

Personally, I defy funky kicks, wherever they be goin' down.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 11, 2009, 10:19:50 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 10, 2009, 09:15:57 AM
I would be interested in how Germans would have influenced the -er pronunciation, since German has an "r" at the uvula, which would seem to be closer to the "waddah" pronunciation.

As I said, I was fuzzy on the details.

"A ways" is a common idiomatic expression. It's nothing to get upset about.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on September 11, 2009, 11:29:08 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 11, 2009, 10:19:50 AM
As I said, I was fuzzy on the details.

"A ways" is a common idiomatic expression. It's nothing to get upset about.

I suspect that it comes out of the overlapping usage between ways and wise, especially as a suffix. For example, anyway /anywise or edgeways/edgewise.
'


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 11, 2009, 11:36:16 AM
. . . some are wise and some otherwise. They've got pretty blue eyes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Harpo on September 11, 2009, 01:04:18 PM
OK, these phrases may be common usage, but they bother me:

If you say "I wonder where he went?" why is it punctuated with a question mark and not a period? You're stating what you are wondering about, not questioning if you're wondering or not.

What about the phrase "She went missing"? When you start out "she went," it sounds as if you know where she went. I would say "She is missing" or even "She disappeared."

Thanks for letting me vent.  :)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on September 11, 2009, 01:26:59 PM
Quote from: Harpo on September 11, 2009, 01:04:18 PM

What about the phrase "She went missing"? When you start out "she went," it sounds as if you know where she went. I would say "She is missing" or even "She disappeared."

In 2003, I remember a news story on BBC World News (via NPR) about Beatles tapes that "went missing" (as in this http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2646921.stm). Within the next week or so, I was struck by the fact I began hearing the expression in other news stories, local and national, and thought it was an odd coincidence, so I Googled "went missing," and page after page, all of the hits were from the UK and Australia. Now try it.

Sort of a Beatlemania aftereffect? Like all of the British expressions and spellings we picked up in the '60s (Many [most?] of which we subsequently dropped: fab, groddy/groady, groovy, along with slang of the period).

I wondered (not arguing that it is so, but still wondering) if it could have in some way been due to the fact that after 9/11, NPR stations began picking up the BBC World News feed overnight.

'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Szykneij on September 11, 2009, 01:37:40 PM
Quote from: Harpo on September 11, 2009, 01:04:18 PM
OK, these phrases may be common usage, but they bother me:

If you say "I wonder where he went?" why is it punctuated with a question mark and not a period? You're stating what you are wondering about, not questioning if you're wondering or not.

Because that phrase is usually not used as a statement. When the inflection of the voice indicates it's a question, a question mark is used. I think you'll agree?     ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 11, 2009, 09:35:36 PM
The misuse of "literally" is really getting to me.

"I literally had to fly back to New York..."

Oh, really? You literally flew? You sprouted wings and flew? When did this word get to be so abused?
Title: Oh, literally? You really flew?
Post by: Egebedieff on September 12, 2009, 01:15:07 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 11, 2009, 09:35:36 PM
The misuse of "literally" is really getting to me.

"I literally had to fly back to New York..."

Oh, really? You literally flew? You sprouted wings and flew? When did this word get to be so abused?

Coincidentally, there is a similar problem with the use of really, which is offered as a synonym for literally, even though we feel less need to use really literally.

The NPR interview transcript is especially enlightening on the topic.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4988053
http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/wordroutes/1499/
http://grammar.about.com/od/words/a/literallygloss.htm

'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 14, 2009, 06:45:09 AM
Concerning the question mark for: "I wonder where he went?"

As explained above, yes, the question mark is wrong.  This is an indirect question.  All you need is a period.  The direct question would be: "Where did he go?"

"Literally" and the NPR interview: I do recall that from 4 years ago!  Many thanks to Mr. Apostrophe for the link!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 14, 2009, 07:04:06 AM
Quote from: ' on September 11, 2009, 01:26:59 PM
In 2003, I remember a news story on BBC World News (via NPR) about Beatles tapes that "went missing" (as in this http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2646921.stm). Within the next week or so, I was struck by the fact I began hearing the expression in other news stories, local and national, and thought it was an odd coincidence, so I Googled "went missing," and page after page, all of the hits were from the UK and Australia. Now try it.

Sort of a Beatlemania aftereffect? Like all of the British expressions and spellings we picked up in the '60s (Many [most?] of which we subsequently dropped: fab, groddy/groady, groovy, along with slang of the period).

I wondered (not arguing that it is so, but still wondering) if it could have in some way been due to the fact that after 9/11, NPR stations began picking up the BBC World News feed overnight.

'

Went missing through the years (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22went+missing%22&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=com.ubuntu:en-GB:unofficial&hs=bls&tbo=1&site=mbd&tbs=tl:1).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 04:31:52 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 16, 2009, 04:29:04 AM
Not necessarily.  Use of the adverb focuses on the verb, i.e., on the action;  "eat healthily" to me suggests, e.g., chewing 30 times before swallowing.  I don't have any quarrel with "eat healthy," which I think is more a matter of ellipsis than of using an adjective where one really needs an adverb.

But, I should take this to Cato's Grumble Emporium  ;)

Cato, my neurons are slow this morning, or I should think I might find other examples of verb followed by adjective, as subtly distinct from verb modified by adverb.

Any enlightenment? Up to and including, you're just plain wrong, Karl  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on September 16, 2009, 04:52:14 AM
He's probably going to say "is this about DavidW?"  Sigh... ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ChamberNut on September 16, 2009, 04:57:06 AM
The thing I struggle with the most is the apostrophe.  :-[
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 05:01:29 AM
Quote from: ChamberNut on September 16, 2009, 04:57:06 AM
The thing I struggle with the most is the apostrophe.  :-[

Man, I had a friend who was an English major who had frank trouble with its VS. it's  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on September 16, 2009, 05:22:53 AM
Whatever happened to healthful? One doesn't eat healthily if one is eating a nutritious diet, but does eat healthfully by doing so, yes?

Food is not healthy -- well, it can be, in that an apple doesn't have apple rust or some other apple disease is healthy -- but is healthful if by its consumption, it promotes good health in the consumer, correct?

Or was my mother wrong?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 05:27:37 AM
"Conducive to good health: healthful" is indeed one reading of healthy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2009, 05:27:47 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 16, 2009, 04:31:52 AM
Cato, my neurons are slow this morning, or I should think I might find other examples of verb followed by adjective, as subtly distinct from verb modified by adverb.

Any enlightenment? Up to and including, you're just plain wrong, Karl  ;)

Interesting: "Eat healthy..." would be obvious as meaning "Eat healthy food."

Without the 3 dots one must make a better effort to realize that "food" is understood, and that "healthy" does not modify "eat."

"Healthily" indeed is an adverb and you are quite right, despite slow neurons.   ;D

"Healthfully" also works: one must decide which word has the better music.   0:)




Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 05:36:39 AM
Separately (and I may have grumbled about this before) . . . I've seen a sign use the phrase beyond comparison, which had the look of someone "correcting" the (native) phrase beyond compare, because how can you have a verb follow a preposition, sheesh?!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2009, 06:37:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 16, 2009, 05:36:39 AM
Separately (and I may have grumbled about this before) . . . I've seen a sign use the phrase beyond comparison, which had the look of someone "correcting" the (native) phrase beyond compare, because how can you have a verb follow a preposition, sheesh?!

My Random House dictionary lists (under the 7th meaning) "compare" as a late medieval noun, so everything is just fine!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 06:46:40 AM
A noun, without fail  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on September 16, 2009, 06:54:52 AM
QuoteThe thing I struggle with the most is the apostrophe. 

Strunk & White have the rule on the use of a possessive apostrophe:  's is always used.  Even for names ending with an "s" - although ever since I can remember I was taught to not add the 's with names like Davis. 

E.g.:

Wrong: Miles Davis' 1970s fusion records are not universally loved. 
Correct: Miles Davis's 1970s fusion records are not universally loved.

What say you?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2009, 07:05:41 AM
Quote from: Franco on September 16, 2009, 06:54:52 AM
Strunk & White have the rule on the use of a possessive apostrophe:  's is always used.  Even for names ending with an "s" - although ever since I can remember I was taught to not add the 's with names like Davis. 

E.g.:

Wrong: Miles Davis' 1970s fusion records are not universally loved. 
Correct: Miles Davis's 1970s fusion records are not universally loved.

What say you?

Cato says: NO!   $:)

I hate the way it looks!   >:D  I agree that it matches the sound of the possessive, when a name ends in "s", but orthographically I think it looks ugly.

And "1970s" should have an apostrophe: 1970's.

Mr. Apostrophe I am sure will agree!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on September 16, 2009, 07:17:40 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 16, 2009, 07:05:41 AM
Cato says: NO!   $:)

I hate the way it looks!   >:D  I agree that it matches the sound of the possessive, when a name ends in "s", but orthographically I think it looks ugly.

And "1970s" should have an apostrophe: 1970's.

Mr. Apostrophe I am sure will agree!   0:)

Yes, but on page 1 in Strunk he says otherwise:

Quote1. Form the possessive singular nouns by adding 's.
Follow this rule whatever the final consonant.  Thus write,

Charles's friend
Burns's poems
the witch's malice

Exceptions are the possessive of ancient proper names in -es and -is ...

Does look odd - but is the correct way to do it.  At least according to S&W.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 16, 2009, 07:30:58 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 14, 2009, 06:45:09 AM
Concerning the question mark for: "I wonder where he went?"

As explained above, yes, the question mark is wrong.  This is an indirect question.  All you need is a period.  The direct question would be: "Where did he go?"


I really don't mind that because the question mark has come to be used to indicate inflection. It's used that way in Japan, for example, like this: "It's just a joke, so don't worry about it?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2009, 07:52:01 AM
Quote from: ' on September 16, 2009, 07:18:31 AM
I do, but there is the exception of Greek names (e.g., Achilles' heel). Coincidence, just last week I set up a friend, who is an editor, by asking him how to handle the apostrophe for names ending in s, and he, of course, agreed with you and me and he also gave the standard Greek exception.

Hooked!

Then I asked him the one I really wonder about: Descartes.

Stumped him too. Not a problem in French, but I haven't found it formally addressed for how to treat it in English.

Any takers?
'

Sure!

Like I said, I use only an apostrophe in such cases, so Descartes' Books would be the only indication you would need for a genitive ("Day carts").

You could avoid the problem: the books of Descartes.

Cato does not have a grammar book published with his name on it, but he finds that irrelevant!   0:)   Sister Claude  0:)   said just to use the ' and so - since she  0:)   was Sister Claude  0:)   and ipso facto on a higher level than Strunk, etc. - that is what I use!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 08:21:35 AM
Different than . . . ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2009, 08:48:34 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 16, 2009, 08:21:35 AM
Different than . . . ?

Oh, don't get me started!!!   8)

Everybody here knows "different from" is the correct phrase! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 16, 2009, 09:14:57 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 16, 2009, 04:31:52 AM
Cato, my neurons are slow this morning, or I should think I might find other examples of verb followed by adjective, as subtly distinct from verb modified by adverb.

Any enlightenment? Up to and including, you're just plain wrong, Karl  ;)

Verbs followed by adjectives are fine when the adjective refers to the subject and not necessarily to the verb. For example, "They swam nude" makes much more sense than "They swam nudely," which is just pretentious. (Jim Harrison used the latter construction in his novel Dalva, and I almost threw the book across the room.) In this case, it is "they" who are nude. They are not swimming in a nude manner, whatever that might be. Likewise, "to blow hot and cold" is the proper expression for equivocating, not "to blow hotly and coldly." You're not blowing in a hot and cold manner; you are, rather, blowing hot and cold (metaphorcal and unmentioned) air. And finally, there is "I feel good," a perfectly acceptable phrase. "I feel well" is OK, too, but you hear it more often as a question, as in "Don't you feel well?" I would say that feeling good probably refers to mood and feeling well to health, but that's not necessarily the case.  
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on September 16, 2009, 09:39:34 AM
However, in response to "How are you?" it is only appropriate for Superman to say "Oh, I'm doing good.  And you?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 09:41:29 AM
I tugged on his cape once.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on September 16, 2009, 09:41:50 AM
QuoteCorrect: Miles Davis's 1970s fusion records are not universally loved.

I think Davis's looks just fine in that sentence. Why people get all bent out of shape about the letter s, I do not know. It wants to be treated with the same respect given other letters! Let it have its apostrophe s!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2009, 09:43:28 AM
Amen to Franco and Superman!

Quote from: Joe Barron on September 16, 2009, 09:14:57 AM
For example, "They swam nude" makes much more sense than "They swam nudely," which is just pretentious. (Jim Harrison used the latter constuction in his novel Dalva, and I almost threw the book across the room.)

And rightly so!

Your anecdote reminded me of a novel by John Gardner, a minor novelist who was big in the 70's and 80's for his novel Grendel.  (One of his novels, whose premise sounds great, and could have been great, was called Freddy's Book, but Gardner failed to carry it off.)

Anyway, the word he used was "sillily"  :o    :o    :o   and that stopped my eyes from reading one word more.

Now, yes, the word can be found in the dictionary.  Yes, it is technically correct.

But Cato is not so doctrinaire that he will not make exceptions!   0:)   

Musically the word "sillily" is a catastrophe: it should be avoided.  You can use it only for a flower in front of a window: otherwise cast it out where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth!   >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2009, 09:45:20 AM
Quote from: owlice on September 16, 2009, 09:41:50 AM
I think Davis's looks just fine in that sentence. Why people get all bent out of shape about the letter s[/i], I do not know. It wants to be treated with the same respect given other letters! Let it have its apostrophe s!!

The letter "S" is all bent!  Maybe it wants to be an I !   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 09:45:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 16, 2009, 09:43:28 AM
Musically the word "sillily" is a catastrophe: it should be avoided.

QFT
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 09:51:28 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 16, 2009, 09:45:20 AM
The letter "S" is all bent!

Yes, but you don't realize all the pressure it's under!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on September 16, 2009, 10:55:03 AM
Quote from: owlice on September 16, 2009, 09:41:50 AM
I think Davis's looks just fine in that sentence. Why people get all bent out of shape about the letter s, I do not know. It wants to be treated with the same respect given other letters! Let it have its apostrophe s!!
Hogarth gave s the highest respect:

(http://www.library.ubc.ca/finearts/an_beauty.jpg)
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 16, 2009, 11:20:30 AM
The use of 's for the possessive of a noun ending in s is, as with so many things, more a matter of style and consistency than correct or incorrect grammar. Strunk and White advocate using apostrophe-s in all cases, such as Charles's and Ives's, except those in which it will sound as bad as sillily, such as Moses's. AP, on the other hand, insists on using the apostrophe only, without a second s. It's a matter of preference. In personal writing, I prefer the apostrophe s.

To sound bad is another example of an adjective following a verb. It sounds better than "It sounds badly."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 16, 2009, 11:30:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 16, 2009, 08:48:34 AM
Oh, don't get me started!!!   8)

Everybody here knows "different from" is the correct phrase! 

I was always taught it was "to differ from" but you are different than. From makes more sense to me, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on September 16, 2009, 11:35:05 AM
We need a word for when someone posts a response that was already covered on the previous page. Perhaps we could trade in healthily. '
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2009, 11:44:08 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 16, 2009, 11:20:30 AM
To sound bad is another example of an adjective following a verb. It sounds better than "It sounds badly."

Thanks, an obvious ensample!  Just goes to show how desperately I needed caffeine this ack emma  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 17, 2009, 01:42:49 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 16, 2009, 11:44:08 AM
Thanks, an obvious ensample!  Just goes to show how desperately I needed caffeine this ack emma  8)

Now that I think about it, I realize that verbs dealing with sense impressions or appearance take adjectives rather than adverbs. Things look, sound, feel, taste and smell good, rather than well. It may be that the sensory verbs substitue for the verb to be and take the adjective accordingly. We are describing the thing, rather than any real action.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 18, 2009, 01:40:13 PM
Quote from: ' on September 17, 2009, 02:01:20 PM
It is because these words are just short of being the "to be" verbs, which would take a predicate adjective. Sometimes it is perception and sometimes it is a situation where you can't claim something to be fact and use a "to be" verb.

If you are sure he is sick, you can say "He is sick." Otherwise, you say "He looked sick."

"The situation is bad." looks/seems/appears/sounds

"Her dress looked blue."
'

Very nice explanation!

An example I give to my students:  "He feels badly" would mean that the nerves in his fingertips are short-circuiting.   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Harpo on September 18, 2009, 06:07:20 PM
Notoriety when used to mean fame
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 19, 2009, 03:35:04 AM
Hear, hear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on September 20, 2009, 08:57:44 AM
Quoteirregardless

Oh, dear God!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on September 20, 2009, 09:26:20 AM
No, it was the thud of a Owl, passed out cold from shock!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 20, 2009, 06:53:14 PM
Has anyone here handled an actual lorgnette?  I ask only for information  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 09:44:31 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booknews/6194031/The-Lost-Symbol-and-The-Da-Vinci-Code-author-Dan-Browns-20-worst-sentences.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 10:00:20 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 09:44:31 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booknews/6194031/The-Lost-Symbol-and-The-Da-Vinci-Code-author-Dan-Browns-20-worst-sentences.html

Marvelous! Thanks, Dave!

Quote from: Tom ChiversA silhouette with white hair and pink irises stood chillingly close but 15 feet away. What's wrong with this picture?

And Brown mistaking the Amazon for el Río de la Plata. Might as well talk about Denver's wharves on the Mississippi.

And only "a keen eye would notice" those "large diamonds."

Crikey. You can both write idiotically, and be a best-selling author.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 21, 2009, 10:04:59 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 09:44:31 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booknews/6194031/The-Lost-Symbol-and-The-Da-Vinci-Code-author-Dan-Browns-20-worst-sentences.html

Excellent, Dave! Thanks for posting it. :)

I might add that these are only examples of his execrable prose. Should we start to examine his history, religion and art related gaffes?

As JR Ewing used to say, if you look up in dictionary "bad writer" you encounter Dan Brown's picture. ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 10:08:27 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 21, 2009, 10:04:59 AM
I might add that these are only examples of his execrable prose. Should we start to examine his history, religion and art related gaffes?

No! You don't want to shatter a Certain Someone's languorous, faun-like dreams! He thinks everything that Dan Brown wrote is so true!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 21, 2009, 10:17:49 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 21, 2009, 10:00:20 AM
Marvelous! Thanks, Dave!

Ditto.


QuoteAnd Brown mistaking the Amazon for el Río de la Plata. Might as well talk about Denver's wharves on the Mississippi.

Is anyone here a Wikipedia editor? :-\ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fontana_dei_Quattro_Fiumi#cite_ref-4
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 10:23:24 AM
Done.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 21, 2009, 10:39:16 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 21, 2009, 10:23:24 AM
Done.

Wherever I look, I don't see a reference to the Amazon at all, but more importantly I find only Rio de la Plata as the river in the Americas.

A few examples:

http://www.rome.info/bernini/fountain-four-rivers/
http://www.romanguide.com/baroquerome/fountain-four-rivers-rome.html
http://www.italyguides.it/us/roma/rome/renaissance_and_baroque/famous_squares_fountains/piazza_navona_square/fountain_of_the_four_rivers/4_rivers_fountain.htm
http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/b/bernini/gianlore/sculptur/1650/4_rivers.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 10:44:39 AM
Well, maybe that's right, then.  They might not have explored the Amazon until afterward.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 10:47:50 AM
Happily, it's an easy "undo."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 21, 2009, 10:52:31 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 21, 2009, 10:47:50 AM
Happily, it's an easy "undo."

:)

Moreover, the article states that that phrase was taken from chapter 100(!) of the book; I don't think there were a hundred (or more) of those to endure in that book when I read it. ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 10:57:51 AM
Quote from: opus106 on September 21, 2009, 10:39:16 AM
Wherever I look, I don't see a reference to the Amazon at all, but more importantly I find only Río de la Plata as the river in the Americas.

Well, the Río de la Plata has such a broad mouth that it is an obvious feature of the coast.  And at least from the wikipedia article, I am not getting any clear idea of the timeline of exploration of the Amazon.  The Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi was raised in 1651.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 11:16:53 AM
I think the critic's problem was the fact that Brown referred to the Rio Plata as an old world river. Putting in the Amazon would have been just as bad. Or am I missing the point you're making?

I am now tempted to read Dan Brown: I am working on a short story now, done as a series of newspaper articles, and I really need to remind myself of what to avoid. Last night, I wrote that someone "gasped with a sharp intake of breath," and deleted it immediately since a gasp is to a sharp breath. It's redundant, and the word "gasp" is itself a kind of cliche anyway. How many times have you actually heard someone  gasp? Changed to "drew a sharp breath," though I miss the word "intake." Oh well, I'll save it for the description of a jet engine.

My point is that anyone can write badly if they're not paying attention. I try to pay attention. Brown apparently does not.

My favorite was "learned the ropes in the trenches." Mixed metaphors are a real temptation, and once the ball gets rolling, you can't stem the tide by spitting on the track.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 11:19:25 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 11:16:53 AM
I think the critic's problem was the fact that Brown referred to the Rio del PLata as an old world river. Putting in the Amazon would have been just as bad.

Hah! Of course. I went the wrong way entirely.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 11:25:12 AM
I must say, though, I have trouble with this critique:

20. Angels and Demons, chapter 1: Although not overly handsome in a classical sense, the forty-year-old Langdon had what his female colleagues referred to as an 'erudite' appeal — wisp of gray in his thick brown hair, probing blue eyes, an arrestingly deep voice, and the strong, carefree smile of a collegiate athlete.

They say the first rule of fiction is "show, don't tell". This fails that rule.


Not to defend Brown's sentence, which is trite, but all descriptions in fiction tell without showing. If you say a man seven feet tall with size 18 shoes, that's telling. There's no no way to show it. A quick physical description is an acceptable way of introducing someone. And I don't know who "they" are.

Or consider this:

Samuel Spade's jaw was long and bony, his chin a jutting v under the more flexible v of his mouth. His nostrils curved back to make another smaller, v. His yellow-grey eyes were horizontal. The v motif was picked up again by the thickish brows rising outward from twin creases above a hooked nose, and his pale brown hair grew down – from high flat temples – in a point upon his forehead. He looked rather pleasantly like a blond satan.

That's all telling. Nothing is shown in the sense of any action taking place. And it's well written to boot.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 11:33:37 AM
Some of that article is nitpicking for humor's sake.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2009, 11:42:04 AM
Oui.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 11:46:39 AM
Oh, pooh.  :-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 11:50:27 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 11:25:12 AM
Not to defend Brown's sentence, which is trite, but all descriptions in fiction tell without showing. If you say a man seven feet tall with size 18 shoes, that's telling. There's no no way to show it. A quick physical description is an acceptable way of introducing someone. And I don't know who "they" are.

You could have him bend over to enter the room and step on everyone's toes (or be careful of them). Then you don't have to mention height or shoe size.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 12:11:32 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 11:50:27 AM
You could have him bend over to enter the room and step on everyone's toes (or be careful of them). Then you don't have to mention height or shoe size.

But why bother? It wouldn't make the fiction any better.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 12:12:09 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 12:11:32 PM
But why bother? It wouldn't make the fiction any better.

Well, depending on how it was written, it probably would.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 12:41:02 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 12:12:09 PM
Well, depending on how it was written, it probably would.

I seriously doubt it. The best writers know when to be direct. Even the most lipidary stylists simply say a man is tall and has a white beard. They wouldn't get cute and try to work it into a conversation or have the guy pick hairs out of his soup.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 01:22:48 PM
The best writers can be direct without exposition. That's what makes them the best writers. Though exposition does have its place.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 01:33:05 PM
Quote from: ' on September 21, 2009, 01:25:19 PM
lapidary?
'

lapidarian?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2009, 01:40:32 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 01:22:48 PM
The best writers can be direct without exposition. That's what makes them the best writers. Though exposition does have its place.

The best writers work in many different ways, and it's not always possible to generalize among them. My own theory, recently formulated, is that if the verbs are stong enough and the action vivid enough, you can get away without describing a character at all. The reader will fill in the details. But that doesn't mean one has to work that way, and not everyone does. Jane Austen never decribes her characters' features. Neither does Hemingway. But Melville gave a vivid description of Ahab's appearance in Moby Dick, and Poe devoted several paragraphs to Ligeia's profile (though, in this case, the description has more to do with the narrator's obsession than with the woman herself).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 21, 2009, 01:54:03 PM
I tend to avoid much character description. Not that I make a point of it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 23, 2009, 07:22:31 AM
Quote from: ' on September 21, 2009, 01:41:40 PM
lapidarianation?

I'm used to seeing lapidary with wit, metaphorically "cutting stones." Lapidarian would be more like engraved in stone. Not clear to me which you were after.
'

My Random House Dictionary does not recognize "lapidarian."  I suppose you could coin the word, and it could also be used as a noun.

A "lapidary style" would mean a very exact and brilliant writing style, parallel therefore with cutting gemstones.

Amen    0:)    to Joe Barron's essay above!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 23, 2009, 07:27:22 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 23, 2009, 07:22:31 AM
A "lapidary style" would mean a very exact and brilliant writing style, parallel therefore with cutting gemstones.

Yeah, that's pretty much the idea I was going for.

I've been thinking further about this whole "show vs. tell" idea. I don't believe the need to show precludes any sort of straightforward description. What it means, I think, is that you want to be specific about a character's traits or feelings. You shouldn't, for example, simply say a guy is cruel. You should show an instance of the cruelty. Or if someone feels sad, you don't just say he felt sad. You show the depressed behavior. Someone, I forget who (but yeah, it was the New Yorker), said that when Woody Allen, in his movies, wants to let us know a character is cold and distant, he'll have another character say, "You're really cold and distant." It's a lazy way of writing. One the other hand, there's a brilliant moment in Shaw's Man and Superman where one of the characters observes that whenever Anne wants someone to do something, she ascribes her desires to someone else. Almost immedately, Anne reponds with something like, "Don't talk like that. You know Violet doesn't like it." I always thought telling, then showing, is kind of a cool thing. It shows, to my mind, the author has a strong grip on what the character is about.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: owlice on September 23, 2009, 01:20:25 PM
QuoteYou could have him bend over to enter the room and step on everyone's toes (or be careful of them). Then you don't have to mention height or shoe size.

I'd think a hunchback in clown shoes walked in if I weren't reading carefully, and if I were, I might think he bent over because he was in pain. Or weird! :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 23, 2009, 01:50:39 PM
Quote from: owlice on September 23, 2009, 01:20:25 PM
I'd think a hunchback in clown shoes walked in if I weren't reading carefully, and if I were, I might think he bent over because he was in pain. Or weird! :D

;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on September 24, 2009, 03:37:30 PM
"In the 7th century, the concept of England did not yet exist. Kingdoms with tribal loyalties vied with each other in a state of semi-perpetual warfare, with the balance of power constantly changing." (http://news.scotsman.com/uk/King39s-lost-treasure-unearthed-by.5678666.jp)

It's creative, I suppose... 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on October 27, 2009, 09:26:54 AM
Cato my good man, would you let me know what you think of this little matter:

"Given the recent press coverage, we would therefore like to be clear Rangers FC is neither operated or run by Lloyds Banking Group"

The little man inside my head feels it should be nor rather than or. Or is it an either/or thing?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on October 27, 2009, 12:42:22 PM
Quote from: Benji on October 27, 2009, 09:26:54 AM
Cato my good man, would you let me know what you think of this little matter:

"Given the recent press coverage, we would therefore like to be clear Rangers FC is neither operated or run by Lloyds Banking Group"

The little man inside my head feels it should be nor rather than or. Or is it an either/or thing?
I'd say it's a neither/nor thing! ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on October 28, 2009, 05:37:58 AM
Handy.

http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/lit_terms_A.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on October 28, 2009, 06:12:32 AM
'Splain.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 28, 2009, 06:13:26 AM
Just as blue as I can be.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on October 28, 2009, 06:14:09 AM
Oh, I get it.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on October 28, 2009, 09:44:07 AM
Quote from: Benji on October 27, 2009, 09:26:54 AM

"Given the recent press coverage, we would therefore like to be clear Rangers FC is neither operated or run by Lloyds Banking Group"

The little man inside my head feels it should be nor rather than or. Or is it an either/or thing?
There is also a 'tautology thing'. Given the word 'given', the word 'therefore' is redundant.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 28, 2009, 09:45:59 AM
Most inelegant.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on October 28, 2009, 11:04:52 AM
Anyone know any other cool lit sites?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 28, 2009, 12:28:37 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on October 28, 2009, 11:04:52 AM
Anyone know any other cool lit sites?

I suppose you've already heard about Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page) and what a useful literary resource it is on the Internet? :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 28, 2009, 01:01:18 PM
Quote from: Benji on October 27, 2009, 09:26:54 AM
Cato my good man, would you let me know what you think of this little matter:

"Given the recent press coverage, we would therefore like to be clear Rangers FC is neither operated or run by Lloyds Banking Group"

The little man inside my head feels it should be nor rather than or. Or is it an either/or thing?

Yes, sorry for the late reply, but "nor" is what you want!

And it seems a colon is missing after the word "clear."

Yes, Project Gutenberg is one of the useful and positive aspects of the Internet.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on October 28, 2009, 02:48:06 PM
Quote from: opus106 on October 28, 2009, 12:28:37 PM
I suppose you've already heard about Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page) and what a useful literary resource it is on the Internet? :)

Indeed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 29, 2009, 12:54:32 AM
Quote from: ' on October 28, 2009, 05:09:54 PM
Not sure if this fits your category, but I use this a lot
www.etymonline.com
'

Thanks. :) I have visited the site before but never bookmarked it. I won't make that mistake this time.

And here's another: http://www.phrases.org.uk
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 29, 2009, 11:21:15 AM
http://www.salon.com/books/review/2009/10/25/lexicographers_dilemma/index.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 30, 2009, 06:30:10 AM
Quote from: ' on October 30, 2009, 04:33:10 AM


(But sometimes, as pointed out before, if you want to discredit the person speaking, you leave in all of the bad grammar, malaprops, etc.)

Also, the fact that this is a quote of someone speaking would be an argument for using Cato's colon instead of my that, since the first independent clause was setting up the second payload statement (even with its faulty or and specious distinction between run and operated). A colon here isn't meddlesome and does what punctuation is meant to do: interpret the pacing. Adding that puts a word in the speaker's mouth. This assumes, of course, it hadn't been there originally; that it is the sort of word that a transcriber is apt to accidentally cut out, as the Google folks are apparently well aware.
'

By quoting someone precisely, you do not discredit them: they discredit themselves!   $:)

The use of the Latin word Sic takes care of the problem of exactly quoting somebody's grammatical error(s).

Of course, you can push the discreditation by writing Sic!!! after the blunder.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 30, 2009, 08:14:32 AM
Quote from: ' on October 30, 2009, 04:33:10 AM
Also, the fact that this is a quote of someone speaking would be an argument for using Cato's colon

*Chortles childishly*

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 30, 2009, 08:55:13 AM

I can see where a prepared story based on casual interviews, or even formal ones, will want the subject's words to be clear: the subject therefore should be given a pre-publication draft, so that all quotations are satisfactory to him or her.


On the other hand...

I just read excerpts of a book purporting to show an "insider's view" of the last presidential campaign by an insider.

When I saw page after page of detailed conversations, which supposedly took place in hallways or restaurants or airplanes, etc. etc. etc., all written in dialogue form with quotation marks, I knew these were fictive, despite the quotation marks.

I find that dishonest.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 30, 2009, 04:22:30 PM
Quote from: ' on October 30, 2009, 03:26:47 PM
This was never done, and I would be surprised if that's not standard at most papers. It was always the case for the three I worked for. Occasionally, when going over a tape, I'd find a need to contact them for clarification, but I never let the interviewee read the article beforehand.

Once someone asked for it as a condition for doing the interview, but my editors said no. They gave the interview anyway, and everything was fine.
'


Interesting: a former student of mine told me he usually let the subject approve the article.  I am somewhat sensitive about this: a local newspaper once interviewed me, and distorted a "quote" from me, complete with a grammatical error   >:D   which I had not made!!! 

You can imagine, therefore, how much Cato disliked the article, even though in general it was quite positive.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 02, 2009, 04:13:36 PM
Quote from: ' on October 30, 2009, 04:33:31 PM
I would be curious to know about the kind of publication and what sort of articles your former student was writing. I can see some areas where it would might be expected. If I were interviewing an expert who was talking about a very technical topic, I might want him to look it over just to make sure I got it right. But I did this for more than 25 years, and some of the interviews were for national publications.
.



The memory has faded: this was back in the late 1970's!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on November 05, 2009, 08:44:04 AM
I have a questions for you guys. I want to write a piece of fiction that includes famous quotations but I don't necessarily want to make it clear who originally said them. The quotations will be well-known enough in general that most people would know them, but I'm wondering if I can run into any trouble doing this plagiarism-wise. I mean, if it's an old quotation, does anyone care if it was Benjamin Franklin who said it?

[Another note: It will be clear within the story that these are in fact quotations.]

Thanks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on November 05, 2009, 09:31:07 AM
Quote from: ' on November 05, 2009, 09:26:36 AM
If you have a publisher, and if so, you lucky bastard, they would have someone in their legal dept who can tell you where citations are necessary -- surely not for the old stuff, unlessit might be in a recent translation.

I'd start with the useful overview in the Chicago Manual of Style, too lengthy to copy by hand (besides, they might sue me if I did). Sections 4.60 & 11.3 in the 15th edition.
'



Thanks. I'll check it out. This story might be more of a headache than it's worth.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on November 05, 2009, 07:24:01 PM
Fewer headaches to you, mon vieux!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on November 06, 2009, 04:28:46 AM
Danke.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 06, 2009, 01:28:47 PM
You might include an afterword, like Thomas Mann did for Doctor Faustus, when Schoenberg complained about the use of the 12-tone system being used for a demonic pact in the novel.

Be sure to use the word "supererogatory" in your afterword to make sure that everyone understands your use of quotations is for an ironic structure, and not for content or lack of originality.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on November 06, 2009, 01:40:00 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 06, 2009, 01:28:47 PM
You might include an afterword, like Thomas Mann did for Doctor Faustus, when Schoenberg complained about the use of the 12-tone system being used for a demonic pact in the novel.

Be sure to use the word "supererogatory" in your afterword to make sure that everyone understands your use of quotations is for an ironic structure, and not for content or lack of originality.   0:)

Thanks, but I've already decided against it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on November 06, 2009, 04:39:14 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on November 05, 2009, 08:44:04 AM
I have a questions for you guys. I want to write a piece of fiction that includes famous quotations but I don't necessarily want to make it clear who originally said them. The quotations will be well-known enough in general that most people would know them, but I'm wondering if I can run into any trouble doing this plagiarism-wise. I mean, if it's an old quotation, does anyone care if it was Benjamin Franklin who said it?

[Another note: It will be clear within the story that these are in fact quotations.]

Thanks.

Anything published before 1920 is out of copyright and can be printed in full without  attribution or fees. People quote Shakespeare all the time without retribution: look at "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead."

Plagiarism is not a legal concept. It is an ethical concept that can get you thrown out of academe, but there are no fines or jail time attached. One cannot be sued for plagiarism. The only legal question is copyright violation, and brief quotations, used for criticism or for parody, do fall under the fair use doctrine. Donald Barthelme, bless him, did something similar to what you're suggesting in the Viennese Opera Ball, when he quoted dialogue from "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber" as though it were conversation at a party. To my knowledge, he did not suffer for it. You'll be fine.

I studied all this crap in communication law.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on November 06, 2009, 07:27:33 PM
Thanks, Joe. I appreciate that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on December 07, 2009, 11:00:49 PM
What's the difference between obliged and obligated? I just realised that I never use the second...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 08, 2009, 06:48:36 AM
Quote from: 'Patri Celelapin on December 08, 2009, 06:12:33 AM
In US English, Obligate is strictly a transitive verb. Websters draws the distinctions pretty clearly. I ran across this, that, judging from your spelling of realised, may be germane:

"My English friends, however, use it all the time. As a matter of fact, they use it in every single instance that I would use the word obligated. So is this all another tempest in a teapot?"

http://belletra.com/written-english/on-posting-regularly-obliged-or-obligated/

'Lapin


"Much obliged" can be heard even today out West as "very grateful" or "Thank you very much."

We are "much obliged" for the link, which has an interesting story about the legal usage in America of "obliged" vs. "obligated."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on December 10, 2009, 01:10:17 PM
Forty-six pages and still going strong--who'da thunkit!?

What is the current state of GMG's collective wisdom regarding the use of "!?"--cool, obnoxious, or who gives a rat's nether parts?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on December 10, 2009, 03:34:39 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on December 10, 2009, 01:10:17 PM
Forty-six pages and still going strong--who'da thunkit!?

What is the current state of GMG's collective wisdom regarding the use of "!?"--cool, obnoxious, or who gives a rat's nether parts?

Hmmm.... I wouldn't use !? but I like to use ?! if it's a particularly dramatic question.

Did you just touch my bum?!  :o

Who ate my kinder egg?!  >:D

Santa isn't coming this year?!  :'(





Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 11, 2009, 05:13:58 AM
Quote from: Benji on December 10, 2009, 03:34:39 PM
Hmmm.... I wouldn't use !? but I like to use ?! if it's a particularly dramatic question.

Did you just touch my bum?!  :o

Who ate my kinder egg?!  >:D

Santa isn't coming this year?!  :'(



Agreed:"?!" for emphasizing the surprise element in a question is quite fine, but I would not reverse them.

For extreme surprise, I always three exclamation marks: I think that it simply looks better.

The child was chewing on the cat again!!!

The child was chewing on the cat!!

A purist would, of course, say that one exclamation mark suffices!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 11, 2009, 05:50:21 AM
Quote from: 'Patri Celelapin on December 11, 2009, 05:44:12 AM
I can see  it  for a case where you were questioningly repeating someone else's exclamation for clarification or as an implicit suggestion that they think twice about whether they meant it, such as in the following dialogue:

"B...!" shouted Bishop Sheen.
"B...!?" inquired 1956 Golden Gloves winner Albert Pell.

'Pan O'Beurre


I suspect Bishop Sheen never said that!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on December 11, 2009, 06:19:11 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 11, 2009, 05:13:58 AM
Agreed:"?!" for emphasizing the surprise element in a question is quite fine, but I would not reverse them.

For extreme surprise, I always three exclamation marks: I think that it simply looks better.

The child was chewing on the cat again!!!

The child was chewing on the cat!!

A purist would, of course, say that one exclamation mark suffices!

Three punctuation marks does usually look better, though a friend of mine insists on using three question marks even when the question isn't in exclamation. E.g.

Do you want Italian for lunch???

Let's see...

Do you want Italian for lunch? No, thank you.
Do you want Italian for lunch?? I don't think so...
Do you want Italian for lunch??? MAMA MIA! OK ALREADY!

I think it adds a hint of aggression. One question mark establishes that it's a question; adding more should not make for a more probing question.  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on December 11, 2009, 06:49:47 AM
It's the Internet's fault. With the ? ? ?.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 11, 2009, 07:23:02 AM
Quote from: Benji on December 11, 2009, 06:19:11 AM
Three punctuation marks does usually look better, though a friend of mine insists on using three question marks even when the question isn't in exclamation. E.g.

Do you want Italian for lunch???

Let's see...

Do you want Italian for lunch? No, thank you.
Do you want Italian for lunch?? I don't think so...
Do you want Italian for lunch??? MAMA MIA! OK ALREADY!

I think it adds a hint of aggression. One question mark establishes that it's a question; adding more should not make for a more probing question.  :P

Interesting: the problem of conveying tone of voice and implied meanings through orthography.  Using three question marks would seem to indicate great puzzlement:

"You think two and two equal five???"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on December 11, 2009, 08:00:33 AM
''Perhaps we need not more people looking round more corners but the same people looking round more corners more thoroughly to avoid the small things detracting from the big things the Prime Minister is getting right.''

Lord Mandelson, winner of the 2009 foot-in-mouth award from the Plain English Campaign.

Not a grammar thing, but it's a corker!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on December 19, 2009, 07:46:31 AM
While there is nothing wrong with the quote, I like these kind of sentences (the merging of the final two "aims") which can be read by different people to mean opposite things...

QuoteConservative Friends of Israel (CFI) is affiliated with the Conservative Party and states on its website that it is "one of the fastest growing political lobby groups." It lists its objectives as supporting Israel, promoting conservatism, fighting terrorism, combating antisemitism and peaceful co-existence in the Middle East.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on December 19, 2009, 07:58:11 AM
So many political groups dedicate themselves to combating peaceful co-existence . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 19, 2009, 04:20:30 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 19, 2009, 07:58:11 AM
So many political groups dedicate themselves to combating peaceful co-existence . . . .

And what would Herr Doktor Freud     0:)    say about such a mistake?   :o

Today I was involved in answering a question about "between...or..." and "between...and..."    $:)

"Between" needs two objects: therefore, choose "between...and..."

Example: "I have to choose between Suzy and Zoe for my prom date."

To say "or Zoe" would mean that you have two first choices, and no second choice for the "between."

My inquisitor was unfortunately unpersuaded.   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on December 19, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 19, 2009, 04:20:30 PM
"Between" needs two objects: therefore, choose "between...and..."

Example: "I have to choose between Suzy and Zoe for my prom date."

To say "or Zoe" would mean that you have two first choices, and no second choice for the "between."

My inquisitor was unfortunately unpersuaded.   :o

Good point. I hadn't considered this before.

And of course, it's between you and me, not between you and I. The latter is an affectation designed to make the speaker appear educated, and is grammatically wrong.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 20, 2009, 03:48:25 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on December 19, 2009, 07:27:51 PM
Good point. I hadn't considered this before.

And of course, it's between you and me, not between you and I. The latter is an affectation designed to make the speaker appear educated, and is grammatically wrong.

Amen!   0:)

What is disconcerting is to hear such a monstrosity (along with similar ones e.g. "for my husband and I") coming from English teachers!!!  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on December 21, 2009, 04:30:33 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on December 19, 2009, 07:27:51 PM

And of course, it's between you and me, not between you and I. The latter is an affectation designed to make the speaker appear educated, and is grammatically wrong.
Maybe this is because we are no longer spoken of as individuals but as though constituting collectively a bowl of soup. How often do we hear that dreadful expression 'the amount of people' nowadays?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on December 21, 2009, 09:07:05 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on December 21, 2009, 04:30:33 AM
Maybe this is because we are no longer spoken of as individuals but as though constituting collectively a bowl of soup. How often do we hear that dreadful expression 'the amount of people' nowadays?

As a sidebar, the AMA manual of style has a neat way of remembering when to use a plural and when to use signular after a collective noun like "number" --- so neat that I've remembered it for years.

When you say "a number," the verb is plural, but when you say "the number," its singular.

For example: A number of patients have died of swine flu. BUT The number of deaths has decreased.

In the first instance, you're talking about the patients (numbers don't die), who are plural. In the second, you're talking about the number itself, which is singular.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on December 21, 2009, 09:21:06 AM
QuoteConservative Friends of Israel (CFI) is affiliated with the Conservative Party and states on its website that it is "one of the fastest growing political lobby groups." It lists its objectives as supporting Israel, promoting conservatism, fighting terrorism, combating antisemitism and peaceful co-existence in the Middle East.

Problem with this sentence is that they got tired in the end and dropped the parallel construction. The last phrase needs a particple in font of it like all the rest, such as "supporting Israel, promoting conservatism, fighting terrorism, combating antisemitism, and achieving peaceful co-existence in the Middle East."

A serial comma would have helped, too, as shown.

On the other hand, if you do in fact want to  comabat peaceful co-existence, you need an "and" before the last pair:  "promoting conservatism, fighting terrorism, and combating antisemitism and peaceful co-existence in the Middle East."

Either way you want to read it, though, its ambiguous as it now stands and something needs to be done. Semantically, I mean. What really needs to be done is to combat conservatism.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on December 22, 2009, 02:52:38 PM
Question #3854: Is it okay to use two hyphens to make a triple-barelled word such as "anti-avant-garde"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 22, 2009, 04:56:57 PM
Quote from: Lethe on December 22, 2009, 02:52:38 PM
Question #3854: Is it okay to use two hyphens to make a triple-barelled word such as "anti-avant-garde"?

Yes!  You can also use hyphens to turn phrases into adjectives, e.g: "He is a 'not-in-my-backyard' environmentalist."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on December 22, 2009, 06:00:24 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 22, 2009, 04:56:57 PM
Yes!  You can also use hyphens to turn phrases into adjectives, e.g: "He is a 'not-in-my-backyard' environmentalist."

At the paper, we reguarly use multiple hyphens in measurements, as in "a 3-foot-long fence" and in ages, as in "a 12-year-old girl."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on December 22, 2009, 06:04:01 PM
Danke!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on December 23, 2009, 08:24:36 AM
Quote from: Lethe on December 22, 2009, 02:52:38 PM
Question #3854: Is it okay to use two hyphens to make a triple-barelled word such as "anti-avant-garde"?

Although, in the form you have given it, you wouldn't put the hyphen between avant and garde, unless the whole chain is intended to stand as an adjective: "anti-avant-garde programming policy." There are varying opinions about whether this hyphen is necessary in more familiar expressions or whether it is always necessary to string all of what amounts to a long group modifier together with hyphens.

There are also some formations for which some guidelines would have you use an endash: "pre–Civil War politics." (Acc to Chicago Manual of Style) and this example from Wikipedia: "High-priority–high-pressure tasks (tasks that are both high-priority and high-pressure)."
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 23, 2009, 05:59:16 PM
Quote from: ' on December 23, 2009, 08:24:36 AM
Although, in the form you have given it, you wouldn't put the hyphen between avant and garde, unless the whole chain is intended to stand as an adjective: "anti-avant-garde programming policy." There are varying opinions about whether this hyphen is necessary in more familiar expressions or whether it is always necessary to string all of what amounts to a long group modifier together with hyphens.

There are also some formations for which some guidelines would have you use an endash: "pre–Civil War politics." (Acc to Chicago Manual of Style) and this example from Wikipedia: "High-priority–high-pressure tasks (tasks that are both high-priority and high-pressure)."
'

Interesting: similar to the "big hamburger sale" at White Castle.   ???

Is it a big hamburger...sale?  Or is it a BIG...hamburger sale?   $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on December 24, 2009, 03:19:17 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 23, 2009, 05:59:16 PM
Interesting: similar to the "big hamburger sale" at White Castle.   ???

Is it a big hamburger...sale?  Or is it a BIG...hamburger sale?   $:)

Maybe. Not sure what you were referring to as being similar to the White Castle example, but sometimes the hyphen clarifies such things, as in "I saw a man eating shark" versus  "I saw a man-eating shark."

[edit: or "I saw a man-eating White Castle hamburger."]

But some guidelines would say that avant garde stands alone as an expression well enough to not need the hyphen: "anti-avant garde policy."

And, to be complete, "anti-" as a prefix doesn't automatically take the hyphen as a prefix to a single term: antipersonnel and antiboysenberry, but anti-American, anti-inflammatory, and anti-hero.
'

And, in time, sometimes anti loses its i: antacid.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Churchillian Christmas Present
Post by: Cato on December 24, 2009, 03:35:56 AM
Quote from: ' on December 24, 2009, 03:19:17 AM
Maybe. Not sure what you were referring to as being similar to the White Castle example, but sometimes the hyphen clarifies such things, as in "I saw a man eating shark" versus  "I saw a man-eating shark."


Precisely!  Many thanks!

And as a little Christmas present:

QuoteThe saying attributed to Winston Churchill rejecting the rule against ending a sentence with a preposition must be among the most frequently mutated witticisms ever. I have received many notes from correspondents claiming to know what the "original saying" was, but none of them cites an authoritative source.
The alt.english.usage FAQ (http://alt.english.usage%20faq) states that the story originated with an anecdote in Sir Ernest Gowers' Plain Words (1948). Supposedly an editor had clumsily rearranged one of Churchill's sentences to avoid ending it in a preposition, and the Prime Minister, very proud of his style, scribbled this note in reply: "This is the sort of English up with which I will not put." The American Heritage Book of English Usage agrees.
The FAQ goes on to say that the Oxford Companion to the English Language (no edition cited) states that the original was "This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put." To me this sounds more likely, and eagerness to avoid the offensive word "bloody" would help to explain the proliferation of variations.

See:

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/churchill.html (http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/churchill.html)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Churchillian Christmas Present
Post by: Egebedieff on December 24, 2009, 03:44:27 AM
Nice! Whenever I hear this, I always think of the extreme example:

"What did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to out of up for?

Another Churchill quote where he wasn't quite so conscientious:

http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/pages/history/story0039.htm

'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 26, 2010, 06:09:37 AM
My wife and I revisited the incredible Ferris Bueller's Day Off last weekend.

Usually we do not watch the "Special Features," but we decided to watch an interview with the cast recorded c. 5 years ago.

Director John Hughes, recently deceased, mentioned that one of the actresses, Mia Sara, at the time of the filming "had just graduated high school."   :o

I have noticed this phrase more and more: I would think that you cannot graduate anything much, unless you are a cylinder!   $:)

People should graduate from schools: they do not "graduate" the schools. 

The school can graduate you, but not vice versa.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on January 26, 2010, 06:28:52 AM
Aye, that's a corker.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on January 26, 2010, 10:22:04 AM
I recommend John McWhorter's "Our Marvelous Bastard Tongue" for thoughts on correct and incorrect usage. (Though it's about more about the history of the language than usage.) McWhorter argues that the rules of grammar are not rules at all (where do they come from? and who enforces them?), and that constructions we do not like (such as "graduated high school") change over time, just as the language does. Things that sound  natural to our ears now, such as the word "standpoint," for example, were opposed at one time with the same kinds of arguments we're seeing here --- illogicality, wordiness. In the 19th century, keepers of the style  gate said "standpoint" was illogical, because you're not actually standing at any point in space (really). "All the time" was also disapprobated, because it used three words where one word --- always --- would do. Same with split infinitives and ending sentences with prepositions. Having read this book and similar articles over the years, I'm finding it harder and harder to get exercised over new locutions, especially since it's a losing battle.  By the time you hear the phrase in conversation, it is too late. McWhorter would argue (and I would agree) that "graduated high school" is fine, since it is now common usage, and everyone agrees on its meaning. 

The battle over "hopefully" has long since been given up.

Of course, I still say "he graduated from high school" out of habit, although to be absolutely correct, one should say "he was graduated from high school." It's not something you do yourself. It is an honor that is conferred on you once you complete the requirements.

But good luck, Cato. I'm rooting for you. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on January 26, 2010, 10:34:18 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on January 26, 2010, 10:22:04 AM
. . . Of course, I still say "he graduated from high school" out of habit, although to be absolutely correct, one should say "he was graduated from high school." It's not something you do yourself. It is an honor that is conferred on you once you complete the requirements.

I do feel like such a throwback, using that (traditionally-correct) usage.

Of course, I am not shy of seeming a throwback . . . .


Thanks for the McWhorter rec, Joe . . . I shall check it out.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 26, 2010, 10:40:47 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on January 26, 2010, 10:22:04 AM
"graduated high school" is fine, since it is now common usage, and everyone agrees on its meaning.

There are a lot of things that are common usage and everyone agrees on their meaning yet they are profoundly wrong and immoral.  Governmental bailouts, for instance. :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 26, 2010, 10:53:33 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 26, 2010, 10:40:47 AM
There are a lot of things that are common usage and everyone agrees on their meaning yet they are profoundly wrong and immoral.  Governmental bailouts, for instance. :D

Lifeboats should be bailed out, but I am not so sure about intemperate banks and investment companies.   0:)

Yes, thanks to Joe Barron for the reference to the James McWhorter book!

And speaking of losing battles: I just revealed to my 6th Graders in Latin the difference between "who" and "whom."

Talk about tilting at windmills!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on January 26, 2010, 11:22:38 AM
I think I might be the last person in the newsroom with a clear idea of the distinction between lay and lie. It has almost disappeared from spoken English, but I insist on sticking to it.

The McWhorter book achieved for me the rare feat of being very short and yet seeming twice as long as it needed to be. He makes the same points over and over, and he'll waste pages setting up strained metaphors. Still, the book contains some interesting information and useful ideas, and it's brief enough (despite being too long) that I didn't feel I wasted my time with it. I think it would have made a fine magazine article.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on January 26, 2010, 11:24:05 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 26, 2010, 10:34:18 AM
I do feel like such a throwback, using that (traditionally-correct) usage.

Hyphens are not needed between adverbs that end in "ly" and the adjectives they modify. Yeesh! What's this country coming to?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 26, 2010, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on January 26, 2010, 11:24:05 AM
What's this country coming to?

As a character in American Beauty puts it: This country's going straight to hell!. :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on January 26, 2010, 11:37:47 AM
FTR: It's John McWhorter, not James. Corrected in my original post.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 26, 2010, 12:08:36 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on January 26, 2010, 11:22:38 AM
I think I might be the last person in the newsroom with a clear idea of the distinction between lay and lie. It has almost disappeared from spoken English, but I insist on sticking to it.

The McWhorter book achieved for me the rare feat of being very short and yet seeming twice as long as it needed to be. He makes the same points over and over, and he'll waste pages setting up strained metaphors. Still, the book contains some interesting information and useful ideas, and it's brief enough (despite being too long) that I didn't feel I wasted my time with it. I think it would have made a fine magazine article.

When I taught German, "lay" vs. "lie" often arose for discussion: I gave the students the image of the "hen lays the egg," and I emphasized the movement of the egg into the nest.  After that the egg just   l i e s   there, not moving.  For some, that worked to keep it straight.

For others, they did not care!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on January 26, 2010, 12:24:44 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on January 26, 2010, 11:24:05 AM
Hyphens are not needed between adverbs that end in "ly" and the adjectives they modify. Yeesh! What's this country coming to?

Sorry to have hyper-hyphenated . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on January 26, 2010, 12:58:23 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 26, 2010, 12:08:36 PM
When I taught German, "lay" vs. "lie" often arose for discussion: I gave the students the image of the "hen lays the egg," and I emphasized the movement of the egg into the nest.  After that the egg just   l i e s   there, not moving.  For some, that worked to keep it straight.

Garrison Keillor years ago did a funny bit about a grammar school teacher who drilled the distinction into kids' heads by rhyming lay with place and lie with recline, over and over and over. That did it for me. I've never confused them since, but I have noticed that lay takes an object and lie does not. That's the way I keep them straight now.

Of course, the fact that lay is also the past tense of lie makes it even more confusing, but that's a whole other bucket of worms.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on January 26, 2010, 01:16:20 PM
There's a strange way in which knowing that the simple past of lie is also lay, made the whole thing easier for me to subdue.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on January 26, 2010, 02:43:36 PM
All these people have my deepest symphony. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=MEG&ei=e31fS5C5E4XIsAOMn8yuCw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAYQBSgA&q=%22have+my+deepest+symphony%22&spell=1)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on January 26, 2010, 02:47:31 PM
Quote from: Beethovenian on January 26, 2010, 02:43:36 PM
All these people have my deepest symphony. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=MEG&ei=e31fS5C5E4XIsAOMn8yuCw&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAYQBSgA&q=%22have+my+deepest+symphony%22&spell=1)

Very funny. I remember once in high school a kid ragging on me about the fact that I liked Beethovien. He tried to put me on, wanting me to believe he was into the music, too, but he kept saying he liked Beethoven's Sympathies and Concellos. I wasn't fooled.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on January 26, 2010, 02:49:45 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on January 26, 2010, 02:47:31 PM
Very funny. I remember once in high school a kid ragging on me about the fact that I liked Beethovien. He tried to put me on, wanting me to believe he was into the music, too, but he kept saying he liked Beethoven's Sympathies and Concellos. I wasn't fooled.

Oh, and the snottas!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on January 30, 2010, 01:39:01 AM
I was once told he was the guy who wrote the "Erotica Symphony".

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 30, 2010, 02:47:59 AM
Quote from: knight on January 30, 2010, 01:39:01 AM
I was once told he was the guy who wrote the "Erotica Symphony".

Mike

In the movie Psycho, there is a scene where Vera Miles is snooping around the bedroom of Mrs. Bates.  A quick shot of an old record player with the "EROICA" symphony is seen.

Hitchcock said he put that in, believing that most of the audience would mis-read it as "EROTICA," since there is an underlying theme of (disturbed) sexuality in the movie.  I have read reports that many people insist the record does indeed say "EROTICA."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on January 30, 2010, 03:59:28 AM
Hah!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on January 30, 2010, 07:40:46 PM
Well, there is PDQ Bach's Erotica Variations. I'm surprised Schickele never unearthed the ms. for the Indistinguishable Symphony.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 31, 2010, 01:36:33 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on January 30, 2010, 07:40:46 PM
Well, there is PDQ Bach's Erotica Variations. I'm surprised Schickele never unearthed the ms. for the Indistinguishable Symphony.

Maybe he could not because it was...indistinguishable!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on January 31, 2010, 04:54:18 AM
The TNT television network says:

MORE MOVIE

LESS COMMERCIALS

::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 01, 2010, 09:04:35 AM
Again, the less-fewer distinction has always walked a fine line. We like to say the rule is "fewer" if we're talking about numbers, but of course that doesn't work if you're dealing with amounts like money or weight. "The new Chevy Malibu costs $5,000 less than the comparable Honda," is fine, for example. I would never say five thousand dollars fewer, though I would also never buy a Chevy.

Now, does one recipe call for five less cups of milk than another, or five fewer? My gut says fewer, but I could go either way.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 01, 2010, 09:08:18 AM
Five cups of milk less
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 01, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on February 01, 2010, 09:04:35 AM
Again, the less-fewer distinction has always walked a fine line. We like to say the rule is "fewer" if we're talking about numbers, but of course that doesn't work if you're dealing with amounts like money or weight. "The new Chevy Malibu costs $5,000 less than the comparable Honda," is fine, for example. I would never say five thousand dollars fewer, though I would also never buy a Chevy.

Now, does one recipe call for five less cups of milk than another, or five fewer? My gut says fewer, but I could go either way.

I think they should both be "fewer". Technically.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 01, 2010, 10:08:53 AM
Quote from: Beethovenian on February 01, 2010, 09:16:52 AM
I think they should both be "fewer". Technically.

Well, that's the thing: technically how? Where does this "technically" come from, and is it followed in all cases? No language is 100 percent logical. Inconsistencies always creep in. And even "five dollars fewer" is technically correct, you will never hear anyone use it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 01, 2010, 10:10:30 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on February 01, 2010, 10:08:53 AM
Well, that's the thing: technically how? Where does this "technically" come from, and is it followed in all cases? No language is 100 percent logical. Inconsistencies always creep in. And even "five dollars fewer" is technically correct, you will never hear anyone use it.

Except me and a few English teachers.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 01, 2010, 10:13:38 AM
Quote from: Beethovenian on February 01, 2010, 10:10:30 AM
Except me and a few English teachers.  ;D

Wow, who wouldn't want to be a fly on the the wall in that conversation, huh?

But I definitely agree it should be "fewer commericals."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 01, 2010, 10:14:47 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on February 01, 2010, 10:13:38 AM
Wow, who wouldn't want to I'd love to be a fly on the the wall in that conversation, huh?

But I definitely agree it should be "fewer commericals."

Yeah, that was bugging the hell out of me Saturday night and then my wife told me to get over it.  :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 01, 2010, 10:29:07 AM
Tastes great, fewer fillings
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 01, 2010, 10:34:03 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 01, 2010, 10:29:07 AM
Tastes great, fewer fillings

:-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 01, 2010, 02:33:25 PM
Quote from: Beethovenian on February 01, 2010, 10:14:47 AM
Yeah, that was bugging the hell out of me Saturday night and then my wife told me to get over it.  :-\

No, whatever you do, don't ever get over it. If needs must, get rid of the wife.

Speaking of botherment: A few years ago, there was a public service spot on local news radio trying to get people to stop bagging their lawn clippings and throwing them in the trash. The tag line was, "It's OK to let it lay," which was memorable in part because it rhymed. Within a couple of weeks, however, the spots had changed, and the annoucer was saying, "It's OK to let it lie." Apparently there was a groundswell of protest, and it worked.

Anal retentives can make a difference.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 01, 2010, 02:43:24 PM
Another example: I think I might have told you before that the AP Manual of Style, under composition titles, lists "The Ring of the Nibelungen," which it says should be written in English. It bothered me for a long time, and when I finally found an e-mail contact, I pointed out that the title was incorrect as written, since the "en" was a genitive ending necessary only in the German, and the proper title in English was "The Ring of the Nibelung." They sent me a note back saying it would be corrected in future editions. So they must have looked it up and agreed with me.

This is kind of a big deal that justifies my continued existence on this planet. I am not personally acquainted with any other reporter who has pointed out a style error to the mighty AP. Bruce, you can buy me a club soda when we meet next week.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 01, 2010, 02:59:02 PM
You are truly awesome, sir.  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 02, 2010, 08:07:07 AM
Aw, shucks.  :-[
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Novi on February 07, 2010, 03:46:17 PM
(http://www.dweebist.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/commas-480x384.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 08, 2010, 06:46:23 AM
Quote from: Novi on February 07, 2010, 03:46:17 PM
(http://www.dweebist.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/commas-480x384.jpg)

Love it!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 08, 2010, 08:19:52 AM
I love those sets of accounts that show:
Income
Less Expenses

Wishful thinking: if only they were!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 10, 2010, 08:45:41 AM
Many thanks for those life-saving commas!

I have mentioned (many moons ago) that I have a somewhat idiosyncratic view of punctuation, where I use it "musically," i.e. as a way to increase or decrease the reader's speed.

Example:

I have mentioned - many moons ago - that I have a (somewhat) idiosyncratic view of punctuation where I use it "musically," i.e. as a way to increase, or decrease, the reader's speed.

And:

I have mentioned many moons ago that I have a somewhat idiosyncratic view of...punctuation, where I use it musically, i.e. as a way to increase - or decrease - the reader's speed. 

I also use punctuation to imply a certain tone.   0:)

But then...don't we all?   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 10, 2010, 08:58:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2010, 08:45:41 AM
Many thanks for those life-saving commas!

I have mentioned (many moons ago) that I have a somewhat idiosyncratic view of punctuation, where I use it "musically," i.e. as a way to increase or decrease the reader's speed.

Example:

I have mentioned - many moons ago - that I have a (somewhat) idiosyncratic view of punctuation where I use it "musically," i.e. as a way to increase, or decrease, the reader's speed.

And:

I have mentioned many moons ago that I have a somewhat idiosyncratic view of...punctuation, where I use it musically, i.e. as a way to increase - or decrease - the reader's speed. 

I also use punctuation to imply a certain tone.   0:)

But then...don't we all?   :o

Jack Kerouac was very good at using punctuation as a tool to mimic music (and speech) - in his case, Jazz  :-\ .   I think it is a useful and worthwhile method of communicating on a general level.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 10, 2010, 09:17:02 AM
I need to revisit Kerouac.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 10, 2010, 09:34:52 AM
Well Karl, Jack used to get around a bit as you know, so perhaps you should visit him before he visits you (even if he is dead, he's still on the road).
;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 10, 2010, 04:38:01 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 10, 2010, 08:45:41 AMI also use punctuation to imply a certain tone.   0:)

But then...don't we all?   :o

Not. All. Of. Us.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 12:13:55 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 10, 2010, 09:17:02 AM
I need to revisit Kerouac.
Hmmm...it's been awhile for me as well (though I revisited On the Road back in the '80s).  Still, I'm very aware of how much he influenced my adolescence.  That vagabond hipster dharma bum lifestyle sounds more glamorous in print than it is in real life, but it is VERY addictive.  Desolation Angels was my favorite of his books.  It might be interesting to see how well it holds up. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on February 11, 2010, 02:33:00 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 12:13:55 AM
Hmmm...it's been awhile for me as well (though I revisited On the Road back in the '80s).  Still, I'm very aware of how much he influenced my adolescence.  That vagabond hipster dharma bum lifestyle sounds more glamorous in print than it is in real life, but it is VERY addictive.  Desolation Angels was my favorite of his books.  It might be interesting to see how well it holds up.

Not very well, at least IMO.  A few years ago I went back and reread most of the books and while parts of them are fun, in general they seemed less compelling than I remembered them.   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2010, 03:41:50 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 12:13:55 AM
. . . That vagabond hipster dharma bum lifestyle sounds more glamorous in print than it is in real life, but it is VERY addictive.

QFT ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 05:18:56 AM
Quote from: Franco on February 11, 2010, 02:33:00 AM
Not very well, at least IMO.  A few years ago I went back and reread most of the books and while parts of them are fun, in general they seemed less compelling than I remembered them.
So I suspect.  The things we find appealing in adolescence seldom retain that appeal after we've matured. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on February 11, 2010, 05:54:16 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 05:18:56 AM
So I suspect.  The things we find appealing in adolescence seldom retain that appeal after we've matured.

You mean Star Wars isn't the greatest film ever made?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2010, 05:55:40 AM
Well, to hear Poju tell it . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 11, 2010, 05:57:30 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 05:18:56 AM
The things we find appealing in adolescence seldom retain that appeal after we've matured.

Classical music excepted. :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2010, 06:02:01 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 11, 2010, 05:57:30 AM

Quote from: DavidRossThe things we find appealing in adolescence seldom retain that appeal after we've matured.

Classical music excepted. :D

Yes, my years of adolescence were when Real Music got its hooks in me but good.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 11, 2010, 06:14:49 AM
I have fond memories of the stuff I read as a kid but, yeah, it doesn't hold up.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 06:16:03 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 11, 2010, 05:55:40 AM
Well, to hear Poju tell it . . . .
I rest my case.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 11, 2010, 06:24:45 AM
You guys are mean.  >:(


:P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 06:31:56 AM
Quote from: Beethovenian on February 11, 2010, 06:24:45 AM
You guys are mean.  >:(


:P
Well, yes, it feels uncomfortable at times, almost like picking on the Down Syndrome kid, but he's so adamant about his intellectual and aesthetic superiority and so impervious to helpful criticism that poking gentle fun at him might actually be a kindness.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on February 11, 2010, 06:53:24 AM
     I didn't know what to say; he was right; but all I wanted to do was sneak out into the night and disappear somewhere, and go and find out what everybody was doing all over the country. --Jack Kerouac, On the Road, page 67, paragraph 3 of my September 1957 Second Printing (which I will consider selling when I am much older and grayer and need money to pay the electricity bill, assuming I have finished reading it by then).

Example of musical punctuation?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2010, 08:42:30 AM
Quote from: secondwind on February 11, 2010, 06:53:24 AM
     I didn't know what to say; he was right; but all I wanted to do was sneak out into the night and disappear somewhere, and go and find out what everybody was doing all over the country. --Jack Kerouac, On the Road, page 67, paragraph 3 of my September 1957 Second Printing (which I will consider selling when I am much older and grayer and need money to pay the electricity bill, assuming I have finished reading it by then).

Example of musical punctuation?

Apparently.  The second semicolon, according to the purists, is an error, because of the use of the conjunction "but."

But in a book about slacker, edge-of-society rule-breakers, you expect things like that!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on February 11, 2010, 08:48:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2010, 08:42:30 AM
Apparently.  The second semicolon, according to the purists, is an error, because of the use of the conjunction "but."

But in a book about slacker, edge-of-society rule-breakers, you expect things like that!   $:)

I read somewhere that for an anniversary of the publication of On The Road the original, unedited typescript was published.  The one Kerouac prepared by taping a ream of paper together into a continuous scroll, so he could type without interruption while in a drug-addled state.  If I remember correctly, there are no paragraph breaks, I don't know if he used punctuation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 11, 2010, 09:19:11 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on February 11, 2010, 08:48:55 AM
I read somewhere that for an anniversary of the publication of On The Road the original, unedited typescript was published.  The one Kerouac prepared by taping a ream of paper together into a continuous scroll, so he could type without interruption while in a drug-addled state.  If I remember correctly, there are no paragraph breaks, I don't know if he used punctuation.

We've got that anniversary edition at the Museum shop; I'll have a look at it tonight.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on February 11, 2010, 09:33:41 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 11, 2010, 09:19:11 AM
We've got that anniversary edition at the Museum shop; I'll have a look at it tonight.

It's possible to see excerpts on line at Amazon.  No paragraphs breaks, but punctuation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on February 11, 2010, 09:35:43 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2010, 08:42:30 AM
Apparently.  The second semicolon, according to the purists, is an error, because of the use of the conjunction "but."

But in a book about slacker, edge-of-society rule-breakers, you expect things like that!   $:)
The comma also is not gramatically correct, coming as it does between two parts of the compound object. "All I wanted to do was x and y" would be correct, not "all I wanted to do was x, and y."  Rhyhmically, however, I prefer Kerouac's punctuation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 10:10:58 AM
Quote from: secondwind on February 11, 2010, 09:35:43 AM
The comma also is not gramatically correct, coming as it does between two parts of the compound object. "All I wanted to do was x and y" would be correct, not "all I wanted to do was x, and y."  Rhyhmically, however, I prefer Kerouac's punctuation.
I prefer it, too.  The thing to remember is that the "rules" of grammar are guidelines, distilled by analyzing practice, and are properly regarded as descriptive, maybe prescriptive, but never proscriptive!  Using punctuation--such as dashes, commas, and even semicolons--to break up written sentences and impart the rhythm and flavor of speech (as well as to render complex statements more intelligible), is not just an acceptable practice but an essential element of the writer's craft.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on February 11, 2010, 10:13:24 AM
The original scroll manuscript of On The Road, written over a three week amphetamine fueled marathon is not the same book that was published in 1957.  From most accounts it is longer, more lurid, and uses real names, but in essence recounts the same experiences.  In 2001 (I think) it was auctioned for over $2 million.

On The Road is probably his best book, although Dharma Bums, The Subterraneans and Desolation Angels are good too.  He wrote other scroll manuscripts, but instead of taping the pages together used teletype paper rolls.

I've got some recordings of him reading or improvising poetry with saxophone accompaniment, Zoot Sims on some - tres 50's cool.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on February 11, 2010, 11:06:19 AM
Quote from: Franco on February 11, 2010, 10:13:24 AM
The original scroll manuscript of On The Road, written over a three week amphetamine fueled marathon is not the same book that was published in 1957.  From most accounts it is longer, more lurid, and uses real names, but in essence recounts the same experiences.  In 2001 (I think) it was auctioned for over $2 million.

By most accounts?  That's what it says on the flap of the Original Scroll Edition, published by Penguin

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0143105469/ref=s9_simi_gw_p14_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0JENXH026MYMHE27SP1E&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on February 11, 2010, 11:09:40 AM
Quote from: Franco on February 11, 2010, 10:13:24 AM

I've got some recordings of him reading or improvising poetry with saxophone accompaniment, Zoot Sims on some - tres 50's cool.
Indeed! 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on February 11, 2010, 11:11:56 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on February 11, 2010, 11:06:19 AM
By most accounts?  That's what it says on the flap of the Original Scroll Edition, published by Penguin

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0143105469/ref=s9_simi_gw_p14_i1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0JENXH026MYMHE27SP1E&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846

I haven't seen the Penquin book and was only vaguely aware of what was reported about the differences, hence my hedging.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2010, 04:29:52 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 10:10:58 AM
I prefer it, too.  The thing to remember is that the "rules" of grammar are guidelines, distilled by analyzing practice, and are properly regarded as descriptive, maybe prescriptive, but never proscriptive!  Using punctuation--such as dashes, commas, and even semicolons--to break up written sentences and impart the rhythm and flavor of speech (as well as to render complex statements more intelligible), is not just an acceptable practice but an essential element of the writer's craft.

That's a big 10-4, good buddy!   :o

Drugged-up (or drugged-out) writing is not my thing: one wonders how much more creative Kerouac might have been without fried, poached, roasted, sauteed, or fricasseed frontal lobes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 12, 2010, 05:04:06 AM
Which is correct when I'm speaking to you and referring to my friend Bob?

Which is correct when I'm speaking to you and referring to my friend: Bob?

Which is correct when I'm speaking to you and referring to my friend, Bob?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 12, 2010, 05:08:48 AM
Makes me think of one of the timing/emphasis jokes in that Firesign Theatre classic:

QuoteI assume you've come to see my mistress, Mr Danger.

–I don't care about your private life, or what his name is . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on February 12, 2010, 05:10:40 AM
Hee. Exactly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 12, 2010, 10:19:15 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 11, 2010, 12:13:55 AM
Still, I'm very aware of how much he influenced my adolescence.  That vagabond hipster dharma bum lifestyle sounds more glamorous in print than it is in real life, but it is VERY addictive.

John Updike once said that he wrote Rabbit, Run as a sort of reponse to Kerouac. He wanted to show that the free-spirit lifestyle has consquences: that people get hurt.

Anyway, I'm plodding through Salinger's Seymour: An Introduction for the first and last time in my life. God, it's torture.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 12, 2010, 10:23:02 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on February 12, 2010, 10:19:15 AM
John Updike once said that he wrote Rabbit, Run as a sort of reponse to Kerouac. He wanted to show that the free-spirit lifestyle has consquences: that people get hurt.

Anyway, I'm plodding through Salinger's Seymour: An Introduction for the first and last time in my life. God, it's torture.
Never read it.  Try Nine Stories.  Great.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 13, 2010, 04:02:08 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on February 12, 2010, 10:19:15 AM
John Updike once said that he wrote Rabbit, Run as a sort of reponse to Kerouac. He wanted to show that the free-spirit lifestyle has consquences: that people get hurt.

Anyway, I'm plodding through Salinger's Seymour: An Introduction for the first and last time in my life. God, it's torture.

I plowed through "Seymour" and saw less as a result!   :o

Writers can be solipsistic and egotistical schmucks: feel free to throw off the shackles and take your copy back to the library before the thumbscrews are tightened even more.

And always remember:

Writers of fiction are liars, even if they do occasionally tell the truth.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 13, 2010, 09:52:48 AM
Finished Seymour this morning, and that's that.  It did get more interesting and readable toward the end, which only reinforced my anger with the rest of it.

David, the only reason I read Seynour at all is that I have read all the rest of Salinger, including the Nine Stories. I guess I should return to that when I'm finished the other books presently in the queue. You're right: That is a good one. And CITR, of course.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 22, 2010, 10:05:39 AM
I have a problem. :o
Yesterday I heard a 13 year old boy refer to an older Scottish boy as 'bad ass'.  Pretty standard stuff, but this was spoken by a Scottish boy in a Scottish city, and if it was in Scots vernacular it would be something like "Aye, he's mental."  Instead, it was, "Aye, he's a bad ass."  Well, if he had been speaking in Scottish lexicon he would have said "Bad arse," but in literal terms that would be suggestive of something different than the behaviour of the "Bad ass."
Isn't 'bad ass' American in origin?  Why do Scottish kids adopt American things like this?  It's doubtful that in South Philadelphia you would catch a teenager saying:  "Och aye, that wee fany, we did away wi' him in last week"  but you're sure to hear it in Scotland...somewhere...depending on who you're talking to...hell, my argument is crumbling...
I want cross-atlantic linguistic equality!  So come on you Americans (other than Cato, Henning, and one or two I don't know about ::) ) - start using AYE !!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on February 22, 2010, 10:32:38 AM
I realize now that I should NOT have enabled viewing of users' avatars.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 22, 2010, 10:51:56 AM
Quote from: John on February 22, 2010, 10:05:39 AM
So come on you Americans (other than Cato, Henning, and one or two I don't know about ::) ) - start using AYE !!

It's not just American English that's popular, but black American English. The slang is everywhere and is very attractive to people who want to feel freer and less contricted in their language and manner. George Carlin years ago perceptively noted that if you take five white guys and five black guys and let them hang around together for about a month, you'll find that the white guys are walking, and talking and standing like the black guys do. You'll never hear a black guy say, "Hey, golly, we won the big game today. Yes, sir. It was a doozy, too!" But you'll see guys with red hair and freckles named Duffy say, "What's happenin'? Nothin' to it. You got it, man. Right. Cool. See ya later baby.'"

There is no linguistic symmetry. It's just the way life is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 22, 2010, 01:12:42 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on February 22, 2010, 10:51:56 AMGeorge Carlin years ago perceptively noted that if you take five white guys and five black guys and let them hang around together for about a month, you'll find that the white guys are walking, and talking and standing like teh black guys to.

Depends on whether they're hanging out together in the board room or the bar room.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 22, 2010, 01:18:07 PM
Well observed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on February 22, 2010, 02:40:34 PM
John, Where were you when you heard, "Och aye, that wee fany, we did away wi' him in last week"? I will avoid it.

How about this, once overheard. A young man in Dundee, as I passed him he put his arm round his girl and said, "Och....see us a rave at yer clump."

I feel that could surely translate across the pond to some black ghetto or other.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 22, 2010, 04:31:01 PM
Quote from: knight on February 22, 2010, 02:40:34 PM
John, Where were you when you heard, "Och aye, that wee fany, we did away wi' him in last week"? I will avoid it.
Mike

I was in Edinburgh.    ;D ;D ;D

No, I made it up.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on February 22, 2010, 09:37:10 PM
Oh, that's a bit unfortunate. Must have been a dubious area....not Morningside!

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 23, 2010, 08:20:05 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 22, 2010, 01:12:42 PM
Depends on whether they're hanging out together in the board room or the bar room.

Don't think George really cared about board rooms.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 23, 2010, 08:30:16 AM
How about elevators?  Just met a chap there by chance this morning . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on February 23, 2010, 09:19:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2010, 08:30:16 AM
How about elevators?  Just met a chap there by chance this morning . . . .

Well, he did say once that if there are two guys in an elevator and one of them farts, everybody knows who did it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on February 23, 2010, 09:20:40 AM
I don't like stereotypes, especially racial stereotypes.

Just sayin' ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 23, 2010, 11:25:02 AM
Quote from: Franco on February 23, 2010, 09:20:40 AM
I don't like stereotypes, especially racial stereotypes.

Just sayin' ...
But George (Carlin) did...at least enough to tell jokes that relied on them.

Just sayin'....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 23, 2010, 11:33:21 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 23, 2010, 11:25:02 AM
But George (Carlin) did...at least enough to tell jokes that relied on them.

Just sayin'....

To say nothing of Richard Pryor (e.g.).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on February 23, 2010, 11:40:31 AM
I have understood the humor of Richard Pryor and George Carlin to be exposing the flaws of stereotyping, not endorsements of it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 23, 2010, 11:55:45 AM
Very good.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 23, 2010, 12:15:48 PM
Quote from: Franco on February 23, 2010, 11:40:31 AM
I have understood the humor of Richard Pryor and George Carlin to be exposing the flaws of stereotyping, not endorsements of it.
See the Carlin observation cited above.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on March 03, 2010, 07:49:53 PM
 literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally literally
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on March 04, 2010, 01:48:36 AM
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 04, 2010, 03:30:10 AM
What the heck do kids these days mean when they use the terms "surreal" and "epic?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 04, 2010, 05:44:46 AM
No knowing, no knowing . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Novi on March 04, 2010, 08:51:14 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 04, 2010, 03:30:10 AM
What the heck do kids these days mean when they use the terms "surreal" and "epic?"

Breton and Virgil? ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on March 04, 2010, 12:53:45 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 04, 2010, 03:30:10 AM
What the heck do kids these days mean when they use the terms "surreal" and "epic?"
I can't say with certainty, but when I am left baffled by the alternative English of my younger students ("clueless," as it were), I turn for help to www.urbandictionary.com (http://www.urbandictionary.com).   I recently had recourse to urbandictionary to decipher "epic fail", and found this:
Quote
3.    Epic Fail    1175 up, 102 down

Epic- Anything great, spectacular, or large/monumental in nature

Fail- An inability to complete an objective, task or job either assigned or volunteered for.

Epic Fail -A mistake of such monumental proportions that it requires its own term in order to sucessfully point out the unfathomable shortcomings of an individual or group.

Jack: Uh, dude? I may or may not have wrecked 14 ferrari's with my moped after derailing a whole train carrying nothing but kittens and puppies...

Jim: Epic Fail, Man. EPIC Fail.

by Operative 668 Mar 24, 2008

Under "surreal," I prefer this definition:

Quote3.    surreal    51 up, 20 down
   
Popular usage has transformed the word "surreal" into litle more than a synonym for "weird", and so rendered it useless. I'll use "surrealistic" if a film (or any work of art) exhibits mannered mimicking of superficial aspects of the visual style of the original Surrealists between the wars (commonly, cribs from Dali, Magritte, Chirico, Bunuel or Cocteau). In all other cases I prefer more specific terms, like "dreamlike", "Nightmarish" or "Bunuelesque". I'd reserve "surrealist" for the output of members of recognized Surrealist groups.
Everything is so surreal.
by elag Mar 5, 2004

Urbandictionary appears to be a highly democratic and participative endeavor.  People submit definitions, and the definitions are listed in order of the number of "thumbs up" votes received from readers.  There was a definition of "epic"  that I particularly liked, but printing it here would probably violate some "family and workplace friendly" requirement of the forum.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on March 04, 2010, 12:55:08 PM
Epic: everything pertaining to greatness! :3

http://images.google.com/images?source=hp&q=epic&gbv=2&aq=f&aqi=&oq=

Edit: it seems that some weird porn got past Google's moderate content filter. I guess they're not sufficiently interested in epic things to check the keyword for content :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Drasko on March 04, 2010, 01:37:00 PM
Quote from: Lethe on March 04, 2010, 12:55:08 PM
Edit: it seems that some weird porn got past Google's moderate content filter. I guess they're not sufficiently interested in epic things to check the keyword for content :(
You're thinking of the picture titled Balkan Erotic, right? It's not porn but performance/short film with full title Balkan Erotic Epic (that's why it got caught in your epic search) by rather well known performance artist Marina Abramović (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Abramović)

unrelated to that, this one had me in stitches:
(http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/epic%20failure.jpg) 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: "Epic Fail - ure"
Post by: Cato on March 04, 2010, 02:03:31 PM
Several sources claim it goes back to 1974 and the Dungeons and Dragons handbook, where a disastrous roll of the dice could cause an "epic fail."  Either the word "fail" was misprinted or the word was shortened on purpose for unknown reasons.

Others claim it goes back to 1980's Japanese videogames not using proper English.  Another claim is that early computer programmers used it to refer to crashing programs.  You might remember: "Abort?  Retry?"  If the computer still crashed or failed to reboot, it was an "epic fail."

Why those 3 last letters cannot be used...who knows?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on March 04, 2010, 02:12:53 PM
Fail is definitely influenced by poor translation from Japanese (like a lot of post 2000s nerd talk - it began to be used ironically, but then gained greater popularity, but still with that "we know this sounds absurd" edge to it) -

(http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/3332/bstarfail.png)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on March 04, 2010, 05:00:19 PM
Quote from: Drasko on March 04, 2010, 01:37:00 PM
unrelated to that, this one had me in stitches:
(http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/epic%20failure.jpg)
That must suck having that on...
trying to figure what's so bad about it, if you cover up the bottom of the nose and the whole mouth, it's not too bad. I'm not sure how appropriate the shading is, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 04, 2010, 06:03:37 PM
John Singer Sargent, he wasn't.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 05, 2010, 05:41:58 AM
Quote from: Drasko on March 04, 2010, 01:37:00 PM
(http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/epic%20failure.jpg)

"In Loving Memory" -- Looks as if the artist wanted her remembered as a zombie.  (And I don't mean a member of the band that did "Time of the Season.")
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on March 05, 2010, 05:53:52 AM
The tattoo appears to me to be a tribute to a loved one who has died.  For sure, tattoo art is often crude and does not always portray a complimentary image from a photograph, but the artist did his best to respond to the wishes of this patron.   

This aspect of online activity, i.e. making fun of people we don't know, is one of the least positive.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 05, 2010, 08:35:32 AM
Quote from: Franco on March 05, 2010, 05:53:52 AM
This aspect of online activity, i.e. making fun of people we don't know, is one of the least positive.

Quote from: DavidRoss on March 05, 2010, 05:41:58 AM
"In Loving Memory" -- Looks as if the artist wanted her remembered as a zombie.

I think, Franco, that this artist fully deserves his lumps.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 04, 2010, 06:03:37 PM
John Singer Sargent, he wasn't.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 05, 2010, 11:03:58 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 04, 2010, 03:30:10 AM
What the heck do kids these days mean when they use the terms "surreal" and "epic?"

They mean cool, boss, rad, gear, superbad and wicked. I did a column  once on the way every generation uses different words to say essentially the same thing: we like something or we don't like it. The words are different, but the sentiment never changes. Shame I can't find the thing online. It was epic.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 05, 2010, 11:22:14 AM
Straight from the fridge, daddy-o.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 05, 2010, 12:48:59 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 04, 2010, 06:03:37 PM
John Singer Sargent, he wasn't.

She looks like she's decomposing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 05, 2010, 12:49:36 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 05, 2010, 11:03:58 AM
They mean cool, boss, rad, gear, superbad and wicked. I did a column  once on the way every generation uses different words to say essentially the same thing: we like something or we don't like it. The words are different, but the sentiment never changes. Shame I can't find the thing online. It was epic.
Hip mod a-go-go and groovalicious, slick.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on March 05, 2010, 04:57:14 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 05, 2010, 12:48:59 PM
She looks like she's decomposing.

She is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 06, 2010, 05:13:04 AM
Perhaps rather like Wilde's Portrait of Dorian Gray, the tat will decompose whilst the dear departed will remain fresh as the daisies she pushes up. We will revisit him in a couple of years and report back.

The former film director of 'Death Wish', Michael Winner, has for years been writing a weekly restaurant review in the Sunday Times. He abuses the word, 'historic' which is attached to any outstanding dish he is served. So, weekly there is a sentence or so along the following lines:

The treacle tart was exactly what was to be expected of this chef, truly historic.

Alternatively

Sadly, my quest for 'the' historic souffle turned into disappointment; as I sent back the better half of the congealed mess that was delivered to me.


You get the style of him, no doubt.

He has just started a TV show where he descends from his mansion and his chauffeur dumps him at the house of some 'real' person eager for 15 minutes of fame. He then proceeds to criticise everything from the foolish participants to their wallpaper and food. I am unclear whether watching it is less painful than going over your privates with sand paper, but this writer is unwilling to give either a try right now.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 06, 2010, 06:40:38 AM
Quote from: knight on March 06, 2010, 05:13:04 AMHe has just started a TV show where he descends from his mansion and his chauffeur dumps him at the house of some 'real' person eager for 15 minutes of fame. He then proceeds to criticise everything from the foolish participants to their wallpaper and food. I am unclear whether watching it is less painful than going over your privates with sand paper, but this writer is unwilling to give either a try right now.
Sounds historic.

As for your uncertain comparison, I suppose it depends on the sandpaper's grit.  Hmmm.  Reminds me of an episode of particular foolishness as a child when I spilled turpentine on my privates.  Sandpaper might be preferable to that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 06, 2010, 07:03:12 AM
Yes, as an adolescent I discovered that after-shave was not a great, or historic, idea either.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 06, 2010, 07:30:56 AM
Quote from: knight on March 06, 2010, 07:03:12 AMYes, as an adolescent I discovered that after-shave was not a great, or historic, idea either.
Epic!  (Or should that be, "Surreal!"?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 06, 2010, 07:34:00 AM
Not too sure what I exclaimed, but I think my eyebrows met my hairline.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 06, 2010, 08:12:53 AM
Off topic a bit but I'm grateful to Cato for this thread, on which I've often found the same playful spirit that attracted me to GMG in the first place.  I wonder what Nigel's up to these days.  Still seeing more opera in a season than I'll see in a lifetime, I imagine, and still cracking wise with admirable pith and dryness best shaken, not stirred.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 06, 2010, 08:51:12 AM
I am in a bit of contact with him, but don't hold a lot of info. He is still attending the opera and travelling around.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 08, 2010, 06:54:02 AM
There are enjoyable grumbles in Why Begins With W, too (not surprisingly).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble - Australian Slang
Post by: Cato on March 08, 2010, 07:39:39 AM
Many thanks for the above comments!

My wife has been hooked on an Australian Horse Opera for Women called McLeod's Daughters, which ran for most of the last decade (2001-2008).

It features in every episode a minimum of 4 women under age 30, dressed in low-cut, very tight, and very sweaty T-shirts (they work on a "station" in the outback), who are trying to survive "epic" 44-minute dramas, all caused by incredibly incompetent and completely clueless males.

The young women wrestle pigs, sheep, horses, and cattle, and occasionally even one of the human bearers of Y-chromosomes, during which they become even sweatier,  :o
and during which one hears curious words.

Last night we heard a word, and it was discouraging, because we could not understand what it was!   0:)

After numerous attempts we heard "Jilleroo".

This apparently is the female version of Jackeroo, which I thought might mean "Jack of all trades," but means "tenderfoot" instead.

Jilleroo in the show was used as a verb!

"Buckaroo" - if you were wondering - comes from a corruption of Spanish vaquero (cowboy).
Title: Jacks and Jills
Post by: Spotswood on March 08, 2010, 07:52:13 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 08, 2010, 07:39:39 AM

After numerous attempts we heard "Jilleroo".

This apparently is the female version of Jackeroo, which I thought might mean "Jack of all trades," but means "tenderfoot" instead.

This is not uncommon. I recently came across the phrase "to jill off," which, well ... oh, dear ...  :-[
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble - Australian Slang
Post by: DavidRoss on March 08, 2010, 08:56:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 08, 2010, 07:39:39 AM
My wife has been hooked on an Australian Horse Opera for Women called McLeod's Daughters, which ran for most of the last decade (2001-2008).
Mine, too.  I wonder if there's a support group available...?
Title: Re: Jacks and Jills
Post by: Cato on March 08, 2010, 10:48:29 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 08, 2010, 07:52:13 AM
This is not uncommon. I recently came across the phrase "to jill off," which, well ... oh, dear ...  :-[

Was this in writing or did some ne'er-do-well publicly proclaim it?   $:)

DavidRoss: Do you watch McLeod's Daughters with your wife?

The answer will reveal quite a bit about your marriage!   :D

A support group for the show's victims must exist somewhere!

Actually, there were episodes which were not half bad.  And as mentioned above, there are specific reasons to watch ... and ignore the plot!   0:)



Title: Re: Jacks and Jills
Post by: Spotswood on March 08, 2010, 12:41:54 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 08, 2010, 10:48:29 AM
Was this in writing or did some ne'er-do-well publicly proclaim it?   $:)

Oh, it was written. If I knew a woman who used that phrase verbally, I'd try very hard to get to know her better.
Title: Re: Jacks and Jills
Post by: DavidRoss on March 08, 2010, 01:02:43 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 08, 2010, 10:48:29 AMDavidRoss: Do you watch McLeod's Daughters with your wife?  The answer will reveal quite a bit about your marriage!   :D
I've watched a few episodes with her.  They're a darned sight better than the horrid disaster flicks she enjoys!
Title: Re: Jacks and Jills
Post by: Spotswood on March 08, 2010, 01:13:24 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 08, 2010, 01:02:43 PM
I've watched a few episodes with her.  They're a darned sight better than the horrid disaster flicks she enjoys!

And if there are a lot of women in tight, sweaty T-shirts, I should think it would be more popular among men and women, anyway, even if the men are portrayed as doofuses. On TV sitcoms, all men are portrayed as doofuses.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 08, 2010, 01:17:59 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 08, 2010, 01:13:24 PM
And if there are a lot of women in tight, sweaty T-shirts, I should think it would be more popular among men and women, anyway, even if the men are portrayed as doofuses. On TV sitcoms, all men are portrayed as doofuses.

Writers for television have insufficient skill to craft humor with male characters who are not doofuses.
Title: Re: Jacks and Jills
Post by: DavidRoss on March 08, 2010, 02:03:32 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 08, 2010, 01:13:24 PM
And if there are a lot of women in tight, sweaty T-shirts, I should think it would be more popular among men and women, anyway, even if the men are portrayed as doofuses. On TV sitcoms, all men are portrayed as doofuses.
True enough!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 08, 2010, 02:06:42 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 08, 2010, 01:17:59 PM
Writers for television have insufficient skill to craft humor with male characters who are not doofuses.

I don't know why that should be, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 08, 2010, 02:17:00 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 08, 2010, 01:17:59 PM
Writers for television have insufficient skill to craft humor with male characters who are not doofuses.
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 08, 2010, 02:06:42 PM
I don't know why that should be, though.
Perhaps they write only from their own experience...?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Ungrammatical Images
Post by: Cato on March 08, 2010, 05:08:57 PM
Off-topic but... here is visual evidence of what David Ross and I have experienced:

(http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/11/07/Daughters_060822094935377_wideweb__300x375,1.jpg)

Dusty, but not sweaty:

(http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/3800000/Drover-s-Girls-mcleods-daughters-3893615-897-596.jpg)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on March 08, 2010, 05:37:26 PM
You're wives drag you to see this every week?
What a shame for you guys.    ::)

Aye, right...  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 09, 2010, 07:27:36 AM
So, men don't like this show?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2010, 12:19:08 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 09, 2010, 07:27:36 AM
So, men don't like this show?

It is much better with the sound off!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2010, 12:30:05 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 09, 2010, 12:19:08 PM
It is much better with the sound off!   $:)

That's what they said about Charlie's Angels!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2010, 02:30:18 PM
An example of the writing:

Inconstant Australian Male attempting to woo Sweaty Tightly T-Shirted Australian Cowgirl:
"Yew know whut yew ah? Spam!"  (You know what you are?)

S.T.T.A.G: "Kind meat?"  (Canned meat?)

I.A.M. : "No.  Sexy, Praddy, 'n' Moin!"  (Sexy, Pretty, and Mine!)

Tolstoy never wrote stuff like that!  (And there's a reason!   ;D  )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 09, 2010, 05:28:36 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 09, 2010, 12:30:05 PM
That's what they said about Charlie's Angels!

And Wagner.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 09, 2010, 05:30:09 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 09, 2010, 02:30:18 PMTolstoy never wrote stuff like that! 
But I undertand the original title of War and Peace was War---What Is It Good For?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 09, 2010, 06:46:08 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 09, 2010, 05:28:36 PM
And Wagner.
Chortle!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2010, 03:49:24 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 09, 2010, 05:30:09 PM
But I undertand the original title of War and Peace was War---What Is It Good For?

Wocka Wocka!   ;D

Which opens up all kinds of possibilities for sequels as well:
"War and Peace and Love and Dope" - The '60's version.

Maybe the lady who attempted a sequel to Gone With The Wind can handle that.


Back to Grumbling!   :o

I might have written about this some time ago: I really dislike T.V. news shows using slang words like "cops" rather than "the police," when reporting about the latest antics in the big city.

I have also heard reporters use "the guy said," when talking about a witness to the latest antics.

Probably the staff feels this makes them more comprehensible to the audience, or more like one of the "guys" down at the bowling alley, or at the local spa for elbow-bending.

We also have a Twinkie named "Megan" on one station, who acts like Godzilla is in the background trampling down skyscrapers whenever she reports on a story, and her stories usually involve rabid chipmunks or grandmothers victimized by junk-mail offers: she dazzles you with breathless, wide-eyed, monotonic hysteria!  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2010, 05:32:58 AM
Originally it was to be a tale of watermelon loss . . . Gone With the Rind.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 10, 2010, 07:15:20 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 10, 2010, 03:49:24 AM
We also have a Twinkie named "Megan" on one station, who acts like Godzilla is in the background trampling down skyscrapers whenever she reports on a story, and her stories usually involve rabid chipmunks or grandmothers victimized by junk-mail offers: she dazzles you with breathless, wide-eyed, monotonic hysteria!  :o

Reporters simply live for the end of the world. This winter, as we experienced three snowstorms in a row, the warnings on TV got bigger as the snowfalls got smaller. The eyes glazed over as the dire predictons went on and on.

As for the cops and guys,  that's not so much a question of correctness as style --- what the editor is willing to live with. At our paper, we don't say cops or guys, nor do we  say kids when we mean children. But if a reporter is out on the street speaking off the cuff, it's harder to correct them. And some papers, particularly tabloids, like to go for working-class slang. I'd expect the word cops in a daily News column, but not in a NYT editorial. It's a matter of context.

I remember Letterman once did a top 10 list of words used in New York Post headlines, and No. 1 was "Slayfest/lotto (tie)."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 10, 2010, 09:59:30 AM
Slayfest?!  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 10, 2010, 10:13:26 AM
Apparently they're really into news about the mob.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2010, 12:41:34 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 10, 2010, 10:13:26 AM
Apparently they're really into news about the mob.

Life and Death In New York!

Another grumble: I have been hearing commercials and people in general mispronouncing "immediately."

It especially happens when they are emphasizing the word, e.g. the school's principal hits the P.A. and says: "I need to see Rappy Scallion in my office eee-mediately!"   :o

Has anyone else noticed this?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 10, 2010, 01:16:14 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 10, 2010, 12:41:34 PM
Life and Death In New York!

Another grumble: I have been hearing commercials and people in general mispronouncing "immediately."

It especially happens when they are emphasizing the word, e.g. the school's principal hits the P.A. and says: "I need to see Rappy Scallion in my office eee-mediately!"   :o

Has anyone else noticed this?
I thought you were going to say "ĭ-midget-lee."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2010, 01:40:44 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 10, 2010, 01:16:14 PM
I thought you were going to say "ĭ-midget-lee."

Wow!  I have not heard that pronunciation here in Ohio!   $:)

Here in the heart of Ohio we do hear the contraction "Clumbus" rather than "Columbus."   ::)

And I have heard "Cincy Annie" for "Cincinnati."

Cincy Annie hangs out at a truck stop across the river in Covington!   0:)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 10, 2010, 02:07:13 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 10, 2010, 01:40:44 PMCincy Annie hangs out at a truck stop across the river in Covington!   0:)
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/16/22861315_aa2fb313e1.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 10, 2010, 02:41:48 PM
Here's the whole list:

TOP TEN WORDS USED IN NEW YORK POST HEADLINES

10. Co-Ed
9. Tot
8. Horror
7. Straphangers
6. Mom
5. Weirdos
4. Hizzoner
3. Torso
2. Herr Stienbrenner
1. Slayfest / Lotto    (tie)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 10, 2010, 03:27:41 PM
So the Post can't count.  Why isn't that a surprise?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on March 11, 2010, 04:52:02 PM
A friend sent me a copy of a newspaper article with the headline: "Republicans turned off by size of Obama's package".  Her comment:  "Think they're jealous?"   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 11, 2010, 07:29:43 PM
Quote from: secondwind on March 11, 2010, 04:52:02 PM
"Republicans turned off by size of Obama's package".

Oh, that is an unfortunate chouice of words ...

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 12, 2010, 09:49:18 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 11, 2010, 07:29:43 PM
Oh, that is an unfortunate choice of words ...

Herr Professor Freud just will NOT go away!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 12, 2010, 12:04:11 PM
It's just, as an editor, I'm sensitive to bad headlines. One of our former editors used to say that every headilne should pass the 13-year-old boy test: If a 13-year-old would find something in it to laugh at, it should be discarded. This one fails that test.

Found this one once in a state parks publication: "Hunting and shooting up"

Truly an unbeatable combination.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on March 13, 2010, 09:06:01 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 12, 2010, 12:04:11 PM
It's just, as an editor, I'm sensitive to bad headlines. One of our former editors used to say that every headilne should pass the 13-year-old boy test: If a 13-year-old would find something in it to laugh at, it should be discarded. This one fails that test.

Yeah.  Epic fail.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 15, 2010, 07:47:48 AM
Quote from: secondwind on March 13, 2010, 09:06:01 PM
Yeah.  Epic fail.

Yeah, like, epic.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on March 15, 2010, 08:34:43 AM
I like the use of italics as a means of word stress.  Italics make a word everything it should be in vocal context.
Italics are great!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on March 15, 2010, 08:38:22 AM
Quote from: John on March 15, 2010, 08:34:43 AM
I like the use of italics as a means of word stress.  Italics make a word everything it should be in vocal context.
Italics are great!

This is a place to grumble, man!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 15, 2010, 08:51:50 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on March 15, 2010, 08:38:22 AM
This is a place to grumble, man!

For sure, man.

Or: For sure, man.

Or: For sure, man.

Less often: For sure, man.

Even less often: For sure, man.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Harpo on March 15, 2010, 09:39:11 AM
Is anyone else bored with the phrase "at the end of the day" (meaning ultimately)? At first I thought the speakers meant the end of the end of the actual day they were speaking....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 15, 2010, 09:53:07 AM
Yes, one of the tiredest of clichés.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 15, 2010, 10:06:38 AM
Ditto. It's on my never-to-be-used list.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on March 15, 2010, 10:47:59 AM
Well, at the end of the day, people are still using it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 15, 2010, 03:21:23 PM
Quote from: John on March 15, 2010, 10:47:59 AM
Well, at the end of the day, people are still using it.

Which is why we grumble about it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on March 15, 2010, 04:45:26 PM
But Joe, at the end of the day, we do not grumble about it.  We grumble about it.
Grumble.  What a great word.  It could be so much more if it wasn't so negative.  Grumble.  We are the grumblers.  Did you hear about the grumbles?
I love grumbles.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 15, 2010, 06:06:33 PM
Wow, dude, you're like psyched.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on March 16, 2010, 07:40:36 AM
If exclamation marks can be used in mid-sentence, can question marks as well (in special cases, not in general)?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 16, 2010, 07:56:19 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 16, 2010, 07:40:36 AM
If exclamation marks can be used in mid-sentence, can question marks as well (in special cases, not in general)?
Damn straight!

You can use anything you want as long as it helps convey your intentions, right? (both cognitive and emotive).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on March 16, 2010, 08:00:17 AM
Quote from: Harpo on March 15, 2010, 09:39:11 AM
Is anyone else bored with the phrase "at the end of the day" (meaning ultimately)? At first I thought the speakers meant the end of the end of the actual day they were speaking....

During the last presidential campaign I think it was Terry McCauliffe who was debating someone on one of the news shows (I remember he was running for something himself) and used that phrase a whopping two dozen times in a few minutes.  Or some such ridiculous amount. 

Kind of like "on the other hand" used as if we were octopussies.

:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on March 16, 2010, 08:15:15 AM
Quote from: Franco on March 16, 2010, 08:00:17 AM
Kind of like "on the other hand" used as if we were octopussies.
:)

*Reminds self: now is not the time for such jokes*

:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 16, 2010, 08:39:13 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 16, 2010, 07:40:36 AM
If exclamation marks can be used in mid-sentence, can question marks as well (in special cases, not in general)?

Could you give an example? I'm trying to think of one, and I can't. I've never used an exclamaition in mid-sentence.

One thing I've noticed and try to correct is the use of question makers at the end of declarative sentences, usually following the verb ask to wonder, as in, "Some of us were wondering where the children went?" This is not a question and does not need a question mark. It is a statement about what the people were wondering. You could rephrase it to read something like,  "Some of us wondered, where did the children go?" but there's really no need to.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on March 16, 2010, 08:57:42 AM
@DavidRoss - I guess it might be an English thing on my part. I need rules - without rules there is anarchy, like drinking tea before 11am or after 7pm - almost antisocial :-*

Quote from: Joe Barron on March 16, 2010, 08:39:13 AM
Could you give an example? I'm trying to think of one, and I can't. I've never used an exclamaition in mid-sentence.
I think that I have seen it several times in pre-20th century writing, and when looking it up I found "Hark! the hallowed angels sing" used as a common example affirming its correctness -- it may have even been somewhere in this thread. It could be one of those things which became outdated, but as there is no book of English language LAW as with many other languages it has never become... illegal.

Quote from: Joe Barron on March 16, 2010, 08:39:13 AM
One ting I've noticed and try to correct is the use of question makers at the end of declarative sentences, usually following the verb ask to wonder, as in, "Some of us were wondering where the children went?" This is not a question and does not need a question mark. It is a statement about what the people were wondering. You could rephrase it to read something like,  "Some of us wondered, where did the children go?" but there's really no need to.
It makes me uncomfortable how widespread this has become. It makes many things people say sound as if they are being sarcastic when spoken with that rising sound at the end of the sentence...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on March 16, 2010, 09:03:40 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 16, 2010, 08:57:42 AM
@DavidRoss - I guess it might be an English thing on my part. I need rules - without rules there is anarchy, like drinking tea before 11am or after 7pm - almost antisocial :-*
I think that I have seen it several times in pre-20th century writing, and when looking it up I found "Hark! the hallowed angels sing" used as a common example affirming its correctness -- it may have even been somewhere in this thread. It could be one of those things which became outdated, but as there is no book of English language LAW as with many other languages it has never become... illegal.
It makes me uncomfortable how widespread this has become. It makes many things people say sound as if they are being sarcastic when spoken with that rising sound at the end of the sentence...

Some of us might think otherwise?  >:(

J/K. I agree.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 16, 2010, 09:16:51 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 16, 2010, 08:57:42 AM
"Hark! the hallowed angels sing" used as a common example affirming its correctness

I don't see this as being the middle of a sentence. It's actually two complete thoughts. The exclamation --- Hark! --- stands alone, followed by the sentence proper, "the Hallowed angels sing."  There would be less confusion if the "t" in "the" were capitalized, thus:
Hark! (pause) The hallowed angels sing.

In this case, Hark! may also be considered a single, independent sentence, since it expresses a one-word command, like "Listen!" or "Hsst!" If we think of "Hark the herald angels sing" as a single sentence, it's only because we're used to running it all together in one breath when we sing the carol. 

In any case, the exclamation point is fine. In fact, it's indispensible.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on March 16, 2010, 09:20:25 AM
Oh, that makes sense. Danke!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 16, 2010, 09:25:53 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 16, 2010, 08:57:42 AM
@DavidRoss - I guess it might be an English thing on my part. I need rules - without rules there is anarchy, like drinking tea before 11am or after 7pm - almost antisocial :-*

The problem with rules, of course, is that there aren't any. In language, what's correct is what is. Of course, in my own writing, I do follow restrictions based on my own and others' ideas about what consitutes good prose, as well as the prescribed style guide, but all of them are subject to change, and others may ignore them entirely. It's like tea etiquette: a social construct, not a rule of nature, and we obey or ignore the construct as we see fit. I have drunk tea before 11 a.m., but no one was around to see me do it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 16, 2010, 09:37:51 AM
Quote from: Lethe on March 16, 2010, 08:57:42 AM
@DavidRoss - I guess it might be an English thing on my part. I need rules - without rules there is anarchy, like drinking tea before 11am or after 7pm - almost antisocial :-*
Ahhh...now we're onto something:  Rules!  Some folks regard them as boundaries--inviolate, with imaginary border guards ready to wag their fingers and cluck their tongues at any transgression.  Others see them as guidelines--general principles we use to check our bearings, somewhat as an overland traveler will pull out the compass now and again to make sure he doesn't stray too far off course.

When you were a child did you always color within the lines? 

Second something, even more in need of discussion:  anarchy!  Anarchy is not utter chaos and disorder; it is self rule, with no kings or parliaments or exalted grand poobahs forcing everyone else to obey their will.  'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished!

Finally--I cannot speak for English English, but the American variety is a pretty darned flexible instrument, despite the efforts of a pompous 19th Century schoolmaster to extract grammatical rules from his own usage and to impose them upon generations of helpless schoolchildren as one more set of ridiculous practices to cripple their creativity, replace understanding with rote learning, and enable others to determine in moments one's social class, educational level, and relative intelligence.

Hah!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 16, 2010, 10:02:28 AM
What's interesting about David's post is that it is grammatically and orthographically perfect by all the standard rules. In language,  what's imortant is not so much what the rules are but that everyone agree on them. True anarchy would mean gibberish.

Making up my own rules, I could say of David's post, "Agree mim me no.  Incorrect no the thing bad right rule dude." I know what I mean. Do you? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 16, 2010, 10:24:13 AM
Speaking of grammar, here is a penetrating critique (http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-Grammar/25497) of Strunk and White.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 16, 2010, 10:38:14 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 16, 2010, 10:24:13 AM
Speaking of grammar, here is a penetrating critique (http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-Grammar/25497) of Strunk and White.
After you've read the linked article, there will be a brief quiz, followed by several sentences for you to diagram, such as the one in italics here. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,15974.msg399214.html#msg399214)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 16, 2010, 11:09:32 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 16, 2010, 10:24:13 AM
Speaking of grammar, here is a penetrating critique (http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-Grammar/25497) of Strunk and White.

The Elements of Style contains mostly sensible advice, and I don't find the critique all that "penetrating."   From the introduction of "The Elements of Style" by E.B. White himself

QuoteStyle rules of this sort are, of course, somewhat a matter of individual preference, and even the established rules of grammar are open to challenge.  Professor Strunk, although one of the most inflexible and choosy of men, was quick to acknowledge the fallacy of inflexibility and the danger of doctrine.

I subscribe to the old adage, that before you break the rules you have to know the rules.  If we could get access to Dick Cheney's cache of intercepted e-mails I'm willing to bet that 99.9999% of rule breaking by our citizens is due to ignorance rather than artistic license.   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 16, 2010, 01:04:13 PM
I disagree. I knew writing instructors who, following S&W, objected to any use of the verb to be as passive, as the article describes. I remember one prof actually red-penciled the phrase "He was going" as passive. I also like the observation that White keeps breaking his own rules, eg., "The adjective hasn't been built that can pull a weak or inaccurate noun out of a tight place." That's actually a good sentence, and yet it violates four of the rules S&W lay down. The disclaimer doesn't quite cut through the white noise, and in any event, I don't think White intended his grammatical rules to be broken. Rather, he was giving what he called geniuses license to cut loose.

The rule that you should know the rules before you break them makes sense only if the rules are valid to begin with.


Not that I think the book's influence is entirely bad. It was the first style book I read, and it did, at least, get me thinking about stuff like this. And I do like some of the rules, including the that/which distinction, which I do follow, even though it's pretty clear EB White made it up. But there are some rules in the book, like the one about split infinitives or avoiding the use of "people" as a plural or person, or avoiding "fix" when you mean repair, that no good writer adheres to and no good writer has ever adhered to.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 16, 2010, 01:24:23 PM
A senior member of the House Rules Committee is quoted as saying:  And I hope very much that, at the end of the day, that if we are going to have a vote, we will have . . . which not only employs the cliché at the end of the day, but throws in a superfluous that, just in case.  If he had ditched at the end of the day and perhaps simply used the adverb ultimately, he might not have forgotten that he'd already said that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 16, 2010, 01:28:49 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 16, 2010, 01:04:13 PM
I disagree. I knew writing instructors who, following S&W, objected to any use of the verb to be as passive, as the article describes.

You may have had rigid writing instructors, but I don't see what that has to do with The Elements of Style.   The book does not present the rules as set in stone, and although Strunk may personally have been an insufferable pedant, White was an extremely talented writer.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 16, 2010, 01:31:24 PM
Extremely in that phrase strikes me as hyperbolic (almost regardless of what talented writer is being spoken of), but that does not materially alter your point. At the end of the day.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 16, 2010, 01:34:49 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 16, 2010, 01:31:24 PM
Extremely in that phrase strikes me as hyperbolic (almost regardless of what talented writer is being spoken of), but that does not materially alter your point. At the end of the day.

Well, aside from Charlotte's Web, his job was to produce urbane text for "The New Yorker" whose only salient attribute was style.   Good qualifications for editing TEOS, I would say.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 16, 2010, 02:30:57 PM
Yes, I don't quarrel over his talent. One of MY stickler teachers (Lord bless 'em, every one) bemoaned overuse of 'very'—use it too often and injudiciously, and you dilute every adjective you use. He'd 've said, Don't say "very talented" where "talented" will serve;  then we don't get cornered into oddness like "extremely talented" for emphasis. How would we distinguish 'extremity' of talent, anyway?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 16, 2010, 03:21:57 PM
Or, what the heck: super-size me!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 16, 2010, 07:38:23 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on March 16, 2010, 01:28:49 PM
You may have had rigid writing instructors, but I don't see what that has to do with The Elements of Style.   The book does not present the rules as set in stone, and although Strunk may personally have been an insufferable pedant, White was an extremely talented writer.

The point Pullam is making is that it has everything to do with the Elements of Style --- that it has been so influential and its rules have been turned into fetishes, even though they are not esssential. And even if the overempahsis fetish is the fault of the instructors and not the book, the influence of the book still needs to be rolled back. It's still the only style guide a lot of students are exposed to, and I can think of none other that insists so strongly on the use of the active voice. As the author of Lapsing Into a Comma points out, the active voice is overrated.

Pullam does acknowledge that White was a talented writer.

Personally, I found Pullam's article liberating over and above his individual arguments. Filling up on style guide rules --- or even suggestions ---  can lead to a paralysis of perfectionism. You can drive yourself crazy by second guessing every deicision you make on the page.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 16, 2010, 08:53:36 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 16, 2010, 07:38:23 PMPersonally, I found Pullam's article liberating over and above his individual arguments. Filling up on style guide rules --- or even suggestions ---  can lead to a paralysis of perfectionism. You can drive yourself crazy by second guessing every deicision you make on the page.

I find this argument extremely unconvincing.  The Elements of Style is an extremely concise and only puts forward a set of common sense rules.  It has become popular precisely because it is much less stultifying than all of the alternatives.  And I see no evidence that passive voice has been endangered by this slim volume.  (No pun intended  ;D)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 17, 2010, 03:09:14 AM
Quote from: Joe"Filling up on style guide rules --- or even suggestions ---  can lead to a paralysis of perfectionism.

Good point, but ultimately the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our style books but in ourselves . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on March 17, 2010, 06:01:52 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2010, 03:09:14 AM

Good point, but ultimately the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our style books but in ourselves . . . .

Hear, hear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 07:30:09 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on March 16, 2010, 08:53:36 PM
I find this argument extremely unconvincing. 

This breaks the rule against unnecessary words, you know.  ;)

Well, nuff said. What I carry away from everyone's comments about Strunk and White is that rules are useful until we find it convenient to ignore them.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 17, 2010, 07:32:31 AM
OTOH, Joe, we agree on the value of books, even where we ultimately disagree with even a substantial portion of the content, when they set us thinking along new paths.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 07:35:44 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2010, 07:32:31 AM
OTOH, Joe, we agree on the value of books, even where we ultimately disagree with even a substantial portion of the content, when they set us thinking along new paths.

No, I like the old paths. Above all, I want to be comfortable and secure in the knowledge that I'm right about everything.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 17, 2010, 07:37:31 AM
You been listening to a lot of Pelléas lately?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 17, 2010, 07:40:04 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2010, 07:37:31 AM
You been listening to a lot of Pelléas lately?

The dream of Gerontius, more likely
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 07:47:53 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2010, 07:37:31 AM
You been listening to a lot of Pelléas lately?

;D

Schubert and Beethoven chamber music, actually, but your point is very well taken.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 07:53:33 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 16, 2010, 02:30:57 PM
Yes, I don't quarrel over his talent. One of MY stickler teachers (Lord bless 'em, every one) bemoaned overuse of 'very'—use it too often and injudiciously, and you dilute every adjective you use. He'd 've said, Don't say "very talented" where "talented" will serve;  then we don't get cornered into oddness like "extremely talented" for emphasis. How would we distinguish 'extremity' of talent, anyway?

My ex-wife, an excellent writer and editor, once told me that a good  way to tell if you're overusing the word "very" is to substitute the word "damned" --- as in, "White was a damned talented writer." It jumps out at you at that point. 

OTOH, modifiers like "very" and "extremely" exist for a reason, and there's no need to pretend they don't. My own bad habit is overuse of "just" and "simply," which don't add much to meaning, either, but seem to me to make sentences flow more evenly. Usually, after writing a draft, I go back and take out all the justs and simplys. I'm always surprised at how many there are.

Redundancy and wordiness have their place and can be used to great rhetorical effect. Just look at Shakespeare.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 17, 2010, 08:01:20 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 17, 2010, 07:53:33 AMRedundancy and wordiness have their place and can be used to great rhetorical effect. Just look at Shakespeare.

Strunk and White's point is the redundancy and wordiness loose their rhetorical effect if every sentence is redundant and wordy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 08:01:51 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on March 17, 2010, 08:01:20 AM
Strunk and White's point is the redundancy and wordiness loose their rhetorical effect if every sentence is redundant and wordy.

Yeah, but we knew that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 17, 2010, 08:03:29 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 17, 2010, 07:53:33 AM
OTOH, modifiers like "very" and "extremely" exist for a reason, and there's no need to pretend they don't.

Verily, verily.

Quote from: Scarpia on March 17, 2010, 08:01:20 AM
Strunk and White's point is the redundancy and wordiness loose their rhetorical effect if every sentence is redundant and wordy.

They lose rhetorical effect, but they become the tone . . . look at minimalism.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 08:04:43 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2010, 08:03:29 AM
... look at minimalism.

Must we?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on March 17, 2010, 08:06:33 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 17, 2010, 08:04:43 AM
Must we?

I'd rather look at it than listen to it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 17, 2010, 08:06:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 17, 2010, 08:03:29 AMlook at minimalism.
A rose is a rose is a rose.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 08:15:48 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 17, 2010, 08:06:54 AM
A rose is a rose is a rose.

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?
Philip Glass
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 17, 2010, 08:37:48 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 17, 2010, 08:15:48 AMKnock knock ...
Who's there?

Knock knock ...
Who's there?

(repeat)

Philip Glass
Ah, yes...but Ms Stein's statement is the pithiest manual of style ever penned.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spotswood on March 17, 2010, 08:42:16 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 17, 2010, 08:37:48 AM
Ah, yes...but Ms Stein's statement is the pithiest manual of style ever penned.

You should read James Thurber's essay on Stein.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 17, 2010, 09:04:58 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on March 17, 2010, 08:42:16 AM
You should read James Thurber's essay on Stein.
I read it in college (back in the dark ages).  Stein, like many of us, was better the more she kept her mouth shut.  But her influence on 20th Century art was profound.  She might not have been all that gifted herself, but she sure could recognize it in others.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on March 29, 2010, 10:48:50 AM
"...reaches a crescendo" is a pretty popular phrase now, but it seems that when people use it they're actually referring to a climax. Of course, the crescendo isn't the climax, it's the build to it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on March 29, 2010, 11:04:48 AM
Quote from: The Six on March 29, 2010, 10:48:50 AM
"...reaches a crescendo" is a pretty popular phrase now, but it seems that when people use it they're actually referring to a climax. Of course, the crescendo isn't the climax, it's the build to it.

In a similar vein: Quantum leap; Light-years ahead.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 30, 2010, 04:29:30 PM
Many thanks for the previous remarks above, especially the Glass joke!  Wocka Wocka!

Last night Blondie Bubblehead, Anchor Woman for a local station's opinion of what is news, regaled her audience about a local fire in an apartment building.

The cause?

"Fire Department officials said that unintended food was the cause."

I have suspected for years that food has the capability of bursting into flames if people buy it without the proper intention.

You do hear about all that food bought unintentionally, and then the food feels unwanted, rejected, and then becomes pyromaniacally mischievous?   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 06, 2010, 03:41:59 PM
Why can't people use apostrophe's correctly anymore?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: listener on April 06, 2010, 04:03:12 PM
Quote from: The Six on April 06, 2010, 03:41:59 PM
Why can't people use apostrophe's (sic) correctly anymore?

Because critics are likely to use cant.

(does not make much sense, but I could not resist)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sydney Grew on April 06, 2010, 04:48:56 PM
Quote from: The Six on April 06, 2010, 03:41:59 PM
Why can't people use apostrophe's correctly any[ ]more?
It is just one symptom of the widespread intellectual impoverishment of to-day - sometimes referred to as "dumbing down." We see it all around us do not we.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on April 11, 2010, 03:58:40 PM
Is there ever a reason to put a space before an exclamation or question mark at the end of a sentence? It seems common practice with a lot by Romance language writers on the internet (or at least, most times I see it done it is by an Italian/French/Spanish speaker)...

Example: "'O Sole Mio !"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Papy Oli on April 12, 2010, 11:50:11 AM
Quote from: Lethe on April 11, 2010, 03:58:40 PM
Is there ever a reason to put a space before an exclamation or question mark at the end of a sentence? It seems common practice with a lot by Romance language writers on the internet (or at least, most times I see it done it is by an Italian/French/Spanish speaker)...

Example: "'O Sole Mio !"

Just did a quick search on the French side and that's only due to grammatical accepted "rules" of our language : basically, if it is a "single" mark (e.g. comma, point...), it is a single space afterwards. If it is a double mark (e.g. exclamation, question mark), you use a "double" space (one either side). Lots of fiddling about really for something that's done unconsciously  ;D





Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on April 13, 2010, 05:25:45 AM
Thank you!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 15, 2010, 05:20:23 PM
My local moronic television reporter, Blondie Bubblehead, recently intoned - complete with the phrase as a caption at the bottom of the screen - the following phrase:

"Coming up: Diffusing a dangerous situation!"

Why anyone would want to do that, rather than defusing it, is a mystery to me!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 16, 2010, 05:51:29 AM
Well, at reduced concentration, the dangers are manageable ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 20, 2010, 11:13:54 AM
May Not Have Thought This One Through Dept.

Quote"If there's a knife in your back, you take it out six inches, then another six inches and pretty soon, it's all out. You've got to use every method to get it removed."

I don't know about you folks, but if there's a knife 12"-+ in my back, it's already sticking out my front.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Chuck Grammar Check
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2010, 04:28:26 PM
My wife was typing the following sentence:

"The teacher was discussing the problem with her mentor and me."

Bill Gates' Microsoft Word underlined "me" as an error, and Grammar Check said to change "me" to "I"  :o !

Should you discuss a problem with me or discuss a problem with I?

I would like to discuss this problem with the geniuses at Microsoft Word...after I smacked them around!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on April 27, 2010, 04:43:24 PM
It's all Bill Gates' fault!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Chuck Grammar Check
Post by: DavidRoss on April 27, 2010, 05:00:46 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 27, 2010, 04:28:26 PM
My wife was typing the following sentence:

"The teacher was discussing the problem with her mentor and me."

Bill Gates' Microsoft Word underlined "me" as an error, and Grammar Check said to change "me" to "I"  :o !

Should you discuss a problem with me or discuss a problem with I?

I would like to discuss this problem with the geniuses at Microsoft Word...after I smacked them around!   $:)
Maybe this is why using the subjective pronoun instead of the objective is getting to be as painfully commonplace as turning plurals into possessives!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on April 27, 2010, 05:37:25 PM
Heading of a big, boxed section of my church bulletin this past Sunday:

APRIL IS CHILD ABUSE MONTH!

Okay, thanks for warning us. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 27, 2010, 09:59:22 PM
Another problem with Microsoft that I experience is that it cannot detect the word 'staff' as being a collective noun. So if I type the likes of....the staff were unhappy about....the programme tries to get me to substitute 'staffs'.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 28, 2010, 04:20:05 AM
Quote from: secondwind on April 27, 2010, 05:37:25 PM
Heading of a big, boxed section of my church bulletin this past Sunday:

APRIL IS CHILD ABUSE MONTH!

Okay, thanks for warning us.

I wondered about the sharp uptick in Vivaldi CD sales in April . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on April 28, 2010, 06:31:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 28, 2010, 04:20:05 AM

I wondered about the sharp uptick in Vivaldi CD sales in April . . . .

You know Karl just because he was a priest, doesn't mean that he's that kind of priest... ::)

;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 28, 2010, 07:07:29 AM
Ouch!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 28, 2010, 08:36:31 AM
Bizzarely, this exchange is superficially the wrong way round. What is this Karl, have you run away and joined this guy?

http://popemichael.homestead.com/index.html

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 08:56:40 AM
Quote from: knight on April 27, 2010, 09:59:22 PM
Another problem with Microsoft that I experience is that it cannot detect the word 'staff' as being a collective noun. So if I type the likes of....the staff were unhappy about....the programme tries to get me to substitute 'staffs'.

Mike

Depends on what kind of staff you are talking about, as in "Moses wore out three wooden staffs wondering in the desert before he switched to a stainless steel model."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 28, 2010, 09:01:30 AM
Oh yes, I had worked out that the staffs turned into snakes before Pharaoh would have gone past the checking system. South Staffs would also have been OK, standing in for South Staffordshire.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 28, 2010, 09:03:47 AM
Quote from: knight on April 28, 2010, 08:36:31 AM
Bizzarely, this exchange is superficially the wrong way round. What is this Karl, have you run away and joined this guy?

http://popemichael.homestead.com/index.html

Mike

Allow me to quote something truly supernatural from the Pope Michael site above - and it really might be "above" all of us!   0:)



QuoteOn October 22, 2010 We gave a presentation at Iowa University.  A recording was made of this, which We hope to post in the next few days.


My emphasis!

Proof that Pope Michael can bend the space-time continuum at will!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on April 28, 2010, 09:09:14 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 08:56:40 AM
Depends on what kind of staff you are talking about, as in "Moses wore out thee wooden staffs wondering in the desert before he switched to a stainless steel model."
In your example, the correct plural would be staves.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 28, 2010, 09:19:33 AM
Quote from: secondwind on April 28, 2010, 09:09:14 AM
In your example, the correct plural would be staves.

Yes I know that, but Microsoft does not....my point really. They deny me the correct collective noun 'Staff', but incorrectly allow me the plural word 'staffs'.

As to Pope Michael, I don't know whether some of the personal information on him has been removed, but when I first hit on the site there were photos of him in his robes with his mum and dad. He lives with them on the farm, sweet really. I am not clear whether his bedroom bears the legend, 'Pope Michael's Vatican, genuflect and enter.'

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 10:11:17 AM
Quote from: secondwind on April 28, 2010, 09:09:14 AM
In your example, the correct plural would be staves.

Not according to my dictionary.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 28, 2010, 10:25:29 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 10:11:17 AM
Not according to my dictionary.

The Random House Dictionary allows "staves" for the musical staff, but not for the group of people.

It does allow - curiously to my American ear - "staves" for the various kinds of sticks, which I would find odd.  It says, however, that "staffs" would also be correct.

The shepherd's staves were made of oak and maple.

The shepherd's staffs  were made of oak and maple.

I like the second one, which could also be used if you substituted "generals' " for "shepherd's" as a commentary on the military!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 28, 2010, 10:26:41 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 10:11:17 AM

Quote from: secondwindIn your example, the correct plural would be staves.

Not according to my dictionary.

My dictionary gives both plural forms as correct.

(Well, and Cato got here first!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 28, 2010, 11:11:44 AM
Right....but my initial comment remains.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 28, 2010, 11:19:02 AM
Quote from: knight on April 28, 2010, 11:11:44 AM
Right....but my initial comment remains.

Yes, your concern that Bill Gates and MondoSoft don't twig collective nouns remains unaddressed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 11:34:48 AM
Quote from: knight on April 28, 2010, 11:11:44 AM
Right....but my initial comment remains.

Mike

I'm afraid I agree with Microsoft.  I put these four sentences into Word and got the following result:

Your staff are incompetent. [flagged as wrong]
Your staff is incompetent.
Your people are incompetent.
Your people is incompetent. [flagged as wrong]

So word recognizes a collective noun (people).   But to my ear "staff" is a singular, it refers to the entity not to the members of the entity collectively. 

For instance, if I were referring to my favorite football team, would I say "my team is the best" or "my team are the best"?  It seems clear to me that my team is the best, and the same for my staff.



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 28, 2010, 11:46:59 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 11:34:48 AM
I'm afraid I agree with Microsoft.  I put these four sentences into Word and got the following result:

Your staff are incompetent. [flagged as wrong]
Your staff is incompetent.
Your people are incompetent.
Your people is incompetent. [flagged as wrong]

So word recognizes a collective noun (people).   But to my ear "staff" is a singular . . . .

The committee are discussing possible improvements to your ear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 11:50:41 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 28, 2010, 11:46:59 AM

The committee are discussing possible improvements to your ear.

Actually I can be reconciled to either one.  I googled the phrase "the staff is here" and "the staff are here" (important to include quotes) and both gave a roughly equal number of hits, which suggests that usage is evenly split.


I found this on a web site called grammar book

Rule 14.     Collective nouns such as team and staff  may be either singular or plural depending on their use in the sentence.
Examples:

The staff is in a meeting.
Staff is acting as a unit here.

The staff are in disagreement about the findings.
The staff are acting as separate individuals in this example.

The sentence would read even better as:
The staff members are in disagreement about the findings.

http://www.grammarbook.com/grammar/subjectVerbAgree.asp
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 28, 2010, 12:23:23 PM
I wonder if this is an English-English usage.

I have never, ever encountered staff when used in a plural form and referring to people being treated as a singular noun. I understand your argument, but it may I guess act like sheep and sheep, singular and plural respectively depending upon the context.

But you would not say, three of your sheep is dead, nor would you say three of your staff is dead.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 28, 2010, 12:23:45 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 11:50:41 AM
Examples:

The staff is in a meeting.
Staff is acting as a unit here.

The staff are in disagreement about the findings.
The staff are acting as separate individuals in this example.

That's the idea.

Quote from: [url]http://www.grammarbook.com/grammar/subjectVerbAgree.aspThe sentence would read even better as:
The staff members are in disagreement about the findings.

Well, that's an opinion.  My ear thinks that "The staff are in disagreement about the findings" reads just fine, thank you very much ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on April 28, 2010, 01:17:49 PM
Quote from: knight on April 28, 2010, 12:23:23 PM
I wonder if this is an English-English usage.

I have never, ever encountered staff when used in a plural form and referring to people being treated as a singular noun. I understand your argument, but it may I guess act like sheep and sheep, singular and plural respectively depending upon the context.

But you would not say, three of your sheep is dead, nor would you say three of your staff is dead.

Mike
Yes, I think this is one of those pesky English usage versus American usage issues.  In American English, a collective noun, like "staff" or "committee", is usually followed by a singular verb.  I think that English usage is the opposite.  Bill Gates should put out a U.K. "proper English" version!  In the meantime, the grammar checker would have been more helpful if it had suggested the singular verb, which would be the correct American usage.

Scarpia, my dictionary insists that the plural of "staff" is "staves" where the meaning is either those funny lines musicians use or a big wooden cudgel or something like that.  Where "staff" means a group of people who work for you or under your supervision, the plural given is "staffs".  Sometimes dictionaries are like doctors--consult two, get three opinions.  ;D

"People", of course, is not a collective noun, but the plural of "person".

"Sheep" is what we call a "count noun", which can be either singular or plural ("a sheep", "three sheep", or "the sheep"), as opposed to a  "non-count noun" like "air" or "rice", which is always treated as singular, no matter how much stuff it describes. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on April 28, 2010, 01:22:12 PM
Quote from: secondwind on April 28, 2010, 01:17:49 PM"People", of course, is not a collective noun, but the plural of "person".

The plural of person is persons.  People is a distinct word, derived from a different Latin root, at least according to Webster's dictionary. 

Also according to Websters, the plural of staff (i.e., the hospital staff) is staffs, the plural of staff (a stick) is staffs (current American usage) or staves (Brittish usage).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on April 29, 2010, 02:04:14 PM
In the etymological sense, "persons" is the correct plural of "person." In current usage, however, "persons" is usually reserved for very particular legal and theological meanings, and in all other cases the plural of "person" will be rendered as "people".  To confuse matter further, "people" can be used both as a singular and a plural, as in "this is a people that loves to dance" and "these people are scary" and in addition can be pluralized to "peoples", as in "the peoples of the ancient world".  What a fun language!

I am surprised that your Websters describes "staves" as a British spelling.  Perhaps it is newer than my dictionaries and so indicates further divergence of American English from British English.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on April 29, 2010, 02:13:00 PM
Quote from: secondwind on April 29, 2010, 02:04:14 PMin all other cases the plural of "person" will be rendered as "people".

People is not the plural of person.   To say that people is the plural of person is like saying that "army" is the plural of "soldier."  People may be a synonym for persons, but it is a different word, even if they both start with a 'p.'  Person is derived from the latin "persona," which literally refers to a mask, and people derives from the latin "populus."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 30, 2010, 09:25:33 AM
Just incredible!  So what did the local Blondie Bubblebrain say today on the morning TV news?

"Coming up, how a family was terrified when a bullet teared through their house!"

Which she pronounced "tared"  :o !

So...was she trying to make a joke with "terrified" maybe?

Since these things are usually scripted, I do wonder whether the writer was having some fun!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: matti on April 30, 2010, 10:13:05 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 30, 2010, 09:25:33 AM
Just incredible!  So what did the local Blondie Bubblebrain say today on the morning TV news?

"Coming up, how a family was terrified when a bullet teared through their house!"

Which she pronounced "tared"  :o !

So...was she trying to make a joke with "terrified" maybe?

Since these things are usually scripted, I do wonder whether the writer was having some fun!

What's funny? Would you mind explaining to a furriner?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2010, 03:23:41 AM
Quote from: matti on April 30, 2010, 10:13:05 PM
What's funny? Would you mind explaining to a furriner?

Sure:

tear - tore - has torn - Irregular (Strong) Verb

The reporter did not know her basic verb forms!  It would be similar to saying "He goed" for "He went."   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on May 01, 2010, 03:33:41 AM
Quote from: matti on April 30, 2010, 10:13:05 PM
What's funny? Would you mind explaining to a furriner?

What's funny is that Cato feels a need to seize on other people's venial grammatical errors and advertise them to the forum and then, on such skimpy evidence, to make broader assessments  about the person's intelligence. There is a popular expression for such prescriptive grammarians.

In this case, a woman, perhaps in a moment of divided attention, failed to observe that the word "tear" is part of that small class of strong verbs, for which the past tense is not formed by adding "-ed."

Although, if he brought this error to her attention, I wonder if she would get squirmy and say that this is a rule that she doesn't choose to observe. Probably not.
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble (retraction)
Post by: Egebedieff on May 01, 2010, 03:45:38 AM
Quote from: ' on May 01, 2010, 03:33:41 AM
What's funny is that Cato feels a need to seize on other people's venial grammatical errors and advertise them to the forum and then, on such skimpy evidence, to make broader assessments  about the person's intelligence.

A small retraction. That isn't really all that funny.
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 01, 2010, 06:30:14 AM
Cato, you'd probably hate to be in my position- remember that girl you asked me if I had married yet? Yesterday,  she asked me, "Where are you at?" over my walkie talkie at work.

Normally, it doesn't bother me, but I felt like either correcting her- "You mean, 'Where are you'," or saying, "In your mom's bed, b****." Well, I would say that, except the managers also have walkie talkies.  :-\

Maybe Cato's influence is rubbing off on me...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble (retraction)
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2010, 06:47:45 AM
Quote from: ' on May 01, 2010, 03:45:38 AM
A small retraction. That isn't really all that funny.
'

I have previously given other mistakes from this character: allow me to explain "Blondie Bubblebrain" as a reference to the Don Henley song Dirty Laundry, which criticized the shallowness of TV news. 

In the song, he uses the phrase "the bubble-headed bleached blonde" to describe the anchor.

And the most relevant line from the song for our purposes here:

"I just have to look good, I don't need to be clear!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble (retraction)
Post by: Egebedieff on May 01, 2010, 06:58:56 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 01, 2010, 06:47:45 AM
I have previously given other mistakes from this character: allow me to explain "Blondie Bubblebrain" as a reference to the Don Henley song Dirty Laundry, which criticized the shallowness of TV news. 

In the song, he uses the phrase "the bubble-headed bleached blonde" to describe the anchor.

And the most relevant line from the song for our purposes here:

"I just have to look good, I don't need to be clear!"
Perhaps it is just the enthusiasm with which you perform your service that forms an impression.'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2010, 07:07:08 AM
Quote from: Greg on May 01, 2010, 06:30:14 AM
Cato, you'd probably hate to be in my position- remember that girl you asked me if I had married yet? Yesterday,  she asked me, "Where are you at?" over my walkie talkie at work.

Normally, it doesn't bother me, but I felt like either correcting her- "You mean, 'Where are you'," or saying, "In your mom's bed, b****." Well, I would say that, except the managers also have walkie talkies.  :-\

Maybe Cato's influence is rubbing off on me...

Be polite!   0:)   Cato might use euphemistic insults like Blondie Bubblebrain, but would never use the "b-word" to which you refer.

Although your rejoinder, while cheap and too easy, does retain its humor...for me at least!   8)

I had a Precious Blood sister who hated "Where...at " and while annoying, there is a Germanic tendency in the expression, possibly influenced by parallels from "Wo...hin"  (Where...to) and "Wo...her" (Where...from).

To be sure, German would simply use "Wo" for "Where" and would not add an "at."

One more comment on Mr. Apostrophe's grumble: as a teacher I combat daily in my classroom the increasingly poor English heard on television.  With so much influence, TV people should be more aware of this responsibility.  Unfortunately, they seem not to care most of the time, and the anchorwoman in question is a multiple offender.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 01, 2010, 07:12:54 AM
Well, I wouldn't really use the word (nor do I ever).  :D 0:) (angel emoticon) I just typed it, since it seemed to go good together.
That would be strange to if the explanation to that was the German influence. I could say, "Stop being so German!" but then I'd have to explain, and I'm too lazy for that. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble (retraction)
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2010, 07:17:27 AM
Quote from: ' on May 01, 2010, 06:58:56 AM
Perhaps it is just the enthusiasm with which you perform your service that forms an impression.'


Cato tends toward great enthusiasm!

There are exceptions, however, to my enthusiasm: bowling, Detroit, and bowling in Detroit.   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble (retraction)
Post by: Egebedieff on May 01, 2010, 07:29:45 AM
And we are never so enthusiastic than when someone lives down to our expectations.'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 01, 2010, 08:16:57 AM
"Teared" instead of "tore" is so extraordinarily deviant from common usage that if not uttered intentionally as some sort of pun on "terrified" (a possibility Cato graciously suggested), then it can only suggest sub-par intelligence on the part of the speaker--assuming, of course, that English is her native language, that she has reached the age of puberty, and that she has experienced normal lifelong exposure to correct usage through interaction with ordinary English speakers, as well as through the schools, literature, television, radio, and movies, rather than having been confined to a box in some tiny enclave of inbred deviance isolated from society at large.

Attacking Cato by implying that some grave moral deficiency underlies his advocacy of "correct" (or at least informed) usage is itself evidence of exactly the sort of mean-spirited small-mindedness the attacker attributes to Cato.

Without compassion--evident in our good faith efforts to understand others, even (and perhaps especially) when their points of view differ from our own--we are condemned to manufacturing conflict and misunderstanding where it need not exist.

edited for clarity and typo correction
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 01, 2010, 10:03:16 AM
One hopes that Mr Apostrophe would not prefer a "whatever" approach to teaching language.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Egebedieff on May 01, 2010, 10:31:32 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 01, 2010, 10:03:16 AM
One hopes that Mr Apostrophe would not prefer a "whatever" approach to teaching language.
Not at all, (editing is something I do on the side, primarily for about a half a dozen cognitive psychology journals). I just don't see much sport in shooting fish in barrels.

That said, I am more interested in descriptive linguistics, and to the present point, strong verbs continue to evolve into weak ones, especially as old verbs take on new meanings ("tear" may be a candidate in that regard).
'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 01, 2010, 10:36:51 AM
Quote from: ' on May 01, 2010, 10:31:32 AM
I just don't see much sport in shooting fish in barrels.

Sure. And since you edit about a half a dozen cognitive psychology journals (e.g.), I am guessing you ought to twig that shooting fish in barrels is not what Cato is about here.

You seem to be enraged over allegations that Cato is being unfair to someone, yet you do not hesitate to be unfair to Cato.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: matti on May 01, 2010, 06:11:08 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 01, 2010, 03:23:41 AM
Sure:

tear - tore - has torn - Irregular (Strong) Verb

The reporter did not know her basic verb forms!  It would be similar to saying "He goed" for "He went."   0:)

Ahh, of course! I should have knowed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 01, 2010, 07:27:29 PM
Quote from: matti on May 01, 2010, 06:11:08 PM
Ahh, of course! I should have knowed.
I can't believe I haved to read that twice to see that...  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on May 01, 2010, 07:36:21 PM
Quote from: Greg on May 01, 2010, 06:30:14 AM
Cato, you'd probably hate to be in my position- remember that girl you asked me if I had married yet? Yesterday,  she asked me, "Where are you at?" over my walkie talkie at work.

Normally, it doesn't bother me, but I felt like either correcting her- "You mean, 'Where are you'," or saying, "In your mom's bed, b****." Well, I would say that, except the managers also have walkie talkies.  :-\

Maybe Cato's influence is rubbing off on me...

Is she from New Orleans?  "Wher're Y'at?" is a common greeting, as in, "how're you doin'"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 01, 2010, 07:47:17 PM
Quote from: Franco on May 01, 2010, 07:36:21 PM
Is she from New Orleans?  "Wher're Y'at?" is a common greeting, as in, "how're you doin'"?
Lol, no- we're all Floridians.
That would be the dumbest greeting ever.

Regular greeting-
"Hi, how are you."
"Fine."

New Orleans greeting-
"Where're y'at?"
"Here."

::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 05, 2010, 11:09:43 AM
Quote from: Franco on May 01, 2010, 07:36:21 PM
Is she from New Orleans?  "Wher're Y'at?" is a common greeting, as in, "how're you doin'"?

Quote from: Greg on May 01, 2010, 07:47:17 PM
Lol, no- we're all Floridians.
That would be the dumbest greeting ever.

Regular greeting-
"Hi, how are you."
"Fine."

New Orleans greeting-
"Where're y'at?"
"Here."

::)


HA! Yesterday, I was asked the same thing online (it was the first thing he asked me, even though my profile clearly states where I'm located), and I told the person that I was at home. ;D His profile says that he is from Portland, Oregon.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 05, 2010, 06:39:06 PM
You should've just said you were in Portland at the moment. After his surprise, tell him that it just happened you were there for a business trip. You could have fun in a few ways-

1) Find out his address- "I'll tell you where I am if you tell me where you are." Next, give him directions to where you are. Write very long and tedious instructions to make him drive for hours, until the directions eventually lead him back to his house. Hide somewhere in his house. When he goes on the computer again to ask you what in the world just happened, use a laptop or some portable computer to respond, "but I am here... this is where I'm staying," then go offline. Quickly sneak into the bathroom, and when he opens the door to go potty, jump out naked, with your arms outstretched and face twisted with ecstasy, and proclaim to the heavens, "HERE I AAAAAMMMMMMMMM!"  ::)

2) Write directions that lead to somewhere about 30 minutes away, in a really rough part of town. After realizing you aren't there, he goes home very frustrated. Send him a message the next time he goes online- "lol pwnd."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 05, 2010, 11:04:46 PM
Quote from: Greg on May 05, 2010, 06:39:06 PM
You should've just said you were in Portland at the moment. After his surprise, tell him that it just happened you were there for a business trip. You could have fun in a few ways-

1) Find out his address- "I'll tell you where I am if you tell me where you are." Next, give him directions to where you are. Write very long and tedious instructions to make him drive for hours, until the directions eventually lead him back to his house. Hide somewhere in his house. When he goes on the computer again to ask you what in the world just happened, use a laptop or some portable computer to respond, "but I am here... this is where I'm staying," then go offline. Quickly sneak into the bathroom, and when he opens the door to go potty, jump out naked, with your arms outstretched and face twisted with ecstasy, and proclaim to the heavens, "HERE I AAAAAMMMMMMMMM!"  ::)

2) Write directions that lead to somewhere about 30 minutes away, in a really rough part of town. After realizing you aren't there, he goes home very frustrated. Send him a message the next time he goes online- "lol pwnd."


Tried those before, have you? ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on May 06, 2010, 04:47:50 AM
No...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on May 14, 2010, 03:24:19 AM
From the webiste of Peter Gounares, who's running for Congress (District One, Alabama).

QuoteWe are at war with Islamic fundamentalist. We are at war with terrorist.

I notice that "Education" isn't mentioned anywhere in the "Principles" or "Issues" sections of his website.   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: secondwind on May 14, 2010, 06:00:40 AM
Actually, the use of the singular should be reassuring.  I thought the problem was much worse than a single fundamentalist and a single terrorist.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on May 19, 2010, 10:28:51 AM
A humdinger from Channel 4 news just now:

"Prime Minister John Major was literaly disembowled on many occasions"

Referring to him losing a lot of political arguments during his premiership.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 19, 2010, 10:41:13 AM
Time to post it again. It should be appropriate for this thread. ;D

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/literally.png)
http://xkcd.com/725/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 19, 2010, 11:22:42 AM
Quote from: Lethe on May 19, 2010, 10:28:51 AM
A humdinger from Channel 4 news just now:

"Prime Minister John Major was literaly disembowled on many occasions"

Referring to him losing a lot of political arguments during his premiership.

Literally doesn't mean literally any more, I suppose, Sara.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on May 19, 2010, 11:28:30 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 19, 2010, 11:22:42 AM
Literally doesn't mean literally any more, I suppose, Sara.

From what I know of the British Parliament, I wouldn't rule out the literal meaning, although I admit it is unlikely that it could happen more than once.   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: listener on May 19, 2010, 11:36:22 AM
...as opposed to littorally, which we'd sea-side issued (and you can bank on that).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: False_Dmitry on May 19, 2010, 11:56:40 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on May 19, 2010, 11:28:30 AM
From what I know of the British Parliament, I wouldn't rule out the literal meaning, although I admit it is unlikely that it could happen more than once.   8)

Regrettably...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on May 19, 2010, 01:29:41 PM
Quote from: False_Dmitry on May 19, 2010, 11:56:40 AM
Regrettably...

I mean it couldn't happen more than once to the same person, even with modern medical science.   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 02, 2010, 12:19:33 PM
I don't get the problems people have with markets having "10 items or less" signs, insisting it should read "or fewer." Either way is perfectly acceptable English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on June 03, 2010, 01:15:13 PM
Yeah, the general rule that less refers to amounts, and fewer to numbers of discrete things, but in common idioms, indeed as in all common idioms, the line does get blurred. One could argue that the number of one's items constitutes an amount, like an amount of money, but that's a little too fine, and in any event it just sounds like special pleading.

It may be also be one of those "rules," like the distinction between that and which, that EB White more or less made up. At the paper, we're supposed to use "more than" instead of "over," the reasoning being that "over" refers to a position in space, but that seems rather arbitrary. Once the meaning of "more than" is understood and accepted, it should be quite acceptable to say that a tax, hike, for example, will be over four percent.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Franco on June 03, 2010, 01:57:21 PM
The less/fewer discussion reminds me of the good/well issue:

Q: How ya doin'?

A: Oh, I'm doin' good

Q: Yeh - who are you, Superman?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 04, 2010, 08:12:22 AM
Q: How can something be a classic on its tenth anniversary (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,68.msg417066.html#msg417066)?

A: When the culture suffers generally from ADD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 18, 2010, 09:50:02 AM
People who put an in front of words starting with h should be flogged.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 18, 2010, 11:47:17 AM
"He is an halibut."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on June 18, 2010, 09:19:37 PM
Quote from: The Six on June 18, 2010, 09:50:02 AM
People who put an in front of words starting with h should be flogged.

An historic ruling that would be, if passed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on June 19, 2010, 03:20:11 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on June 18, 2010, 09:19:37 PM
An historic ruling that would be, if passed.

Devised by Cockneys and other people who drop their aitches. Note however that 'an honorary post' is absolutely correct. Anyone who says 'a honorary post' equally deserves the punishment suggested.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on June 19, 2010, 03:29:50 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on June 19, 2010, 03:20:11 AM
Anyone who says 'a honorary post' equally deserves the punishment suggested.

Five hundred floggings an hour.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on June 19, 2010, 03:04:30 PM
Quote from: Opus106 on June 19, 2010, 03:29:50 AM
Five hundred floggings an hour.
Are you kidding? You mean, five hundred floggings a minute, right? We'd just have an team of floggers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on June 21, 2010, 07:08:00 AM
Amiable, amicable, affable: is there any contextual difference between these?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on June 24, 2010, 12:29:19 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 18, 2010, 11:47:17 AM
"He is an halibut."

I am off to book an hotel for myself. I am meeting an historian to discuss why the law is a ass.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on July 16, 2010, 10:41:58 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on June 19, 2010, 03:29:50 AM
Five hundred floggings an hour.

Well maybe they should be sent to an university as well.   ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on July 16, 2010, 11:21:41 AM
It's got to be an hour, since the aitch there is silent.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on July 16, 2010, 01:59:41 PM
Quote from: The Six on June 02, 2010, 12:19:33 PM
I don't get the problems people have with markets having "10 items or less" signs, insisting it should read "or fewer." Either way is perfectly acceptable English.
:o  Good heavens, man!  Get thee to a grammarian, lest thy soul suffer eternal damnation! 
Title: This one from a professor at Columbia
Post by: Joe Barron on September 06, 2010, 08:20:00 AM
Posted today on by blog:

I don't want to be one of those overbearing scolds who correct other people's grammar in public, but I was startled the other day by this sentence on page 68 of James Shapiro's informative book, Contested Will, which discusses a lawsuit filed in 1600 by one William Shakespeare: "Scholars still can't agree whether this was our Shakespeare or another who sued Clayton; whomever it was, it fit the pattern of a tight-fisted Shylock all too well."

Whomever? I realize that there are times when the who/whom distinction can be tricky, but this isn't one of those times. "Whom" should appear only as the object of a verb or preposition, and this sentence contains no verb or preposition of which whom could possibly be the object. The only verb is the vicinity is "was," which is a linking verb and doesn't take the objective case anyway. No matter how you parse it, "whomever" is out of place. And if you want to make the case for "fit," then whomever is being used incorrectly as the subject — drop the comma and the second it, and you get, "Whomever it was fit the pattern ... all too well," and the incorrect use of "whomever" stands naked before the world.

I do hope this was a copy-editing mistake and was not done at Shapiro's insistence. The guy is an English professor at Columbia, for heaven's sake. A slip like that makes me wonder about the value of higher education. (And so the grammar scold in me, so long supressed, rises to the surface once more.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 06, 2010, 08:24:00 AM
I'd say it's pretty tricky.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 06, 2010, 08:27:52 AM
"Whomever it was" . . . oh, that's nae guid.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 06, 2010, 08:31:24 AM
Maybe it's a typo.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 06, 2010, 08:49:04 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 06, 2010, 08:24:00 AM
I'd say it's pretty tricky.

Not at all. Whoever is clearly called for. Here are some tricky ones:

Police arrested Josquin, whom they believe to be the killer.

and

Police arrested Josquin, who they believe is the killer.

Whom and who are correct in both these instances. In the first, whom is the object of believe. In he second, who is the subject of is. The distinction becomes clear if you rearrange the sentences, using he and him instead of who and whom:

Police believe him to be the killer (him/whom, objective case).

Police believe he is the killer (he/who, nominative case).

The example from Shapiro is nowhere near this subtle. Here, the use of whomever is just an affectation, like saying "between you and I."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on September 06, 2010, 09:20:36 AM
I thought, 'Between you and I.' was an outright error rather than any kind of affectation. It is a contraction of 'Between you and between me.' I don't think the word 'I' could be substituted for 'me'.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 06, 2010, 09:40:12 AM
Quote from: knight on September 06, 2010, 09:20:36 AM
I thought, 'Between you and I.' was an outright error rather than any kind of affectation. It is a contraction of 'Between you and between me.' I don't think the word 'I' could be substituted for 'me'.

Mike

It is wrong, but you'll find otherwise educated people using it  because they think it makes them sound smart. They think it's in the same category as saying "If I were he" instead of saying "If I was him." The former is correct (though the latter is idiomatic and acceptable).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 06, 2010, 10:01:05 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 06, 2010, 09:40:12 AM
It is wrong, but you'll find otherwise educated people using it  because they think it makes them sound smart. They think it's in the same category as saying "If I were he" instead of saying "If I was him." The former is correct (though the latter is idiomatic and acceptable).
Yes.  To me, cases like this and "whomever it was" are more egregious than something like "Who did you give it to?" because the speaker is going out of his way to sound superior to common usage and failing. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 06, 2010, 11:09:19 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 06, 2010, 08:49:04 AM
Not at all. Whoever is clearly called for.

I see it now.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 06, 2010, 04:59:50 PM
Amen to all the very sensible comments above from Joe Barron and David Ross!   0:)

Cato has been out of action for too many weeks now!  But I have been keeping track of assaults and peppers against proper English!

While visiting an intellectually endarkened city in California, I came across the following monstrosity: nailed to a telephone pole was a cardboard sign:

"Keen Mattres 4 Sale: Pillow Top!  $200."

Now it is quite possible that the "mattres" was even "peachy keen"  0:)   but we suspect that perhaps it was actually a "king mattress" which - since it was for sale via  a telephone pole, whose uses for communication apparently transcend electricity - was not so "keen."   8)

This shows the death of the nasalized "ng" in many areas, and so "keen" now is identical to "king" in many mouths.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 06, 2010, 05:41:03 PM
Well, a hand-lettered sign on a telephone pole is a different situation than a scholarly book on Shakespeare.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 06, 2010, 05:44:24 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 06, 2010, 04:59:50 PMNow it is quite possible that the "mattres" was even "peachy keen"  0:)   but we suspect that perhaps it was actually a "king mattress"...

You're referring to yourself as "we" now?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 06, 2010, 06:49:52 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on September 06, 2010, 05:44:24 PM
You're referring to yourself as "we" now?

:o    8)    ;D   Yes, Cato is full of personality!   0:)    $:)     ::)

Of course, you might think I am full of myself, or ourselves, or something else!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 06, 2010, 08:22:22 PM
Re your avatar, Cato, my sources here (youngish member of my household) tell me it's from Billions to Sneeze At, written & drawn by C. Barks.  Is this correct?

"Hurry up and bring me that penny; I need it to make the pile deeper!"

P.S.  I only just now found this thread.  I have always wondered where cork-up-the-arseness ends and accepted popular usage begins.  Personally, I like to point out others' written flaws, but when I speak and write, it's usually full of improprieties that would curl your toes.  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 07, 2010, 01:41:47 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 06, 2010, 08:22:22 PM
P.S.  I only just now found this thread.  I have always wondered where cork-up-the-arseness ends and accepted popular usage begins.

Forget Space; that shifting borderland is the Final Frontier! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2010, 04:03:37 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 06, 2010, 08:22:22 PM
Re your avatar, Cato, my sources here (youngish member of my household) tell me it's from Billions to Sneeze At, written & drawn by C. Barks.  Is this correct?

"Hurry up and bring me that penny; I need it to make the pile deeper!"

P.S.  I only just now found this thread.  I have always wondered where cork-up-the-arseness ends and accepted popular usage begins.  Personally, I like to point out others' written flaws, but when I speak and write, it's usually full of improprieties that would curl your toes.  :P



Welcome to one of the more reasonable areas of Life (in general)!   :o

Yes, I do believe the Uncle Scrooge McDuck drawing is from that story! 

Carl Barks (not to be confused EVER with Karl Marx  0:)    ) was quite a genius!




Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 07, 2010, 04:07:30 AM
I chuckled at one of the earlier episodes in the first season of Get Smart when there was a who/whom joke.

It seems to me that the "easy fix" for this is . . . high school.  Most of us who have spent some time learning a foreign language, absorb the grammatical distinction between who & whom, which is then easy to reinforce en anglais.


I know:  it's so old-school of me to think of high school as a place where students learn things, rather than participate in sports and (perhaps) learn to construct only very basic sentences.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 07, 2010, 05:07:40 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 07, 2010, 04:07:30 AM
I chuckled at one of the earlier episodes in the first season of Get Smart when there was a who/whom joke.

It seems to me that the "easy fix" for this is . . . high school.  Most of us who have spent some time learning a foreign language, absorb the grammatical distinction between who & whom, which is then easy to reinforce en anglais.


I know:  it's so old-school of me to think of high school as a place where students learn things, rather than participate in sports and (perhaps) learn to construct only very basic sentences.
Aye--I think first of nominative & dative rather than subjective & objective. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2010, 10:58:11 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 07, 2010, 05:07:40 AM
Aye--I think first of nominative & dative rather than subjective & objective.

Many Latin accusative endings have an "-m" in the singular, and that "-m" is directly related to the "-m" in "whom."

I point this out to my present grade-school Latin students, who too often ask: "Uh, what's 'whom'?"   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 07, 2010, 11:18:23 AM
Hume? Hoom?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 08, 2010, 10:52:48 AM
It rubs me the wrong way when someone trying to make an argument says "many people" when "one or two persons" is the reality. How can professional opinioneers, etc. get away with this?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 08, 2010, 10:54:05 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 08, 2010, 10:52:48 AM
It rubs me the wrong way when someone trying to make an argument says "many people" when "one or two persons" is the reality. How can professional opinioneers, etc. get away with this?

People are idiots.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 08, 2010, 10:59:17 AM
Or, when they say "many people" where they mean "I."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on September 08, 2010, 11:03:50 AM
Wikipedia editors have become notorious for their increasingly artful way of concealing non-neutral POV viewpoints - "some argue" being a top choice.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 08, 2010, 11:08:00 AM
Quote from: Lethe on September 08, 2010, 11:03:50 AM
Wikipedia editors have become notorious for their increasingly artful way of concealing non-neutral POV viewpoints - "some argue" being a top choice.

Oh, aye, that's good and weaselly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 08, 2010, 11:11:16 AM
I hate when politicians say, "The American people want this." or "The American people want that."

Blah.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 08, 2010, 11:14:01 AM
What won't surprise you is, that was exactly the pet phrase ("the People") with which the Bolsheviks were barnstorming in the 1920s.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 08, 2010, 11:44:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 08, 2010, 10:59:17 AM
Or, when they say "many people" where they mean "I."

Yup!  Actually, that is what I wanted to say in the first place! ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 08, 2010, 12:20:55 PM
Yes, both "The American people know" and "some people say" are old rhetorical devices.

Somebody very famous in politics right now    0:)    is especially notorious for the "strawman argument" of "Some people say..." when in fact nobody is saying any such thing, in particular his opponents!

Today's grumble, which I actually saw a few weeks ago in California at a gas station:

"Hot Chilly For Sale" which - I know - sounds almost too good to be true, especially since this was in the desert!   :o

It is possible it was done on purpose to attract attention.

And speaking of "on purpose"...

I am hearing - from kids especially, but also now from adults - the phrase "it happened on accident."   :o

Obviously this is a case of what linguists call "attraction."  "On purpose" logically has an opposite counterpart, and it could be "on accident."

Except it isn't!   $:)    It seems a minor thing, but "on accident" I cannot accept: let us preserve "by accident."

And if anyone has any dealings with children these days, you know that when some malefactor has done something "on purpose," that phrase is deemed too weak to show the level of evil involved!   >:D

Such maleficent and malevolent evil-deed-doers always perpetrate crimes in the following way: "And he did it on purpose   >:D  for no reason!!!    >:D

The horror!  The horror!

Talk about rhetorical devices!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 08, 2010, 12:34:59 PM
I have a friend who hates it when someone is asking advice for himself, but attributes it to some "friend" of his . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 08, 2010, 04:23:17 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 08, 2010, 12:20:55 PM
I am hearing - from kids especially, but also now from adults - the phrase "it happened on accident."   :o

Obviously this is a case of what linguists call "attraction."  "On purpose" logically has an opposite counterpart, and it could be "on accident."

Except it isn't!   $:)    It seems a minor thing, but "on accident" I cannot accept: let us preserve "by accident."
I'm hearing youngsters--including young adults--say "bored of" instead of "bored with." 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 08, 2010, 04:36:55 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 08, 2010, 04:23:17 PM
I'm hearing youngsters--including young adults--say "bored of" instead of "bored with."

Ah yes!  That is another curiosity! 

In my teaching career the mangling of prepositions by students has been one of the worst trends. In an attempt to sound more intelligent than the students really are, they create one malaprepositionism after the other!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 08, 2010, 05:42:26 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 07, 2010, 05:07:40 AM
Aye--I think first of nominative & dative rather than subjective & objective.

Subjective?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 08, 2010, 06:30:36 PM

DavidRoss: 

Did you maybe mean "subject and object" instead of "subjective and objective"?  I've never heard "subject" and "object" being used in that way when discussing cases.   Or were you making a sly joke that I'm not getting, a little play on words?  If so, I hereby apologize in advance.   :-[
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 07:18:14 AM
Here's a great oops in the back cover blurb of a jazz reissue:

Quote. . . established that the twains of jazz improv and rockish rhythms had indeed met.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 09, 2010, 07:32:24 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 08, 2010, 06:30:36 PM
Did you maybe mean "subject and object" instead of "subjective and objective"?  I've never heard "subject" and "object" being used in that way when discussing cases.   Or were you making a sly joke that I'm not getting, a little play on words?  If so, I hereby apologize in advance.   :-[
No joke intended.  "Subjective case" and "objective case" are terms in common use...or at least they were back in the dark ages when I was a child!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 07:59:13 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 09, 2010, 07:32:24 AM
No joke intended.  "Subjective case" and "objective case" are terms in common use...or at least they were back in the dark ages when I was a child!  ;)

Aye, and we are documented on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_pronoun) ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 08:02:08 AM
Reminds me of one of (many, many) well-loved recurring phrases in Wodehouse: He does not understand the nice distinction between meum and tuum.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 08:03:00 AM
I mean, it's a different distinction . . . I've just got Wodehouse on my mind (a wonderful condition).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Verena on September 09, 2010, 08:41:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 08, 2010, 12:20:55 PM

And speaking of "on purpose"...

I am hearing - from kids especially, but also now from adults - the phrase "it happened on accident."   :o

Obviously this is a case of what linguists call "attraction."  "On purpose" logically has an opposite counterpart, and it could be "on accident."

Except it isn't!   $:)    It seems a minor thing, but "on accident" I cannot accept: let us preserve "by accident."


Hello Cato,

I think most linguists would call it "analogy" or "leveling", attraction is rather something like the development of "let's" from "let us".
8)
It seems like there is little chance that "by accident" will be preserved .. Languages change all the time - especially spoken language - and the force of analogy in particular is very strong. So unless "by accident" is highly frequent and hence strongly entrenched in speakers' minds, it will gradually be superseded by "on accident" - on (by?) analogy with "on purpose" and similar phrases which pattern that way. I can only welcome such analogical proceses.
:D
First of all, they give linguists food for thought and a reason to keep their jobs: Occurring in all languages, they exemplify processes that shape language in general, rather than specific languages only. Secondly, they ease the cognitive burden involved in producing and processing language - if I have to keep in mind a small number of forms only, I can focus my thoughts on more momenteous problems, such as, for example, which CDs I absolutely need to buy next.  ;D
And last, but not least, as a non-native speaker I have always found these prepositions in English to be rather unpredictable, so a little leveling would not at all come amiss in my view.  :-X


 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 09, 2010, 08:49:37 AM
Verena: Many thanks for the comments!

"Attraction" can also be used to describe the following phenomenon, which I sometimes give to my students and ask: "What's wrong here?  Or is nothing wrong?"

"A group of very well-dressed men and women were entering the hotel."

:o   $:)   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 09, 2010, 08:59:20 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 09, 2010, 08:49:37 AM
Verena: Many thanks for the comments!

"Attraction" can also be used to describe the following phenomenon, which I sometimes give to my students and ask: "What's wrong here?  Or is nothing wrong?"

"A group of very well-dressed men and women were entering the hotel."

:o   $:)   0:)
Does the speaker mean "a group of [well-dressed men and women]" or "a group of [well-dressed men] and women?"  "Were" suggests the latter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Verena on September 09, 2010, 09:01:09 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 09, 2010, 08:49:37 AM
Verena: Many thanks for the comments!


You're welcome!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 09, 2010, 09:04:37 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 09, 2010, 08:59:20 AM
Does the speaker mean "a group of [well-dressed men and women]" or "a group of [well-dressed men] and women?"  "Were" suggests the latter.

I see.  I foresee a pedantic puzzle. 

A group of well dressed men and women were entering the hotel.  Were the women well dressed?  No!   If they were part of the well dressed group we would have to say "was entering" the hotel!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 09, 2010, 09:24:53 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on September 09, 2010, 09:04:37 AM
I see.  I foresee a pedantic puzzle. 

A group of well dressed men and women were entering the hotel.  Were the women well dressed?  No!   If they were part of the well dressed group we would have to say "was entering" the hotel!


A+ !
  for you, Scarpia!   ;D    Very pedantic puzzle indeed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 09:29:41 AM
A group of well-dressed men and floozies . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 09:31:00 AM
Or, were entering might suggest that they entered the hotel by severals means and ingresses . . . but then, that would vitiate the degree to which they were acting as a group . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 09, 2010, 10:41:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 09, 2010, 09:29:41 AM
A group of well-dressed men and floozies . . . .

I love "floozies" !   0:)

As opposed to : I love floozies!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 09, 2010, 10:48:20 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on September 09, 2010, 09:04:37 AM
I see.  I foresee a pedantic puzzle. 

A group of well dressed men and women were entering the hotel.  Were the women well dressed?  No!   If they were part of the well dressed group we would have to say "was entering" the hotel!

When I went to school back in the Pleistocene epoch, our teacher gave us examples not unlike the above and told us to rewrite them so that there is absolutely no mistaking what the speaker intended.  The teacher understood that even when you use perfect grammar the sentence would nevertheless sound stilted and not the way people comfortably talk (except for maybe somebody like William F. Buckley, who of course doesn't talk at all anymore.)

I would have said (why do you have to say "group" in the first place?): Several well-dressed men and women were entering the hotel.

However, if the women were not well-dressed, I would change the sentence to read:

Some women, accompanied by well-dressed men, were entering the hotel.

What do you think? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 10:54:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 09, 2010, 10:41:54 AM
I love "floozies" !   0:)

As opposed to : I love floozies!   :o

In a rest room (I promise to keep this clean) I recently saw a sign which the inscriber intended to read PRESS BUTTON FOR FLUSH.  However, the cross-stroke in the aitch did not ink in, so what I actually read was PRESS BUTTON FOR FLUSII.

And I thought, All right, if you wish, and isn't that a colorful alternative spelling for "floozie"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 09, 2010, 11:01:07 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 09, 2010, 10:48:20 AM
When I went to school back in the Pleistocene epoch, our teacher gave us examples not unlike the above and told us to rewrite them so that there is absolutely no mistaking what the speaker intended.  The teacher understood that even when you use perfect grammar the sentence would nevertheless sound stilted and not the way people comfortably talk (except for maybe somebody like William F. Buckley, who of course doesn't talk at all anymore.)

I would have said (why do you have to say "group" in the first place?): Several well-dressed men and women were entering the hotel.

However, if the women were not well-dressed, I would change the sentence to read:

Some women, accompanied by well-dressed men, were entering the hotel.

What do you think?

Exactly.  A graceful sentence is one that is clear and doesn't require extensive analysis to resolve grammatical ambiguities.  Why invoke the "group" if it is not essential to the narrative.  It is the superfluous nature of the "group" that makes the singular form sound stilted.  In cases where the idea of a group is more essential the singular form sounds natural.  For instance, "a well dressed group of men makes a better impression than a bunch of slobs."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 11:06:54 AM
A lump of slobs
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2010, 11:07:33 AM
A haberdash of fine gentlemen.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 09, 2010, 11:14:15 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 09, 2010, 10:48:20 AM
When I went to school back in the Pleistocene epoch, our teacher gave us examples not unlike the above and told us to rewrite them so that there is absolutely no mistaking what the speaker intended.  The teacher understood that even when you use perfect grammar the sentence would nevertheless sound stilted and not the way people comfortably talk (except for maybe somebody like William F. Buckley, who of course doesn't talk at all anymore.)

I would have said (why do you have to say "group" in the first place?): Several well-dressed men and women were entering the hotel.

However, if the women were not well-dressed, I would change the sentence to read:

Some women, accompanied by well-dressed men, were entering the hotel.

What do you think?
I think there's a significant difference between several individuals entering and a group entering.  A group implies a massed body, an association, and a unity of purpose that does not apply if several individuals enter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 09, 2010, 11:33:54 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 09, 2010, 11:14:15 AM
I think there's a significant difference between several individuals entering and a group entering.  A group implies a massed body, an association, and a unity of purpose that does not apply if several individuals enter.

Of course that is true.  That is why the context is important.  Who is talking or writing about the people entering the hotel?  Is this a casual conversation; is this police reporting; is this a newpaper article?  What was going on that someone felt a need to comment on these men and women entering the hotel? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: karlhenning on September 11, 2010, 04:15:41 AM
Happened again, in an otherwise heartening human-interest piece (http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/09/10/ramadan.roadtrip.folo/index.html):

Quote
"And unfortunately in our society, whomever shouts the loudest is going to get the most air time."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: Cato on September 11, 2010, 06:52:08 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 11, 2010, 04:15:41 AM
Happened again, in an otherwise heartening human-interest piece (http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/09/10/ramadan.roadtrip.folo/index.html):

Just like my students, when they are trying to "sound smart"  :o  to impress me!

Technically there is nothing wrong with the colloquial "is going to get."   "Will get" or "will receive" or (the more dynamic) "will seize" would be more elegant.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: DavidRoss on September 11, 2010, 06:55:17 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 11, 2010, 06:52:08 AM
Just like my students, when they are trying to "sound smart"  :o  to impress me!

Technically there is nothing wrong with the colloquial "is going to get."   "Will get" or "will receive" or (the more dynamic) "will seize" would be more elegant.
even better, just "gets"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: Joe Barron on September 12, 2010, 03:58:31 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 11, 2010, 06:52:08 AMTechnically there is nothing wrong with the colloquial "is going to get."   "Will get" or "will receive" or (the more dynamic) "will seize" would be more elegant.

I don't think "seize" would work here. It doesn't carry the connotation, as get does, that the air time is some sort of reward for talking the loudest. If you seize the air time anyway, why the need to talk loud? Receive might indeed be more elegant, but I think "get" has more punch. It isn't just that there is nothing "wrong" with being colloquial. Sometimes colloquial is preferable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 12, 2010, 04:13:30 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 12, 2010, 03:58:31 PM
. It isn't just that there is nothing "wrong" with being colloquial. Sometimes colloquial is preferable.

Yes.  What a good point you've made.  (Or should I have said, "You've made a good point"" or "You make a good point" or "What a good point you make!")
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: Cato on September 12, 2010, 06:39:37 PM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 12, 2010, 04:13:30 PM
Yes.  What a good point you've made.  (Or should I have said, "You've made a good point"" or "You make a good point" or "What a good point you make!")

Yowza!   0:)

"Is you is or is you ain't my baby?"   :o

No way to clean that up and make it scan!

Or is there?   :o

Sounds like a challenge!   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: knight66 on September 12, 2010, 10:56:19 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 12, 2010, 06:39:37 PM
Yowza!   0:)

"Is you is or is you ain't my baby?"   :o

No way to clean that up and make it scan!

Or is there?   :o

Sounds like a challenge!   ;D

To be or not to be my baby

That is the question

>:D
Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble :: Who/Whom Watch
Post by: Cato on September 13, 2010, 03:28:46 AM
Quote from: knight on September 12, 2010, 10:56:19 PM
To be or not to be my baby

That is the question

>:D
Mike

Not bad!  Extra credit for the allusion to Bill S.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 13, 2010, 04:06:19 AM
Quote from: knight on September 12, 2010, 10:56:19 PM
To be or not to be my baby

A Louis Jordan song, covered by Joe Jackson, methinks . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 14, 2010, 11:48:03 AM
I suppose it may well be right . . . but the verb derogate strikes me as a curious back-formation from the adjective derogatory.  In all events (right or wr.), my ear takes it as one of those dated late-60s/early-70s thangs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 14, 2010, 11:51:52 AM
I'm reading a story where the Victorian folks travel around in chaise lounges.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 14, 2010, 11:57:51 AM
Chaises longues, I think you mean . . . I wonder when longue became lounge?  For that's how I heard it in my youth, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 14, 2010, 11:59:03 AM
QuoteIt is sometimes erroneously written as "chaise lounge (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/chaise_lounge)", which has persisted so strongly in America that it is no longer considered incorrect there, and can even be found in its dictionaries[1] (an example of folk etymology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folk_etymology)). In modern French the term chaise longue can refer to any long reclining chair such as a deckchair (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deckchair).

Thanks to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaise_longue).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 14, 2010, 01:13:39 PM
The real question is, why are the people traveling in them? Isn't a chaise longue just a piece of furniture?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 14, 2010, 01:16:56 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 14, 2010, 01:13:39 PM
The real question is, why are the people traveling in them? Isn't a chaise longue just a piece of furniture?

Exactly. He meant "chaise."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 14, 2010, 01:36:10 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 14, 2010, 01:16:56 PM
Exactly. He meant "chaise."

Here in Ohio for all of my 6 decades I have only heard "lounge" as the pronunciation.

As for the story, if people are traveling in them, maybe the word should be "chaise a la chasse," or just "chaise avec chauffeur."

To which regrettable phrases I should say: "Pardon my French!"  And in Ohio, that phrase means you just uttered a curse word of some sort!   :o


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 14, 2010, 01:46:05 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on September 14, 2010, 01:16:56 PM
Exactly. He meant "chaise."

Bien sûr!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 14, 2010, 03:11:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 14, 2010, 01:36:10 PM
Here in Ohio for all of my 6 decades I have only heard "lounge" as the pronunciation.

I'm sorry to report that I haven't seen "chaise longue" in 30 years, except in old books.  Too bad.  I don't care if "chaise lounge" is now acceptable.  I won't use that word.  It has come into common use perhaps because there's a lot of dyslexia.  Or maybe because most folk, not knowing French, don't know just what to DO with "longue" so slither it into "lounge" 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 14, 2010, 05:11:05 PM
The Lounge Slither
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 14, 2010, 05:48:27 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 14, 2010, 05:11:05 PM
The Lounge Slither

Sounds like clarinet cocktail music, by the title.  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 15, 2010, 09:03:46 AM
Great typo in the article referenced here (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17220.0.html):

Quote from: Anthony FaiolaOfficially, the Vatican said Kasper withdrew from the trip because of a flair up of gout.

The mistaken substitution could hardly have more flair than in that sentence! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 15, 2010, 09:30:46 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 15, 2010, 09:03:46 AM
Great typo in the article referenced here (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,17220.0.html):
 
The mistaken substitution could hardly have more flair than in that sentence! ; )

Amen!   0:)

As opposed to the flairless monstrosity which appeared on two 8th Grade papers today:

:o   "throughed"    :o

Truly these are the end times!  The obvious cheating involved was bad enough, since the odds that two paramecia would independently come up with something so illiterate for the same assignment are miniscule.

A translation of the Latin word for "threw" was the point: so not only are they unaware that no such words as "throwed" or "threwed" exist, except in their feverish platyhelminthic nervous systems, they compound it with gross immorality.

And yes, Cato extracted confessions with a modicum of Jack-Baueresque interrogation techniques.   $:)

This is after all a Catholic school: confessions are easily obtained!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 15, 2010, 11:20:02 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 14, 2010, 03:11:50 PM
I'm sorry to report that I haven't seen "chaise longue" in 30 years, except in old books.  Too bad.  I don't care if "chaise lounge" is now acceptable.  I won't use that word.  It has come into common use perhaps because there's a lot of dyslexia.  Or maybe because most folk, not knowing French, don't know just what to DO with "longue" so slither it into "lounge"

Interesting that this issue should come up this week. I was editing a submitted column and came across chaise lounge, and I probably wouldn't have noticed if not for this discussion. Had to change it. We use Webster's as the arbiter of spelling (when a word is not listed by the AP), and chaise lounge does not appear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 15, 2010, 11:21:59 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 15, 2010, 11:20:02 AM
Interesting that this issue should come up this week. I was editing a submitted column and came across chaise lounge, and I probably wouldn't have noticed if not for this discussion. Had to change it. We use Webster's as the arbiter of spelling (when a word is not listed by the AP), and chaise lounge does not appear.

You're welcome.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 15, 2010, 11:24:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 15, 2010, 09:30:46 AM
This is after all a Catholic school: confessions are easily obtained!   0:)

Sort of makes us recovering Catholics wonder how we ever survived it ...  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on September 15, 2010, 11:30:34 AM
Back in the day, when letters were dictated into a tape recorder; I had used the word, 'invoke' in relation to a section of an act of Parliament. The typist phoned me to tell me that; "Ye canie use this wurd 'invoke'. Ah hay looked it up an' it means; tae summun up the dieties'.

I replied that I assumed she had been looking at the shorter Oxford Dictionary.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 15, 2010, 02:07:04 PM
Cap'n, ma engines canna hol' warp ten fa lang. Wha' air we ganna dew?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on September 15, 2010, 02:10:33 PM
Wedge the warp handbreak on with a big fat dictionary of 'Scottish Use and Usage'.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 15, 2010, 03:04:38 PM
(Did I walk in on the Klingon opera thread by mistake?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 15, 2010, 03:50:47 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 15, 2010, 03:04:38 PM
(Did I walk in on the Klingon opera thread by mistake?)

Wocka Wocka!

Suddenly...a haggis!    :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on September 15, 2010, 11:09:20 PM
One of those nouns that is the same as singular or as plural. Not sure what a collective noun for them would be, perhaps a 'gut-full'.

Slàinte mhath

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2010, 02:55:41 AM
If the haggis were in the singular . . . how could you tell?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on September 16, 2010, 03:25:47 AM
It would be lamenting for its mate.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 16, 2010, 03:47:42 AM
Quote from: knight on September 16, 2010, 03:25:47 AM
It would be lamenting for its mate.

Mike

Aye, there's the roob!

Which in America would mean that a bumpkin is standing nearby!   0:)

Not to be confused with a pumpkin!

And speaking of confusing, I have a group of pumpkins in my class who regularly translate the Latin word miles as either "solider" or "soilder."   :o

I have emphasized that since a "SOLDIER" might "DIE," the word "die" needs to be evident, when they write "soldier."  Then I patted myself on the back for giving them such a brilliant mnemonic device!   $:)

But that means they need to remember the device!!!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 16, 2010, 03:52:20 AM
"I smell a device." ~ Sir Toby Belch
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on September 16, 2010, 04:02:29 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 16, 2010, 03:47:42 AM


Which in America would mean that a bumpkin is standing nearby!   0:)


Why thank you sir.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: oyasumi on September 17, 2010, 09:10:46 AM
So what's with this alumnus/alumni thing? I thought alumnus was singular, but keep seeing "University of Whatever Alumni" bumper stickers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 17, 2010, 09:14:53 AM
Coupon with the first syllable pronounced queue.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 17, 2010, 09:22:50 AM
Quote from: oyasumi on September 17, 2010, 09:10:46 AM
So what's with this alumnus/alumni thing? I thought alumnus was singular, but keep seeing "University of Whatever Alumni" bumper stickers.

Yes, alumnus, and its feminine counterpart alumna, are both singular.

Plurals are alumni/alumnae.

I have heard the Latin endings dropped e.g. "I'm an alumn (or "alum") of ..."

Pronounced "a loom" but should the "n" really be kept, when spelling this non-standard pronunciation, to prevent confusion with the chemical alum ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 17, 2010, 09:25:55 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 17, 2010, 09:14:53 AM
Coupon with the first syllable pronounced queue.

That is what you hear in Ohio, or at least in the Dayton/Columbus/Cincinnati area.   0:)

My Random House dictionary accepts both "koo" and "kyoo."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 17, 2010, 09:28:52 AM
I guess it's right, but that don't mean my ear has got to like it ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 18, 2010, 09:49:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 17, 2010, 09:28:52 AM
I guess it's right, but that don't mean my ear has got to like it ; )

That's Cato's rule too!   ;D

Today, while I was researching the origin of a ritual known in America as a high-school prom, a curiosity crossed swords with my retinas:


"The trend caught on, and senior proms soon spread to colleges throughout the United States. All classes of soon-to-be graduating college seniors dawned their finest clothes for a night of dancing and socializing with peers."

Well, the kids might have danced until it dawned on them it was time to go home, but I would hope they donned their gay apparel, rather than laying their clothes in the early morning sunshine! 

Of course, in some cases they might be laying in the early morning sunshine!   $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 18, 2010, 09:55:26 AM
Too funny!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 18, 2010, 11:19:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 18, 2010, 09:49:39 AM"The trend caught on, and senior proms soon spread to colleges throughout the United States. All classes of soon-to-be graduating college seniors dawned their finest clothes for a night of dancing and socializing with peers."

Beyond the malapropism, it's not even an accurate description of what happens at a prom. The point is drinking and groping, and the clothes are hardly ever the finest. In fact, they're usually pretty awful.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 18, 2010, 03:13:05 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 17, 2010, 09:14:53 AM
Coupon with the first syllable pronounced queue.
Yes!!! Thanks for reading my mind!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 18, 2010, 03:15:38 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 18, 2010, 11:19:39 AM
Beyond the malapropism, it's not even an accurate description of what happens at a prom. The point is drinking and groping, and the clothes are hardly ever the finest. In fact, they're usually pretty awful.

My unreconstructed, Peter-Pannish, 50-something brother-in-law uses an unreconstructed expression, when dealing with car parts that come apart surprisingly fast:

"Well, that came off quicker 'n a prom dress!"

:o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on September 18, 2010, 03:17:23 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 18, 2010, 11:19:39 AM
Beyond the malapropism, it's not even an accurate description of what happens at a prom. The point is drinking and grioping, and the clothes are hardly ever the finest. In fact, they're usually pretty awful.

Grioping - is this some in-joke I don't get, or what.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 18, 2010, 07:19:51 PM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on September 18, 2010, 03:17:23 PM
Grioping - is this some in-joke I don't get, or what.

Yes, that's exactly what that is. Lay off of me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 20, 2010, 01:59:53 PM
What say ye about the following?

Thus spake my 20-something principal today: "Some parents over-exaggerate how much time their kids spend on homework, and I'm sure some under-exaggerate ."

I know some people will defend "over-exaggerate" as a degree of exaggeration, but if any defense for "under-exaggerate" exists, let me know! 

Of course he meant: "Some parents will "understate"...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on September 20, 2010, 02:22:59 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 20, 2010, 01:59:53 PM
What say ye about the following?

Thus spake my 20-something principal today: "Some parents over-exaggerate how much time their kids spend on homework, and I'm sure some under-exaggerate ."

I know some people will defend "over-exaggerate" as a degree of exaggeration, but if any defense for "under-exaggerate" exists, let me know! 

Of course he meant: "Some parents will "understate"...

Perhaps he was attempting to exagitate you, which is under exaggeration (in my dictionary at least...)  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 07:22:35 AM
Well,  you knew what he meant, so I don't see too much of a problem. We say a lot of  things in conversation we wouldn't want to justify in print. I have more trouble with over-exaggerate, which suggests that there is a level where you can exaggerate just enough. Under-exaggerate is an interesting,though. Never heard it before, but I kind of like it. It seems more vivid than just "understate," because it connotes an almost  purposeful exaggeration on the low side.  "Understate" could imply a mistake or being unaware just how much homework the kids do. A misunderestimation, as Bush would say.

And what's with the ageism? Is it necessary to know the guy is 20 something? Seems like there's some kind of message here about these kids today.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on September 21, 2010, 07:25:38 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 07:22:35 AM
We say a lot of  things in conversation we wouldn't want to justify in print.

Amen.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 21, 2010, 07:42:14 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 07:22:35 AM
We say a lot of  things in conversation we wouldn't want to justify in print.

Ans some of us say things "in print" that we wouldn't have to nerve to say to someones face.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 21, 2010, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 20, 2010, 01:59:53 PM
What say ye about the following?

Thus spake my 20-something principal today: "Some parents over-exaggerate how much time their kids spend on homework, and I'm sure some under-exaggerate ."

I know some people will defend "over-exaggerate" as a degree of exaggeration, but if any defense for "under-exaggerate" exists, let me know! 

Of course he meant: "Some parents will "understate"...

Maybe the speaker was being more precise than you realize.  Perhaps he or she was saying that parents are supposed to exaggerate the virtues of their children, but some go to far and others don't do enough.  I fear you are misunderestimating the abilities of your principal.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 21, 2010, 08:00:31 AM
"...20-something principal..."   ;D

Well, of course something is being implied!   $:)

And Joe Barron is quite correct: we knew what he meant.  Probably the brain just see-sawed from "over-exaggerate" to "under-exaggerate."   His memos, however, contain some curiosities.

And yes, I love "misunderestimate" !   :o     A fun word! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 21, 2010, 08:02:40 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 21, 2010, 08:00:31 AM
And yes, I love "misunderestimate" !   :o     A fun word!

They have "The Queen's English" and we have "The President's American."   ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 08:42:20 AM
Whenever I see an ad for the drug Abilify, I think it sounds like a word Bush would use: "We're tryin' to abilify democracy in the Middle East."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2010, 08:44:42 AM
Refudiate, Joe!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 02:43:47 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 21, 2010, 08:44:42 AM
Refudiate, Joe!

Well, now we're talkin' a out someone else entirely. You bethca!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 02:53:05 PM
Here's an article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/13/AR2010091304476.html) habitues of this thread will appreciate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on September 21, 2010, 03:21:15 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 02:53:05 PM
Here's an article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/13/AR2010091304476.html) habitues of this thread will appreciate.

This gave me a chuckle:

The Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star described professional football as a "doggy dog world."

Cute, no?  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 21, 2010, 04:21:13 PM
Dog my cats iffen it ain't so!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 21, 2010, 05:18:57 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 21, 2010, 02:53:05 PM
Here's an article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/13/AR2010091304476.html) habitues of this thread will appreciate.

"Much obliged!"    $:)

When the guardians of the language do not understand what they are guarding, then the denigration of the language is inevitable.

But to continue the underground war against slovenly speechifying   8)   is why we have Cato's Grammar Grumble!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 22, 2010, 11:58:22 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 21, 2010, 05:18:57 PM
"Much obliged!"    $:)

When the guardians of the language do not understand what they are guarding, then the denigration of the language is inevitable.

But to continue the underground war against slovenly speechifying   8)   is why we have Cato's Grammar Grumble!   0:)

I agree with some of what the guy has to say, but not all. Opposition to an expression like "reach out to" is largely a matter of taste, not of correctness. Grammatically, there's nothing wrong with it, and as authors wiser than I have pointed out, words and expressions we use today without thinking were once opposed as being illogical or sloppy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 22, 2010, 12:10:56 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 21, 2010, 05:18:57 PMWhen the guardians of the language do not understand what they are guarding, then the denigration of the language is inevitable.

Incorrect usage alert: denigration.  People who fail to respect standard usage of the English language do not unfairly criticize it or disparage it (Oxford definition).  They cause it to deteriorate or degrade. 

When the guardians of the language do not understand what they are guarding, then the deterioration of the language is inevitable.

::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 23, 2010, 03:47:17 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on September 22, 2010, 12:10:56 PM
Incorrect usage alert: denigration.  People who fail to respect standard usage of the English language do not unfairly criticize it or disparage it (Oxford definition).  They cause it to deteriorate or degrade. 

When the guardians of the language do not understand what they are guarding, then the deterioration of the language is inevitable.

::)



Quite right!  I vaguely recall thinking "degradation" for the comment, but somehow, possibly because of the similarity in sound, out came "denigration."   :o

Last night a commercial on TV for a movie about a magical owl flitted by:  a critic's one-word recommendation was quoted with very large golden letters.

"Wonderous!"

My wife wondered if that might be a British spelling, but I see nothing about it in any of my 3 dictionaries, or on-line.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 23, 2010, 03:51:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 23, 2010, 03:47:17 AM
Last night a commercial on TV for a movie about a magical owl flitted by:  a critic's one-word recommendation was quoted with very large golden letters.

"Wonderous!"

My wife wondered if that might be a British spelling, but I see nothing about it in any of my 3 dictionaries, or on-line.

Not sure where it came from; I remember puzzling over that spelling in 1977, with the Yes single "Wonderous Stories" (the only thing worth listening to on the Going for the One album, IMO).

Say, maybe it originates with that . . . pop group affectation?
; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 24, 2010, 05:39:36 AM
Yesterday, during a conference with a parent, whose child is not a diligent genius, a most regretable fact which the parent refuses to believe, the parent said in response to our observation of laziness (no homework) and basic space-cadet behavior (no book, no notes, no focus):

"I just can't ascribe to that claim! X has been spending 3 hours a night on homework!"

Indeed!  She would probably also not subscribe to that claim.    0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 24, 2010, 11:33:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 24, 2010, 05:39:36 AM
Yesterday, during a conference with a parent, whose child is not a diligent genius, a most regretable fact which the parent refuses to believe, the parent said in response to our observation of laziness (no homework) and basic space-cadet behavior (no book, no notes, no focus):

"I just can't ascribe to that claim! X has been spending 3 hours a night on homework!"

Indeed!  She would probably also not subscribe to that claim.    0:)
Tel maitre, tel valet! Bring back the Jesuit education until it's not too late!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 24, 2010, 11:51:02 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 24, 2010, 11:33:07 AM
Tel maitre, tel valet! Bring back the Jesuit education until it's not too late!  :D

Florestan, I think what you want to say is "before it's too late."  The word "the" before Jesuit isn't necessary, either. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 24, 2010, 11:53:14 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 24, 2010, 11:51:02 AM
Florestan, I think what you want to say is "before it's too late."  The word "the" before Jesuit isn't necessary, either. ;)
You are right on both accounts! English is not my native tongue, so please bear with me!  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 24, 2010, 11:59:55 AM
Today's memo from our copy editor. We think about this s#!@ constantly.

Here's the latest from my collection of items that appear to be among the lesser known, either in the AP Stylebook, or Montgomery style.

1.   Social Security (capitalized always when referring to U.S. system).
2.   fire company — although company is abbreviated when speaking of a business, we do not abbreviate it for fire company (Montgomery style).
3.   There is no comma before Inc.  Monster Inc.
4.   over/more than. Use over for spatial relationships and more than with numerals. [I observe this distinction at the paper, but I disagree with it in principle. "More than" is a perfectly acceptable meaning for "over."-JB]
5.   national anthem is not capitalized. "The Star-Spangled Banner" is.
6.   damage/damages  A home sustains damage in a fire — damage from the storm, etc. Damages only refers to a monetary award from a lawsuit.
7.   Things happen every day. But it was an everyday occurrence. [You go, girl!]
8.   percents are always written as numerals. Taxes are up 6 percent.
9.   numerals written as plurals do not have an apostrophe. He graduated in the 1970s, there are six 7s and three 8s.
10.    Ages: Sally is 8 years old (no hyphens), but Sally is an 8-year-old.
11.   Washington, D.C. (there's actually a comma).
12.   Don't say this February, etc. if it is the current year – just in February.
13.   He graduated from Podunk U. NOT he graduated Podunk U.
14.   Awhile/ a while. It's been awhile since I saw him. I have not seen him for a while. It's two words when it follow a preposition. (English doesn't always make sense.) [You're telling me. I can't really think of any time the use of "awhile" as one word would be justified, though it is in the dictionary].

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 24, 2010, 12:02:01 PM
Quote from: Florestan on September 24, 2010, 11:53:14 AM
You are right on both accounts! English is not my native tongue, so please bear with me!  :)

I figured it isn't. But your English is still better than my Romanian.  (Oh, and it's "right on both counts."  ;) )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 24, 2010, 12:04:25 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 24, 2010, 12:02:01 PM
I figured it isn't. But your English is still better than my Romanian.  (Oh, and it's "right on both counts."  ;) )
Oh my! I guess I'd never pass an examination supervised by Cato! :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 24, 2010, 12:42:16 PM
Quote from: Florestan on September 24, 2010, 12:04:25 PM
Oh my! I guess I'd never pass an examination supervised by Cato! :D

I don't think I would, either.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 24, 2010, 02:50:20 PM
Could have read:

7. Toyota be damned.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 27, 2010, 09:37:48 AM
Quote from: CBSnews.comJimi Heselden, who's company purchased Segway . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 27, 2010, 02:55:41 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 27, 2010, 09:37:48 AMJimi Heselden, who's company purchased Segway . . . .

This one took me a second, which shows you how easily overlooked these mistakes can be. Still, from a news organization, that's pretty bad.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 27, 2010, 03:26:26 PM
Quote from: Joe Barron on September 27, 2010, 02:55:41 PM
This one took me a second, which shows you how easily overlooked these mistakes can be.

Still, if you work for Segway and you find out that the owner of the company was killed in a fatal Segway accident, who's responsible for a misplaced whose is not your biggest problem.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 27, 2010, 03:54:36 PM
In news reportage (to paraphrase Jeeves) there is no time at which proper grammar does not matter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on September 27, 2010, 04:11:32 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 27, 2010, 03:54:36 PM
In news reportage (to paraphrase Jeeves) there is no time at which proper grammar does not matter.


911 operator:  May I help you.
citizen:  Help, my hair are on fire!!!
911 operator:  I'm afraid that is not possible.  It is possible that your hair is on fire, or that your hairs are on file (although that would be awkward) but it is entirely impossible that your hair are on fire.  (click)
::)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 27, 2010, 04:14:51 PM
Calling in an emergency, and news reportage, are two different activities, yes?

; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on September 27, 2010, 06:38:36 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on September 27, 2010, 03:26:26 PM
Still, if you work for Segway and you find out that the owner of the company was killed in a fatal Segway accident, who's responsible for a misplaced whose is not your biggest problem.

I'm sorry, is that what happened? Nobody said anything about that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 01, 2010, 05:21:58 AM
What will the first grumble of October be . . . ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 04, 2010, 04:29:25 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 01, 2010, 05:21:58 AM
What will the first grumble of October be . . . ?

A fairly unusual one, made by a local (Ohio) sportscaster.

Such reporters are infamous for their chewing and eschewing proper grammar and vocabulary.

Reporter Terry Dactyl fingered the wrong word while he spoke about a local high-school football team: "Tonight the Hornets withheld their first real test on the gridiron." 

And then I suppose they took the ball and went home!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 04, 2010, 05:07:12 AM
I think I should withstand comment here.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on October 04, 2010, 05:12:56 AM
I saw two examples of "it's" being used for "its" over the weekend, one on the side of a half-and-half carton.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 04, 2010, 05:37:25 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on October 04, 2010, 05:12:56 AM
I saw two examples of "it's" being used for "its" over the weekend, one on the side of a half-and-half carton.  ::)

I did a double-take this morning, as I found that very error in a book, about a literary family, and written by a scion thereof.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 04, 2010, 05:53:29 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on October 04, 2010, 05:12:56 AM
I saw two examples of "it's" being used for "its" over the weekend, one on the side of a half-and-half carton.  ::)

The death of a thousand cuts!

I have far too many students who still refuse to memorize the differences among the verb  lead, its      0:)  past tense led and the metal lead.

One dared to complain: "Who cares?  People still understand it!"   :o

The ugly head of Relativism rises from the depths!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on October 04, 2010, 07:15:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 04, 2010, 05:53:29 AMOne dared to complain: "Who cares?  People still understand it!"   :o

Well, I wouldn't quite go that far. Still, the confusion of lead and led is understandable, since our only other common example of this sort of thing is that read is the past tense of read. (And you weren't sure know how to pronounce the first one until you got to the second, were you? :P )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on October 04, 2010, 07:44:21 AM
Check out this choice lump of rump:

He added: "Because the heartbeat of Medal of Honor has always resided in the reverence for American and Allied soldiers, we have decided to rename the opposing team in multiplayer from Taliban to Opposing Force."

Heartbeat....resided... in the reverence.... sorry, what language is this?  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 04, 2010, 08:00:07 AM
Is that anything like what Wikipedia calls "simple English"? ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on October 04, 2010, 09:38:27 AM
Quote from: Benji on October 04, 2010, 07:44:21 AM
Check out this choice lump of rump:

He added: "Because the heartbeat of Medal of Honor has always resided in the reverence for American and Allied soldiers, we have decided to rename the opposing team in multiplayer from Taliban to Opposing Force."

Heartbeat....resided... in the reverence.... sorry, what language is this?  ???

I'm guessing Medal of Honor is a video game?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on October 04, 2010, 11:51:19 AM
Quote from: Joe Barron on October 04, 2010, 09:38:27 AM
I'm guessing Medal of Honor is a video game?

It is indeed. One with a heartbeat, seemingly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 04, 2010, 11:52:54 AM
Where the heartbeat resides, there will the tax rates apply . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 04, 2010, 10:27:20 PM
Is it only me who's irritated by the use of the word "medication" when what the speaker really means is "medicine" or "drug" or "pill"?

Nobody spoke that way 20 years ago.  It seems to be a recent invention and it doesn't work.  Sounds a bit pompous, somehow. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2010, 04:53:31 AM
Transcendental medication
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 05, 2010, 05:09:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 04, 2010, 11:52:54 AM
Where the heartbeat resides, there will the tax rates apply . . . .

I think that is a philosophy dear to the hearts of all governments!

QuoteTranscendental medication

In the 60's that was LSD!   $:)

On "medication" as a substitute: polysyllabic words are often preferred by those with low confidence in their own abilities.

However, I find the monosyllabic slang word "meds" particularly grating.

And we no longer have hospitals in many areas: we now have "Medical Centers."

From Movieline.com today on the conviction of Die Hard Director John McTiernan for wiretapping (???):


"Since 15 years have past since McTiernan helmed either film, he could probably use a refresher course on the tactics John McClane and Dutch employed to escape even the most dire of circumstances."

Somebody else needs a refresher course!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2010, 05:38:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 05, 2010, 05:09:27 AM
I think that is a philosophy dear to the hearts of all governments!

The heart of the government is an anatomically curious thing . . . there are only veins through which blood flows to the heart . . . no arteries to carry any away.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2010, 06:49:04 AM
An organ which engendered a new variety of parasite, too: the cardiac tick.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 05, 2010, 11:56:22 AM
Yes, I hate "meds" even more than "medication" when it's used as a substitute for "medicine" or "pills".  And when I rant at high volume about the pompous misuse of old, perfectly fine words (e.g., medication = giving people medicine),  my husband screeches to everyone in the house, "Ma's off her meds again!"  So, for me, it's a one-two punch. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 06, 2010, 05:52:58 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 05, 2010, 11:56:22 AM
Yes, I hate "meds" even more than "medication" when it's used as a substitute for "medicine" or "pills".  And when I rant at high volume about the pompous misuse of old, perfectly fine words (e.g., medication = giving people medicine),  my husband screeches to everyone in the house, "Ma's off her meds again!"  So, for me, it's a one-two punch.
So are you off your meds...again...ma?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on October 06, 2010, 07:02:11 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 05, 2010, 11:56:22 AM
Yes, I hate "meds" even more than "medication"

I can't agree with this. I think meds is a nice,  anglo-saxon sounding abbreviation of a longer, latinate word. It's a neat way of savng syllables, like shortening facsimile to fax, or nuclear to nuke. The only problem with it that I see, and as your example shows, is  that it's become a cliche. "X is off his/her meds" is a handy way to insult someone without having to come up with anything original or witty.

Have no trouble with medication, either. The language will do what the language will do. And once the ball gets rolling, you can't stem the tide by spitting on the track.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 07:13:05 AM
No, David.  I don't take "meds" - unlike 90% of the population.  I  just suffer over things  and then yell and the family laughs & smirks, then I laugh, and then I go and do some yardwork or other chores.

Curious as to how y'all cope, now that I've been so honest. :P

Hey, Joe, re "medication".  I don't find changes in vocabulary over the years inherently objectionable.  But some changes are.  "Medicine" is still a good word; I can't figure out why it was ever changed.  "Medication" means to deliver or prescribe medicine.  There was  never any need that I could see to confuse these 2 words when they both clearly meant different things.  ;D

Maybe it's a little like saying "carpeting" instead of carpet.  You know, the carpet is worn and you need a new one, not the carpeting is worn etc., which one hears a fair bit.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 06, 2010, 07:35:44 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 07:13:05 AMHey, Joe, re "medication".  I don't find changes in vocabulary over the years inherently objectionable.  But some changes are.  "Medicine" is still a good word; I can't figure out why it was ever changed.  "Medication" means to deliver or prescribe medicine.  There was  never any need that I could see to confuse these 2 words when they both clearly meant different things.  ;D

Maybe it's a little like saying "carpeting" instead of carpet.  You know, the carpet is worn and you need a new one, not the carpeting is worn etc., which one hears a fair bit.

The word "medication" dates to the 15th century, according to Websters.  I don't see any basis for objection, except that it is one syllable longer than medicine.

A carpet and carpeting is not the same thing.   Carpet is normally used for the textile mat that can be put on a floor.  Carpeting is the material the mat is made of, and is common usage when the it is permanently installed (i.e., wall-to-wall carpeting).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 07:43:59 AM
Yes, you have a point as regards carpet & carpeting.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 06, 2010, 07:57:23 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 07:43:59 AM
Yes, you have a point as regards carpet & carpeting.

Interesting: although my Random House dictionary does not explicitly make the distinction, I have been seeing "carpet" used to mean specifically "wall-to-wall carpet(ing)" and "rug"  used for the kind one can roll up and move.

A "throw rug" also is heard here in Ohio.

And what would one do then with the idea of "The Flying Carpet" ?
  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 06, 2010, 08:03:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 06, 2010, 07:57:23 AM
Interesting: although my Random House dictionary does not explicitly make the distinction, I have been seeing "carpet" used to mean specifically "wall-to-wall carpet(ing)" and "rug"  used for the kind one can roll up and move.

A "throw rug" also is heard here in Ohio.

And what would one do then with the idea of "The Flying Carpet" ?
  0:)

Wall-to-wall carpeting" gets three times as many hits on Google as "wall-to-wall carpet."  And carpet is sometimes used to describe the material a carpet is made of as well.  But carpet as the thing and carpeting as the material are the more common usages.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 06, 2010, 08:23:08 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 07:13:05 AM
Hey, Joe, re "medication".  I don't find changes in vocabulary over the years inherently objectionable.  But some changes are.  "Medicine" is still a good word; I can't figure out why it was ever changed.  "Medication" means to deliver or prescribe medicine.  There was  never any need that I could see to confuse these 2 words when they both clearly meant different things.  ;D
The verb meaning "to deliver medicine" is not "medication" but "medicate."  "Medication" is a noun that describes a means of delivering medicine.  For instance, a typical tablet given as medication might include 5% medicine and 95% binders, buffers, coatings, colorants, and so on.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on October 06, 2010, 08:48:22 AM
Woody Allen once said his parents were very Old World, down-to-Earth People whose values in life were God and carpeting.

The joke wouldn't work with "carpets." In this sense, carpeting is not just material. It's an activity that involves selection and pricing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Joe Barron on October 06, 2010, 08:55:38 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 07:13:05 AM
Hey, Joe, re "medication".  I don't find changes in vocabulary over the years inherently objectionable.  But some changes are.  "Medicine" is still a good word; I can't figure out why it was ever changed.  "Medication" means to deliver or prescribe medicine.  There was  never any need that I could see to confuse these 2 words when they both clearly meant different things.

You should leaf through the AMA style guide sometime. Some of the distinctions they make --- like radiograph v. X-ray, or dose v. dosage -- would make you feel right at home. Or else drive you nuts.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 02:47:04 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 06, 2010, 08:23:08 AM
The verb meaning "to deliver medicine" is not "medication" but "medicate."  "Medication" is a noun that describes a means of delivering medicine.  For instance, a typical tablet given as medication might include 5% medicine and 95% binders, buffers, coatings, colorants, and so on.

Would this be correct:  "The medication of the general public with aspirin would reduce heart attacks"?  Not the content but the use of the word medication.  Or should one be saying, "The medicating of the general public..."

I guess what I was originally trying to say is that, for a long time,  common usage was, "Jimmy,  take your medicine!"  Now, it's, "Jimmy,  take your medication!"  Still sounds pompous to me, as per Cato's commentary.

Why would this be an improvement irrespective of all the other information here as to definition of "medication"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 06, 2010, 02:49:08 PM
Fred's meds
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 06, 2010, 02:56:24 PM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 02:47:04 PM
Would this be correct:  "The medication of the general public with aspirin would reduce heart attacks"?  Not the content but the use of the word medication.  Or should one be saying, "The medicating of the general public..."

I guess what I was originally trying to say is that, for a long time,  common usage was, "Jimmy,  take your medicine!"  Now, it's, "Jimmy,  take your medication!"  Still sounds pompous to me, as per Cato's commentary.

Why would this be an improvement irrespective of all the other information here as to definition of "medication"?

Webster's defines "medications" as "the act of process of medicating" or "a medical substance."  So your use of medication in the example sentence is correct, although perhaps not idiomatic.  The second strikes me as even more awkward.   For all of the fine distinctions we could make between medicine and medication, there are no sharp boundaries in actual usage or in the dictionary definitions I have found.  They are essentially synonyms.   Medications strikes my ear as more "technical," what a doctor would say, but I don't find it particularly pompous.  Apparently medication is not a recently minted work, either (again, according to the dictionary).


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 03:08:41 PM
Thanks for your  helpful commentary, Scarpia. 

I just wanted to discuss the scrapping of a  common, age-old usage for no apparent reason. 

Does anyone here think that we are all much or even marginally better off because everyone and his mutt now says "medication" instead of "medicine"?

Also, I do recognize that the AMA style guide is useful for doctors and hospital personnel in general, but that is a different bunch of people and I'm not talking about that specific use at all.

Dose VS dosage.  Now, that should be fun to get into! ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 06, 2010, 04:43:34 PM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 03:08:41 PMI just wanted to discuss the scrapping of a  common, age-old usage for no apparent reason. 

I may  be beating a dead horse here, but according to the Random House dictionary the first citation of the word "medication" is from 1375.  If there was an argument that using the word medication was "scrapping age-old usage" it should have been made in the year 1376, not today.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 07, 2010, 06:23:59 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 06, 2010, 04:43:34 PM
I may  be beating a dead horse here, but according to the Random House dictionary the first citation of the word "medication" is from 1375.  If there was an argument that using the word medication was "scrapping age-old usage" it should have been made in the year 1376, not today.
Pssst...Scarps...the correct verb form for hypotheticals is "were," not "was"--though contemporary usage failing to distinguish factual from counterfactual statements is leading to the scrapping of that age-old usage.  ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 07, 2010, 06:26:12 AM
Maintain the subjunctive mood!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 06:29:16 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 07, 2010, 06:23:59 AM
Pssst...Scarps...the correct verb form for hypotheticals is "were," not "was"--though contemporary usage failing to distinguish factual from counterfactual statements is leading to the scrapping of that age-old usage.  ;)

Well, I'm from da Bronx, so and in the vernacular, I should have just said, "yo, it ain't like that" and been done with it.   ::)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 07, 2010, 06:35:47 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 06, 2010, 03:08:41 PM
I just wanted to discuss the scrapping of a  common, age-old usage for no apparent reason. 

Dose VS dosage.  Now, that should be fun to get into! ;D
Dose vs dosage.  Looks like use vs usage to me.  ;)

Who has scrapped the term "medicine?"  I hear it in normal, everyday use, just as I always have.

"Okay, doc, what medicine would you recommend for his pain?"
"For chronic, severe pain the best would be hydromorphone hydrochloride."
"Is that Dilaudid?"
"Yes, that's one of the best-known trade names, but the medication I would recommend is the new controlled-release Exalgo, which has been shown to be particularly effective at steady-state pain management."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 07, 2010, 06:36:50 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 07, 2010, 06:23:59 AM
Pssst...Scarps...the correct verb form for hypotheticals is "were," not "was"--though contemporary usage failing to distinguish factual from counterfactual statements is leading to the scrapping of that age-old usage.  ;)

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 07, 2010, 06:26:12 AM
Maintain the subjunctive mood!

Amen!   0:)  I have fought for the preservation of the Subjunctive throughout my career in the classroom.  I am sometimes met with puddles of drool and eyes with a glaze thicker than a Christmas ham.  But being a quixotic type, I march into the thicket of their ignorance and reveal the hierophantic mysteries.

Whether or not my revelation survives the onslaught of the kulcher outside is questionable.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 07, 2010, 06:38:17 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 06:29:16 AM
Well, I'm from da Bronx, so and in the vernacular, I should have just said, "yo, it ain't like that" and been done with it.   ::)
;D And I'm from California, so I'll just say, "I hear you, dude."  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 07, 2010, 06:42:47 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 07, 2010, 06:36:50 AM
Amen!   0:)  I have fought for the preservation of the Subjunctive throughout my career in the classroom.  I am sometimes met with puddles of drool and eyes with a glaze thicker than a Christmas ham.  But being a quixotic type, I march into the thicket of their ignorance and reveal the hierophantic mysteries.

Whether or not my revelation survives the onslaught of the kulcher outside is questionable.   0:)
Perhaps there's a market for t-shirts: "Save the Subjunctive!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 07, 2010, 06:44:02 AM
I'd wear one!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 06:46:55 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 07, 2010, 06:44:02 AM
I'd wear one!

I have no doubt.   ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 07, 2010, 06:48:38 AM
Even if I were not a grammar geek, I should ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 07, 2010, 06:57:13 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 07, 2010, 06:42:47 AM
Perhaps there's a market for t-shirts: "Save the Subjunctive!"

Great idea!

"If I WERE you, I would

Save The Subjunctive!"  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on October 07, 2010, 07:06:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 07, 2010, 06:57:13 AM
Great idea!

"If I WERE you, I would

Save The Subjunctive!"  8)

I'm sorry to break the news but Beyonce already has this covered.

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41M0STaJzdL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 07:33:00 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 07, 2010, 06:57:13 AM
Great idea!

"If I WERE you, I would

Save The Subjunctive!"  8)

In English, I don't find the subjunctive worth saving.   "I was there," "you were there," but "if I were there."  It is not a recognizable tense in English, we're just supposed to pick up that the apparently mis-conjugated verb means "subjunctive."  It makes sense in Latinate languages that have a real subjunctive tense.  If, 100 years from now, it were forgotten, that would be fine, in my opinion.

(Donning flame-proof suit.)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 07, 2010, 07:37:12 AM
Be that as it may, the subjunctive will continue to exist in the literature. There are limits to the "tidying" process of English grammar over time. ("The eons are closing!")
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 07:38:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 07, 2010, 07:37:12 AM
Be that as it may, the subjunctive will continue to exist in the literature. There are limits to the "tidying" process of English grammar over time. ("The eons are closing!")

Thou art absolutely correct.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 07, 2010, 07:45:00 AM
I durst not suggest otherwise.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 07, 2010, 08:46:04 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 07:33:00 AM
In English, I don't find the subjunctive worth saving.   "I was there," "you were there," but "if I were there."  It is not a recognizable tense in English, we're just supposed to pick up that the apparently mis-conjugated verb means "subjunctive."  It makes sense in Latinate languages that have a real subjunctive tense.  If, 100 years from now, it were forgotten, that would be fine, in my opinion.

(Donning flame-proof suit.)

Indeed!   8)

The subjunctive is a most recognizable "mood" in English: "were" in "If he were here right now..." is obviously Present Subjunctive Singular, NOT a Past Indicative Plural, which it normally is.

"If I knew where he is staying in London, I would call his hotel."

"Knew" in the if-clause is NOT a Past Indicative, but a Present Subjunctive.

Also:
The subjunctive "were" is not Latinate, but related to German's subjunctive  "wäre."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 07, 2010, 08:58:15 AM
Addendum: the importance of the subjunctive is something to be considered.

The subjunctive allows us to think of potential events which will not happen, or did not happen.  It allows us to postulate.

"If he were at the theater, he would be sleeping through the play."
(Subjunctive Contrary-to-Fact Condition Present Tense: he is not at the theater, but you assume he would be bored and sleeping if he were there.)

"If he was at the theater, he slept through the play."

(A Past True Condition: you do not know if he was at the theater or not last night:  the odds are 50/50.  But you are positive that he slept through the play, if he was there.)

Exactly how you think about potential pasts, presents, and futures without the subjunctive is obscure: "would" (a subjunctive form) is used quite often in English!  Keeping the distinctions clear allows for clarity of thought.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 09:08:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 07, 2010, 08:58:15 AM
Addendum: the importance of the subjunctive is something to be considered.

The subjunctive allows us to think of potential events which will not happen, or did not happen.  It allows us to postulate.

"If he were at the theater, he would be sleeping through the play."
(Subjunctive Contrary-to-Fact Condition Present Tense: he is not at the theater, but you assume he would be bored and sleeping if he were there.)

"If he was at the theater, he slept through the play."

(A Past True Condition: you do not know if he was at the theater or not last night:  the odds are 50/50.  But you are positive that he slept through the play, if he was there.)

Exactly how you think about potential pasts, presents, and futures without the subjunctive is obscure: "would" (a subjunctive form) is used quite often in English!  Keeping the distinctions clear allows for clarity of thought.

I'm not saying there is no need for the subjunctive.  It's too bad English doesn't have one, and that any verb tense more complicated than a simple present or future tense consists of obscure combinations of nominally incompatible verb tenses. 

For your example "If he were at the theater, he would be sleeping through the play." one could say "If he had come to the theater, he would be sleeping through the play."   The same meaning, no?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on October 07, 2010, 09:16:08 AM
I just saw a pamphlet with notes about the Florida Gators explaining about the turf they use and the construction of the stadium.
I forgot the sentence, but it was basically two sentences separated by a comma. What happen to the semi-colon?  ???
Oh, well.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 07, 2010, 09:34:52 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 07, 2010, 09:08:31 AM
I'm not saying there is no need for the subjunctive.  It's too bad English doesn't have one, and that any verb tense more complicated than a simple present or future tense consists of obscure combinations of nominally incompatible verb tenses. 

For your example "If he were at the theater, he would be sleeping through the play." one could say "If he had come to the theater, he would be sleeping through the play."   The same meaning, no?

No, not quite the same meaning because of the mixed times.  "Had come" in your example is in fact Past Subjunctive with a Present Subjunctive in the result clause.  It means therefore if he had arrived (much earlier) at the theater, he would right now be there sleeping.

"If he had come to the theater, he would have slept through the play" postulates a completely past event, which never happened, with however no extension into the present.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sonata33 on October 07, 2010, 11:02:28 AM
I love hypercorrections, and I am not leaving this thread disappointed.  :-*
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 07, 2010, 11:25:55 AM
Re:  "If he were at the theater, he would be sleeping through the play."

Why not just say, "If he were at the theater, he would sleep through the play"?

Doesn't this all hinge on just what precisely is going on here?  We have to know who is discussing what, and why. 

Is the speaker talking about a person's general behaviour, or about a specific attendance at the theater? 

In the 1st instance, he goes to the theater involuntarily, and hates it; in the 2nd, he may love going to the theater, but in this case he arrived there in a debilitated condition and would definitely sleep through the play.

Anyway, back to discussion of 'was' and 'were'.  I think some of you are confusing subjunctive with conditional.  'Taint the same. 

"If I were you I would save the subjunctive" was posted on the previous page.  But as I see it - and apparently there is much discussion & disagreement about this in the World of Grammar - that is not the subjunctive.  The subjunctive version is:  Were I you, I would save the subjunctive.

Whether you be in agreement or not to  my viewpoint, I welcome your input.

Even if you don't agree with me, I welcome your input.







Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 08, 2010, 05:11:44 AM
Quote from: Chosen Barley on October 07, 2010, 11:25:55 AM
Re:  "If he were at the theater, he would be sleeping through the play."

Why not just say, "If he were at the theater, he would sleep through the play"?


Is the speaker talking about a person's general behaviour, or about a specific attendance at the theater? 

In the 1st instance, he goes to the theater involuntarily, and hates it; in the 2nd, he may love going to the theater, but in this case he arrived there in a debilitated condition and would definitely sleep through the play.

Anyway, back to discussion of 'was' and 'were'.  I think some of you are confusing subjunctive with conditional.  'Taint the same. 

"If I were you I would save the subjunctive" was posted on the previous page.  But as I see it - and apparently there is much discussion & disagreement about this in the World of Grammar - that is not the subjunctive.  The subjunctive version is:  Were I you, I would save the subjunctive.

Whether you be in agreement or not to  my viewpoint, I welcome your input.

Even if you don't agree with me, I welcome your input.

0:)  Thank you!  Some foreign language grammar books avoid using the word "subjunctive" and have replaced it with the word "conditional" to emphasize that the (subjunctive) forms are used in conditions contrary-to-fact.


"...would sleep" and "would be sleeping" are different only in that the latter is progressive.  One might need more context to determine which might sound better.


"Were I you" = "If I were you..." : only the word "if" is dropped.  Both are conditions using the subjunctive.   German has the same rule: subjunctive verb first if the word "if" is not used.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 08, 2010, 04:32:49 PM
Prepare for a REAL GRUMBLE!   :o

The following has been annoying me for a very long time: tonight I happen to have heard the crime against sensible pronunciation while my computer was ready!

There are national ads in America for realtors: "Call a realtor!  Don't sell your house on your own!"

The problem is the absolutely bizarre pronunciation of "realtor" heard in the ad.

One hears: Ree-Awl-TORE !!! 

Since when is the suffix -tor pronounced TORE???

Aviator?  Who says aviaTORE?

Prosecutor?  ProsecuTORE?

To be sure, there are people who say "ree-la-tor" and switch the middle letters around.  I find that better than saying -TORE at the end of the word.

There!  The grumble is over!   $:)   And I feel fine!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 08, 2010, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 08, 2010, 04:32:49 PM
Prepare for a REAL GRUMBLE!   :o

The following has been annoying me for a very long time: tonight I happen to have heard the crime against sensible pronunciation while my computer was ready!

There are national ads in America for realtors: "Call a realtor!  Don't sell your house on your own!"

The problem is the absolutely bizarre pronunciation of "realtor" heard in the ad.

One hears: Ree-Awl-TORE !!! 

Since when is the suffix -tor pronounced TORE???

Aviator?  Who says aviaTORE?

Prosecutor?  ProsecuTORE?

To be sure, there are people who say "ree-la-tor" and switch the middle letters around.  I find that better than saying -TORE at the end of the word.

There!  The grumble is over!   $:)   And I feel fine!   0:)

Merriam-Webster offers this:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/audio.pl?realto01.wav=Realtor%27 (http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/audio.pl?realto01.wav=Realtor%27)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 08, 2010, 07:27:39 PM
Dude!  It's Jackie Chan!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 09, 2010, 04:51:38 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 08, 2010, 07:27:39 PM
Dude!  It's Jackie Chan!

;D

Truly difficult to mispronounce that! 

However, I do have a few students who could "mispronunciate" it quite easily!   0:) 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: greg on October 09, 2010, 07:28:03 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 09, 2010, 04:51:38 PM
;D

Truly difficult to mispronounce that! 

However, I do have a few students who could "mispronunciate" it quite easily!   0:)
Well, at least our pronunciation. The original might involve a use of a tone, and I wonder if the "a" is even pronounced the same way...  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 11, 2010, 07:04:02 AM
Quote from: Greg on October 09, 2010, 07:28:03 PM
Well, at least our pronunciation. The original might involve a use of a tone, and I wonder if the "a" is even pronounced the same way...  ;)

Probably true: my daughter studied Chinese for some years, and I recall there being (at least on the beginning level I listened to) 4 pronunciations of "A," and the usual "Apple" pronunciation was not one of them.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 11, 2010, 07:20:58 AM
Aye, that's a most Anglo-Saxon use of the vowel A.

Just the thought of the A's in Anglo-Saxon being pronounced as in father, grateth.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on October 11, 2010, 07:45:22 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 11, 2010, 07:20:58 AM
Aye, that's a most Anglo-Saxon use of the vowel A.

Just the thought of the A's in Anglo-Saxon being pronounced as in father, grateth.

Ah ha! What better time to ask if this is acceptable, because I'm not 100% on it: see the part of Dr Karl's post that I have made bold (emboldened? haha...what is the right word?!)?

Is this usage acceptable? In the example above the word would be as without the inverted comma, so it's useful in Karl's usage because it helps use grasp what he means instantly. Now what about using it in the context of, say, decades (1950s or 1950's)?

And what about after acronyms? I'll use an American example for your ease of reference: ATM. So let's say I want to know the exact number of ATM machines in a given place. Would I say:

A. What is the number of ATMs in Boston?
B. What is the number of ATM's in Boston?

I have been avoiding this acronym issue for a long time. I have to write letters to my customers using all sorts of lovely plural acronyms and I have chickened out every time. I would say:

C. What is the number of AT machines in Boston?  :'(  Even though part of me thinks the plural indicator is attached, but hidden, to the M anyway so I shouldn't even have to stress out about it!!!

D. What is the number of ATM in Boston?

As always, your collective wisdom is appreciated.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 11, 2010, 08:00:36 AM
Good morning, Ben!

I was making fairly fresh use of recent-ish reading in Woe Is I: The Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English.

I should revisit it before daring to present it here . . . but the gist I remember is, don't use apostrophes in general (1950s, ATMs), but use the apostrophe when the item being pluralized is a single letter (since if you plurize as, is and us they will mimic other common words).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on October 11, 2010, 08:13:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 11, 2010, 08:00:36 AM
Good morning, Ben!

I was making fairly fresh use of recent-ish reading in Woe Is I: The Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English.

I should revisit it before daring to present it here . . . but the gist I remember is, don't use apostrophes in general (1950s, ATMs), but use the apostrophe when the item being pluralized is a single letter (since if you plurize as, is and us they will mimic other common words).


And a good afternoon / early evening to you, Dr Karl!

That makes perfect sense to me. I can't wait to U's my new found knowledge (told you I couldn't wait...)  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 21, 2010, 09:36:14 AM
Nothing to grumble over since the 11th?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on October 22, 2010, 11:07:13 AM
No major nourishment but here's a light snack:

http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/ (http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Chosen Barley on October 26, 2010, 10:26:43 PM
Port au Prince.

Do you think that English speaking Americans, especially newsreaders on radio and tee vee, should be pronouncing the above word as it is spelled?  What do you think of their pronouncing it Port au Prance?   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on November 02, 2010, 12:39:51 PM
A. What is the number of ATMs in Boston?

Thank goodness there are a number. We are currently in danger of being homogenized. Why have we suddenly become an amount of people. Help!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Benji on November 02, 2010, 12:47:32 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on November 02, 2010, 12:39:51 PM
A. What is the number of ATMs in Boston?

Thank goodness there are a number. We are currently in danger of being homogenized. Why have we suddenly become an amount of people. Help!!

I have had to force myself out of that bad habit and i'm trying to convince other people at my workplace of the correct use of 'amount', and to spot the times that they really mean 'value'.

E.G. I see this a lot: "The payment is for the same amount" when really "The payment is of the same value" makes more sense, to me at least. I experience significant resistance.  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on November 02, 2010, 04:13:10 PM
And from today's redundant again once more department: Reporter Lynsey Paulo on Barbara "Call me 'Your Majesty'" Boxer's election eve dinner at a restaurant she and her husband "frequent quite often."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on November 02, 2010, 04:58:38 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on November 02, 2010, 04:13:10 PM
. . . election eve dinner at a restaurant she and her husband "frequent quite often."

Ouchissimo!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 29, 2010, 12:57:17 PM
Cato has not been slacking off like Haggar and Levi Strauss, although it might seem that way!   0:)

Assorted things have stood in the way of updating the site here with some of the grammatical atrocities daring to incense my sensibilities, and maybe even indollar them!   $:)

But with a few minutes now available I offer the following mutants to aghast you!
(Yes, I know that "aghast" has not been a verb for centuries!  So no huffing and puffing and blowing my nouns down!  Yes, I know it isn't a noun either!)

MUTANTS #1 and #2

From a moron parent in an e-mail about their child's failing grade:

"He said he past everything!"   $:)

I, Cato , would be magnanimously willing to overlook such an error as trivial, if the moron parent had not continued to argue in a second e-mail, which had the following Mutant:

"He said you never told him about the F's and I'm not gonna start a family fewed just because of Latin."   :o

That sentence is just shocking in so many ways!   0:)

MUTANT #3

I have told you before about the moron TV station here, which employs grade-school dropouts apparently through a government program to support morons who happen to be physically attractive.  Today this station had a "runner" at the bottom of the screen:

"Korean Crisis Escalading."   $:)

Yes, I can just see all those Cadillacs lining up now at the 49th parallel!   8)   Again, we would be forgiving if "D" and "T" were a little closer together on the keyboard. 


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on December 19, 2010, 05:20:18 PM
Oops!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on December 19, 2010, 05:21:09 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 29, 2010, 12:57:17 PM
From a moron parent in an e-mail about their child's failing grade:

"He said he past everything!"   $:)

Yikes!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 19, 2010, 06:11:58 PM
Catholics will be familiar with the following phrase from the Mass:

"All honor and glory is yours, Almighty Father."   :o

This has always boxed my ears: the original Latin is also singular.  Now one can find assorted Latin authors (Caesar is one) who write plural subjects with singular verbs.  The usual explanation is that the verb is assumed for each member of the plural subject, and is a way to emphasize the members of a plural subject.  The other explanation is that the author wants to show a unity between/among the members of the subject, and treats them as a singular collective.

For later Latin, barbarism is the explanation!  In a hymn from c. 800 A.D. one reads Gloria, Laus, et Honor sit tibi where "sit" is a singular with a triple subject.

A debate on a Catholic website about this had a relativist English professor saying "it depends on where you come from."   :o   And so everything can be correct: it depends on where you come from.   ;D

Similar debate:

"Two and two are four" vs. "Two and two is four."   A mathematics teacher wrote that the phrase "The sum of..." is understood before "Two and two."  Therefore:  "The sum of two and two is four."

Understood: still, I would prefer plurals in both of these problems.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on December 20, 2010, 03:57:15 AM
On fb, Our Man in Sicily posts a link from La filosofia dei Peanuts.  Which strikes me as rather grammatically fussy, in observing that the English noun Peanuts is plural.  Mentally, I have always thought the title of the legendary strip in the singular;  I mean, I have never thought of the characters (Charlie Brown, Lucy or Linus Van Peldt, Peppermint Patty, Snoopie, Schroeder) as one Peanut each.

— I still remember watching Jeopardy as a boy, and seeing one of the challenging answers to be replied to in the form of a question . . . well, the gist of it was the Charles Schultz considered Peanuts to be the worst name for a comic strip ever.  I don't know the story of how the name came to be used . . . I have an idea that Sparky's own title for the strip was Little People.

Anyway, I have thought forever of Peanuts as being a collective noun amd functioning in the singular.  Yes, I should have preferred La filosofia de Peanuts.  Probably impossibly eccentric of me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 20, 2010, 09:10:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 20, 2010, 03:57:15 AM
On fb, Our Man in Sicily posts a link from La filosofia dei Peanuts.  Which strikes me as rather grammatically fussy, in observing that the English noun Peanuts is plural.  Mentally, I have always thought the title of the legendary strip in the singular;  I mean, I have never thought of the characters (Charlie Brown, Lucy or Linus Van Peldt, Peppermint Patty, Snoopie, Schroeder) as one Peanut each.

— I still remember watching Jeopardy as a boy, and seeing one of the challenging answers to be replied to in the form of a question . . . well, the gist of it was that Charles Schulz considered Peanuts to be the worst name for a comic strip ever.  I don't know the story of how the name came to be used . . . I have an idea that Sparky's own title for the strip was Little People.

Anyway, I have thought forever of Peanuts as being a collective noun and functioning in the singular.  Yes, I should have preferred La filosofia de Peanuts.  Probably impossibly eccentric of me.


Yes, quite right!  And not eccentric at all:  "Peanuts" is a great comic strip.


As I recall, the name was imposed by the newspaper syndicate.  :o   "Li'l Folks" was the preferred title from Schulz.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on January 04, 2011, 12:00:33 PM
 A quote from a advert being shown on UK TV.

"People have a lot of misconceptions about California; but none of them is true."

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 04, 2011, 12:21:15 PM
Quote from: knight on January 04, 2011, 12:00:33 PM
A quote from a advert being shown on UK TV.

"People have a lot of misconceptions about California; but none of them is true."

Mike

And how many people heard this and approved it, before it received a "green light" to be broadcast?   :o

Of course, when you look at how many crappy, illogical scripts are made into movies...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on January 04, 2011, 01:36:13 PM
Slight misquote by me, but the main offense is intact. A surprise appearance towards the end. Not then a hole-in-the-wall attempt despite its ineptness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExuuFNFdd0k

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 04, 2011, 04:47:42 PM
Quote from: knight on January 04, 2011, 01:36:13 PM
Slight misquote by me, but the main offense is intact. A surprise appearance towards the end. Not then a hole-in-the-wall attempt despite its ineptness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExuuFNFdd0k

Mike

Did you note that the 80 I.Q. bikini is reading "Quantum Physics" ?   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on January 04, 2011, 05:01:31 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 04, 2011, 04:47:42 PM
Did you note that the 80 I.Q. bikini is reading "Quantum Physics" ?   :o

I'm not convinced she is so dumb.  There are lots of girls who look good in a bikini, not all manage to make so much of it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on January 04, 2011, 08:46:21 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on January 04, 2011, 05:01:31 PM
I'm not convinced she is so dumb.  There are lots of girls who look good in a bikini, not all manage to make so much of it.
I'm reminded that Racquel Welch and Sharon Stone looked awfully good in bikinis and supposedly have reasonably high IQs in the 140-150 range.  And Jill St. John, another hottie from the past was supposedly really bright:  160+.

If you could get paid handsomely just for being attractive, wouldn't it be smart to take advantage of it?  Even Fabio's bright enough to figure that one out!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on January 04, 2011, 09:57:15 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on January 04, 2011, 08:46:21 PM
I'm reminded that Racquel Welch and Sharon Stone looked awfully good in bikinis and supposedly have reasonably high IQs in the 140-150 range.  And Jill St. John, another hottie from the past was supposedly really bright:  160+.

If you could get paid handsomely just for being attractive, wouldn't it be smart to take advantage of it?  Even Fabio's bright enough to figure that one out!

Jill St John,...rrrrowwwrrrr :P :-*
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on January 05, 2011, 10:28:51 AM
Hah! DavidRoss  (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Composers%20That%20Are%20Linked%20To%20Your%20Soul)has already grumbled about "Composers That Are Linked To Your Soul" ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on January 05, 2011, 12:43:41 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 05, 2011, 10:28:51 AM
Hah! DavidRoss  (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Composers%20That%20Are%20Linked%20To%20Your%20Soul)has already grumbled about "Composers That Are Linked To Your Soul" ; )
Hah!  Don't you like being objectivized, treated as a thing rather than a person, Karl?  I love the irony (intentional, knowing you, clever lad!) of this right on the heels of the hubba-hubba-Jill-St-John-in-a-bikini comments! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 05, 2011, 01:01:55 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on January 05, 2011, 12:43:41 PM
Hah!  Don't you like being objectivized, treated as a thing rather than a person, Karl?  I love the irony (intentional, knowing you, clever lad!) of this right on the heels of the hubba-hubba-Jill-St-John-in-a-bikini comments!

Jill St. John was once courted by Henry Kissinger in the early 1970's!   :o

She is now your grandmother's age!  So show some respect, whippersnappers!   $:)

"Hubba-hubba" indeed!   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 07, 2011, 03:51:31 AM
Recently, here in Ohio's central city of Columbus, a vagrant who was an ex-disc jockey was videotaped by a roving reporter.  Within a week or so the vagrant was a YouTube sensation: he has a deep mellifluous "Barry-White" style voice, but ruined his career by succumbing to temptations from Demon Rum and his sister Mary Juana.

Now he is doing commercials for Kraft Macaroni and Cheese!   8)

On the news this morning, I hear the following sentence:

"His life was ruined by drugs and alcohol."

Allow me to grumble here, not about the grammar necessarily, but about the content. 

Let us get rid of the Passive Voice here and say:

"He ruined his life with drugs and alcohol."

And speaking of "succumbing," I have recently discovered that a mispronunciation of "succumb" is advancing through the language:  "surcome"   :o  which is accompanied by the nearly incomprehensible past tense "surcame."   :o

In fact, I came across the latter word, and with some "googling" found out what was happening.

You can guess that Cato will say we must not succumb to "surcome."   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on January 07, 2011, 04:01:16 AM
Surcome: antonym of overcome.

See how it all fits now?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on January 07, 2011, 04:02:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 05, 2011, 01:01:55 PM
Jill St. John was once courted by Henry Kissinger in the early 1970's!   :o
She is now your grandmother's age! 
Not even my mother's age.  Perhaps my older sister's age, if I had one.  Henry the K tested the limits of his aphorism, "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac."

"Surcome" ... sounds like a character in a Jackie Treehorn movie.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on January 07, 2011, 04:05:03 AM
Don't you mean cinnanym?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on January 07, 2011, 04:10:04 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 07, 2011, 04:05:03 AM
Don't you mean cinnanym?

Mmm... cinnanym bun.

(http://www.rogeroverall.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/homer_simpson31.jpg)

(http://www.rogeroverall.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/homer_simpson31.jp)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on February 07, 2011, 10:36:55 AM
ok, I've got myself into the


Xenakis'

Xenakis's


kerfubble. Please help me with the rules here. When?,... and when?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 07, 2011, 10:42:57 AM
Oh, I just packed that book up . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 07, 2011, 10:49:01 AM
So it was easy to find in its crate.

Patricia T. O'Conner tells us the rules are simple:

1. If the word is singular, always add 's

2. If the word is plural and doesn't already end in s, add 's

3. If the word is plural and ends in s, add just the apostrophe

Thus, in the present case: Xenakis's
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 07, 2011, 10:52:40 AM
She does add (though it does not affect the present case):

Quote from: Patricia T. O'ConnerIt's also customary to drop the final s when forming the possessives of ancient classical or biblical names that already end in s: Whose biceps were bigger, Hercules' or Achilles'?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 07, 2011, 11:00:28 AM
Karl's reference book is interesting on this point: why the exception for ancient and Biblical names?  And the example given could be debated: would you hear the extra "s" if you said "Hercules's biceps" or "Achilles's biceps" ?

Although I have never liked the look of such a possessive e.g. Xenakis's or James's,  for such names we do (usually?) say that extra "s," and since English already is a nightmare for spelling, why compound the problem?   $:)

You can also avoid the problem by using "of," e.g. The mystico-mathematical music of Xenakis intrigues me.  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 07, 2011, 11:06:41 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 07, 2011, 11:00:28 AM
. . . Although I have never liked the look of such a possessive e.g. Xenakis's or James's . . . .

I admit it looked odd to me, the first time I read a Guinness label (St James's Gate, Dublin). But after a couple of pints, that possessive began to look just fine to me . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 07, 2011, 11:50:27 AM
Hmmm...the exception I learned was for proper nouns, thus Doc Martin's gate, the Martins' gate, James's gate, and the Jameses' gate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Satzaroo on February 07, 2011, 06:07:38 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 07, 2011, 03:51:31 AM
Recently, here in Ohio's central city of Columbus, a vagrant who was an ex-disc jockey was videotaped by a roving reporter.  Within a week or so the vagrant was a YouTube sensation: he has a deep mellifluous "Barry-White" style voice, but ruined his career by succumbing to temptations from Demon Rum and his sister Mary Juana.

Now he is doing commercials for Kraft Macaroni and Cheese!   8)

On the news this morning, I hear the following sentence:

"His life was ruined by drugs and alcohol."

Allow me to grumble here, not about the grammar necessarily, but about the content. 

Let us get rid of the Passive Voice here and say:

"He ruined his life with drugs and alcohol."

And speaking of "succumbing," I have recently discovered that a mispronunciation of "succumb" is advancing through the language:  "surcome"   :o  which is accompanied by the nearly incomprehensible past tense "surcame."   :o

In fact, I came across the latter word, and with some "googling" found out what was happening.

You can guess that Cato will say we must not succumb to "surcome."   $:)

Surrounded by double entendres: I just drove on a road at a Marine base called Slocum. Now I'm reading your post about the word succumb.
I feel surrounded by double entendres. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2011, 03:55:14 AM
Quote from: Schlomo on February 07, 2011, 06:07:38 PM
Surrounded by double entendres: I just drove on a road at a Marine base called Slocum. Now I'm reading your post about the word succumb.
I feel surrounded by double entendres.

Hmm: I thought the Marines were pretty fast at everything, including the ladies!   :o

On the other hand, if you were surrounded by Double Entendres, then the bartender should not have let you drive home!   $:)

Especially through a Marine base!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 08, 2011, 04:07:14 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 07, 2011, 11:50:27 AM
Hmmm...the exception I learned was for proper nouns, thus Doc Martin's gate, the Martins' gate, James's gate, and the Jameses' gate.

Patricia T. O'Conner covers that . . . I did not quote at length : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 08, 2011, 05:03:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2011, 03:55:14 AM
Hmm: I thought the Marines were pretty fast at everything, including the ladies!   :o

On the other hand, if you were surrounded by Double Entendres, then the bartender should not have let you drive home!   $:)

Especially through a Marine base!   0:)

It was the town of Scotrun which somehow caused me double-takes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2011, 05:55:57 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 08, 2011, 05:03:51 AM
It was the town of Scotrun which somehow caused me double-takes.

John of Glasgow would have something to say about that!   8)

Where did you see that town?  In the South, a "run" can be a small brook or stream.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 08, 2011, 06:32:33 AM
Penn's woods.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: snyprrr on February 08, 2011, 06:34:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 07, 2011, 11:00:28 AM
Karl's reference book is interesting on this point: why the exception for ancient and Biblical names?  And the example given could be debated: would you hear the extra "s" if you said "Hercules's biceps" or "Achilles's biceps" ?

Although I have never liked the look of such a possessive e.g. Xenakis's or James's,  for such names we do (usually?) say that extra "s," and since English already is a nightmare for spelling, why compound the problem?   $:)

You can also avoid the problem by using "of," e.g. The mystico-mathematical music of Xenakis intrigues me.  0:)

I had been doing that and just got fed up with my ignorance. Actually, the right way just looks wrong, that's why I couldn't figure it.

btw- I wooould consider Xenakis a Mythical Greek Character, so why can't I do it the other way?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 09, 2011, 04:21:48 AM
Quote from: snyprrr on February 08, 2011, 06:34:34 PM
. . . Actually, the right way just looks wrong, that's why I couldn't figure it.

Then, too, I find this is often the case with English spelling . . . the right way just looking wrong, I mean
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Diner on February 17, 2011, 08:56:22 AM
I received an email yesterday with the word "disconsuming" in it.  ???

I think they meant "disconcerting."  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MishaK on February 17, 2011, 09:15:35 AM
Quote from: mn dave on February 17, 2011, 08:56:22 AM
I received an email yesterday with the word "disconsuming" in it.  ???

I think they meant "disconcerting."  ;D

I am disappointed that I don't get more emails about "disconsuming". Most emails I get encourage consuming, rather than its opposite.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 17, 2011, 02:10:22 PM
Quote from: Mensch on February 17, 2011, 09:15:35 AM
I am disappointed that I don't get more emails about "disconsuming". Most emails I get encourage consuming, rather than its opposite.

The best I can find on "disconsume" is from an economics text, where it is used as jargon to describe the sale of e.g. rental goods by a business.

In this case, "corporate disconsumption" would be the sale of rental cars by Hertz after a year or two of use.

It apparently does NOT mean stopping consumption.

Really, a disconcerting and downright unfun word!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 18, 2011, 10:04:39 AM
Quote from: Mensch on February 17, 2011, 09:15:35 AM
I am disappointed that I don't get more emails about "disconsuming". Most emails I get encourage consuming, rather than its opposite.

Yes.  It is a badly distributed and disgusting digest.  Discounting that, such disparate emails directly disambiguate the disasterous and disinteretsed disarray dialectics of the matter.
It is most disconcerting.
???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on February 18, 2011, 10:12:04 AM
Quit dissing around, people!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 18, 2011, 10:54:38 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on February 18, 2011, 10:12:04 AM
Quit dissing around, people!

We need no dissing contests at the GMG!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on February 18, 2011, 11:03:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 18, 2011, 10:54:38 AM
We need no dissing contests at the GMG!   0:)

Now, dis I like.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on February 19, 2011, 10:45:30 AM
I haven't had time to plow through all 74 pages, so perhaps this problem has already been addressed, but if I see the wrong its/it's, to/too, your/you're, there/their, etc. one more time, I'm just going to scream!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 19, 2011, 11:56:19 AM
Contrapunctus, izzat u?  How's GG doin'?  Good to see you back!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 19, 2011, 01:56:10 PM
Quote from: Kontrapunctus on February 19, 2011, 10:45:30 AM
I haven't had time to plow through all 74 pages, so perhaps this problem has already been addressed, but if I see the wrong its/it's, to/too, your/you're, there/their, etc. one more time, I'm just going to scream!

They're, they're! :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on February 19, 2011, 10:22:25 PM
Quote from: Sherman Peabody on February 19, 2011, 11:56:19 AM
Contrapunctus, izzat u?  How's GG doin'?  Good to see you back!
I don't think so! I haven't been gone--I just got here!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 20, 2011, 06:21:10 AM
Quote from: Kontrapunctus on February 19, 2011, 10:22:25 PM
I don't think so! I haven't been gone--I just got here!
OK, then welcome for the first time! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Szykneij on February 20, 2011, 10:48:41 AM
Quote from: Kontrapunctus on February 19, 2011, 10:22:25 PM
I don't think so! I haven't been gone--I just got here!

There was another member called "Contrapunctus" from quite a while back. (You'd probably rather not be mistaken for him.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on February 20, 2011, 11:11:10 AM
Quote from: Szykneij on February 20, 2011, 10:48:41 AM
There was another member called "Contrapunctus" from quite a while back. (You'd probably rather not be mistaken for him.)
Oh my...is it possible to change my screen name?

Another pet peeve: "then" instead of "than"--grrr... I'm a high school English teacher, so it's often pure torture to go online most of the time!  ;D

OK...my new name, as is plainly visible, is Toccata&Fugue!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on February 20, 2011, 11:17:33 AM
This article seems to be in the spirit of the grumble.

http://www.city-journal.org/2011/21_1_snd-american-english.html

It will point you to:

What Happens in Vagueness Stays in Vagueness
The decline and fall of American English, and stuff
CLARK WHELTON
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 22, 2011, 07:50:57 AM
This kind of thing is prevalent in England too and seems to derive from the hypothesis that correcting children in their grammar has the effect of choking their creativity. This idea must surely have been totally debunked by now.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 22, 2011, 08:29:21 AM
Like, you know, I mean, whatever....

I liked his mention of the trend for young women to speak through their noses.  Surely they're not all mid-Westerners or emulating Gwyneth Paltrow?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on February 22, 2011, 08:43:31 AM
Quote from: Sherman Peabody on February 22, 2011, 08:29:21 AM
I liked his mention of the trend for young women to speak through their noses.

I never looked at the name of the author; neither when I was reading Scarpia's post nor when I was reading the article. But somehow, I assumed it was a woman who wrote it. Strange. ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 24, 2011, 09:28:14 AM
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on February 20, 2011, 11:17:33 AM
This article seems to be in the spirit of the grumble.

http://www.city-journal.org/2011/21_1_snd-american-english.html

It will point you to:

What Happens in Vagueness Stays in Vagueness
The decline and fall of American English, and stuff
CLARK WHELTON

Great article, but also highly troubling and all too true!

I listen to my colleagues here in an Ohio Catholic grade school.  The younger faculty members especially are prone to the "Like" disease and other similar ailments ("It was, like, y' know, sort of, like, uh, kind of like..." and by that time I have fallen asleep.)

After listening to my students in the hall, I at times despair about their ability to express themselves coherently.   :o   Enabling them to attain a higher level of literacy, and through that to avoid the mumbling patois found in the malls and coffee shops, is the main goal of my little Latin program.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on February 25, 2011, 12:18:10 PM
Grumble on, dudes! Even the Christian Science Monitor needs an editor:

Quote from: Stephen KurczyThe Swiss three-year freeze took affect immediately.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2011, 01:28:15 PM
QuoteThe Swiss three-year freeze took affect immediately.

Oy!   $:)   At least it was not a Swiss Miss freeze, which would send the birth rate there even lower!   0:)

One of the annoyances attacking Cato's sensibilities - attacks similar to acid being poured directly into the corpus callosum - is the pronunciation of "immediately" as "eemediately."

Thus mangles my 30-something principal  >:D    :o    >:D    :o 
(he had a birthday) the word constantly: "Will Bobby So -n-so report to the office eemediately?"

But I hear the mispronunciation on TV and elsewhere: a short "i" for some reason is impossible for certain people to spit out! 


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 27, 2011, 11:56:14 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 25, 2011, 01:28:15 PM

But I hear the mispronunciation on TV and elsewhere: a short "i" for some reason is impossible for certain people to spit out!

Perhaps it is eempossible!
This hasn't hit England as far as I've noticed. I expect it willed be emailed shortly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 27, 2011, 12:22:58 PM
ee-mee-jut-lee
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 01, 2011, 07:33:08 AM
Quote. . . but to the federal government they are the legal equivalent of Colin Powell and Charlie Sheen: holding nothing in common.

Obama would like to change that.

Obama thinks Colin and Charlie should, erm, get together? . . .

(Interesting article, thanks, Sherm!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 05, 2011, 03:11:38 AM
An alert 7th Grader reported the following monstrosity from a sportscaster at a basketball game on TV:

"Sometimes the referee calls that foul all the time."   :o

The best excuse I could think of for the sportscaster: perhaps "sometimes" implied "at some games," or "when certain teams play (that the referee has bet against?   0:) )."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 05, 2011, 03:21:18 AM
Also, concerning the expression of opinions with foul-mouthed language found at another topic:  if I were a moderator, people using the "eph-ithet" and other such low-class and ultimately feeble-minded words would be banned, until they found a new attitude, a new mouthwash, and a new dictionary.  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 05, 2011, 04:45:35 AM
Do direct me to said post on said topic.

Knight
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 05, 2011, 08:18:29 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 05, 2011, 03:11:38 AM
An alert 7th Grader reported the following monstrosity from a sportscaster at a basketball game on TV:

"Sometimes the referee calls that foul all the time."   :o

The best excuse I could think of for the sportscaster: perhaps "sometimes" implied "at some games," or "when certain teams play (that the referee has bet against?   0:) )."

On our very own NPR, an interviewee who was perhaps not a sportscaster, but who was there essentially to discuss football, committed both of the following within (I believe) 60 seconds of each other:

The content of the talks were . . . .

. . . and:

Neither [the player] nor [the manager] were . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 05, 2011, 12:03:43 PM
Quote from: knight66 on March 05, 2011, 04:45:35 AM
Do direct me to said post on said topic.

Knight

You can check here under an author named "James."

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,18090.40.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,18090.40.html)

Not only the eph-ithet, but also toilet talk can be found there!   ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 05, 2011, 01:11:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 05, 2011, 12:03:43 PM
You can check here under an author named "James."

Not only the eph-ithet, but also toilet talk can be found there!   ::)
You mean people actually read James's posts?  Isn't the content always the same?  And didn't we get our fill of that in junior high?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 05, 2011, 03:19:13 PM
Quote from: Sherman Peabody on March 05, 2011, 01:11:50 PM
You mean people actually read James's posts?  Isn't the content always the same?  And didn't we get our fill of that in junior high?

Some people never grow up!

(http://movieevangelist.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/peter-pan.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 05, 2011, 03:22:11 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 05, 2011, 12:03:43 PM
You can check here under an author named "James."

http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,18090.40.html (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,18090.40.html)

Not only the eph-ithet, but also toilet talk can be found there!   ::)

Very tame for a 'James' post. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 05, 2011, 05:03:39 PM
"Meets low expectations."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2011, 06:12:56 AM
So, in the past months a series of very stupid and severely unfunny commercials for an insurance company has infected American TV stations.  The company is Nationwide, and their ads begin with a goofball who is called:

"The World's Greatest Spokesperson In the World ."   :o

When one considers how many hands such things pass through, it is most dismaying that such an obvious error persisted. 

Of course, the whole ad campaign itself is an error!   $:)

Needless to say, I will not be buying Nationwide insurance.   8)

And don't even get me started on that dreadful monstrosity in the middle of the 7-word title!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 09, 2011, 07:36:30 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 09, 2011, 06:12:56 AM
So, in the past months a series of very stupid and severely unfunny commercials for an insurance company has infected American TV stations.  The company is Nationwide, and their ads begin with a goofball who is called:
Damn!  Geico is doing the same thing! (Though I don't think they preface their unfunny idiot spokesman with a title.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 08:58:47 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 09, 2011, 06:12:56 AM
So, in the past months a series of very stupid and severely unfunny commercials for an insurance company has infected American TV stations.  The company is Nationwide, and their ads begin with a goofball who is called:

"The World's Greatest Spokesperson In the World ."   :o

When one considers how many hands such things pass through, it is most dismaying that such an obvious error persisted. 

Of course, the whole ad campaign itself is an error!   $:)

Needless to say, I will not be buying Nationwide insurance.   8)

And don't even get me started on that dreadful monstrosity in the middle of the 7-word title!   0:)

Those ads are tongue-in-cheek. I believe the redundancy of the spokesman's (there, said it, phew) title is meant to be funny.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 09, 2011, 09:08:51 AM
Jumpin' Jehosophat!  I just looked up the Nationwide spokesperson ads on youtube and they are even worse than the Geico ones.  That the management at Nationwide spent good money on this crap calls their judgment on everything else into serious question!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 09:12:22 AM
Quote from: Sherman Peabody on March 09, 2011, 07:36:30 AM
Damn!  Geico is doing the same thing! (Though I don't think they preface their unfunny idiot spokesman with a title.)

If you mean these ads, it sounds like the guy is channeling Hugo Weaving's Agent Smith from The Matrix. But this particular one is funny:

http://www.youtube.com/v/cdy3orO6tQA

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2011, 09:22:50 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 08:58:47 AM
Those ads are tongue-in-cheek.

That pose may not at all redeem them, of course.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 09:44:02 AM
Quote from: Apollon on March 09, 2011, 09:22:50 AM
That pose may not at all redeem them, of course.

A commercial is always just an interruption.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 09, 2011, 09:54:23 AM
Agreed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 02:17:36 PM
Not a grammar grumble, but a vocabulary vomit:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/09/cbs.sheen.ew/index.html?hpt=Sbin

I'm all for elegant variation, but calling a TV writer a "scribe" is spreading it on a bit thickly--particularly when done twice in a row. Could you pass the Grey Poupon?

A producer is now a "showrunner"? Come again? A CEO is a "topper"? Sorry, "Topper" is a Cary Grant film.

Is this some kind of Cockney slang, or can reporters scribes now invent words at will?

But wait: this could be fun! Let's see...

A football player is now a gridironer.
A car is now a roadroller.
A dictator is now a keepemdowner.
The president of the USA is now the Oval Officer.



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2011, 04:50:08 AM
From a tech article in the on-line New York Times.

QuoteBut the shocker here, though, is that . . . .

Either but, or though;  not both, please.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 10, 2011, 05:31:02 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 02:17:36 PM
Not a grammar grumble, but a vocabulary vomit:
Absurdly inflated diction and silly slang are hallowed hallmarks of the genre.  See Variety, for instance.  Or Danny DeVito's voiceover in L.A. Confidential.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 10, 2011, 05:40:42 AM
Quote from: Apollon on March 10, 2011, 04:50:08 AM
From a tech article in the on-line New York Times.

Either but, or though;  not both, please.

While grammatically redundant, the "though" serves a stylistic, rhythmic function of heightening the build-up before the shocker is revealed. I imagine this thread has already been through the prescriptive vs. descriptive argument.

Btw, in some circles, beginning a sentence with a coordinating conjunction is also inadmissible. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 10, 2011, 05:43:11 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 02:17:36 PMA producer is now a "showrunner"? Come again?

My understanding is the producer and showrunner are not the same.  Larry David is described as the showrunner for Seinfeld for the first seven seasons and Jerry Seinfeld took over for season 8-9, but the show had other producers and executive producers.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 10, 2011, 05:55:47 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 10, 2011, 05:31:02 AM
Absurdly inflated diction and silly slang are hallowed hallmarks of the genre.  See Variety, for instance.  Or Danny DeVito's voiceover in L.A. Confidential.

I've never read Variety and rarely read any sort of coverage of pop culture, so the random, confusing neologisms are unexpected and seem childish and ugly. I did see (and love) L.A. Confidential, though, so I take your point.

If conveying information or opinion to your reader is paramount, try to adhere to accepted norms for clarity's sake. If you want to experiment and break rules to the point of unintelligibility, write modernist literature :)

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on March 10, 2011, 05:43:11 AM
My understanding is the producer and showrunner are not the same.  Larry David is described as the showrunner for Seinfeld for the first seven seasons and Jerry Seinfeld took over for season 8-9, but the show had other producers and executive producers.

I stand corrected.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 10, 2011, 07:06:50 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on March 10, 2011, 05:40:42 AM
While grammatically redundant, the "though" serves a stylistic, rhythmic function of heightening the build-up before the shocker is revealed.

Not to my ear; rhythmically, I find that redundant though a stutter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 10, 2011, 07:36:59 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on March 10, 2011, 05:55:47 AM
I've never read Variety and rarely read any sort of coverage of pop culture, so the random, confusing neologisms are unexpected and seem childish and ugly. I did see (and love) L.A. Confidential, though, so I take your point.

If conveying information or opinion to your reader is paramount, try to adhere to accepted norms for clarity's sake. If you want to experiment and break rules to the point of unintelligibility, write modernist literature :)
Bear in mind their intended audience, which includes neither you nor I, but Charlie Sheen and legions of Sheen wannabes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 23, 2011, 09:53:00 AM
Quote from: (poco) Sforzando on March 23, 2011, 09:39:05 AM
Stop saying foolish things. (Not that you ever will.) Schoenberg wrote his share of lesser works, but surely Pierrot, Erwartung, the Five Orchestral Pieces, Herzgewächse, and some others qualify as works of genius.

Just a footnote to Mr. Ross: when correcting JdP's usage, please don't forget to remind him that the personal pronoun is always capitalized in English. No exceptions, whether at the start of a sentence or the middle.

First off, I don't mean this to seem snarky at (poco) Sfz's expense (whom I hold in good esteem).

This is the second instance in a relatively brief time that I've seen personal pronoun used to mean (restrictively) first person indicative pronoun.

Is that coincidence?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 23, 2011, 10:25:10 AM
Quote from: Apollon on March 23, 2011, 09:53:00 AM
(whom I hold in good esteem).

Is there "bad" esteem?  The expression is "high" esteem because you can have different levels of esteem, all good.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 23, 2011, 10:34:21 AM
You're right that in current usage the sense is implicitly favorable.

The dictionary does still give the neutral judgement, opinion as an Archaic reading of the noun, though.  So I'll consider my use an archaism rather than an error
; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 23, 2011, 11:57:33 AM
i carry your heart with me

i carry your heart with me ( i carry it in
my heart) i am never without it (anywhere
i go you go, my dear; and whatever is done
by only me is your doing, my darling)
i fear
no fate (for you are my fate, my sweet) i want
no world (for beautiful you are my world, my true)
and it's you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you

here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life; which grows
higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart

i carry your heart (i carry it in my heart)

               ~Edward Estlin Cummings
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sylph on March 23, 2011, 02:17:40 PM
Quote from: Grazioso on March 09, 2011, 02:17:36 PM
Not a grammar grumble, but a vocabulary vomit:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/TV/03/09/cbs.sheen.ew/index.html?hpt=Sbin

I'm all for elegant variation, but calling a TV writer a "scribe" is spreading it on a bit thickly--particularly when done twice in a row. Could you pass the Grey Poupon?

A producer is now a "showrunner"? Come again? A CEO is a "topper"? Sorry, "Topper" is a Cary Grant film.

Is this some kind of Cockney slang, or can reporters scribes now invent words at will?

But wait: this could be fun! Let's see...

A football player is now a gridironer.
A car is now a roadroller.
A dictator is now a keepemdowner.
The president of the USA is now the Oval Officer.

Don't ridicule what you don't understand. People in the industry talk like that. It may seem absurd and sound grating, but it's what it is. Variety has its own vocabulary and if they were to write "clearly", no one would understand them.

With their jargon, they get the point across.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sylph on March 23, 2011, 02:19:28 PM
Also, showrunner is not any executive producer. There is usually only one, sometimes they come in a pair, however.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 24, 2011, 02:53:05 PM
Quote from: Sylph on March 23, 2011, 02:17:40 PM
Don't ridicule what you don't understand. People in the industry talk like that. It may seem absurd and sound grating, but it's what it is. Variety has its own vocabulary and if they were to write "clearly", no one would understand them.

With their jargon, they get the point across.

I ridicule it precisely because I don't understand it  ;D Which is to say, as an educated native English speaker, I shouldn't have to guess their meaning or acquire a special entertainment industry argot handbook before reading a news story on CNN.com. That said, I already acknowledged my mistake regarding "showrunner" not being directly equivalent to "producer," though I still maintain it's one heck of an ugly neologism. Also, if its usage is known primarily just to industry insiders, it probably shouldn't be used in a general-audience article without a brief note of explanation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 24, 2011, 03:23:39 PM
one heck of an ugly neologism

Oh, I like that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 28, 2011, 03:37:33 PM
From the local TV news station, not so much a grammar grumble as a...well, see for yourself:

"Coming up, a sneak peek at our local lingerie football team." 

There is so much wrong there, morally   8)  , legally   $:)  , athletically    :-*  ,  and stylistically   :o  , I really don't know where to begin!   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 29, 2011, 04:15:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 28, 2011, 03:37:33 PM
From the local TV news station, not so much a grammar grumble as a...well, see for yourself:

"Coming up, a sneak peek at our local lingerie football team." 

There is so much wrong there, morally   8)  , legally   $:)  , athletically    :-*  ,  and stylistically   :o  , I really don't know where to begin!   ;D

After viewing the sneak peek - purely for the purpose of making the entry here complete - allow me to assure our faithful readers that the report was highly questionable in taste!

For your edification:

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_aGatGSdnPFY/TP2WL259w0I/AAAAAAAAAkg/ipYWq5GvLd8/s1600/lfl.jpg)

And one of my favorites from the Cleveland Crush:

(http://media.cleveland.com/startingblocks/photo/9415680-large.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on March 29, 2011, 11:05:32 PM
Recently I was screening applications for a writing job. One application was excluded as it was received five days after the deadline and no extenuation circumstances were put forward. This was pointed out and the response from the applicant started as follows.

'You need to know that I am (always, invariably) on time meeting deadlines for my work.'

Apart from the inaccuracy of his claim he provided in one sentence abundant reasons to reject the application.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 30, 2011, 04:20:01 AM
Quote from: knight66 on March 29, 2011, 11:05:32 PM


'You need to know that I am (always, invariably) on time meeting deadlines for my work.'

Apart from the inaccuracy of his claim he provided in one sentence abundant reasons to reject the application.

Mike

And thereby also proving that he is at least efficient!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on March 30, 2011, 04:43:28 AM
I'm not sure I like that he's speculating on anyone else's needs . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on March 30, 2011, 05:40:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 28, 2011, 03:37:33 PM
From the local TV news station, not so much a grammar grumble as a...well, see for yourself:

"Coming up, a sneak peek at our local lingerie football team." 

There is so much wrong there, morally   8)  , legally   $:)  , athletically    :-*  ,  and stylistically   :o  , I really don't know where to begin!   ;D

On the contrary, I'm confident in suggesting we have a new national pastime:

(http://slanchreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/lingerie-football.jpg?w=524&h=353)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on March 30, 2011, 06:44:17 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on March 30, 2011, 05:40:16 AM
On the contrary, I'm confident in suggesting we have a new national pastime:

(http://slanchreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/lingerie-football.jpg?w=524&h=353)

Doesn't look like a comfortable experience.   :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: From Here On In
Post by: Cato on March 30, 2011, 09:08:10 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on March 30, 2011, 08:29:30 AM
From here on in

Is this somehow different from 'From here on out'?

Why not simply 'From here on'? or perhaps better 'From now on'.

You are quite right: for some reason - possibly rhythmic? - there is a tendency to insert an extra preposition where none is needed.

e.g. "off of" is another example, which the nuns of Saint Mary's   0:)   railed against, but which is still heard and read everywhere.

"They lived off the land" not "They lived off of the land."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on March 30, 2011, 09:40:26 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 29, 2011, 04:15:50 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_aGatGSdnPFY/TP2WL259w0I/AAAAAAAAAkg/ipYWq5GvLd8/s1600/lfl.jpg)
Well, the players doubtless have their charms, but I can do without the cheerleaders:

(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb238/samaa4444/MALE-CHEERLEADERS.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 30, 2011, 10:03:18 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 30, 2011, 09:40:26 AM
Well, the players doubtless have their charms, but I can do without the cheerleaders:

(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb238/samaa4444/MALE-CHEERLEADERS.jpg)

A crime against aesthetics, indeed!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Do You Kasasa?
Post by: Cato on March 30, 2011, 02:40:20 PM
Okay, I have had it!

Mrs. Cato insists on watching the local TV news, which has some of the world's most galling commercials.

A league of apparently benighted banks has a series of ads asking "Do you kasasa?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga4rui68FOo&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga4rui68FOo&feature=related)

The promo, as given by another unfunny 20-something, never defines precisely what "kasasa" stands for, except to imply that it seems to mean ATM machines across the country. 

"Kasasa" I find stupid.  Guilty as charged!  The sentence is...OBLIVION!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Do You Kasasa?
Post by: DavidRoss on March 30, 2011, 03:06:47 PM
Thanks, Cato, for introducing me to the Democrats' heir apparent to Obama:

http://www.youtube.com/v/tZP4kKEHlLc&feature=related
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Do You Kasasa?
Post by: Cato on March 30, 2011, 04:32:19 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on March 30, 2011, 03:06:47 PM
Thanks, Cato, for introducing me to the Democrats' heir apparent to Obama:


:o    :o     :D    :o     :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 15, 2011, 03:01:06 PM
"Eeny" !!!???

"EENY"!   :o

Why am I hearing more and more people saying "eeny"  $:)  ? 

As in:

"I don't have eeny more money!"

And why am I hearing "sell" as a NOUN???   :o

As in:

"We got a big sell goin' on right now." 

(Spoken by a clerk at the Sherwin-Williams Paint Store: he said it three times, so it was not an idle mistake.)

Maybe the answer lies in those West Virginia and Kentucky license plates which recently seem more ubiquitous up here in "Ahiya."  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 18, 2011, 07:50:36 PM
I've been hearing "buy" used as a noun for years.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on April 19, 2011, 02:04:45 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 15, 2011, 03:01:06 PM
"Eeny" !!!???

"EENY"!   :o

Why am I hearing more and more people saying "eeny"  $:)  ? 

As in:

"I don't have eeny more money!"

And why am I hearing "sell" as a NOUN???   :o

As in:

"We got a big sell goin' on right now." 

(Spoken by a clerk at the Sherwin-Williams Paint Store: he said it three times, so it was not an idle mistake.)

Maybe the answer lies in those West Virginia and Kentucky license plates which recently seem more ubiquitous up here in "Ahiya."  ;D
But it has always been a noun hasn't it? The expression 'a hard sell' has been around for some time I thought. The use with stocks is probably fairly new, though I don't know how well accepted it is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 19, 2011, 10:55:43 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on April 19, 2011, 02:04:45 AM
But it has always been a noun hasn't it? The expression 'a hard sell' has been around for some time I thought. The use with stocks is probably fairly new, though I don't know how well accepted it is.

I found a reference to the phrase "a hard sell" as being acceptable in that context.  Another reference says it is simply short for a "a hard (thing to) sell" which would mean that "sell" is still a verb in that context.

My Random House dictionary has it as a noun for its final (17th) meaning, but not for the idea of discounting a price, only for "the act of selling."

It remains unclear whether my incident stems from confusion or the inability of some speakers to open their mouths widely enough to say "sale," either because of dental challenges or because of the presence of a cancer stick.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on April 19, 2011, 10:57:42 AM
In stock exchange parlance "a buy" or "a sell" is shorthand for "a buy/sell rating" or a stock to which such a rating is attached.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on April 23, 2011, 06:31:52 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 29, 2011, 04:15:50 PM
After viewing the sneak peek - purely for the purpose of making the entry here complete - allow me to assure our faithful readers that the report was highly questionable in taste!
I don't know about everybody else, but I don't find those football suits to be flattering at all... just weird. I don't even want to look at that.  ???

They should just omit all the safety gear and play full contact football to the death, maybe even naked. If I were an evil dictator, that would be an interesting idea...  >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 24, 2011, 02:48:34 PM
Quote from: Greg on April 23, 2011, 06:31:52 PM
. If I were an evil dictator, that would be an interesting idea...  >:(

Take your pick:

(http://blog.kievukraine.info/uploaded_images/4695-707996.jpg)

(http://www.americanthinker.com/mao2.jpg)

(http://www.husseinandterror.com/jpeg%20pics/02.jpg)

(http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/bridget/kimjongil.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on April 24, 2011, 04:49:33 PM
Those guys probably wouldn't appreciate my idea. I'm sure they go for the little boys instead...  :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sylph on April 30, 2011, 03:00:26 PM
It is not a matter of grammar – rather of style or orthography – but, apparently, The Telegraph doesn't consider rave and club to be some sorts of music genres. (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/confused/confused0003.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/animated/anim_59.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8485668/Royal-wedding-inside-Kate-and-Williams-extraordinary-palace-reception.html

Which is why, I inferred, it puts them in quotation marks. (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk/smile/confused/confused0069.gif) (http://www.dogproductshop.co.uk)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sylph on April 30, 2011, 03:02:31 PM
And it's style guide obviously says that Princess Anne is incorrect – she is the Princess Royal only – but a caption below one of the photographs on the website uses precisely that incorrect form. No one is actually going through that style guide, it seems.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sylph on April 30, 2011, 03:14:11 PM
Sometimes these guides are just silly.

The Times says never to use Shiite, only Shia is acceptable. The Telegraph says Shia is a noun, Shiite is an adjective.

What to say when Oxford Dictionary of English edited by Angus Stevenson clearly allows both: Shiite can be "an adherent of the Shia branch of Islam" as a noun and means "relating to Shia" as an adjective.

Just hilarious.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 30, 2011, 03:38:43 PM
Quote from: Sylph on April 30, 2011, 03:14:11 PM
Sometimes these guides are just silly.

The Times says never to use Shiite, only Shia is acceptable. The Telegraph says Shia is a noun, Shiite is an adjective.

What to say when Oxford Dictionary of English edited by Angus Stevenson clearly allows both: Shiite can be "an adherent of the Shia branch of Islam" as a noun and means "relating to Shia" as an adjective.

Just hilarious.

I have also been seeing "Shi'ite" with the apostrophe, most probably to avoid an obvious and obscene misreading!   0:)

Reuters:

QuoteMore than 200 Shi'ite Muslims protested in Saudi Arabia's oil-producing east on Friday in solidarity with fellow believers in nearby Bahrain, who are facing a rolling crackdown, two activists said.

See:

http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=218474 (http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=218474)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on May 14, 2011, 12:08:11 PM
In a timely manner
In a timely fashion

Is there a difference, or is one preferable?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 14, 2011, 01:02:49 PM
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 14, 2011, 12:08:11 PM
In a timely manner
In a timely fashion

Is there a difference, or is one preferable?

They are synonyms, so the preference would be only regional, i.e. some areas might say "manner" instead of "fashion."  One could avoid the issue and use "punctually."  But the phrases are perhaps politer.

"Timely" might seem curious because it looks like an adverb, but that usage is rare.  It is indeed an adjective.  Similar is the noun "contumely" which means "very insulting behavior."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on May 16, 2011, 09:03:29 AM
For UK members of this forum, how do you distinguish between "that" and "which"? In the US, we (should) use "that" if it introduces essential material: "Beetoven's Hammerklavier Sonata contains a fugue that many pianists say is nearly unplayable." (UK folks would likely write "...which many pianists would say...")
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 16, 2011, 09:25:48 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on May 16, 2011, 09:03:29 AM
For UK members of this forum, how do you distinguish between "that" and "which"? In the US, we (should) use "that" if it introduces essential material: "Beetoven's Hammerklavier Sonata contains a fugue that many pianists say is nearly unplayable." (UK folks would likely write "...which many pianists would say...")

I find it strange when that is used for a person where, usually, I'm accustomed to seeing a who.

For instance: There is at least one person that finds this sentence strange.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on May 16, 2011, 09:37:58 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 16, 2011, 09:25:48 AM
I find it strange when that is used for a person where, usually, I'm accustomed to seeing a who.

For instance: There is at least one person that finds this sentence strange.

Yes, that seems to be a universal problem.  :)  It also reminds me of another error use that involves humans: people (and animals, one would suppose) are hanged; clothing and pictures are hung!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 16, 2011, 09:43:24 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on May 16, 2011, 09:37:58 AM
It also reminds me of another error use that involves humans: people (and animals, one would suppose) are hanged; clothing and pictures are hung!

I think this is just a case of the quirkiness of the language in general, rather than an error or difference in usage of the language by a certain set of people.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 16, 2011, 09:47:41 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 16, 2011, 09:25:48 AM
I find it strange when that is used for a person where, usually, I'm accustomed to seeing a who.

For instance: There is at least one person that finds this sentence strange.

I fight with my Latin students here in Ohio about this, because out in the streets both "which" and "who" are being replaced more and more with "that."  As a result, they have in some cases rarely heard "which" or "who" and do not know the difference, let alone the increasingly theoretical difference (out in the streets) between "that" and "which."

Example: Cars, which are pink, look feminine.

This implies that all cars are pink!

Better:

Cars that are pink look feminine.

From what I understand, the British would use "which" rather than "that" in the last example.  Note in the second example the lack of commas.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 16, 2011, 10:03:38 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 16, 2011, 09:43:24 AM
I think this is just a case of the quirkiness of the language in general, rather than an error or difference in usage of the language by a certain set of people.

Well, not "just."  My Random House dictionary has nearly 40 meanings and explanations for "hang."

Part of the problem goes back to the verb being a "fusion of 3 verbs" of Germanic ancestry.  German, e.g. has two verbs for "hang."  One shows motion, can take a direct object, and is a "weak verb" (i.e. no vowel change in its form).  (hängen, hängte, hat gehängt)

The other shows no motion, is intransitive, and has a vowel change.  (hängen, hing, hat gehangen)

In theory, English can follow this: They hanged the murderer from the tree.

His body hung there for a day.

But people mix this up all the time:  "They hung 'im!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 17, 2011, 06:03:34 PM
Following the idiotic sexual behavior of assorted politicians (Clinton, Gingrich, "DSK," etc. etc.) and actors (Robin Williams, Mel Gibson, etc. etc.), Arnold Schwarzenegger, if you happened not to have heard, fathered a child via one of the "household staff."   $:)

Our deliciously incompetent local TV news reporter found a way to make Herr Schnook sound even worse:

"Coming up: more about Arnold Schwarzenegger and his affair with a child."   :o

To quote W.C. Fields: "It baffles Science!"  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 18, 2011, 02:13:51 AM
Tiger Woods could turn this around, but maybe not the guvvenator . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on May 18, 2011, 02:26:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 17, 2011, 06:03:34 PM
"Coming up: more about Arnold Schwarzenegger and his affair with a child."   :o

To quote W.C. Fields: "It baffles Science!"  0:)
Ok, that one had me rolling on the floor...

I've been wondering lately though about English teachers. Now I can only rely on my own experience on the matter, but looking back at my school education (1-12), I had some wonderful English teachers early on. But they got worse as time went on. My 7-11 teachers were, simply put, awful. If I could go back in time, I would tell them that not only did they fail me as English teachers, they actually destroyed my confidence and helped me regress. If it were not for my 12th grade English teacher, my life would be totally different. I used to write papers and I would experiment. The long and the short of it is that I got the same grade no matter how much effort I put into the writing (and it didn't matter if I gave them my first draft or 10th draft to correct).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 18, 2011, 03:56:24 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on May 18, 2011, 02:26:02 AM
Ok, that one had me rolling on the floor...

I've been wondering lately though about English teachers. Now I can only rely on my own experience on the matter, but looking back at my school education (1-12), I had some wonderful English teachers early on. But they got worse as time went on. My 7-11 teachers were, simply put, awful. If I could go back in time, I would tell them that not only did they fail me as English teachers, they actually destroyed my confidence and helped me regress. If it were not for my 12th grade English teacher, my life would be totally different. I used to write papers and I would experiment. The long and the short of it is that I got the same grade no matter how much effort I put into the writing (and it didn't matter if I gave them my first draft or 10th draft to correct).

I am one of the few (the only?) teacher(s) in Ohio certified in German, Latin, Ancient Greek, and History: it has been my personal experience that your best teachers are often found in the earlier grades, and that your worst teachers (in general) will be found in high school and college.

Were you in public schools, where unions protect the incompetent?  I have taught in public schools a few times throughout my career (in mainly Catholic schools), and have been appalled by the lack of teaching and competence.  Future English teachers were often ruined by the idiotic revolution of relativism in the 1960's, where grammar was viewed as "oppressive" and a way for The Establishment to control people.  (I have heard the lectures by the professors: I wish I were inventing this!)

And so teaching grammar and proper spelling were often discarded in favor of "personal expression," and "creative grammar" meant that there were really no mistakes: correcting "They was" could mean that you were a racist, or a fascist, or both!   $:)

I corrected the Advanced Placement Examination for European History for several years: students write 3 essays on European History in c. 90 minutes.

We were not allowed to deduct for spelling or grammar.  My wife recently corrected high-school state examinations for Ohio and Pennsylvania in Social Studies: amazingly, the standards - written by state educational bureaucrats in co-operation with the teacher unions - said that if a student simply scrawled down as few as 3 "key words" under a question, he was given full credit.  No sentence was necessary.

Sadly, many tests were simply blank, or had wrong answers.  She corrected over 10,000 in 3 months: a good sampling.  The work depressed her toward the end of the assignment, because... "Passing" was lowered to 30% in some cases, so that the public schools could look competent.

Catholic schools are not perfect either: we are unfortunately suffering from the same influences, but not to the same degree.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 18, 2011, 04:25:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 18, 2011, 03:56:24 AM
. . . We were not allowed to deduct for spelling or grammar.  My wife recently corrected high-school state examinations for Ohio and Pennsylvania in Social Studies: amazingly, the standards - written by state educational bureaucrats in co-operation with the teacher unions - said that if a student simply scrawled down as few as 3 "key words" under a question, he was given full credit.  No sentence was necessary.

Cor, but that's perfect!  Who needs that white-supremacist grammar folderol, anyway?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 18, 2011, 04:28:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 18, 2011, 03:56:24 AM
IFuture English teachers were often ruined by the idiotic revolution of relativism in the 1960's, where grammar was viewed as "oppressive" and a way for The Establishment to control people.  (I have heard the lectures by the professors: I wish I were inventing this!)

Hey, ho, hum, ho, Fascist commas gotta go!

Quote
My wife recently corrected high-school state examinations for Ohio and Pennsylvania in Social Studies: amazingly, the standards - written by state educational bureaucrats in co-operation with the teacher unions - said that if a student simply scrawled down as few as 3 "key words" under a question, he was given full credit.  No sentence was necessary.

Q: Write a short essay on the importance of learning History

A: Gladiator, Troy, 300.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on May 18, 2011, 04:42:57 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 18, 2011, 03:56:24 AM
I am one of the few (the only?) teacher(s) in Ohio certified in German, Latin, Ancient Greek, and History: it has been my personal experience that your best teachers are often found in the earlier grades, and that your worst teachers (in general) will be found in high school and college.

Were you in public schools, where unions protect the incompetent?  I have taught in public schools a few times throughout my career (in mainly Catholic schools), and have been appalled by the lack of teaching and competence.  Future English teachers were often ruined by the idiotic revolution of relativism in the 1960's, where grammar was viewed as "oppressive" and a way for The Establishment to control people.  (I have heard the lectures by the professors: I wish I were inventing this!)

And so teaching grammar and proper spelling were often discarded in favor of "personal expression," and "creative grammar" meant that there were really no mistakes: correcting "They was" could mean that you were a racist, or a fascist, or both!   $:)

I corrected the Advanced Placement Examination for European History for several years: students write 3 essays on European History in c. 90 minutes.

We were not allowed to deduct for spelling or grammar.  My wife recently corrected high-school state examinations for Ohio and Pennsylvania in Social Studies: amazingly, the standards - written by state educational bureaucrats in co-operation with the teacher unions - said that if a student simply scrawled down as few as 3 "key words" under a question, he was given full credit.  No sentence was necessary.

Sadly, many tests were simply blank, or had wrong answers.  She corrected over 10,000 in 3 months: a good sampling.  The work depressed her toward the end of the assignment, because... "Passing" was lowered to 30% in some cases, so that the public schools could look competent.

Catholic schools are not perfect either: we are unfortunately suffering from the same influences, but not to the same degree.
It was a public school, but in the case of the history department - well they probably were better at teaching me to write than the English teachers. The AP history teacher in particular was a real stickler (in a good way), and that didn't hurt either (coinciding with the good English teacher).

My biggest problem, even today, is that some of the rules simply were not explained well enough. So in some areas I don't have the grounding I would like (or need). The class that helped teach me truly how to write was a philosphy class of all things (in college). We were required to write 3-5 pages, double spaced. Anything more or less was an automatic failure. We had to write roughly 2 per month. The first paragraph had to be a proper intro and last paragraph had to be a conlcusion (not just a rehash of what was said earlier - a revelation for me). This structure forces one to have a clear and succinct argument (as well as logical structure and flow). It also requires good word usage and grammar structure in order to be convincing. And to top it all off, the professor was Hungarian! Two of my best teachers ever were Hungarian come to think of it - this guy, and my French teacher from 11th grade.

I just don't think that 'personal expression' stuff does anyone any good. Someone serious about the language (meaning intertested in writing, publishing, etc.) certainly needs more and anyone who wants to become a professional will only be helped if they can write well. Even those who don't think they need it can be helped. They never know when they need marketing materials, website materials, etc. Heck, they might want to keep a journal or diary - and writing well helps make that fun too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 18, 2011, 05:21:17 AM
Of the three teachers in high school who were the strongest influences upon me, in the sense of being an inspiration both to learn and to apply myself to my utmost, two of them were English teachers.  (The third was my high school band director.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 18, 2011, 05:22:44 AM
Some years ago when I was at a Catholic high school, the Advanced Placement English teacher came to me and said that the best student in his class was a German exchange student!!!

He had the best writing style and knew English grammar to a more specific degree. 

The boy was something of a language genius, but his English teachers back in the Vaterland got the job done!   (One of them hailed from Ireland.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on May 20, 2011, 12:12:39 AM
Here is a question that I cannot seem to find an answer:

IF you are writing about companies, what is the explanation for when you use 'the'? For example, I would write:
Coca-Cola is great.
The Coca-Cola Group is great.
The Coca-Cola Company is great.
Coca-Cola, LLC is great.
Coca-Cola North America is great.
The Coca-Cola North Amercia group is great.

My reasoning is that when you add 'group' or 'company', that these become the subject and Coca-Cola becomes the descriptor. Is this the correct logic?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 20, 2011, 09:43:45 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on May 20, 2011, 12:12:39 AM
Here is a question that I cannot seem to find an answer:

IF you are writing about companies, what is the explanation for when you use 'the'? For example, I would write:
1Coca-Cola is great.
2The Coca-Cola Group is great.
3The Coca-Cola Company is great.
4Coca-Cola, LLC is great.
5Coca-Cola North America is great.
6The Coca-Cola North America group is great.

My reasoning is that when you add 'group' or 'company', that these become the subject and Coca-Cola becomes the descriptor. Is this the correct logic?

In general "the" narrows down the noun:

Apples are wonderful = all apples are wonderful

The apples are wonderful = a certain group of apples

However, in your examples, context could change things, or not make a difference.

#1 is obviously the product.

#2-#6 can be seen simply as variations on a theme, although with the words "Company" and "Group" I would always use the word "the."  To say "Coca-Cola Company announced a dividend" sounds very odd.

However this sounds fine:

Investors say Coca-Cola North America is well-managed.

Insert the others and things are still fine.

However, this context changes things to my ears at least:

Coca-Cola North America has objected to the lawsuit. 
Here I would prefer one of the "The" versions, simply because it is more formal.  Certainly it is not impossible to drop "the" in this case.  However, if this is the company's official name, then yes, use it.

Both #5 and #6 imply that there are other companies with the "Coca-Cola" name in other areas, e.g. Coca-Cola Europe.  #2 and #6 (group) say that the firm is an amalgamation of independent companies, while #3 - #5 do not.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mn Dave on May 20, 2011, 09:47:12 AM
I had a major grumble when a prominent fantasy author used "purposely" for "purposefully." Not just once, but twice. I quit the book and took it back after the second occurrence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on May 20, 2011, 09:48:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 20, 2011, 09:43:45 AM
In general "the" narrows down the noun:

Apples are wonderful = all apples are wonderful

The apples are wonderful = a certain group of apples

However, in your examples, context could change things, or not make a difference.

#1 is obviously the product.

#2-#6 can be seen simply as variations on a theme, although with the words "Company" and "Group" I would always use the word "the."  To say "Coca-Cola Company announced a dividend" sounds very odd.

However this sounds fine:

Investors say Coca-Cola North America is well-managed.

Insert the others and things are still fine.

However, this context changes things to my ears at least:

Coca-Cola North America has objected to the lawsuit. 
Here I would prefer one of the "The" versions, simply because it is more formal.  Certainly it is not impossible to drop "the" in this case.  However, if this is the company's official name, then yes, use it.

Both #5 and #6 imply that there are other companies with the "Coca-Cola" name in other areas, e.g. Coca-Cola Europe.  #2 and #6 (group) say that the firm is an amalgamation of independent companies, while #3 - #5 do not.

Isn't it a lot simpler than that?  Coca-Cola is a proper noun.  You don't use an article with a proper noun.  In "the Cola-Cola company" the noun is company and Coca-cola is a modifier, normal rules for the use of the article apply.   No?

A weird exception to the proper noun rule applies in California.  When referring to Interstate 5, people will say "take the 5" whereas in NY people will say "take 95."   New Yorkers consider "95" to be a proper noun while I suppose Californians consider "take the 5" to be a contraction of "take the 5 freeway."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on May 20, 2011, 01:10:16 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on May 18, 2011, 02:26:02 AMMy 7-11 teachers were, simply put, awful.

But I bet they taught you how to brew a mean Slurpee.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 20, 2011, 04:30:36 PM
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on May 20, 2011, 09:48:02 AM
Isn't it a lot simpler than that?  Coca-Cola is a proper noun. You don't use an article with a proper noun.  In "the Cola-Cola company" the noun is company and Coca-Cola is a modifier, normal rules for the use of the article apply.   No?

A weird exception to the proper noun rule applies in California.  When referring to Interstate 5, people will say "take the 5" whereas in NY people will say "take 95."   New Yorkers consider "95" to be a proper noun while I suppose Californians consider "take the 5" to be a contraction of "take the 5 freeway."

Sorry, no: where did you learn that?   ???   

No article with a proper noun?

e.g.  "The New York Yankees will not win the World Series."

Nobody except a Russian immigrant would say "New York Yankees will not win World Series."   ;D

And here in Columbus, the word "the" is used religiously before "The Ohio State University" !   0:)   
You never hear the name of the university in their official pronouncements without the article before the name.

Here in Ohio we (usually) use the abbreviation "I" with the freeways' numbers: "Take I-71 to I-90 in Cleveland." 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 28, 2011, 04:29:37 PM
Taneyev's Tent of Twirbling Tones is a topic I started under the Composer Discussion.

A request to define "twirble" seems appropriate here!   $:)

So, in my usage (an Internet search shows that people have used the word as a name, one used it as the name of a fantasy bird from the Amazon, and somebody else used it to describe a bird's tail feathers) it means something rather specific:

Try this: to tweet and/or twitter and/or warble while whirling - at least in your mind - with happiness.   0:)

Hence the title of the Taneyev topic!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 28, 2011, 05:03:06 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 18, 2011, 03:56:24 AM
Were you in public schools, where unions protect the incompetent?  I have taught in public schools a few times throughout my career (in mainly Catholic schools), and have been appalled by the lack of teaching and competence.  Future English teachers were often ruined by the idiotic revolution of relativism in the 1960's, where grammar was viewed as "oppressive" and a way for The Establishment to control people.  (I have heard the lectures by the professors: I wish I were inventing this!)

And so teaching grammar and proper spelling were often discarded in favor of "personal expression," and "creative grammar" meant that there were really no mistakes: correcting "They was" could mean that you were a racist, or a fascist, or both!   $:)

I corrected the Advanced Placement Examination for European History for several years: students write 3 essays on European History in c. 90 minutes.

We were not allowed to deduct for spelling or grammar.  My wife recently corrected high-school state examinations for Ohio and Pennsylvania in Social Studies: amazingly, the standards - written by state educational bureaucrats in co-operation with the teacher unions - said that if a student simply scrawled down as few as 3 "key words" under a question, he was given full credit.  No sentence was necessary.

Sadly, many tests were simply blank, or had wrong answers.  She corrected over 10,000 in 3 months: a good sampling.  The work depressed her toward the end of the assignment, because... "Passing" was lowered to 30% in some cases, so that the public schools could look competent.

Catholic schools are not perfect either: we are unfortunately suffering from the same influences, but not to the same degree.
Grammar, of course, supports clarity of thought and expression thereof.  I love the story of your wife's experience.  It explains nearly everything--not only why idiocy and slovenly thinking are rampant, by why those so victimized by the schools are unable to recognize the vast extent of their own ignorance.  One imagines Charles Darwin enjoying such advantages, his Origin of Species reduced to "Advantageous...mutations...survive."

Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on May 20, 2011, 09:48:02 AM
A weird exception to the proper noun rule applies in California.  When referring to Interstate 5, people will say "take the 5" whereas in NY people will say "take 95."   New Yorkers consider "95" to be a proper noun while I suppose Californians consider "take the 5" to be a contraction of "take the 5 freeway."
Not all of California.  This is a Southern California conceit that first appeared about 25 years ago...though I must report, sadly, that it's making more frequent appearances upstate.  Tsk, tsk.  Completely contrary to the evolutionary thrust of English.  Sadly, not the only case of cultural regression thrust upon us by the unenlightened.  :-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2011, 08:10:04 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on May 28, 2011, 05:03:06 PM
Grammar, of course, supports clarity of thought and expression thereof.  I love the story of your wife's experience.  It explains nearly everything--not only why idiocy and slovenly thinking are rampant, by why those so victimized by the schools are unable to recognize the vast extent of their own ignorance.  One imagines Charles Darwin enjoying such advantages, his Origin of Species reduced to "Advantageous...mutations...survive."

"Take The 5"

Not all of California. This is a Southern California conceit that first appeared about 25 years ago...though I must report, sadly, that it's making more frequent appearances upstate.  Tsk, tsk.  Completely contrary to the evolutionary thrust of English.  Sadly, not the only case of cultural regression thrust upon us by the unenlightened.  :-X

My snooty Southern California sister-in-law ("Why would anyone live anywhere else than Southern California? Ah-ha-ha-haaa!"  >:D  ) uses the phrase all the time of course, along with other preciosities from the area.

"Take the 5" reminds me of my father's accountant, who had a sign in his office boldly proclaiming "Take the goy!"   ;D   We always thought that was hysterical, since most of his clients were goyim!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 30, 2011, 08:22:59 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 30, 2011, 08:10:04 AM
"Take the goy!"   ;D   We always thought that was hysterical, since most of his clients were goyim!

As much as I dislike a joke being explained, I ask you earnestly: could you tell me what's hysterical about that? (The online dictionary I referred to gives me the same meaning for both words.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 30, 2011, 08:42:52 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 30, 2011, 08:22:59 AM
As much as I dislike a joke being explained, I ask you earnestly: could you tell me what's hysterical about that? (The online dictionary I referred to gives me the same meaning for both words.)

As if the former were restrictive, since it applies to all the clientele . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 30, 2011, 08:44:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 30, 2011, 08:42:52 AM
As if the former were restrictive, since it applies to all the clientele . . . .

Thanks, Karl.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on May 30, 2011, 08:58:22 AM
Always a pleasure, Nav.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2011, 09:13:24 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 30, 2011, 08:22:59 AM
As much as I dislike a joke being explained, I ask you earnestly: could you tell me what's hysterical about that? (The online dictionary I referred to gives me the same meaning for both words.)

Our family accountant was Jewish   0:)  , and goy in Yiddish is the singular for a Gentile (goyim is plural). 

"Take" was code for "take advantage of."    ;D

But Sam was quite fair, and therefore had a large clientele!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 30, 2011, 10:08:33 AM
Muchly* appreciated, Cato.




*Please don't take me to task. I like using that word just for tun. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on May 31, 2011, 09:46:03 PM
Placing the definite article in front of freeway names is correct usage, and an acceptable, if not popular choice worldwide with English speakers. People from Northern California historically carry a curious inferiority complex over SoCal, and use the issue as another opportunity to revel in it. I take 5 when I need a break. I take the 5 to get to Disneyland.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 01, 2011, 02:53:43 AM
We're cazh.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 05, 2011, 12:34:55 PM
Quote from: The Six on May 31, 2011, 09:46:03 PM
Placing the definite article in front of freeway names is correct usage, and an acceptable, if not popular choice worldwide with English speakers. People from Northern California historically carry a curious inferiority complex over SoCal, and use the issue as another opportunity to revel in it. I take 5 when I need a break. I take the 5 to get to Disneyland.
Nah. It's a silly affectation, like most of what passes for culture in that vast wasteland.  ;) I lived in Southern California off and on from the mid-'60s to the late '70s, but the first time I ever heard someone use that peculiar locution was circa 1985.  It also runs counter to the historic thrust of English that strips away unnecessary crap.

PS --hope I needn't explain this is intended to be a response in kind, good-natured chiding, like locker room camaraderie.  Not that I don't mean it, but that it's hardly the sort of thing to take seriously or to get upset about.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 06, 2011, 05:33:30 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on June 05, 2011, 12:34:55 PM
Nah. It's a silly affectation, like most of what passes for culture in that vast wasteland.  ;) I lived in Southern California off and on from the mid-'60s to the late '70s, but the first time I ever heard someone use that peculiar locution was circa 1985.  It also runs counter to the historic thrust of English that strips away unnecessary crap.


Right!  "The" in front of a highway's number is not proper: you should take "Interstate 5" or even "I - 5."   "The 5" is local slang, which would be incomprehensible to an outsider.   Other Americans would understand that "I - 5" equals Interstate 5.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 06, 2011, 09:45:56 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 06, 2011, 05:33:30 AM
Right!  "The" in front of a highway's number is not proper: you should take "Interstate 5" or even "I - 5."   "The 5" is local slang, which would be incomprehensible to an outsider.   Other Americans would understand that "I - 5" equals Interstate 5.

It's hardly incomprehensible. The many transplants in LA seem to have no problem with it and adopt it just fine.

That "the" has a softer sound than "I" makes it more appealing, probably. You certainly can't fault it grammatically, and I think either way is ok. It also resolves the conundrum that not every freeway is an interstate. Grouping them all under the collective "the" takes away the muddiness of saying "Take I-5 to Route/US 101."

QuoteNah. It's a silly affectation, like most of what passes for culture in that vast wasteland.   I lived in Southern California off and on from the mid-'60s to the late '70s, but the first time I ever heard someone use that peculiar locution was circa 1985.  It also runs counter to the historic thrust of English that strips away unnecessary crap.

If you think it's unnecessary then I suppose you also think that the "I" in "I-5" would be cumbersome. "Take 5 to 101 to etc...," the numbers by themselves sounds a bit odd.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on June 06, 2011, 09:56:46 AM
Quote from: The Six on June 06, 2011, 09:45:56 AMThat "the" has a softer sound than "I" makes it more appealing, probably. You certainly can't fault it grammatically, and I think either way is ok. It also resolves the conundrum that not every freeway is an interstate. Grouping them all under the collective "the" takes away the muddiness of saying "Take I-5 to Route/US 101."

People in LA consider it "maddness" to know the difference between an interstate highway and a state route?  I would consider it "maddness" not to distinguish, since interstates and state routes can have the same number.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 06, 2011, 10:27:59 AM
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on June 06, 2011, 09:56:46 AM
People in LA consider it "maddness" to know the difference between an interstate highway and a state route?  I would consider it "maddness" not to distinguish, since interstates and state routes can have the same number.

You might want to reread my post  :-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Père Malfait on June 06, 2011, 10:55:14 AM
Quote from: Leon on June 06, 2011, 10:14:52 AM
Here in Nashville, we're pretty simple folk and just say "go towards town on 24" or "take 65 South".  Where we get creative is in giving directions by landmarks which used to be there, as in, "then you turn left where the old Service Merchandise used to be."

LOL, another Nashvillian here (a native, no less!), and I freely admit to being guilty of that very thing from time to time.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 06, 2011, 10:56:43 AM
Remind me not to ask you gents for directions ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 06, 2011, 11:36:57 AM
When you come to Boston, I'll meet you where Jordan Marsh used to be. You can get there from the T, board at the stop which used to be Tufts Medical Center ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 06, 2011, 11:40:27 AM
There's many a corner which used to be marked by a Brigham's ice cream joint, too ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on June 12, 2011, 02:46:55 PM
Yesterday we took 132 West to 99 North to 4 to 5 to Biz-80 West at the WX and turned off to the frontage road past the causeway, then down to 105, up to 28H, past the dump to 102 to 27 to 99, and then turned toward home just after the city limits. What's so hard about that? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on June 18, 2011, 09:00:10 PM
The phrase "he's all over the place" must be remarkably confusing to non-native speakers. I just noticed that this is used with two contradictory definitions (somebody who is in complete control so that they seem to be everywhere at once, or somebody who is in no control and is unintentionally snaking around) :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on June 22, 2011, 04:34:05 PM
Also:

Sonata in B-flat major for piano, violin, and cello, D.28

Is the comma before the "and" a standard which must always be followed?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on June 23, 2011, 01:47:18 AM
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on June 22, 2011, 04:34:05 PM
Is the comma before the "and" a standard which must always be followed?

No.  There are arguments for and against it.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma).  I usually use it, unless it creates ambiguity, as in the example in the wikipedia article.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on June 23, 2011, 02:23:00 AM
Thanks! It often looks a little awkward whenever I try to include it - I'll reserve it for special occasions.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on June 23, 2011, 02:46:07 AM
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on June 23, 2011, 02:23:00 AM
Thanks! It often looks a little awkward whenever I try to include it - I'll reserve it for special occasions.

Gold, frankincense, and myrrh, for example?   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 27, 2011, 03:17:37 PM
Quote from: Wendell_E on June 23, 2011, 02:46:07 AM
Gold, frankincense, and myrrh, for example?   ;D

Cato's back, so "get your hands on your heads, get off the bar, and get on the wall!"   ;D

Note the comma before the "and" above!   0:)

And concerning streets and highways: in Michigan on entrance ramps to freeways, you will often see either a No Left Turn sign, or a No U-Turn sign.    Yes, I know what you are thinking: who would ever enter a freeway and then suddenly decide to turn left to drive across 2, 3, or 4 lanes of traffic into a concrete median, or to do u-turn from ramp???

I wrote that these signs are in Michigan!!! 
Remember that whenever somebody from Ohio moves to Michigan, the collective I.Q.'s in both states rises!   0:)  *

Here in Columbus, there is a street called "North Broadway," which runs...east-west!  It is therefore possible to drive eastward on West North Broadway!   $:)

There is a "South Broadway" in a suburb, which at least runs northeast-southwest.   0:)

My favorite in the area is north of the Columbus Zoo, and is called "Seldom Seen Road" !   :o   A great place to live for somebody trying to get away from it all!

* Obviously this does NOT apply to any GMG Michiganders!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on June 27, 2011, 03:39:28 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 06, 2011, 05:33:30 AM
Right!  "The" in front of a highway's number is not proper: you should take "Interstate 5" or even "I - 5."   "The 5" is local slang, which would be incomprehensible to an outsider.   Other Americans would understand that "I - 5" equals Interstate 5.
I first heard "the 5" ("the 10"?) in 1991, while watching something about Rodney King on the news. When I lived in LA in the 1970s, people would take "the Santa Monica" or "the San Diego." If I ever move back there, I will take the Santa Monica or the San Diego.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 28, 2011, 04:55:33 AM
I learn so much on the GMG!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 28, 2011, 04:57:38 AM
Quote from: Jay F on June 27, 2011, 03:39:28 PM
I first heard "the 5" ("the 10"?) in 1991, while watching something about Rodney King on the news. When I lived in LA in the 1970s, people would take "the Santa Monica" or "the San Diego." If I ever move back there, I will take the Santa Monica or the San Diego.

Take my advice: don't ever move back there!   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 28, 2011, 05:00:27 AM
Do you know the way to the San José?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on June 28, 2011, 06:11:32 AM
I learnt a wonderful new word today from a newspaper article. On being asked to describe the female involved in a Chinese honey trap scandal, an associate said:

"She was anything but pulchritudinous (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pulchritudinous)."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 28, 2011, 06:16:22 AM
Hah! I learnt that word from . . . Bugs Bunny (so, from Mel Blanc) . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 29, 2011, 06:22:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 28, 2011, 04:57:38 AM
Take my advice: don't ever move back there!   ;D

Yes, please don't. There are enough transplants clogging up the streets in LA. Everybody loves to hate it, but the reason most of them don't leave is that this is actually the most beautiful big city in the country. But enough with the actor/waiters coming here.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 29, 2011, 06:29:34 AM
Quote from: The Six on June 29, 2011, 06:22:36 AM
Yes, please don't. There are enough transplants clogging up the streets in LA. Everybody loves to hate it, but the reason most of them don't leave is that this is actually the most beautiful big city in the country.

That's not what my Chicago friends say.

And I understand that your statement is no slight to Boston, which isn't really a big city (only part of its charm, IMO).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on June 29, 2011, 07:07:44 AM
Quote from: The Six on May 31, 2011, 09:46:03 PM
Placing the definite article in front of freeway names is correct usage, and an acceptable, if not popular choice worldwide with English speakers. People from Northern California historically carry a curious inferiority complex over SoCal, and use the issue as another opportunity to revel in it. I take 5 when I need a break. I take the 5 to get to Disneyland.
I thought Californians surf to get to Disneyland.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on June 30, 2011, 02:16:57 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 28, 2011, 04:57:38 AM
Take my advice: don't ever move back there!   ;D
I wasn't planning on it.

Quote from: The Six on June 29, 2011, 06:22:36 AM
Yes, please don't. There are enough transplants clogging up the streets in LA. Everybody loves to hate it, but the reason most of them don't leave is that this is actually the most beautiful big city in the country. But enough with the actor/waiters coming here.
Not to worry. I'm well past the "actor/waiter" stage. But thanks for the welcoming attitude.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 30, 2011, 02:22:31 AM
Aye, that's so LA. What, a newcomer? No thanks, we've got enough people here already.  Try El Salvador . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 30, 2011, 02:50:17 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2011, 02:22:31 AM
Aye, that's so LA. What, a newcomer? No thanks, we've got enough people here already.  Try El Salvador . . . .

Actually, the state legislature has been driving people away: high taxes and regulation, leading to high unemployment, have led to several straight years of migration losses.

See:

http://www.newgeography.com/content/001925-if-california-is-doing-so-great-why-are-so-many-leaving (http://www.newgeography.com/content/001925-if-california-is-doing-so-great-why-are-so-many-leaving)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on June 30, 2011, 02:59:56 AM
Quote from: The Six on June 29, 2011, 06:22:36 AM
Yes, please don't. There are enough transplants clogging up the streets in LA. Everybody loves to hate it, but the reason most of them don't leave is that this is actually the most beautiful big city in the country. But enough with the actor/waiters coming here.
LA and beautiful in the same sentence! Is that allowed?  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 30, 2011, 03:18:43 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on June 30, 2011, 02:59:56 AM
LA and beautiful in the same sentence! Is that allowed?  :)

Well, the Disney/L.A. Philharmonic Concert Hall is a winner!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 30, 2011, 08:15:11 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on June 30, 2011, 02:59:56 AM
LA and beautiful in the same sentence! Is that allowed?  :)

Yes, that's the well-kept secret. Sure, the gritty urban areas aren't nice, but it's no different than a typical dirty American city. Even the bad neighborhoods are pretty nice looking compared to, say, New York. And New Yorkers have said that.

But the beautiful parts are all the nature that you typically can't find in such a big city: mountains, valleys, beaches, desert and foresty areas, and snow is not a long drive away. It's mostly natural beauty as opposed to man-made.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 30, 2011, 02:22:31 AM
Aye, that's so LA. What, a newcomer? No thanks, we've got enough people here already.  Try El Salvador . . . .

Right, everyone outside here has an opinion of something that's "so LA."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on June 30, 2011, 08:28:35 AM
Quote from: The Six on June 30, 2011, 08:15:11 AM
But the beautiful parts are all the nature...and foresty areas...

So true...LA has the best kindling of any city in the world  :D

Actually I have no opinion of LA. Never been there. Closest I got was Fort Irwin, the National Training Center.

Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 30, 2011, 08:38:50 AM
Today on my "favorite" T.V. station here in Columbus, a reporter from D.C. named "Holly" (a 40-something Barbie doll) delivers the following about the visit of Prince William to Canada:

"But protesters will also be present: they want Quebec to succeed   :o   and have promised to disrupt the prince's visit."

Don't we all want Quebec to succeed?   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 30, 2011, 08:44:52 AM
The War of the Québecois Succession!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 30, 2011, 08:53:12 AM
Quote from: Leon on June 30, 2011, 08:32:02 AM
I would that that even a L.A. native would fake more intelligence than to get into a pissing match about which city is better, i.e., compared to New York City.

I mean, really ...

;)

I don't know how you got that, I didn't say anything about "better," only that most don't realize how good-looking the city can be. Bringing up NY was a comparison.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on June 30, 2011, 09:11:06 AM
If sunshine were all it takes to make a city look good ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 30, 2011, 03:01:50 PM
Then Boston could look good?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on July 17, 2011, 10:56:10 AM
Oh,  I just love this!

(http://www.guitarrum.net/english_teacher_win.jpg)

(She should not have capitalized "high school"--but that's a minor niggle in view of her massive win!) :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on July 18, 2011, 06:30:14 AM
QuoteApache Ant is a Java library and command-line tool who's mission is to drive processes described in build files as targets and extension points dependent upon each other


Really?  ???

http://ant.apache.org/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on July 23, 2011, 03:54:13 AM
I was vaguely aware of it before, but have just confirmed for myself that crevice and crevasse have distinct meanings. Kinda cool.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on July 26, 2011, 06:22:41 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on July 17, 2011, 10:56:10 AM
Oh,  I just love this!
I love it, too!  Thanks, John!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on July 26, 2011, 07:56:37 AM
A lot of people seem to hate this "it is what it is" phrase that's really popular now. Yeah, it's a cliche and does sound kinda dumb, but to me it has basically the same meaning as que sera sera, and nobody complains about that, I guess cause it's older and foreign and was in a song or something. Someone needs to make an "it is what it is" song.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on July 26, 2011, 08:38:43 AM
Quote from: The Six on July 26, 2011, 07:56:37 AM
. . . Someone needs to make an "it is what it is" song.

I'm on it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Brahmsian on August 12, 2011, 05:28:10 AM
Not sure if it belongs here, but I thought I'd include 'redundant sayings'.  Here's one:

Dead carcass   ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 12, 2011, 05:42:32 AM
It's evolved so that the principal reading is trunk of a dead animal, and you're right, that suggests redundancy. But originally, it was anatomical (not the limbs/extremities, e.g.) in orientation, not specifically an evaluation of whether the creature is dead or alive.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 12, 2011, 07:00:50 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 26, 2011, 08:38:43 AM
I'm on it.
Hmmm.  Here's a start, off the top of my head:

It is
What it is.
What it is, is what it is,
And it's not
What it's not,
What it's not's not what it is.

But it never will be
What it could be
What it should be,
For as long
As we neglect
To give what is
Due respect.

For it is
What it is.
What it is, is what it is,
And it's not
What it's not,
What it's not's not what it is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on August 14, 2011, 05:05:45 PM
Is 'strategical' outdated or valid in some circumstances? As it seems to fully duplicate 'strategic', I had assumed that it was incorrect but it seems to be listed in many dictionaries.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 14, 2011, 05:33:59 PM
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on August 14, 2011, 05:05:45 PM
Is 'strategical' outdated or valid in some circumstances? As it seems to fully duplicate 'strategic', I had assumed that it was incorrect but it seems to be listed in many dictionaries.
As in, "It can be strategical to return back an unwanted gift"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on August 15, 2011, 05:39:05 AM
Just saw this headline on the yahoo front page:

"Attempted suicide by Statue of Liberty..."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on August 15, 2011, 06:27:08 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 14, 2011, 05:33:59 PM
As in, "It can be strategical to return back an unwanted gift"?

Oh, indeedie, thanks. I constantly hear it used in sentences like "That was a great strategical decision" which sounds a bit clumsy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 15, 2011, 08:02:52 AM
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on August 15, 2011, 06:27:08 AM
Oh, indeedie, thanks. I constantly hear it used in sentences like "That was a great strategical decision" which sounds a bit clumsy.
To my ear, too.  And contrary to the historical thrust of the English language.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 15, 2011, 03:49:36 PM
Quote from: Leon on August 15, 2011, 08:05:17 AM
But, isn't "return back" redundant?
Yes. That's the point.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on August 18, 2011, 06:45:20 AM
I'm quite sure that the phrase 'from whence' has made an appearance in this thread before. It was therefore with surprise that I read this page (http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-fro2.htm) which traces back said phrase to Dickens, Defoe and Shakespeare among others, after I found it in a poem by Walter Scott.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 18, 2011, 06:48:21 AM
Aye, it's a redundancy with an impressive pedigree. Anyway, wasn't it Johnson who said of the Elizabethans that they were eloquent before they were grammarians?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on August 18, 2011, 06:54:34 AM
Quote from: gninnehlrakarlhenning on August 18, 2011, 06:48:21 AM
Aye, it's a redundancy with an impressive pedigree. Anyway, wasn't it Johnson who said of the Elizabethans that they were eloquent before they were grammarians?

I agree that it's easier off the tongue for modern speakers, and perhaps not-so-modern speakers as well, but as I said elsewhere, I prefer to side with logic in this case. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on August 19, 2011, 11:52:34 PM
I like 'from whence' I seem to recollect the King James uses it. I have assumed that it denotes not merely the place but travel from it. Mind you it is archaic and I have never used the phrase as far as I recall.

So, if a disease comes 'from' France: that is its origin
If I say The pox continues to infect people here. Travel to France from whence it came, is now prohibited.

I think that denotes two things it started there and has travelled from there to here.

Could be entirely wrong, but that has been the way I have read that conjunction when I encountered it. I imagine you can turn up examples that would contradict my interpretation.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on August 20, 2011, 02:10:27 AM
Quote from: Soapy Molloy on August 20, 2011, 02:02:01 AM
Isn't the from in "from whence" itself redundant/tautological?

That's the usual complaint, and a justifiable one at that. I supposed that the misuse started in recent times; but as I posted earlier, it actually goes back many centuries, assuming it's a misuse at all.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 20, 2011, 09:54:23 AM
Quote from: Soapy Molloy on August 20, 2011, 02:02:01 AM
Isn't the from in "from whence" itself redundant/tautological?  Whence and whither being the (archaic) English equivalents of the (still current) German woher and wohin meaning where from (do you come) and where to (are you going). As opposed to plain wo = where as in where is (it situated).  I rather regret the loss of these differentiations of meaning, and still use them if I can find a context where it doesn't look entirely too absurd.  Though I can see it makes the language easier to learn without them.
If not for German grammar I couldn't say "Whence comest thou?" and "Whither thou goest?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 23, 2011, 08:42:40 AM
What's up with this "less" vs. "fewer" thing? That there's supposed to be some difference between the two words, they've been interchangeable for a century. It wasn't until a couple hundred years ago that some guy said he thought using "fewer" in certain situations sounded better, and somehow it caught on and became a rule in the minds of some people.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 23, 2011, 10:14:27 AM
In the case of countable nouns, fewer; in the case of mass nouns, less.  You really cannot say fewer sugar, sorry.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 23, 2011, 10:25:58 AM
"Fewer" certainly is limited to certain cases, but "less" can apply to almost anything. "Less than 20 years old," "four is less than five," "there are less fish in the pond," etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 23, 2011, 10:40:26 AM
Less people is a barbarism, as well. No, one cannot simply use less whenever fewer applies.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 23, 2011, 10:43:57 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 23, 2011, 08:42:40 AM
. . . It wasn't until a couple hundred years ago that some guy said he thought using "fewer" in certain situations sounded better, and somehow it caught on and became a rule in the minds of some people.

That's a fun thought. But really, you could say some such about almost anything.  The rules of grammar were not completely 'established' at the time of the Elizabethans, sure.  Shakespeare himself, in the few extant documents in his own hand, spelled his own name different ways. That historical fact doesn't change our own context, in which we spell his name one way, and not others.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 23, 2011, 11:04:57 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 23, 2011, 10:25:58 AM
"Fewer" certainly is limited to certain cases, but "less" can apply to almost anything. "Less than 20 years old," "four is less than five," "there are less fish in the pond," etc.
Of course you are welcome to speak however you wish.  Bear in mind, however, that diction and grammar reveal one's social class and education.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 23, 2011, 11:23:10 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 23, 2011, 10:43:57 AM
That's a fun thought. But really, you could say some such about almost anything. 

The difference is that most rules are borne out of necessity, that there is something that needs to be distinguished. If the distinction of less v. fewer were that important, why is there no equivalent for the opposite, "more?"



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 23, 2011, 11:26:23 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 23, 2011, 10:43:57 AM
That's a fun thought. But really, you could say some such about almost anything.  The rules of grammar were not completely 'established' at the time of the Elizabethans, sure.  Shakespeare himself, in the few extant documents in his own hand, spelled his own name different ways. That historical fact doesn't change our own context, in which we spell his name one way, and not others.

English has long evolved in the gray area between prescriptive and descriptive rules, and its orthography in particular has lived a tortured life. Like you imply, older texts typically undergo normalization by contemporary editors to create some kind of readily comprehensible consistency with modern trends.

1603 text:

--Thou art a fcholler, fpeake to it Horatio.
--Lookes it not like the king?
--Moft like, it horrors mee with feare and wonder.

1605 text:

--Thou art a fcholler, fpeake to it Horatio.
--Lookes a not like the King? marke it Horatio.
--Moft like, it horrowes me with feare and wonder.

[I can't type a proper long s]

into

--Thou art a scholar; speak to it, Horatio.
--Looks it not like the king? mark it, Horatio.
--Most like: it harrows me with fear and wonder.

Quote from: DavidRoss on August 23, 2011, 11:04:57 AM
Of course you are welcome to speak however you wish.  Bear in mind, however, that diction and grammar reveal one's social class and education.

It's a dual question of personal taste and flair and fitting into speech and discourse communities.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 23, 2011, 02:17:29 PM
All right!  CATO'S back!

"Get off the bar and get on the wall!"   $:)

For "less vs. fewer" see Oxford Dictionaries Online:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/page/grammartiplessorfewer (http://oxforddictionaries.com/page/grammartiplessorfewer)

To be clear about the orthography mentioned above: what seems to be "F" is actually an "S," and is related to the "double S" letter seen in German.

Today, on my local TV news, intrepid yet insipid reporter Blondie Bubblebrain said during a segment on the minor East-Coast earthquake:

"The Ohio State University has some scientifical   :o   equipment that picked up the tremors!"

Well, at least the equipment was not "scientificalistic" !   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 24, 2011, 03:35:12 AM
Scientificallisticexpiællidocious!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 24, 2011, 04:28:11 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 23, 2011, 11:23:10 AM
The difference is that most rules are borne out of necessity, that there is something that needs to be distinguished. If the distinction of less v. fewer were that important, why is there no equivalent for the opposite, "more?"

Because most rules aren't born out of necessity  :) Look at the progress from Old English to Middle to Modern, with its simplification and streamlining of declensions, the near death of the subjunctive, etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 24, 2011, 04:33:46 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 23, 2011, 11:26:23 AM
English has long evolved in the gray area between prescriptive and descriptive rules, and its orthography in particular has lived a tortured life.

QFT, and well put.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 24, 2011, 04:35:40 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 23, 2011, 02:17:29 PM
All right!  CATO'S back!

Huzzah! Let the clocks be cleaned!

Quote from: CatoTo be clear about the orthography mentioned above: what seems to be "F" is actually an "S," and is related to the "double S" letter seen in German.

Never knew that; I do love learning new things!  I mean, I knew of the existence of the long S; didn't know of its typographic kinship to the esszet [sp?]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 24, 2011, 04:50:45 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 23, 2011, 02:17:29 PM
To be clear about the orthography mentioned above: what seems to be "F" is actually an "S," and is related to the "double S" letter seen in German.

Though it should be noted that the long s and ß are both present and distinct in Fraktur (aka "Gothic") printing in German:

(http://0.tqn.com/d/german/1/0/m/S/FraktErlk400.gif)

Note the second word of line 2 "ist" and second word of line 5 "fasst."

Quote

Today, on my local TV news, intrepid yet insipid reporter Blondie Bubblebrain said during a segment on the minor East-Coast earthquake:

"The Ohio State University has some scientifical   :o   equipment that picked up the tremors!"

Well, at least the equipment was not "scientificalistic" !   0:)

Sounds like a typical case of overcorrection, some sort of analogue to "medical." The most common example is probably elementary school grammar trauma leading adults to always use "him and I" even when it's the object of a preposition.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 26, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Now what English should have is a gender-neutral singular pronoun. Everyone just uses "they" as singular now, so it's too late, but it still sounds kind of odd. "If you find the culprit, arrest them."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 26, 2011, 06:58:50 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 26, 2011, 06:50:39 AM
Now what English should have is a gender-neutral singular pronoun. Everyone just uses "they" as singular now, so it's too late, but it still sounds kind of odd. "If you find the culprit, arrest them."

It might be more elegant and accurate to employ such a pronoun, but the meaning of "they" is generally clear, and the trend in English has been towards simplification, like losing the dual and masculine/feminine/neuter pronoun distinctions from Old English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 26, 2011, 07:05:48 AM
It's still largely not acceptable in formal writing, which leads to the long "he or she" being used. Of course some will just use "he" as gender-neutral, which apparently is not PC, and gives people something to complain about. And they'll you'll have the odd column by a female writer using "she" as gender-neutral, which always makes me double-take and look back to see if we're talking about someone specific.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 26, 2011, 07:28:59 AM
On the whole, distinguishing between masculine and feminine pronouns remains value added to the language, I should think ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 26, 2011, 07:31:08 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 26, 2011, 07:05:48 AM
It's still largely not acceptable in formal writing, which leads to the long "he or she" being used.

While in principle I sympathize with the desire for an English equivalent to on . . . the use of they or them when the antecedent is singular (or even their use, in instances of extreme PC slop, with a singular verb) can only be considered illiteracy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 26, 2011, 10:35:12 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 26, 2011, 07:31:08 AM
While in principle I sympathize with the desire for an English equivalent to on . . . the use of they or them when the antecedent is singular (or even their use, in instances of extreme PC slop, with a singular verb) can only be considered illiteracy.

Well, it's not typically acceptable Standard Written English today, but it's an interesting linguistic usage with a long history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they

Quote
The 2011 translation of the New International Version Bible utilizes singular they instead of "he" or "he or she", reflecting changes in English usage. The translators commissioned a study of modern English usage and determined that singular "they" ("them"/"their") is by far the most common way that English-language speakers and writers today refer back to singular antecedents such as "whoever, anyone, somebody, a person, no one, and the like."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 26, 2011, 10:42:42 AM
Quote from: Leon on August 26, 2011, 07:40:17 AM
Well, here in the South we have advanced to the level of distinquishing between the singular and plural second person pronoun: You (singular) and Y'all (plural).

:D

"This Grammar Endorsed by Daisy Duke"   :o

(http://www.shaniasplace.com/Shania%20News/Pictures/Misc/DaisyDuke.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 26, 2011, 10:54:56 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 26, 2011, 10:35:12 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they)

Aye, I've read that dodgy article before.  File it under tendentious faux pedigree ; )

If we wrote a paper with 'support' that flaky, we'd be thrown out on our ear.  Tell me that ain't true . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 26, 2011, 12:39:37 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 26, 2011, 10:54:56 AM
Aye, I've read that dodgy article before.  File it under tendentious faux pedigree ; )

If we wrote a paper with 'support' that flaky, we'd be thrown out on our ear.  Tell me that ain't true . . . .

Whatever the merits of that article, you're probably tilting at windmills by decrying the singular they. It's so commonly used and understood in speech, that it's only a matter of time before the arbiters of written style cave on the issue. (That process has apparently already begun.) If it's been used in writing for centuries, is common in speech, and does not erect barriers to understanding, but rather facilitates it through economy, it's probably not a bad thing :)

Recall that one reason for style guides is to promote clarity, but another is about power: the willingness and ability to accede to the printed prescriptions acts as a condition for membership in a particular community.

(Here, fwiw, are the translators' notes for the NIV Bible, as mentioned earlier, wherein they explain their stance on the issue and the methodology behind it: http://www.biblegateway.com/niv/Translators-Notes.pdf )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 26, 2011, 12:47:45 PM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 26, 2011, 12:39:37 PM
Whatever the merits of that article, you're probably tilting at windmills by decrying the singular they.

No, I'd be tilting at windmills if I conducted a public campaign over it.  Here, I am just expressing a comparatively conservative grammatical opinion.  That, is trust, is not so visually ludicrous as the Quixote simile you kindly suggest.

Quote from: GraziosoIt's so commonly used and understood in speech, that it's only a matter of time before the arbiters of written style cave on the issue.

I am sure.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 26, 2011, 01:12:43 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 26, 2011, 12:47:45 PM
No, I'd be tilting at windmills if I conducted a public campaign over it.  Here, I am just expressing a comparatively conservative grammatical opinion.  That, is trust, is not so visually ludicrous as the Quixote simile you kindly suggest.

Understood. But, hey, you need to write a Don Quixote piece: "Don Quixote Tilts at a Windmill, Misses, and Impales a Grammarian" for countertenor and small orchestra. I can just hear the countertenor screech during the third stanza...  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 30, 2011, 07:25:16 AM
It disturbs me that Merriam Webster has changed its definition of acronym to include initialisms. Sonar is an acronym, FBI is not.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 30, 2011, 09:02:00 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 30, 2011, 07:25:16 AM
It disturbs me that Merriam Webster has changed its definition of acronym to include initialisms. Sonar is an acronym, FBI is not.

There you go; another useful distinction, which will be blurred by usage, no matter what you or I might say.

'Tis the weigh of the world . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 30, 2011, 02:39:12 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 30, 2011, 09:02:00 AM
There you go; another useful distinction, which will be blurred by usage, no matter what you or I might say.

Fight back. Start the Socforpropcronymtion! (That's the Society for Proper Acronym Distinction to you and me.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 30, 2011, 04:38:07 PM
I can agree with the distress about "they/them" being used as a non-sexual singular pronoun: but such is the politico-grammatical correctness from a society which is almost a matriarchy now!   ;D

And yes, I suspect it will be accepted fairly soon.

Yesterday local TV news - a fantastic source for bad grammar - made the following statement:

"A Dayton man stabbed his wife to death who prosecutors refused to charge for domestic abuse."   ???   :o   ???   :o

We have four problems here:

1. "Whom" should be used, not "Who."

2. I find the phrase "charge for domestic abuse" somewhat odd: charged "with" would be usual.

3. and 4. After you place your eyes back into your head and pick up your lower jaw, you realize from the rest of the report that the relative clause in question needs to be placed after the word "man" and not "wife" !!!  Also, the verb in the clause should be "had refused."






Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 30, 2011, 05:23:57 PM
What's this $24.95?

— Charge for domestic abuse.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 30, 2011, 05:46:03 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 30, 2011, 05:23:57 PM
What's this $24.95?

— Charge for domestic abuse.


Well, somebody must pay for it!   ;D

And we were not even watching the station which is usually the source of so much garbled grammar!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 04:59:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 30, 2011, 04:38:07 PM
I can agree with the distress about "they/them" being used as a non-sexual singular pronoun: but such is the politico-grammatical correctness from a society which is almost a matriarchy now!   ;D

I should start by saying that, to my ears, English style reached its peak in the 18th century and has been rolling downhill ever since.

That said, the singular "they" is not, from everything I've read, an imposition from the PC Police, but rather a centuries-long usage that evolved to address an insufficiency of the language: the lack of a generic third-person singular pronoun that refers to people.

Quote
Yesterday local TV news - a fantastic source for bad grammar - made the following statement:

"A Dayton man stabbed his wife to death who prosecutors refused to charge for domestic abuse."   ???   :o   ???   :o

Interesting that the brain readily understands the meaning, despite the (egregious) solecisms. And in fairness, it's easy to see why the talking head used that construction:

* The who/whom distinction has been dying out in spoken English--goodbye, inflections.
* A lengthy relative clause inserted in the "proper" position would have undercut the impact. Better to have divided it into two sentences: "A Dayton man stabbed his wife to death. Prosecutors refused to charge him with domestic abuse." (BTW, should he not be charged with murder instead of domestic abuse?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 05:10:18 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 04:59:31 AM
That said, the singular "they" is not, from everything I've read, an imposition from the PC Police, but rather a centuries-long usage . . .

But is it, really? I expect you've read about it more, and that you have more (and properly substantiating) examples from the literature than appear in the Wikipedia "article." Characters in plays and fiction using sub-par (or outright poor) grammar, is not "usage," but characterization.

My friend, I should really be interested in your bringing forward examples of the sustained, centuries-long usage which would justify this claim.  The examples which I have seen do fully vindicate the view that it's PC imposition.  (Taking it as read that resistance to the Zeitgeist in this, is ultimately futile.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 05:14:51 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 04:59:31 AM
Interesting that the brain readily understands the meaning, despite the (egregious) solecisms.

It is interesting, but isn't redemption. When I was in Petersburg, there were countless occasions where non-Russian-speakers (including myself) would try to make themselves understood as best they might, generally with faltering grammar, the wrong verb (verbs are a particular challenge in Russian) and incorrectly declined nouns.  Yours is a subtle mind, and I know I needen't tell you that the fact that the listener succeeded in understanding what the speaker wished to convey, is a matter entirelty different to grammatic approval.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 05:25:44 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2011, 05:10:18 AM
But is it, really? I expect you've read about it more, and that you have more (and properly substantiating) examples from the literature than appear in the Wikipedia "article." Characters in plays and fiction using sub-par (or outright poor) grammar, is not "usage," but characterization.

I'm talking about spoken English, in which case an accurate characterization would indeed be a reflection of spoken use.

Quote
My friend, I should really be interested in your bringing forward examples of the sustained, centuries-long usage which would justify this claim.  The examples which I have seen do fully vindicate the view that it's PC imposition.  (Taking it as read that resistance to the Zeitgeist in this, is ultimately futile.)[/font]

I'll try to dig up some examples, though I don't have access to a university library atm. As for the PC Police, I sincerely doubt that the form's widespread use in spoken English--across social and educational classes--was somehow initiated and enforced by that particular academic cabal. In my last run-ins with the PC Police, the preferred gender-neutral pronoun was in fact the construction "he or she," not "they," which would have been unacceptable.

And I certainly don't recall the usage as having evolved only recently--not that I jotted down examples back when I was a kid :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 05:28:34 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2011, 05:14:51 AM
It is interesting, but isn't redemption. When I was in Petersburg, there were countless occasions where non-Russian-speakers (including myself) would try to make themselves understood as best they might, generally with faltering grammar, the wrong verb (verbs are a particular challenge in Russian) and incorrectly declined nouns.  Yours is a subtle mind, and I know I needen't tell you that the fact that the listener succeeded in understanding what the speaker wished to convey, is a matter entirelty different to grammatic approval.

Certainly. My interest here is in language "on the ground," not prescriptive academic grammar, which is another matter. Certainly by those standards, which lag behind shifts in spoken English, that newscaster's sentence was abominable. 

Edit: the whole idea of a prescriptive academic grammar raises lots of interesting questions: who, for example, gets to do the prescribing, and why? What are the benefits of adherence and drawbacks of noncompliance?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 05:30:14 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 05:25:44 AM
I'm talking about spoken English, in which case an accurate characterization would indeed be a reflection of spoken use.

Well, happily tape was running in 1815 . . . .

; )

Quote from: Grazioso. . . In my last run-ins with the PC Police, the preferred gender-neutral pronoun was in fact the construction "he or she," not "they," which would have been unacceptable.

Aye, that's a clunker, isn't it? One can understand a speaker lapsing into they as less ummusical.

Quote from: GraziosoAnd I certainly don't recall the usage as having evolved only recently--not that I jotted down examples back when I was a kid :)

Like Brahms's notebook of parallelisms in the works of JS Bach : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 05:30:51 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 05:28:34 AM
Certainly. My interest here is in language "on the ground," not prescriptive academic grammar, which is another matter. Certainly by those standards, which lag behind shifts in spoken English, that newscaster's sentence was abominable. 

Ho capito.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 05:34:19 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2011, 05:30:14 AM
Well, happily tape was running in 1815 . . . .

; )

That's of course the dilemma for linguists. You have to draw inferences from written works in earlier centuries.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 05:36:18 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 05:34:19 AM
That's of course the dilemma for linguists. You have to draw inferences from written works in earlier centuries.

Of course.  It does seem to yield room for tendentious inferences, though.

I appreciate your approach to the question, though; thanks for your part in the discussion!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 05:38:33 AM
Tangentially . . . the history of the development and proliferation of recording technologies has changed life in so many ways, and underscores the fact that, scarcely less Schliemann trying to unlock the riddle of Troy, what we don't know about the past is a vaster pool than what we know.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 06:03:18 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2011, 05:36:18 AM
Of course.  It does seem to yield room for tendentious inferences, though.

I appreciate your approach to the question, though; thanks for your part in the discussion!


True, as does all historical study.

Just to clarify my approach: anyone can, with a little aptitude and effort, learn to conform to a style guide. Not everyone has the need or desire to. The great mass of men--or is that "wo/men"?  :D--communicate just fine without such training and compliance.

More interesting to me are the questions of a) how language functions in practice and b) the disjunctions between descriptive and prescriptive grammars and the attendant socio-political ramifications.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 06:03:49 AM
Of interest, indeed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 31, 2011, 06:49:17 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 04:59:31 AM

* The who/whom distinction has been dying out in spoken English--goodbye, inflections.
* A lengthy relative clause inserted in the "proper" position would have undercut the impact. Better to have divided it into two sentences: "A Dayton man stabbed his wife to death. Prosecutors refused to charge him with domestic abuse." (BTW, should he not be charged with murder instead of domestic abuse?)

That sentence actually needs to be: "Prosecutors had earlier refused to charge him with domestic abuse."  The report had information about a domestic disturbance at the 73-year old couple's house a few weeks earlier.  The past perfect or pluperfect tense would have clarified things immensely...but not completely!

A side note: the station of course played the call that the husband made to 9-11.  "I need the police to come to my house.  I just murdered my wife.  I just couldn't take her mouth any longer."

I am against playing such things, since they serve absolutely no public purpose whatsoever other than massaging the ids of the ghouls, geeks and freaks in the audience.  In this case, the effect was tragicomic.

What were her fatal words? 

In The Agony of Flies by Elias Canetti the author wonders: "And what if there is a word that kills?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on August 31, 2011, 07:11:56 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 31, 2011, 06:49:17 AM
I am against playing such things, since they serve absolutely no public purpose whatsoever other than massaging the ids of the [geeks] in the audience.

I take offence to that unnecessary generalisation. >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on August 31, 2011, 07:20:35 AM
Oh, there are good and deserving geeks, no question.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 31, 2011, 09:46:35 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on August 31, 2011, 07:11:56 AM
I take offence to that unnecessary generalisation. >:(

Okay, erase "geeks" and substitute "schmucks."   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 10:39:43 AM
Karl, you asked for historical examples of the singular they. I don't have ready access to an academic library atm, so I had to rely on Al Gore's fine invention for now. Grain of salt:

http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/sgtheirl.html
http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austhlis.html
http://betterbibles.com/2006/09/10/singular-they-in-english-bibles/

Overviews:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FOB-onlanguage-t.html
http://www.editorscanberra.org/a-singular-use-of-they/



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 31, 2011, 11:07:07 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on August 31, 2011, 10:39:43 AM
Karl, you asked for historical examples of the singular they. I don't have ready access to an academic library atm, so I had to rely on Al Gore's fine invention for now. Grain of salt:

http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/sgtheirl.html
http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austhlis.html
http://betterbibles.com/2006/09/10/singular-they-in-english-bibles/

Overviews:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FOB-onlanguage-t.html
http://www.editorscanberra.org/a-singular-use-of-they/

Thanks for the information!

Consternating for the opponents of using "they" to refer to indefinites was this example:

Somebody must have have shown her the answer, didn't...?

How many people would end that sentence with "he or she" ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 01, 2011, 11:29:43 AM
Read this just now:

QuoteIn the music industry, arguably the worst tragedy that can befall an artist is to die in their prime.

Not wringing my hands, you understand. Just chuckling. Quietly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 01, 2011, 11:49:29 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 01, 2011, 11:29:43 AM
Not wringing my hands, you understand. Just chuckling. Quietly.

I'm sure that they must have been referring to premature greying, and put an I in the place of a Y. An innocent mistake.

;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 01, 2011, 06:15:17 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 01, 2011, 11:29:43 AM
Read this just now:

QuoteIn the music industry, arguably the worst tragedy that can befall an artist is to die in their prime.
Not wringing my hands, you understand. Just chuckling. Quietly.

More synchronicity! 

And concerning the content of the statement: actually, it all depends on the artist!   

Some never have a prime!   8)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 12:55:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 31, 2011, 11:07:07 AM
Consternating for the opponents of using "they" to refer to indefinites was this example:

Somebody must have have shown her the answer, didn't...?

How many people would end that sentence with "he or she" ?

Really, "didn't" is incorrect. It should be "mustn't".


I am fine with "they" for the indefinite. It may be a neologism, but I think it works better than the alternatives. After being confronted with the issue at uni, I finally resolved that "they" is better than "s/he" (how the hell do you say it?), "he or she" (too unwieldy, especially when used more than once in a paragraph), "he" (possible inaccurate, potentially prejudicial) and "ve" (and various other true neologisms, none of which have any English precedent I know of).


Eche of theym sholde ... make theymselfe redy. — Caxton, Sonnes of Aymon (c. 1489)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on September 02, 2011, 01:29:33 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 12:55:37 AM
Really, "didn't" is incorrect. It should be "mustn't".


I hate that work. I never use it. I even refuse to write it in my own post!  :o

It just sounds odd to me. I always feel that there is a more elegant or better sounding way to say that word.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 02, 2011, 01:31:12 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on September 02, 2011, 01:29:33 AM
I always feel that there is a more elegant or better sounding way to say that word.

Like breaking it down to its components?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 01:41:09 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on September 02, 2011, 01:29:33 AM
I hate that work. I never use it. I even refuse to write it in my own post!  :o

It just sounds odd to me. I always feel that there is a more elegant or better sounding way to say that word.

I think it's a word the British find more comfortable to use than the Americans (you're not trying to pronounce the first "t", are you?). Old British proverb: "Mustn't grumble!"

One thing that annoys me is the American use of "tony" as an adjective. It's a man's name, for flip's sake!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 02, 2011, 01:46:14 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 01:41:09 AM
One thing that annoys me is the American use of "tony" as an adjective.

What! Please use it in a sentence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on September 02, 2011, 01:47:37 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 01:41:09 AM
I think it's a word the British find more comfortable to use than the Americans (you're not trying to pronounce the first "t", are you?). Old British proverb: "Mustn't grumble!"

One thing that annoys me is the American use of "tony" as an adjective. It's a man's name, for flip's sake!
I know the pronunciation. Adding the 't' back might help.  ;D

I have never used 'tony' as an adjective. In what context is it used? I can only think of the Tony Awards.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on September 02, 2011, 01:49:05 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on September 02, 2011, 01:31:12 AM
Like breaking it down to its components?
That, using a synonym, or changing the sentence around entirely.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 02:21:18 AM
"Tony" as an adjective seems to mean "classy", "refined" or "upper class". Presumably it is supposed to mean "possessing 'tone' ", i.e. refined tone.

"The Fforbes Hamilton Smythes live in a tony neighborhood."


Although the Onion did say this:
QuoteReport: Adjectives 'Tony,' 'Snarky' Used Only By Media
September 15, 1999 | ISSUE 35•33

BOSTON—According to a report released Monday by the McLuhan Institute For Media Studies, the adjectives "tony" and "snarky" are used exclusively by the media and have not occurred in person-to-person conversation in 36 years. "It is our finding that the most recent occurrence of 'tony' in a non-media context was during a conversation between two socialites at a 1963 New Year's Eve party at New York's Ritz-Carlton Hotel," the report read. "As for 'snarky,' to the best of our knowledge, the word has never been used by a non-media source." The adjectives join "glitterati," "gal pal" and "posh digs" in the pantheon of words and terms existing exclusively in the media.


http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-adjectives-tony-snarky-used-only-by-media,4007/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 02, 2011, 02:29:11 AM
Doesn't sound any worse than some of the Cockney slang I've come across (not in conversation, but while perusing trivia and solving crosswords). Will it make you happier if it was spelt 'toney'? ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on September 02, 2011, 02:36:34 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on September 02, 2011, 02:29:11 AM
Doesn't sound any worse than some of the Cockney slang I've come across (not in conversation, but while perusing trivia and solving crosswords). Will it make you happier if it was spelt 'toney'? ;D
That's a tony post!  :-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 02:42:17 AM

Cockneys get special dispension regarding grammar, because they sound so gosh darn cute. Same with the Irish!

"Top o' the mornin' to ya, darlin'."
"And how does a morning have a 'top', may one ask?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 02, 2011, 03:02:28 AM
Biggles and the Cutesy Cockneys
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 02, 2011, 04:15:41 AM
Biggles goes to the Dogs

"Dash it all, Algernon, I will not have you splitting an infinitive in the members' lounge. And stop sniggering when I say 'member'."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 03, 2011, 05:26:14 AM
There are TV ads hawking some new miracle drug for a disease or syndrome du jour of some sort.

I do not know what the drug supposedly treats, because I focus immediately on the ridiculous pronunciation of the drug's name.

It is called "Humira."

Except it isn't!  One would think it would rhyme with "Elvira."  But it would apparently be silly to assume that!

In every ad, one hears the word pronounced "Hu-may-ra." 

And WHY is it pronounced that way?  Why spell it with an "i" and decide that the "i" will actually be a long "a" sound???

Incompetence?  Bad attitude?  "Dude!  It's just English!  Nobody cares how it's spelled!"   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 03, 2011, 06:56:13 AM
I sometimes get confused by the pronunciation of Jaques Bailly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Bailly). Where I would an expect an I, for instance, he would reveal an A or an E. And it's not because of the 'difficulty' of the words; it's the weird way you guys pronounce.  $:) ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 04, 2011, 05:38:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 03, 2011, 05:26:14 AM
There are TV ads hawking some new miracle drug for a disease or syndrome du jour of some sort.

I do not know what the drug supposedly treats, because I focus immediately on the ridiculous pronunciation of the drug's name.

It is called "Humira."

Except it isn't!  One would think it would rhyme with "Elvira."  But it would apparently be silly to assume that!

In every ad, one hears the word pronounced "Hu-may-ra." 

And WHY is it pronounced that way?  Why spell it with an "i" and decide that the "i" will actually be a long "a" sound???

Incompetence?  Bad attitude?  "Dude!  It's just English!  Nobody cares how it's spelled!"   :o

One would think it would rhyme with "Elveera", which is what it sounds like in the ads: a long "i" diphthong sound.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 04, 2011, 09:39:48 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 04, 2011, 05:38:51 AM
One would think it would rhyme with "Elveera", which is what it sounds like in the ads: a long "i" diphthong sound.

You hear it is "a long i diphthong sound" ?

Maybe they have different ads for different sections of the country?  In either case, not how I would say a newly coined word with that spelling.

Here in Ohio (where the "i" in O-hi-o is a normal long "i" sound) I have never heard "Elveera" for "Elvira" with a long "i", e.g.  the infamous and very pneumatic hostess for cheap horror movies back in the '80's was known as "Elvira" (with a long i).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 04, 2011, 09:42:24 AM
You also hear it thus in the Country Western literature, where your heart will be on fire for Elvira . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 04, 2011, 10:20:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 04, 2011, 09:39:48 AM
You hear it is "a long i diphthong sound" ?

Maybe they have different ads for different sections of the country?  In either case, not how I would say a newly coined word with that spelling.

Here in Ohio (where the "i" in O-hi-o is a normal long "i" sound) I have never heard "Elveera" for "Elvira" with a long "i", e.g.  the infamous and very pneumatic hostess for cheap horror movies back in the '80's was known as "Elvira" (with a long i).

To clarify:

The English name "Elvira" I've always heard with an English long "i," sounded like the word "eye."

The name of that drug in the ads is pronounced with an English "ee" sound, which is pronounced by most speakers as a diphthong instead of a pure vowel. Say "humeera" and "humayra" fast with without trying to clearly articulate the penultimate syllable, and you can hear how close they can sound.

That pronunciation is what I'd expect since it's an invented non-English word, and for such a word, you naturally work off analogues to other languages. In Spanish, Italian, German, Greek (if I'm not mistaken), etc., it would be pronounced akin to the English "ee."



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 04, 2011, 01:47:00 PM
To clarify:

http://www.youtube.com/v/WGyXQJp3XQA
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 04, 2011, 05:21:00 PM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 04, 2011, 10:20:51 AM
To clarify:

The English name "Elvira" I've always heard with an English long "i," sounded like the word "eye."

This.

I pronounce Humira "hyu-mii-ra" (approx.).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 06, 2011, 09:47:53 AM
We have mentioned this problem many moons ago, but it has become more ubiquitous.

Mrs. Cato was watching a TV news show, where some celebrity du jour said: "I graduated coliege in 1996."   :o

As far as I know, a cylinder can be graduated, and the college can graduate a person, but not vice versa!

Where is the word "from" in that sentence? 

Yea, verily, yea, doth it grate the soul!   0:)    Maybe the college should demand its sheepskin back!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 06, 2011, 02:07:40 PM
They say "I graduated college" in Japanese. No "from." Of course with a different language there's a different concept, and the word really means something closer to "complete."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 07, 2011, 10:03:35 AM
Fwiw:

QuoteUsage Note: The verb graduate has denoted the action of conferring an academic degree or diploma since at least 1421. Accordingly, the action of receiving a degree should be expressed in the passive, as in She was graduated from Yale in 1998. This use is still current, if old-fashioned, and is acceptable to 78 percent of the Usage Panel. In general usage, however, it has largely yielded to the much more recent active pattern (first attested in 1807): She graduated from Yale in 1998. Eighty-nine percent of the Panel accepts this use. It has the advantage of ascribing the accomplishment to the student, rather than to the institution, which is usually appropriate in discussions of individual students. When the institution's responsibility is emphasized, however, the older pattern may still be recommended. A sentence such as The university graduated more computer science majors in 1997 than in the entire previous decade stresses the university's accomplishment, say, of its computer science program. On the other hand, the sentence More computer science majors graduated in 1997 than in the entire previous decade implies that the class of 1997 was in some way a remarkable group. · The Usage Panel feels quite differently about the use of graduate to mean "to receive a degree from," as in She graduated Yale in 1998. Seventy-seven percent object to this usage.
--The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 07, 2011, 10:05:34 AM
Interesting that only 77% object to the usage.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2011, 11:22:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 07, 2011, 10:05:34 AM
Interesting that only 77% object to the usage.

The other 23% need to be flogged!   8)

Many thanks to Grazioso for the information!

Today we grumble not so much about a grammar point as about logic.

The Wall Street Journal on September 6, 2011 had a front-page story with the headline:

U.S. Eyes Covert Plan To Counter Iran in Iraq    :o

Prithee, how exactly is this plan any longer "covert" when it is on the front page of a national newspaper?

Now you might think: well, they are just reporting that we have a covert plan to counter Iran in Iraq.  They are not telling us exactly what the plan is.  But (sigh): we read later that "U.S. officials" want to increase "aggressive interdictions" at the border and that Iranian arms smuggling will be specifically targeted, that military special operations forces will be under the CIA, etc.  These same "U.S. officials" of course "declined to provide details."

Huh?   :-X

But this is nothing new!   We have often heard in the media things like: "The government has a secret program designed to blah blah blah etc etc etc."

You idiots, how is any of this a SECRET any more???!!!  Better to say: The government HAD a secret program which we are now splattering over the front page!

Thank you!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 07, 2011, 11:37:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 07, 2011, 11:22:27 AM
The other 23% need to be flogged!   8)

Many thanks to Grazioso for the information!

Today we grumble not so much about a grammar point as about logic.

The Wall Street Journal on September 6, 2011 had a front-page story with the headline:

U.S. Eyes Covert Plan To Counter Iran in Iraq    :o

Prithee, how exactly is this plan any longer "covert" when it is on the front page of a national newspaper?

Now you might think: well, they are just reporting that we have a covert plan to counter Iran in Iraq.  They are not telling us exactly what the plan is.  But (sigh): we read later that "U.S. officials" want to increase "aggressive interdictions" at the border and that Iranian arms smuggling will be specifically targeted, that military special operations forces will be under the CIA, etc.  These same "U.S. officials" of course "declined to provide details."

Huh?   :-X

But this is nothing new!   We have often heard in the media things like: "The government has a secret program designed to blah blah blah etc etc etc."

You idiots, how is any of this a SECRET any more???!!!  Better to say: The government HAD a secret program which we are now splattering over the front page!

Thank you!   0:)

I guess the mention of "covert" was supposed to entice readers with the promise of a daring tale of James Bond-esque adventure in the Middle East. Whatever sells papers...sigh. I would have titled the article "Giant Boobs." What percentage of the Usage Panel would approve?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2011, 12:24:25 PM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 07, 2011, 11:37:18 AM
I guess the mention of "covert" was supposed to entice readers with the promise of a daring tale of James Bond-esque adventure in the Middle East. Whatever sells papers...sigh. I would have titled the article "Giant Boobs." What percentage of the Usage Panel would approve?

I believe the giant boobs wrote the headline, and other giant boobs approved it. $:)

Do you know H. L. Mencken's coinage: the booboisie ?   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 08, 2011, 11:11:37 AM
Looking for junk grammar on Amazon — even the official copy — is like shooting fish in a barrel, you might say:

QuoteTheir catalogue of country-tinged songs have found their way to the upper reaches of the charts . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 08, 2011, 05:47:36 PM

Their grammar are stupid!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 08, 2011, 06:20:55 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 08, 2011, 05:47:36 PM
Their grammar are stupid!

And so's their grampa!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 09, 2011, 03:28:20 AM
Okay kiddies!  Another howler from local Columbus news on the teevee!

The set-up: you see a shot of the skyline around New York City's Central Park.  Intrepid reporter Blondie Bubblegumbrain intones a news item telling of an increased terror threat because of the 10th anniversary of 9-11.

With the screen still showing the skyline around Central Park, she then says: "As you can see, New York is very tense!"  ???

After drying our tears from laughing, my wife and I then had to admit: maybe she was right!   :o

Those buildings maybe were rigid with fear!    0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 09, 2011, 03:58:40 AM
Mercy!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 09, 2011, 05:28:40 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 09, 2011, 03:28:20 AM
Okay kiddies!  Another howler from local Columbus news on the teevee!

The set-up: you see a shot of the skyline around New York City's Central Park.  Intrepid reporter Blondie Bubblegumbrain intones a news item telling of an increased terror threat because of the 10th anniversary of 9-11.

With the screen still showing the skyline around Central Park, she then says: "As you can see, New York is very tense!"  ???

After drying our tears from laughing, my wife and I then had to admit: maybe she was right!   :o

Those buildings maybe were rigid with fear!    0:)

Just take her word for it. She's on TV. It must be true.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 09, 2011, 05:45:27 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 09, 2011, 05:28:40 AM
Just take her word for it. She's on TV. It must be true.

Why, yes, I had forgotten that!   ;D

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 09, 2011, 03:58:40 AM
Mercy!

Aye, mercy indeed!  Many aspects of modern life are now unwittingly self-satirizing: to mock them, you just quote them!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 09, 2011, 06:34:19 AM
Gaaaahd! I LITERALLY could NOT beLIEVE my EYES!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 12, 2011, 05:52:58 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 09, 2011, 06:34:19 AM
Gaaaahd! I LITERALLY could NOT beLIEVE my EYES!

;D  On an episode of The Big Bang Theory, a not-very-bright boyfriend of "Penny" says something "I literally got hit a million times."

To which claim Sheldon the Physicist replies skeptically: "Literally?  Li-te-ral-ly?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 12, 2011, 06:10:16 AM
Why is Penny within quotes? :-\ I literally cannot understand that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 12, 2011, 06:13:53 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on September 12, 2011, 06:10:16 AM
Why is Penny within quotes? :-\ I literally cannot understand that.
Because "Penny" is not a real person but a character within a play.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 12, 2011, 06:20:06 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 12, 2011, 06:13:53 AM
Because "Penny" is not a real person but a character within a play.

Aha! And what about Sheldon the Physicist? 

A case of the grumbler being grumbled about? :D ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 06:24:24 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 12, 2011, 06:13:53 AM
Because "Penny" is not a real person but a character within a play.

So is Hamlet, but we don't usually use quotation marks to denote fictional characters.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 12, 2011, 06:25:56 AM
Emphasis, perhaps?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 06:31:58 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 12, 2011, 06:25:56 AM
Emphasis, perhaps?

She deserves emphasis  :o

(http://wiki.the-big-bang-theory.com/images/thumb/2/2d/Kaley-Cuoco.jpg/200px-Kaley-Cuoco.jpg)

(Look at Peter Cushing examining the evidence.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 12, 2011, 07:47:33 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 06:31:58 AM
She deserves emphasis  :o

(http://wiki.the-big-bang-theory.com/images/thumb/2/2d/Kaley-Cuoco.jpg/200px-Kaley-Cuoco.jpg)

(Look at Peter Cushing examining the evidence.)

And what oomphatic evidence!   ;D

(Apologies to any ladies here at GMG, but admiring God's handiwork is a form of praise to the Divine!   0:)   )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 10:01:16 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 12, 2011, 06:25:56 AM
Emphasis, perhaps?

That would call for italics.

Quote from: Cato on September 12, 2011, 07:47:33 AM
And what oomphatic evidence!   ;D

And what oomphatic evidence!   ;D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 12, 2011, 10:03:01 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 10:01:16 AM
That would call for italics.

Says "you"! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 10:09:59 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 12, 2011, 10:03:01 AM
Says "you"! ; )

Thus saith the "style guides." But, either way, it's my language, and I'll do what I want with it  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 12, 2011, 10:13:27 AM
Aye, I was (not to labor the point) having a go at being funny.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 10:19:32 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 12, 2011, 10:13:27 AM
Aye, I was (not to labor the point) having a go at being funny.

I know  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 12, 2011, 10:50:42 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 10:19:32 AM
I know  :)

And off-topic, Basil Rathbone was the ultimate Sherlock Holmes!

Although Jeremy Brett comes very close!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 11:49:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 12, 2011, 10:50:42 AM
And off-topic, Basil Rathbone was the ultimate Sherlock Holmes!

Although Jeremy Brett comes very close!

If nothing else, the gaunt Cushing, with his pronounced zygomatic arches, deep-set eyes, and aquiline nose, comes very close to the physical descriptions of the character.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 12, 2011, 12:05:33 PM
I like Basil Rathbone as Holmes. But cannot bear Nigel Bruce as Watson.

Let the flaming begin . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 12, 2011, 03:52:26 PM
Quote from: Grazioso on September 12, 2011, 11:49:33 AM
If nothing else, the gaunt Cushing, with his pronounced zygomatic arches, deep-set eyes, and aquiline nose, comes very close to the physical descriptions of the character.

Peter Cushing is indeed another good one, but in my mind Basil Rathbone as Holmes is parallel with Sean Connery as James Bond.  Imprinting might be involved.

And to return to a previous topic:

(http://thetvlegion.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/kaley_cuoco.jpg)

"Our boss was a penny pincher, until Penny sued him for sexual harassment!"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 12, 2011, 06:01:38 PM
I just saw a really doubleplusdumb TV commercial for Mercedes-Benz, wherein a computer-animated car is chained to rocks.  The car then accelerates and the doors are torn off.

A voice then intones something about the new Mercedes having... "less doors."  :o    :o     :o    :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 12, 2011, 07:49:36 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 12, 2011, 07:47:33 AM
And what oomphatic evidence!   ;D

(Apologies to any ladies here at GMG, but admiring God's handiwork is a form of praise to the Divine!   0:)   )

So how about apologising to the atheists, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 13, 2011, 04:54:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 12, 2011, 06:01:38 PM
I just saw a really doubleplusdumb TV commercial for Mercedes-Benz, wherein a computer-animated car is chained to rocks.  The car then accelerates and the doors are torn off.

A voice then intones something about the new Mercedes having... "less doors."  :o    :o     :o    :o

I'm sorry, did you say something? I was looking at this:

(http://thetvlegion.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/kaley_cuoco.jpg)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on September 13, 2011, 05:03:11 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 12, 2011, 07:49:36 PM
So how about apologising to the atheists, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

But, they cannot possibly expect any credit! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 13, 2011, 08:28:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 13, 2011, 05:03:11 AM
But, they cannot possibly expect any credit! ; )

Amen!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 26, 2011, 10:18:56 AM
So what do you do with apostrophes is you're talking about a proper noun that already has a possessive?

I tried the new fries at Wendy's is easy, but if it were to be rearranged, I tried Wendy's' new fries looks odd. Take out the second apostrophe and I could very well be talking about some girl named Wendy, and not the restaurant.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 26, 2011, 10:29:27 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 26, 2011, 10:18:56 AM
So what do you do with apostrophes is you're talking about a proper noun that already has a possessive?

I tried the new fries at Wendy's is easy, but if it were to be rearranged, I tried Wendy's' new fries looks odd. Take out the second apostrophe and I could very well be talking about some girl named Wendy, and not the restaurant.

Why do you want to complicate mattes? Just use the first example. ;D

But if you insist on using the second, do as programmers are wont to do and use an escape character! :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 26, 2011, 10:51:36 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 26, 2011, 10:18:56 AM
So what do you do with apostrophes is you're talking about a proper noun that already has a possessive?

I tried the new fries at Wendy's is easy, but if it were to be rearranged, I tried Wendy's' new fries looks odd. Take out the second apostrophe and I could very well be talking about some girl named Wendy, and not the restaurant.

As advised by Opus 106 you could simply not say the second example.

However, if you insisted on the second, just keep it "Wendy's."  The fictional girl running the restaurant would be the one making and temporarily possessing the French fries.

Using "Wendy's" by itself assumes that one knows that "she" owns a restaurant.  e.g. I like to eat at Wendy's (restaurant). 

By placing a food item in the sentence, the word "restaurant" drops out of the understanding.

Interesting: here in Columbus the company is experimenting with new designs for the restaurants, and have built several prototypes for future remodeling and expansion.  They have computerized pop machines from Coca-Cola, allowing one to create drinks not normally available.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on September 26, 2011, 10:52:00 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 26, 2011, 10:18:56 AM
So what do you do with apostrophes is you're talking about a proper noun that already has a possessive?

I tried the new fries at Wendy's is easy, but if it were to be rearranged, I tried Wendy's' new fries looks odd. Take out the second apostrophe and I could very well be talking about some girl named Wendy, and not the restaurant.

None of my style guides address this. Barring rephrasing, as in your initial example, I would go with "I tried Wendy's new fries." Context should make it clear. Doubling the apostrophe would be confusing and odd. The purpose of writing is to communicate, not to obfuscate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 26, 2011, 11:19:28 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 26, 2011, 10:51:36 AM
As advised by Opus 106 you could simply not say the second example.

Oh, of course. I just wanted to know if there was any actual rule for it. I guess there isn't.

QuoteInteresting: here in Columbus the company is experimenting with new designs for the restaurants, and have built several prototypes for future remodeling and expansion.  They have computerized pop machines from Coca-Cola, allowing one to create drinks not normally available.

I've seen and tried this an an El Pollo Loco. It's very cool. If you like choosing between Vanilla Coke, Cherry Coke, and all that you'll love it because it's like that for pretty much every soda in the Coke family. A void in my beverage life has been filled with Raspberry Sprite.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 27, 2011, 02:09:42 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 26, 2011, 10:51:36 AM
Interesting: here in Columbus the company is experimenting with new designs for the restaurants, and have built several prototypes for future remodeling and expansion.  They have computerized pop machines from Coca-Cola, allowing one to create drinks not normally available.
Hmmm, replicating the soda fountains of our youth, where a dime would get you a delicious chocolate-cherry coke, or a vanilla-strawberry phosphate, or any other bubbly concoction your little heart might desire?  (Minus the ambiance, of course.  Sigh.  I miss the ambiance.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 01, 2011, 05:22:04 PM
From Toucan's topic on Berlioz and Elitism in Classical Music, part of a translation of an essay by the composer:

QuoteMusic is at once a sentiment and a science; it requires from he who cultivates it, interpreter or composer, natural inspiration and knowledge that may be acquired only after long study and profound meditations.

Ouch!   $:)

"...from him who cultivates it..."

This reminds me of a mistake heard in English: e.g. "The teacher says: I will expect an apology from whomever broke the window."

Yes, it sounds - sort of - right, but no.  This is called "attraction."  Because of the missing antecedent, "from" attracts "whomever" into the wrong case.

"Whomever" is an object form and cannot be a subject for "broke."

$:)   "I will expect an apology from the person who broke the window."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 02, 2011, 08:17:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 01, 2011, 05:22:04 PM
From Toucan's topic on Berlioz and Elitism in Classical Music, part of a translation of an essay by the composer:

Ouch!   $:)

"...from him who cultivates it..."

This reminds me of a mistake heard in English: e.g. "The teacher says: I will expect an apology from whomever broke the window."

Yes, it sounds - sort of - right, but no.  This is called "attraction."  Because of the missing antecedent, "from" attracts "whomever" into the wrong case.

"Whomever" is an object form and cannot be a subject for "broke."

$:)   "I will expect an apology from the person who broke the window."
Think again, Cato..."from he who cultivates" is the same as "from whoever broke the window."  In these cases "he" and "whoever" are the subjects of the clause which is the object of the proposition. But I think you're right to simply avoid the issue with plain speech: "expect an apology from whoever broke the window" and "music requires both inspiration and knowledge cultivated by study and thoughtfulness."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 02, 2011, 02:32:13 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 02, 2011, 08:17:36 AM
Think again, Cato..."from he who cultivates" is the same as "from whoever broke the window."  In these cases "he" and "whoever" are the subjects of the clause which is the object of the proposition. But I think you're right to simply avoid the issue with plain speech: "expect an apology from whoever broke the window" and "music requires both inspiration and knowledge cultivated by study and thoughtfulness."

No, that still means that the antecedent for "who" would be the Nominative "he" and making it the object of "from."  "He" can only be a Subject: where then is its verb?  "Who" is the subject for "cultivates." 

You are probably thinking of "He who" sayings, which can indeed begin a sentence as a replacement for "whoever."  But the phrase should not be used here because of the preposition "from."

On an unrelated topic, not specifically grammatical but musical and linguistic: in my local Catholic Church this morning, we were treated to some very bad music for a new translation of the basic parts of the Mass.

Some liturgical "composer" named "LeBlanc" committed some monstrous crimes against syllabification, including triplets with 2 of the three notes violating the natural stress of the word: plus, the two syllables had long-vowels.  The result was clumsy to say the least!

But wait!   :D

The worst was a half-note on the "-ed" of a verb!!!   :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 03, 2011, 11:32:17 AM
It should be "from he who cultivates it." The nominative form is used because "he" functions as the subject of the clause, regardless of the clause itself being an object of the preposition.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 03, 2011, 11:46:58 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on October 03, 2011, 11:32:17 AM
It should be "from he who cultivates it." The nominative form is used because "he" functions as the subject of the clause, regardless of the clause itself being an object of the preposition.
[/b]

???

See my previous explanation.

e.g.

"The gift is from..."

a. he
b. his
c. him

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on October 03, 2011, 07:32:15 PM
And him cultivated it very nicely.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 04, 2011, 04:34:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 03, 2011, 11:46:58 AM
[/b]

???

See my previous explanation.

e.g.

"The gift is from..."

a. he
b. his
c. him

That example functions differently. "The gift is from him" is standard because the pronoun is functioning exclusively as the object of the preposition. "from he who cultivates it" is standard because the pronoun is functioning as the subject of the clause following the preposition.

[from him]
[from {he who cultivates it}]

Function within the clause dictates the case.

Quote from: The Six on October 03, 2011, 07:32:15 PM
And him cultivated it very nicely.

Word!  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 04, 2011, 12:53:40 PM
Quote from: Daffy DuckPronoun trouble.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 05, 2011, 04:22:11 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on October 04, 2011, 04:34:24 AM
That example functions differently. "The gift is from him" is standard because the pronoun is functioning exclusively as the object of the preposition. "from he who cultivates it" is standard because the pronoun is functioning as the subject of the clause following the preposition.

[from him]
[from {he who cultivates it}]

Function within the clause dictates the case.

Word!  :)

No, you still do not understand.

"From" needs an object!

The antecedent for "who"  comes from the Object of the preposition "From."

"He" cannot be the object of a preposition: it is only for subjects.  "Who" is the subject for "cultivates."

Therefore: "...from him who cultivates it." is correct.

Trust me, and the English teachers I consulted - just to make sure, despite my background in 4 languages - at a teachers' convention during the last two days. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 05, 2011, 04:28:49 AM
Teachers schmeachers! "He" is not the object of the preposition. "He who cultivates it" is the object, within which the pronoun declines nominitively. Case dismissed.  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 05, 2011, 05:10:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 05, 2011, 04:22:11 AM
No, you still do not understand.

"From" needs an object!

The antecedent for "who"  comes from the Object of the preposition "From."

"He" cannot be the object of a preposition: it is only for subjects.  "Who" is the subject for "cultivates."

Therefore: "...from him who cultivates it." is correct.

Trust me, and the English teachers I consulted - just to make sure, despite my background in 4 languages - at a teachers' convention during the last two days.

I do understand exactly what you're saying; I'm just disagreeing with it :)

Quote from: chasmaniac on October 05, 2011, 04:28:49 AM
Teachers schmeachers! "He" is not the object of the preposition. "He who cultivates it" is the object, within which the pronoun declines nominitively. Case dismissed.  :P

Exactly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 05, 2011, 05:28:19 AM
We need to consult Ornette Coleman!

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5148fX235sL._SL500_AA300_.jpg)  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 05, 2011, 05:28:39 AM
Well, I ignored the oddity from the previous post, which distorted my example (The gift is from him) into making "him" a subject for "cultivates."

Allow me to quote:
QuoteFunction within the clause dictates the case.

You are quite right, so let us follow that rule.

"From" is not part of the relative clause: within its part of the sentence, it is a preposition needing an object: "him" in this case.

Its function as a preposition generates the only form possible: him.

Within the relative clause the verb generates the form "who."  It does not generate a "he."

I have already explained that "he who" cannot be used here: it is an indefinite expression which can be used at the beginning of a sentence, but not here.

Q.E.D.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 05, 2011, 05:39:36 AM
 :D Ah, good times!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 05, 2011, 06:55:15 AM
Perhaps this burning controversy can be settled by agreeing that both are correct, depending upon how we choose to think of the clause.  Is "he who picks grammatical nits" the clause which itself is the object of "from," or is "who picks grammatical nits" a clause modifying "him" which is the object of the preposition? Some of us read it as the former, and some as the latter.

More cowbell!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 05, 2011, 08:08:23 AM
That solution can work for things e.g. "Do you know who broke the window?"

"Who broke the window" is a direct object of "know,", and "who" is an interrogative (not relative) pronoun here.  With our other sentence and its preposition "from" we understand "who" as referring to the object of "from," i.e. him.

Years ago a very bright student of mine once asked: "Can you interpret 'who' as a relative pronoun with an understood antecedent?"   :o

i.e.  "Do you know (the person) who broke the window?"

Wow!     0:)     Yes, I suppose you could understand it that way. 

I should mention that this student is now a Ph.D. in Computational Linguistics at Princeton (a real Professor Higgins!) and the last I heard, was working on programs for computers to understand languages.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2011, 08:14:37 AM
Quote from: chasmaniac on October 05, 2011, 04:28:49 AM
Teachers schmeachers! "He" is not the object of the preposition. "He who cultivates it" is the object, within which the pronoun declines nominitively. Case dismissed.  :P

Erm, no. "He" is indeed the (mis-declined) object; "who cultivates it" is a subordinate clause modifying (what should be) the pronoun "him."

From him. From whom? From him who cultivates it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2011, 08:15:42 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 05, 2011, 08:08:23 AM
That solution can work for things e.g. "Do you know who broke the window?"

I know him who broke the window.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 05, 2011, 08:35:20 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 05, 2011, 08:14:37 AM
Erm, no. "He" is indeed the (mis-declined) object; "who cultivates it" is a subordinate clause modifying (what should be) the pronoun "him."

From him. From whom? From him who cultivates it.


You're the sort what cause unrest.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2011, 08:36:52 AM
God created me in part to serve as a disruptor; I accept that . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 05, 2011, 08:50:23 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 05, 2011, 08:14:37 AM
Erm, no. "He" is indeed the (mis-declined) object; "who cultivates it" is a subordinate clause modifying (what should be) the pronoun "him."

From him. From whom? From him who cultivates it.


This much I'll give you: "from" calls powerfully for the dative. Yes, I feel its shrill demand! Granting it, however, leaves us with subject and verb misaligned, thus: "[him] cultivates it". Sumfin's gotta give. Who cultivates it? He does.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2011, 09:21:08 AM
Quote from: chasmaniac on October 05, 2011, 08:50:23 AM
Who cultivates it? He does.

He does, indeed, and I know him. For that matter, I know him whom he knows, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 05, 2011, 09:56:34 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 05, 2011, 08:36:52 AM
God created me in part to serve as a disruptor; I accept that . . . .

Amen!   0:)

Chasmaniac wrote:
Quote
Granting it, however, leaves us with subject and verb misaligned, thus: "[him] cultivates it". Sumfin's gotta give. Who cultivates it? He does.

It does no such thing, since you are now mixing interrogative pronouns with relative pronouns.  See the earlier example for an explanation.

One more example of a common "from" - and - "who(m)" problem:

"Who'd ya get a present from?"  ("Whooja" is actually more likely!   $:) )

Your English teacher taught you not to end sentences with prepositions (although there are limits to that, e.g. the infamous "to put up with").

Of course, the very proper "From whom did you receive a present?" which corrects the "who" error, is obsolescent, if not obsolete.

The result is a population increasingly unclear and even achingly, frustratingly vague in their language, when distinctions like who/whom die away.

I mentioned my attendance at a convention of teachers: one expert commented that in 1960, studies show that the average vocabulary of a graduating American high-school senior was c. 40,000-50,000 words.    :o    ???

In 1994, the surveys showed a 50% drop, which was attributed to the decline of reading, and to a decline in the quality of what was read.

All of these surveys, estimates, etc. vary widely.  In my experience, an A+ high-school senior is more likely to be in the area of 10,000 words, with a third of that being his everyday vocabulary.    Trim away vocabulary as you descend the ladder of grades.

What I can verify via my c. 40-year career is the unwillingness of present-day students to open a dictionary to discover what a word means, and the lack of a habit of reading among an increasing majority.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 05, 2011, 10:09:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 05, 2011, 09:56:34 AM
What I can verify via my c. 40-year career is the unwillingness of present-day students to open a dictionary to discover what a word means, and the lack of a habit of reading among an increasing majority.

Ours is a culture of instant gratification and ever-decreasing attention spans. Why read or educate yourself when it takes work? After all, you could be texting while watching Jersey Shore or tweeting on the Net while watching YouTube videos.

Along with TV and the Internet, spell checkers are another easily abused technology contributing to reduced literacy. Bear/bare, its/it's... "But, teacher, the spell checker said it was ok!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 05, 2011, 10:59:50 AM
Quote from: Grazioso on October 05, 2011, 10:09:39 AM
Ours is a culture of instant gratification and ever-decreasing attention spans. Why read or educate yourself when it takes work? After all, you could be texting while watching Jersey Shore or tweeting on the Net while watching YouTube videos.

Along with TV and the Internet, spell checkers are another easily abused technology contributing to reduced literacy. Bear/bare, its/it's... "But, teacher, the spell checker said it was ok!"

Amen!   0:)

I tell parents that practically everything we stand for in the schools is attacked and undone by our kulcher right now.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 05, 2011, 11:48:54 AM
(* sigh *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 08, 2011, 08:29:26 AM
What are the opinions on the relative merits of the following?

As someone, myself, who is . . . .

As someone, myself, who am . . . .


Setting aside the "solution" of recasting the sentence ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 08, 2011, 10:28:00 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 08, 2011, 08:29:26 AM
What are the opinions on the relative merits of the following?

As someone, myself, who is . . . .

As someone, myself, who am . . . .


Setting aside the "solution" of recasting the sentence ; )

"someone" = "one", which yields "is"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 08, 2011, 10:47:49 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 08, 2011, 08:29:26 AM
What are the opinions on the relative merits of the following?

As someone, myself, who is . . . .

As someone, myself, who am . . . .


Setting aside the "solution" of recasting the sentence ; )

Recast, recast!

Barring that, the first option: "As someone [nonessential intensifier] who is..."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 08, 2011, 02:05:39 PM
Quote from: Grazioso on October 08, 2011, 10:47:49 AM
Recast, recast!

Barring that, the first option: "As someone [nonessential intensifier] who is..."
be

Yes, indeed!  "As I myself..." would be fine, but "someone" intensified by "myself"...bells go off!   $:)

What is the entire sentence?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 09, 2011, 04:50:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 08, 2011, 02:05:39 PM
be

Yes, indeed!  "As I myself..." would be fine, but "someone" intensified by "myself"...bells go off!   $:)

What is the entire sentence?

You get the cognitive dissonance of

"As someone who is" clashing with "I, who am"

What's with this modernist language, Karl?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Todd on October 09, 2011, 06:46:10 PM
This is not a regular thread for me, but I could think of no better place to post the below (though it may have been posted before):


(http://cdn.thegloss.com/files/2011/09/jfk.jpg)



Carry on.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 09, 2011, 06:55:55 PM
Quote from: Todd on October 09, 2011, 06:46:10 PM
This is not a regular thread for me, but I could think of no better place to post the below (though it may have been posted before):


(http://cdn.thegloss.com/files/2011/09/jfk.jpg)



Carry on.

Precisely!  Three cheers and a "Huzzah!" for The Oxford Comma!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: karlhenning on October 11, 2011, 04:33:41 AM
"Stalin was nothing in a tight sweater!" ~ Mo Rocca
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 11, 2011, 05:23:46 AM
Quote from: Todd on October 09, 2011, 06:46:10 PM
This is not a regular thread for me, but I could think of no better place to post the below (though it may have been posted before):


(http://cdn.thegloss.com/files/2011/09/jfk.jpg)



Carry on.

Nice. Only barbarians omit the final comma in a series.

(http://in-this-economy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/wez-road-warrior.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 11, 2011, 05:37:59 AM
Although some barbarians would simply modify the sentence to make it unambiguous even without the comma. 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 11, 2011, 05:46:09 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on October 11, 2011, 05:37:59 AM
Although some barbarians would simply modify the sentence to make it unambiguous even without the comma. 0:)

Fixed:

"We invited JFK and Stalin; we also invited strippers because JFK and Stalin always fall off the pole."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 11, 2011, 04:35:24 PM
Quote from: Grazioso on October 11, 2011, 05:46:09 AM
Fixed:

"We invited JFK and Stalin; we also invited strippers because JFK and Stalin always fall off the pole."

"I've heard of falling off the wagon: I thought maybe only Santa Claus could fall off the pole!"

(http://www.davidstuff.com/general/wcfields1.jpg)

"Fall off the pole?    $:)    There's another joke in there somewhere!"   0:)  Which we will avoid!



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 12, 2011, 06:49:42 AM
Grammar is not involved in our grumble today, but rather the ridiculousness of advertising.

A local shopping area has both a McDonald's "restaurant" and Kentucky Fried Chicken sharing an area.

The Colonel's descendants placed a banner on a light pole located at the edge of the McDonald's parking lot, so that the banner can face all of the traffic going into the "Drive-Through" lane.

The banner says: "POPCORN CHICKEN!  (Because chicken shouldn't come in nuggets!)"

The last part refers to McDonald's Chicken McNuggets.

So now you know!  Chicken should not come in nuggets, it should be like.....P :o PC :o RN!!!

That makes more sense, doesn't it?   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on October 12, 2011, 07:11:17 AM
It's a poorly-worded and executed campaign, but the point they're trying to make is that their "popcorn" is 100 percent white meat, straight from the chicken breast, while the nuggets come from no part of the chicken in particular and are just a bunch of extra parts pounded together.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Grazioso on October 12, 2011, 09:52:09 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 12, 2011, 06:49:42 AM
Grammar is not involved in our grumble today, but rather the ridiculousness of advertising.

A local shopping area has both a McDonald's "restaurant" and Kentucky Fried Chicken sharing an area.

The Colonel's descendants placed a banner on a light pole located at the edge of the McDonald's parking lot, so that the banner can face all of the traffic going into the "Drive-Through" lane.

The banner says: "POPCORN CHICKEN!  (Because chicken shouldn't come in nuggets!)"

The last part refers to McDonald's Chicken McNuggets.

So now you know!  Chicken should not come in nuggets, it should be like.....P :o PC :o RN!!!

That makes more sense, doesn't it?   0:)

Someone should open a Chinese restaurant next door to them both and have the traditional chickens hanging in the window. The sign would read "Chicken chicken!" :)

(http://img2.photographersdirect.com/img/20281/wm/pd1991794.jpg)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 13, 2011, 09:21:31 AM
Hey, experts!

Or should I say, Hwæt!, in this rarefied abode?

Is it OK to translate "beim schlafengehen" as beddybyes?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 14, 2011, 04:05:26 PM
Don't know how to put a picture here without joining a swingers' club or something, so here's a link: http://www.thestar.com/news/fixer/article/1070237--the-fixer-parking-signs-a-comedy-of-errors?bn=1 (http://www.thestar.com/news/fixer/article/1070237--the-fixer-parking-signs-a-comedy-of-errors?bn=1)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 14, 2011, 06:08:09 PM
Quote from: chasmaniac on October 13, 2011, 09:21:31 AM
Hey, experts!

Or should I say, Hwæt!, in this rarefied abode?

Is it OK to translate "beim schlafengehen" as beddybyes?

"While going to bed" works as a translation too! 

I have never thought about the word "beddybye" before, but now, since you have asked, I like the hyphenated spelling "beddy-bye."  It parallels "good-bye."

Say your beddy-byes to Grandma and Grandpa.  But if you do not like the hyphen, there is support for dropping it and separating the words.

Some people might add an apostrophe, "Beddy-bye's," like those Canadian sign-makers!  (Thanks for the link!)

But no, not necessary! 

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 15, 2011, 02:55:42 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 14, 2011, 06:08:09 PM
Some people might add an apostrophe, "Beddy-bye's," like those Canadian sign-makers!

:D

Must be my inner Angle, but I have a soft spot for compounds! "Beddy-byes" works though.

Toodle pip!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 15, 2011, 06:38:24 AM
Quote from: chasmaniac on October 14, 2011, 04:05:26 PM
Don't know how to put a picture here without joining a swingers' club or something, so here's a link: http://www.thestar.com/news/fixer/article/1070237--the-fixer-parking-signs-a-comedy-of-errors?bn=1 (http://www.thestar.com/news/fixer/article/1070237--the-fixer-parking-signs-a-comedy-of-errors?bn=1)

Right-click the image, select "copy image location," then click the image button on the GMG message menu (the one below the I) and paste the copied image location between the bracket sets.  Like this (quote this post to see how it's done):

(http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/cc/4e/4e3ab1634c95b0d96dbac6d0067f.jpeg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on October 15, 2011, 09:40:45 AM
(http://www.23hq.com/alexander/photo/2791623/large?signature=603+1200457865+BA2286A27E3935960FC1DB67E281B4ECDA157361)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on October 17, 2011, 03:07:51 PM
I'm having a grammar grumble. Which is correct?

"How good a school can it be if its students can't write or spell?" or

"How good of a school can it be if its students can't write or spell?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 17, 2011, 04:12:22 PM
Quote from: Jay F on October 17, 2011, 03:07:51 PM
I'm having a grammar grumble. Which is correct?

"How good a school can it be if its students can't write or spell?" or

"How good of a school can it be if its students can't write or spell?"

Very interesting question, Jay F!

Here is what I found at Dictionary.com:
Quote

Of  is sometimes added to phrases beginning with the adverb "how"  or "too"  followed by a descriptive adjective: How long of a drive will it be? It's too hot of a day for tennis.  This construction is probably modeled on that in which "how"  or "too"  is followed by "much,"  an unquestionably standard use in all varieties of speech and writing: How much of a problem will that cause the government?  There was too much of an uproar for the speaker to be heard.  The use of of with descriptive adjectives after "how"  or "too"  is largely restricted to informal speech. It occurs occasionally in informal writing and written representations of speech.

I would have assumed just the opposite, i.e. that the lack of "of" was informal!

An online debate about the issue had people grudgingly accepting the elimination of "of" by the purists, but also saying that "how good of" still sounded better.

In defense of the "of," one can understand its presence from the idea that one of the schools is being examined now, one whose students cannot write or spell.

So, both versions are accepted, but "how good a school" is seen as preferable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on October 19, 2011, 08:32:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 17, 2011, 04:12:22 PM
Very interesting question, Jay F!

Here is what I found at Dictionary.com:
I would have assumed just the opposite, i.e. that the lack of "of" was informal!

An online debate about the issue had people grudgingly accepting the elimination of "of" by the purists, but also saying that "how good of" still sounded better.

In defense of the "of," one can understand its presence from the idea that one of the schools is being examined now, one whose students cannot write or spell.

So, both versions are accepted, but "how good a school" is seen as preferable.
It came up in conversation yesterday, and while I prefer to leave out the "of," I wasn't sure it was incorrect to leave it in.

Thanks, Cato.
Title: An Error Of Attraction
Post by: Cato on November 01, 2011, 10:48:40 AM
From a New York Times business news website:

"Federal regulators have discovered that hundreds of millions of dollars in customer money has gone missing from MF Global in recent days, prompting an investigation into the brokerage firm."

So are you wondering, "what is Cato grumbling about now?"   :o

Title: Re: An Error Of Attraction
Post by: Mn Dave on November 01, 2011, 10:54:43 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 01, 2011, 10:48:40 AM
From a New York Times business news website:

"Federal regulators have discovered that hundreds of millions of dollars in customer money has gone missing from MF Global in recent days, prompting an investigation into the brokerage firm."

So are you wondering, "what is Cato grumbling about now?"   :o

Gone missing? :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on November 01, 2011, 10:58:21 AM
Quote from: Mn Dave on November 01, 2011, 10:54:43 AM
Gone missing? :)

Have they?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on November 01, 2011, 11:00:53 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 01, 2011, 10:48:40 AM
So are you wondering, "what is Cato grumbling about now?"   :o

Just curious: is it okay to leave out the question mark at the end of that (such a) sentence?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mn Dave on November 01, 2011, 11:01:19 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on November 01, 2011, 10:58:21 AM
Have they?

Oh, yeah. That too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on November 01, 2011, 11:51:55 AM
Is this on the test?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 01, 2011, 04:01:01 PM
Quote from: Opus106 on November 01, 2011, 10:58:21 AM
Have they?

An A+ to you!

The mistake is called "attraction."  Because the subject is so far away from the verb, and because the singular "money" is right next door to the verb, it is "attracted" into the singular.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 02, 2011, 04:40:48 AM
Fatal attraction . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 17, 2011, 11:30:16 AM
Snuck up on you, did it?

Sneak up on you, did it?


Both right, in different ways?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on November 17, 2011, 12:25:06 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 17, 2011, 11:30:16 AM
Snuck up on you, did it?

Sneak up on you, did it?


Both right, in different ways?
Snuck, though common in today's vernacular, always grates on my ear.  Sneaked is the proper past tense and consistent with the English language's historical trend toward grammatical simplicity.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on November 17, 2011, 12:28:40 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on November 17, 2011, 12:25:06 PM
Snuck, though common in today's vernacular, always grates on my ear.  Sneaked is the proper past tense and consistent with the English language's historical trend toward grammatical simplicity.

But David, without strong verbs, the terrorists will win!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on November 17, 2011, 12:29:36 PM
Sneakeded
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on November 17, 2011, 12:30:48 PM
Quote from: Ataraxia on November 17, 2011, 12:29:36 PM
Sneakeded

Snucked!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on November 17, 2011, 05:48:00 PM
Quote from: chasmaniac on November 17, 2011, 12:28:40 PM
But David, without strong verbs, the terrorists will win!
Haven't we strong verbs enough without inventing more?  And haven't the terrorists already won?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on November 17, 2011, 05:49:00 PM
Quote from: chasmaniac on November 17, 2011, 12:30:48 PM
Snucked!
On the other hand, "snookered" is a delightful word.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on November 22, 2011, 07:12:20 PM
When did "No problem" replace "You're welcome"? I hate it when I thank the waiter for, say, refiling my water, and he/she replies, "No problem." I once had this exchange:

Me: Thank you.
Waiter: No problem.
Me: Well, that's good.
Waiter: Excuse me?
Me: I'm glad it wasn't a problem for you to refill my water.
Waiter: Whatever.

I'm glad all of my food had been served; otherwise, I'm sure he would have spat in it!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 24, 2011, 06:50:23 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on November 17, 2011, 05:49:00 PM
On the other hand, "snookered" is a delightful word.

True!  "Snuck" as a past tense for "sneaked" must have entered American English (in my opinion) because of some sort of tendency from German immigrants to parallel strong vowel changes in German.  "Schleichen" (sneak) in German is a strong verb with a past tense of "Schlich."

To be sure, the problem with my theory is that the long e "-eak" sound in English (as opposed to "Break" with a long a) is found in weak verbs, i.e. with -ed past tenses.  If "leak" and "peek" had past tenses of "luck" and "puck" then "snuck" would make sense as a form.

For a discussion - but also with no real answer, except for one commentator saying the form "snuck" must describe the action better than "sneaked" - see:

http://blog.oup.com/2007/11/snuck/ (http://blog.oup.com/2007/11/snuck/)

Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on November 22, 2011, 07:12:20 PM
When did "No problem" replace "You're welcome"? I hate it when I thank the waiter for, say, refiling my water, and he/she replies, "No problem."


"No problem" as a replacement for "Don't mention it" or "You're welcome" is fairly common here in Ohio.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 24, 2011, 11:32:27 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 24, 2011, 06:50:23 AM
True!  "Snuck" as a past tense for "sneaked" must have entered American English (in my opinion) because of some sort of tendency from German immigrants to parallel strong vowel changes in German.  "Schleichen" (sneak) in German is a strong verb with a past tense of "Schlich."

To be sure, the problem with my theory is that the long e "-eak" sound in English (as opposed to "Break" with a long a) is found in weak verbs, i.e. with -ed past tenses.  If "leak" and "peek" had past tenses of "luck" and "puck" then "snuck" would make sense as a form.

For a discussion - but also with no real answer, except for one commentator saying the form "snuck" must describe the action better than "sneaked" - see:

http://blog.oup.com/2007/11/snuck/ (http://blog.oup.com/2007/11/snuck/)

"No problem" as a replacement for "Don't mention it" or "You're welcome" is fairly common here in Ohio.

I seem to remember having heard it thus in use, before I thought to take exception to it. An aberration which on me hath upsnoke!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 24, 2011, 04:45:56 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 24, 2011, 11:32:27 AM
I seem to remember having heard it thus in use, before I thought to take exception to it. An aberration which on me hath upsnoke!

Check out Conan O'Brien quoting an authority on "snuck" vs. Jennifer Garner:

http://www.youtube.com/v/q51ld-scMI8
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 25, 2011, 10:23:13 AM
Here's a good one: "As God as my witness."  :-[
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Bulldog on November 25, 2011, 10:44:37 AM
Quote from: The Six on November 25, 2011, 10:23:13 AM
Here's a good one: "As God as my witness."  :-[

Not quite accurate - "is" my witness.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 25, 2011, 11:50:38 AM
I know. "As God as" is what I've seen the most. Seems to fall in line with people not knowing what they're hearing, and thinking it's correct ("You're not suppose to do that"). I always liked "with God as my witness,"  though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on November 26, 2011, 10:16:03 PM
This made my head hurt:

Quote from: snyprrr on November 26, 2011, 09:57:47 PM
For me, Rihm's hallmark is that I can always follow his writing as the pencil is hitting the paper: he sounds like he's writing straight from the fount of his imagination; I can practically hear the shards of pencil against paper.

Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevna Pettersson on November 26, 2011, 10:11:03 PM
The pencil-paper analogy is a good way to descibe his late quartets

Is this actually an analogy, or because it partly describes the physical process of composition anyway, is it too close to the subject itself? y i so bad at english ;_;
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 27, 2011, 05:41:45 AM
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevna Pettersson on November 26, 2011, 10:16:03 PM
This made my head hurt:

Quote from: snyprrr on November 26, 2011, 10:57:47 PM
Quote
    For me, Rihm's hallmark is that I can always follow his writing as the pencil is hitting the paper: he sounds like he's writing straight from the fount of his imagination; I can practically hear the shards of pencil against paper.

Is this actually an analogy, or because it partly describes the physical process of composition anyway, is it too close to the subject itself? y i so bad at english ;_;

Well, my first instinct is that the quote at least comes close to an analogy: using "like" sends up the simile flag, of course, but the distinctions among metaphor, simile, and analogy have been called artificial.  All three attempt to explain something by using a comparison.

One grammarian says the simile uses "like" (He runs like a locomotive, when he has the ball), the metaphor simply uses "is"  (He is a locomotive, when he has the ball), and the analogy uses "as if" (When he has the ball, it seems as if he is a locomotive).

Purists, however, might not admit that this analogy example is actually an analogy, because a locomotive is too different from a human being.  For them, the similarity must be closer for an analogy to work.  While they would admit that the runner in the analogy is unswerving, powerful, unstoppable, etc., "the analogy breaks down" because a locomotive is not even close to a human being.

The purist is no doubt influenced by the analogy (ratios) as defined in Mathematics  (a/b = c/d).  Maybe you recall questions called analogies from standardized tests:

"Politician is to taxes as pirate is to gold."   0:)   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on November 27, 2011, 06:13:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 27, 2011, 05:41:45 AM
Purists, however, might not admit that this analogy example is actually an analogy, because a locomotive is too different from a human being.  For them, the similarity must be closer for an analogy to work.  While they would admit that the runner in the analogy is unswerving, powerful, unstoppable, etc., "the analogy breaks down" because a locomotive is not even close to a human being.

Thank you for the super reply - I wasn't even aware of this part being considered a problem to some.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on November 27, 2011, 09:34:04 AM
I frequently hear "anxious" when the word should be "eager." Even Brian Williams on the NBC evening news got it wrong a week or two back when he said they were "anxious" to have Chelsea Clinton join their staff...unless they really are worried about it!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 29, 2011, 04:19:25 PM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on November 27, 2011, 09:34:04 AM
I frequently hear "anxious" when the word should be "eager." Even Brian Williams on the NBC evening news got it wrong a week or two back when he said they were "anxious" to have Chelsea Clinton join their staff...unless they really are worried about it!  :D

Right!  So maybe they should be anxious with a Clinton in the area!   8)

Today in my Latin class the old "Neither-nor" problem came up: should one use a plural verb or a singular?

In Latin, the verb is singular, if both subjects are singular.

I have seen debates online about the singular being standard in English, unless the subject after "nor" is plural, which leads to this:

Neither the television nor the radios work properly.

Neither the radios nor the television works properly.  (Courtesy of the University of Wisconsin.)

And if one follows the rule that a singular must be used, it can lead to this curiosity:

I say that either you or his brother has my money.


I say that either his brother or you has my money.


"You has" rings false of course: the manuals say to arrange the sentence so that such a curiosity does not happen.

And then we have this:

Neither you nor I...correct.   a. is   b. am   c. are   d. HELP!   :o

Again, technically, if the last subject governs the verb, "am" is supposedly correct, but I have not experienced that.  The manuals say to arrange the sentence to avoid this scenario: Neither I nor you are correct.

I have never liked these rules: much more efficient is to use the plural with "neither...nor" and "either...or."  Done!  No re-arranging.


Neither you nor I are happy today, are we?
   ;D

Certainly feel free to follow the manuals!  I just find the whole thing inefficient.

Are things different in the United Kingdom or Australia?




Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 29, 2011, 04:21:07 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 29, 2011, 04:19:25 PM
Neither you nor I are happy today, are we?   ;D

For whatever reason, my habit would be to say Neither of us is happy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 29, 2011, 05:10:35 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 29, 2011, 04:21:07 PM
For whatever reason, my habit would be to say Neither of us is happy.

That would be most efficient!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on December 01, 2011, 06:48:05 PM
I'd like to lament the loss of the once-proud adverb. I saw it coming; why add that cumbersome ly to words when you can leave them out and get the point across the same way? Adjectives have replaced adverbs, and soon enough nouns will replace adjectives. (How many times have you seen a sentence like "They're a class organization" recently?)

First the rhinoceros, now this. I will never forget.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on December 02, 2011, 02:55:32 AM
Not a grumble but a question - how to handle capital letters in a title. I want to leave all connectives and prepositions lower case, but a longish, multisyllabic preposition looks downright weird without the big letter thingy at its front end. What say the braintrust?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 02, 2011, 03:14:03 AM
Quote from: chasmaniac on December 02, 2011, 02:55:32 AM
Not a grumble but a question - how to handle capital letters in a title. I want to leave all connectives and prepositions lower case, but a longish, multisyllabic preposition looks downright weird without the big letter thingy at its front end. What say the braintrust?
There are different rules on prepositions. Some will say that the short ones should be lower case and the longer ones upper case (4 letters or less lower case, 5 letters or more upper case). Others will tell you that all preopostions are lower case (jsut an older rule I think). Of course, if it is the first or last word, it will be capitalized.

Examples:
Much Ado About Nothing
As You Like It
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2011, 03:21:43 AM
I'll add a grumble, though: to whatever degree it may be the baleful influence of the interwebs, or advertising (or both) — capitalizing every word in A title or headline.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on December 02, 2011, 03:57:37 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 02, 2011, 03:21:43 AM
I'll add a grumble, though: to whatever degree it may be the baleful influence of the interwebs, or advertising (or both) — capitalizing every word in A title or headline.

If anything, the interwebs is best at making a person stop using capital letters altogether. (Except when they are angry of course.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2011, 04:10:26 AM
NOT LIKE!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2011, 04:23:58 AM
Quote from: chasmaniac on December 02, 2011, 02:55:32 AM
Not a grumble but a question - how to handle capital letters in a title. I want to leave all connectives and prepositions lower case, but a longish, multisyllabic preposition looks downright weird without the big letter thingy at its front end. What say the braintrust?

Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 02, 2011, 03:14:03 AM
There are different rules on prepositions. Some will say that the short ones should be lower case and the longer ones upper case (4 letters or less lower case, 5 letters or more upper case). Others will tell you that all preopostions are lower case (jsut an older rule I think). Of course, if it is the first or last word, it will be capitalized.

Examples:
Much Ado About Nothing
As You Like It

Yes, Mc UKRNeal has explained things nicely: if you follow the purists' method 100% of the time, then you end up with:

Much Ado about Nothing
As You like It

And yes, that looks very odd!

Quote from: The Six on December 01, 2011, 06:48:05 PM
I'd like to lament the loss of the once-proud adverb. I saw it coming; why add that cumbersome ly to words when you can leave them out and get the point across the same way? Adjectives have replaced adverbs, and soon enough nouns will replace adjectives. (How many times have you seen a sentence like "They're a class organization" recently?)

First the rhinoceros, now this. I will never forget.

A class organization must have a rather rigid hierarchy of some sort!   ;D

And yes again!  I tilt at the windmill of the vanishing adverb every day in my Latin classes.  Its tabescence shows the slacker attitude toward all sorts of things these days!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2011, 04:32:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 02, 2011, 04:23:58 AM
As You like It

No, no, because that's a verb not a preposition! : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2011, 05:03:58 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 02, 2011, 04:32:33 AM
No, no, because that's a verb not a preposition! : )

Right!  Doing three things at once has its hazards!   ;D    I suppose I just looked at "like it" and, because the context was prepositions, ran with that!

Right now I have a diagramming project with my Latin students: the hope is that they will have a better grasp of things in both English and Latin: adverbs and prepositions are a problem for my students.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2011, 05:53:50 AM
The ubiquitous "I" as an object came up last hour in my Latin II class.

"If the soldiers capture either Domitia or I in this house, they will kill us."  Thus my student's translation, despite the word for "me" in Latin being, amazingly, "me."

When I asked why he changed the correct word "me" to the incorrect "I," he responded chillingly: "I don't know.  I guess it sounded right."   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2011, 05:56:14 AM
Guess again, punkin-haid!
Title: When Morons Rule
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2011, 12:44:33 PM
Okay, so today I receive an e-mail around noon from diocesan bureaucrats (i.e. morons), who claim that I have not turned in a "Non-Spousal Insurance Employment Form."

If I do not turn it in, my insurance "will be adjusted to reflect the change in insurance status."  I must return the form by Monday at 8:00 A.M.

Today is Friday!!!

First, I have never seen the form.  Second, I am not sure what the title means: "Non-Spousal" would indicate that it deals with people other than a spouse, e.g. children, grandparents, etc.  Why should I turn in any such form, since I need insurance only for my wife.  Third, what is "Insurance Employment" ?  Employment in an insurance company?

So my first impulse is to ignore it as not applicable, since it is a "non-spousal" form.  But I have a bad feeling, because I remember that...

...we are dealing with morons!   :o

So I call them, and of course, being morons, they do not know how to answer the phone.  So I attempt to leave a message, but since we are dealing with morons, the amount of time for a message is under 5 seconds!!!  A voice comes on and says: "You have exceeded the time allowed for a message."

On the other hand, they could be deviously intelligent!   :o   No messages, no work!  But being bureaucrats and morons, they really do not work anyway.

So I send an e-mail and a fax, asking about the purpose of the form and reminding them that their telephone system does not work.

At 2:00 I receive a reply: the "Non-Spousal Insurance Employment Form" is in fact for spouses!!!   :o   If your wife is employed, then the diocese wants to know why they are partially paying for her health insurance, rather than her employer.  If she has no insurance, you need to attest - complete with a seal from a notary public - that she has no insurance!

I am outraged that suddenly I am being told about a form that is A. grossly misnamed, and B. needs to be in their office on Monday morning!!!

I: I don't understand: if this form deals with my spouse's employment, why is it called a "Non-Spousal Insurance Employment" form?
Moron Bureaucrat: Well, we need to know if your wife is employed or not.
I: Yes, I know.  Let me pose the question differently: "Non-Spousal" means the form has nothing to do with my wife.
Moron Bureaucrat: But it does.  It's the form we use to find out if your wife could get insurance from her employer.

Welcome    0:)   to Cloud KafkaLand!!!    0:)   

I: No, it does not.  "Non" means it has nothing to do with one's spouse! 
Moron Bureaucrat: Well, you're just not understanding.  If your spouse is not employed, then you need to turn in the form.
I: No, I understand that your form is misnamed.  What you mean is: "Spousal Non-Employment Form."  The word "insurance" is not really necessary.
Moron Bureaucrat: Well, it's the same thing.

I (silently in my mind): You think that because you're a moron bureaucrat!!!

So, of course I scramble for 45 minutes to find a notary and to mail the form, which I also fax as a back-up plan.

And of course these bureaucrats "earn" more than any of the diocesan teachers!

Our moronocracy becomes ever more unbearable and terrifying!   :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2011, 12:58:09 PM
'At's the grandmama of all grumbles!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 02, 2011, 01:55:35 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 02, 2011, 05:53:50 AM
The ubiquitous "I" as an object came up last hour in my Latin II class.

"If the soldiers capture either Domitia or I in this house, they will kill us."  Thus my student's translation, despite the word for "me" in Latin being, amazingly, "me."

When I asked why he changed the correct word "me" to the incorrect "I," he responded chillingly: "I don't know.  I guess it sounded right."   :o

Almost everthing I actually know about English grammar I learned from my high school German classes.  (Sorry, Latin was not available.)   I did not learn it from English classes at any time, or more correctly, it never took.  I needed to see the principles in action in another language, and a different context, before I could actually understand them.    so hopefully your student will eventually grasp that what goes for Latin goes for English as well.

And it could have been worse.  He could have translated the last part as "they will kill we."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2011, 02:22:43 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 02, 2011, 01:55:35 PM
Almost everything I actually know about English grammar I learned from my high school German classes.  (Sorry, Latin was not available.)   I did not learn it from English classes at any time, or more correctly, it never took.  I needed to see the principles in action in another language, and a different context, before I could actually understand them.    so hopefully your student will eventually grasp that what goes for Latin goes for English as well.

And it could have been worse.  He could have translated the last part as "they will kill we."

I have also taught German and Ancient Greek in my career, and you are quite right.  Many of my former students have told me the same thing: their English classes just did not get the points across, but for some reason in my German class things became clearer.  The comparison and contrast with the foreign language helped them greatly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on December 02, 2011, 02:30:30 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 02, 2011, 02:22:43 PM
I have also taught German and Ancient Greek in my career, and you are quite right.  Many of my former students have told me the same thing: their English classes just did not get the points across, but for some reason in my German class things became clearer.  The comparison and contrast with the foreign language helped them greatly.

Being Canadian, it was French did this for me. Studying Old English though taught me vastitudes about my own language.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 20, 2011, 10:20:36 PM
If we want to continue this discussion, probably best here. Some background:
Quote from: Elgarian on December 20, 2011, 05:06:32 AM
aluminium

Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 20, 2011, 05:41:12 AM
Probably my least liked work in the English language. It just sounds grating to my ears (probably because you will never hear it in the US). I prefer aluminum. Interestingly, it appears that its first use was indeed aluminum, but was changed (according to Wiki) because it did not sound classical enough! You can't make up stuff like this! 


Quote from: Elgarian on December 20, 2011, 08:34:32 AM
But don't you find that in 'aluminum', the stresses are too plodding and heavy-handed?:
al-oo-min-um, as in: 'I dig the mud. Not at all like the metal, with is soft and light, but better suited for something dull and boring like lead.

Now, aluminium, by contrast, ripples itself into the air halfway through:
al-you-min-i-um. Which has a sort of quicksilverish character that suggests a bird flutteringly taking flight, or some such - much more like the metal itself.


I am not convinced, however, that it would be a good material for making stockings from. Neither would tin be adequate. I wonder whether the Hanover Band are aware of the stockingistical problems they're causing Karl, at this festive season.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on December 20, 2011, 08:54:51 AM
That's not how we colonials pronounce it. Rather it's  a loo muh num

Sarge


Quote from: North Star on December 20, 2011, 01:51:34 PM
IUPAC prefers the use of aluminium in its internal publications
'Nuff said!
Quote from: Opus106 on December 20, 2011, 08:18:49 PM
Their copy of periodic table lists it as an alternative spelling in a footnote. (http://old.iupac.org/reports/periodic_table/index.html)

Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 20, 2011, 10:07:00 PM
Exactly. According to wiki..."The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) adopted aluminium as the standard international name for the element in 1990 but, three years later, recognized aluminum as an acceptable variant. Hence their periodic table includes both. IUPAC prefers the use of aluminium in its internal publications, although nearly as many IUPAC publications use the spelling aluminum."

See. already the use of aluminium is suspect, because another detested word, variant, is being used here as if to slight aluminum. Variant doesn't sound as bad as aluminum, it just irratates, because this is the wrong word choice (alternative would be much better here). And while we are on the subject, most detested phrase is 'at the weekend'. This sounds so wrong for so many reasons. I don't want you to think I am being prejudiced against British English, it drives me nuts when Americans leave off words - for example, "I will come with." It's I will come with you! Bloody lazy Americans!! :)  (Sorry to rant, and in the wrong thread too, but I had to let it out!) :) (I guess I will repost in the grammar thread, where continued dialog would be more appropriate)
Oh, and while I never say it that way, I do enjoy the British pronunciation of renaissance (with stress on second syllable instead of the first). I could never say it myself that way, but I enjoy hearing it from others.

And in response to Elgarian, I would say it is the opposite way around. Aluminium takes forever to roll off the tongue. In contrast, aluminum doesn't break things up. But I must admit, I've never heard a British speaker say aluminum, and if they say it the way he wrote (and not Sarge's correction), then I'm not sure I'd like aluminum either.

Anyway, this seemed to the more appropriate thread to continue the discussion...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on December 20, 2011, 10:35:11 PM
Oh, just to be clear, I misread North Star's post -- I thought he said the 'other' word was being used in their internal publications, and I was slightly taken aback by that. (Why would an established scientific organisation use incorrect terminology? :D) I'll bet that the publications which use 'aluminum' are printed in the U.S. ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 21, 2011, 12:04:58 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on December 20, 2011, 10:35:11 PM
Oh, just to be clear, I misread North Star's post -- I thought he said the 'other' word was being used in their internal publications, and I was slightly taken aback by that. (Why would an established scientific organisation use incorrect terminology? :D) I'll bet that the publications which use 'aluminum' are printed in the U.S. ;D
From Wikipedia:
Most countries use the spelling aluminium. In the United States, the spelling aluminum predominates.[13][59] The Canadian Oxford Dictionary prefers aluminum, whereas the Australian Macquarie Dictionary prefers aluminium. In 1926, the American Chemical Society officially decided to use aluminum in its publications; American dictionaries typically label the spelling aluminium as a British variant.
8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 12:36:44 AM
Just spotted this, but I'd already responded over in the other thread, so I'll just copy my post here:

I had mentioned the pronunciation 'al-oo-min-um'
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on December 20, 2011, 08:54:51 AM
That's not how we colonials pronounce it. Rather it's  a loo muh num

Sarge

I grant you the 'muh' instead of my 'min', Sarge, and your version is much better than mine in terms of the sound of each syllable, but I was more concerned with where the stresses fall - di dah di dah. Perhaps you think I've overstressed the stress on the last syllable? Still, I'd say the stress there is implied by the way the word scans, even if it's underemphasised in practice.

My chief spoken example of this (I mean, the one in my mind as I work through this knotty philosopho-poetico-linguistical problem) comes from Scotty in Star Trek 4, though there he's dealing with 'transparent aluminum' - which I suppose is a different animal, and it could be argued that my experience in the field isn't wide-ranging enough. I propose to make further study of it at the weekend.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 12:49:27 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 20, 2011, 10:20:36 PM
And in response to Elgarian, I would say it is the opposite way around. Aluminium takes forever to roll off the tongue. In contrast, aluminum doesn't break things up.

Well, it takes forever to roll off the tongue only in the same way as it takes a brook to bubble its way lightly over rocks, or for a sparrow to flit between branches. But a-loo-mi-num just drops like a stone (or never gets off the ground in the first place).

Let's consider how Wordsworth would have tackled it. 'I wandered lonely, a lump of aluminum ...' just doesn't work, does it? It sounds like walking in lead boots. Contrast with the ripplingly expressive 'I wandered lonely, like aluminium ...'

Need I say more?

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 12:53:44 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 12:36:44 AM
Just spotted this, but I'd already responded over in the other thread, so I'll just copy my post here:

I had mentioned the pronunciation 'al-oo-min-um'
I grant you the 'muh' instead of my 'min', Sarge, and your version is much better than mine in terms of the sound of each syllable, but I was more concerned with where the stresses fall - di dah di dah. Perhaps you think I've overstressed the stress on the last syllable? Still, I'd say the stress there is implied by the way the word scans, even if it's underemphasised in practice.

My chief spoken example of this (I mean, the one in my mind as I work through this knotty philosopho-poetico-linguistical problem) comes from Scotty in Star Trek 4, though there he's dealing with 'transparent aluminum' - which I suppose is a different animal, and it could be argued that my experience in the field isn't wide-ranging enough. I propose to make further study of it at the weekend.
Errr, Scotty is your example? A Scot trying to speak British English using an American pronunciation in a movie? You know, I'm in a good mood after reading this!

And that weekend thing - a low blow, a low blow! :)  It's all wrong I tell you. :)  I ate at Harrod's this weekend. Really, when? I ate at Harrod's at the weekend. Awful...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 12:57:15 AM
"At the weekend" is relativistic speech.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 01:02:51 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 12:53:44 AM
Errr, Scotty is your example? A Scot trying to speak British English using an American pronunciation in a movie?

Well, I knew you were basically on a hiding to nothing over this issue, so I thought I'd give you an easy target so you could think you'd shot me down, and therefore not feel so bad.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 01:04:20 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 12:57:15 AM
"At the weekend" is relativistic speech.

You mean, people only say it when travelling at speeds close to the speed of light?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 01:07:10 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 01:04:20 AM
You mean, people only say it when travelling at speeds close to the speed of light?

More like talking at speeds close to the speed of light. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 01:13:32 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 01:07:10 AM
More like talking at speeds close to the speed of light. ;)

Well Navneeth, we can test your hypothesis. When people talk to me at excessively high speed, I definitely notice that time is affected in my reference frame: they seem to be talking for a lot longer than they really are. I think that clinches it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 01:23:16 AM
Bravo! I guess it's only a matter of months before we receive phone calls from the Swedish Academy.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 02:24:04 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 12:53:44 AM

Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 12:36:44 AM
. . . My chief spoken example of this (I mean, the one in my mind as I work through this knotty philosopho-poetico-linguistical problem) comes from Scotty in Star Trek 4 . . . .

Errr, Scotty is your example? A Scot trying to speak British English using an American pronunciation in a movie? You know, I'm in a good mood after reading this!

You gents remind me that I just watched an episode from The Twilight Zone (season 4, "Valley of the Shadow," first aired 17 Jan 1963) in which Jas Doohan plays a minor role.  I didn't recognize him . . . wasn't until the final credits were rolling that I saw his name (one good reason to hang on and watch the end credits for these TV-on-DVD "re-runs").  I hit the previous scene button a couple of times, and sure enough, there he appeared!

The word aluminum did not figure in his lines there, or we should have a comparison . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 02:25:49 AM
Any light on cock a snook, Alan? : ) You know that phrase is going places, when you read it in liner notes for a Vivaldi CD . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 02:31:29 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 12:49:27 AM
Well, it takes forever to roll off the tongue only in the same way as it takes a brook to bubble its way lightly over rocks, or for a sparrow to flit between branches. But a-loo-mi-num just drops like a stone (or never gets off the ground in the first place).

Let's consider how Wordsworth would have tackled it. 'I wandered lonely, a lump of aluminum ...' just doesn't work, does it? It sounds like walking in lead boots. Contrast with the ripplingly expressive 'I wandered lonely, like aluminium ...'

Need I say more?
A lump of aluminium doesn't sound any better than a lump of aluminum. I think the issue is still in pronunciation. The pitch is still declining on the num. So it would sound like a loo muh num.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 02:33:26 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 01:02:51 AM
so I thought I'd give you an easy target so you could think you'd shot me down, and therefore not feel so bad.


Very gentlemanly of you... ;D A true Elgarian!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on December 21, 2011, 03:01:15 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 02:31:29 AM
A lump of aluminium doesn't sound any better than a lump of aluminum. I think the issue is still in pronunciation. The pitch is still declining on the num. So it would sound like a loo muh num.

I think the trick with aluminium is palatalizing the lu as lyu. That what gives it the pinky finger classiness. I'm an old prole, so I stick with aluminum.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 03:21:30 AM
Maybe you will find this amusing....
http://www.youtube.com/v/m2mt6BB1798
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on December 21, 2011, 03:35:32 AM
I'm amused.  ;D

But I bet she isn't!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 04:51:33 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 03:21:30 AM
Maybe you will find this amusing....

Here we are, deeply enmeshed in the darkest recesses of philosopho-linguistic analysis, and you speak of ... amusement?

[Looks around questioningly, with shoulders shrugged upwards, arms slightly outstretched, palms uppermost.]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 04:53:28 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 21, 2011, 02:25:49 AM
Any light on cock a snook, Alan? : )[/font]

Is the snook an aluminium one? And when exactly is it to be cocked? At the weekend?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:01:56 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 04:53:28 AM
Is the snook an aluminium one? And when exactly is it to be cocked? At the weekend?
First, I found this interesting: from phrases.org.uk:
Cock a snook

Meaning

A derisive gesture.

Origin

In trying to explain the origin of 'Cock a snook' it would be helpful to know what a snook is. Unfortunately we don't really. There is a species of fish called snook, but it isn't that, unless there's a form of derisive gesture that I've had too sheltered an upbringing to be aware of. A snook is also a promontory of jutting out land. That could have something to do with the gesture as it does involve sticking fingers out. Apart from this single phrase, snook isn't a word you would expect to hear very often. It is sometimes reported to be derived from snout, as in thumbing one's nose. That's possible but, although snout and snook are somewhat similar, why didn't they just 'cock a snout'. That term doesn't appear to be recorded.

The general understanding of what's meant by 'cock a snook' is the spread hand with thumb on the nose, preferably with crossed eyes, waggling fingers and any other annoying gesticulation that comes to mind at the time. It's what the Americans call 'the five-fingered salute'.

The use of cock is also difficult to explain. Again it might refer to the sticking out and turning up of the fingers. That would be in line with the term cocked-hat in which the brim is turned up jauntily. It could also be a reference to the shape of a cock's comb, which is rather like the shape of the gesture. It took some time for the gesture as we now know it to be established - various other forms were used in the past.

The first reference I can find that mentions the phrase is Wynne's Diary, 1791:


"They cock snooks at one on every occasion."

That gives no clue as to what was meant by the term. The next time we see it is in Augustus Hare's The story of my life, 1879:


"If I put my hands so ... (cutting a snooks), they might reproach me very much indeed."

This provides little more clarity. Is 'cutting a snooks' even the same thing? Then, in The Times, 1904, we have "The young monkey puts his tongue in his cheek and cocks a snook at you.", which makes no reference to any sort of hand gesture.

All in all, this is an odd phrase and we know precious little about its origin.


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 05:04:20 AM
Quote from: chasmaniac on December 21, 2011, 03:01:15 AM
I think the trick with aluminium is palatalizing the lu as lyu. That what gives it the pinky finger classiness. I'm an old prole, so I stick with aluminum.

And what of those of us who palatalize that syllable in aluminum, hmmm? ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 05:06:02 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:01:56 AM
First, I found this interesting: from phrases.org.uk:
Cock a snook

Meaning

A derisive gesture.

Origin

In trying to explain the origin of 'Cock a snook' it would be helpful to know what a snook is. Unfortunately we don't really. There is a species of fish called snook, but it isn't that, unless there's a form of derisive gesture that I've had too sheltered an upbringing to be aware of. A snook is also a promontory of jutting out land. That could have something to do with the gesture as it does involve sticking fingers out. Apart from this single phrase, snook isn't a word you would expect to hear very often. It is sometimes reported to be derived from snout, as in thumbing one's nose. That's possible but, although snout and snook are somewhat similar, why didn't they just 'cock a snout'. That term doesn't appear to be recorded.

The general understanding of what's meant by 'cock a snook' is the spread hand with thumb on the nose, preferably with crossed eyes, waggling fingers and any other annoying gesticulation that comes to mind at the time. It's what the Americans call 'the five-fingered salute'.

The use of cock is also difficult to explain. Again it might refer to the sticking out and turning up of the fingers. That would be in line with the term cocked-hat in which the brim is turned up jauntily. It could also be a reference to the shape of a cock's comb, which is rather like the shape of the gesture. It took some time for the gesture as we now know it to be established - various other forms were used in the past.

The first reference I can find that mentions the phrase is Wynne's Diary, 1791:


"They cock snooks at one on every occasion."

That gives no clue as to what was meant by the term. The next time we see it is in Augustus Hare's The story of my life, 1879:


"If I put my hands so ... (cutting a snooks), they might reproach me very much indeed."

This provides little more clarity. Is 'cutting a snooks' even the same thing? Then, in The Times, 1904, we have "The young monkey puts his tongue in his cheek and cocks a snook at you.", which makes no reference to any sort of hand gesture.

All in all, this is an odd phrase and we know precious little about its origin.




Thanks! The mystery enlarges . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:08:21 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 21, 2011, 05:06:02 AM
Thanks! The mystery enlarges . . . .
Here is the image they had too, for those who are visual:
(http://www.phrases.org.uk/images/silhouette.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 05:09:55 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 02:31:29 AM
A lump of aluminium doesn't sound any better than a lump of aluminum.

Nice try, but that's merely sleight of hand. The problem there lies in the questionable use of the word 'lump' in both contexts, and the issue is one of inappropriate association. 'A lump of aluminum' is poetically effective in its gloomy lumpenness, because aluminum has the same kind of deadening sound as lump. But one simply wouldn't associate aluminium with lump. One would be searching instead for lullulating words like 'liminary'. So one might think of airy expressions like 'a line of aluminium linking loops'. It's a matter of judging a word by the company it keeps, really.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 05:25:01 AM
Sweet and lode.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:27:33 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 05:09:55 AM
Nice try, but that's merely sleight of hand. The problem there lies in the questionable use of the word 'lump' in both contexts, and the issue is one of inappropriate association. 'A lump of aluminum' is poetically effective in its gloomy lumpenness, because aluminum has the same kind of deadening sound as lump. But one simply wouldn't associate aluminium with lump. One would be searching instead for lullulating words like 'liminary'. So one might think of airy expressions like 'a line of aluminium linking loops'. It's a matter of judging a word by the company it keeps, really.
Ah, but your poetic example is equally flawed as the meter and flow of a poem are significant to it's success. The two words have different numbers of syllables. We cannot substitute one for the other and maintain the integrity of the poem. In any case, neither is commonly used in poetry (for which I think we are both grateful).

And I hope Cato doesn't mind we've commandeered his thread for a bit... ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:43:46 AM
That site is interesting. Here's another (having nothing to do with the previous discussion):

Drop-dead Gorgeous

Meaning

Breathtakingly beautiful.

Origin

"Drop-dead gorgeous" seems to have been with us since just 1985. A piece about Michelle Pfeiffer in Time in February of that year says:


"Trim, smart and drop-dead gorgeous, Pfeiffer has been nibbling at stardom since her stints in Grease II and Scarface."

The phrase struck a chord and there are many references to it in newspapers and journals from very soon after that.

It didn't arrive out of the blue. The term "drop dead", meaning excellent had been around since at least 1962. In The New York Herald-Tribune, January 1962, we have:


"Fashions from Florence not drop-dead. For almost the first time in history Simonetta failed to deliver an absolutely drop-dead collection."

It got picked up as an intensifier for various things, as here from the Washington Post, July 1980:


"For drop dead chic food, Harborplace has a sushi and tempura bar."

Of course, "drop dead" has also been used as a term demonstrating dislike for some time. This originated in the US in the 1930s.

Phrases tend to be coined to deal with things that people engage with frequently or consider important. There are hundreds of phrases to do with topics like God, money, sex etc. It's hardly surprising that death scores highly too and that 'dead' is one of the words that appears in many English idioms. Here's a selection that begin with a, b or c - there are many more:


As dead as a dodo
As dead as a doornail
As dead as mutton
At the dead of night
Back from the dead
Better dead than red
Brain dead
Bring out your dead
Chivalry is not dead
Cut out the dead wood

The use of the word dead in English idioms is an example of how difficult a language it is to learn for non-native speakers. That's perhaps what could be expected from a language that has nine different ways to pronounce 'ough':


through - oo
though - o
thought - awt
tough - uff
plough - ow
thorough - uh
cough - off
hiccough - up
lough - ock

Even supposing someone understood the word 'dead' (and there are at least 31 meanings for dead just as an adjective), that doesn't help in understanding idioms. These rely on a knowledge of context that goes beyond the dictionary; for example, how is it that people who are "dead from the neck up" or "dead to the world", can be alive and well? Why is a "dead shot" to be admired when a "dead loss" isn't? Go into an English pub at closing time and you'll be asked, "are those drinks dead"? You might even hear someone claiming to be "in dead earnest".

If you learned your English as a first language, be thankful. If not, and when someone meets you they say "drop-dead gorgeous", don't be offended.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 05:47:35 AM
Re: cocking a snook and all that. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,16889.0.html)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 05:48:36 AM
I don't think I'll eat a drop dead chic dish, thank you very much ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 05:51:03 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 05:47:35 AM
Re: cocking a snook and all that. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,16889.0.html)

Thanks (again), Nav.  Did we decide that cock a snoot was a typo?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 05:54:17 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:27:33 AM
Ah, but your poetic example is equally flawed as the meter and flow of a poem are significant to it's success. The two words have different numbers of syllables. We cannot substitute one for the other and maintain the integrity of the poem. In any case, neither is commonly used in poetry (for which I think we are both grateful).

And I hope Cato doesn't mind we've commandeered his thread for a bit... ;D

No, no, I was using the expression 'poetically effective' in a general way, such as one might encounter in well-written prose - not implying that one might construct some kind of 'Ode to Aluminium'. Though, hmmm:

Sweet silv'ry block, how dull 'aluminum' thy plight doth tire!
And how sweet 'aluminium' life inspire!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on December 21, 2011, 05:56:16 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 21, 2011, 05:51:03 AM
Thanks (again), Nav.  Did we decide that cock a snoot was a typo?

If I remember correctly, it was decided that we should cock the snook at anyone who disagrees with the phrase we favour.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 06:01:40 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 05:54:17 AM
No, no, I was using the expression 'poetically effective' in a general way, such as one might encounter in well-written prose - not implying that one might construct some kind of 'Ode to Aluminium'. Though, hmmm:

Sweet silv'ry block, how dull 'aluminum' thy plight doth tire!
And how sweet 'aluminium' life inspire!
Ok. That did make me laugh! :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 06:02:03 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:08:21 AM
Here is the image they had too, for those who are visual:
(http://www.phrases.org.uk/images/silhouette.jpg)

That illustration seems almost to make the case for cock a snoot.

For snoot is slang for the nose (a corruption of snout?) And the silhouette of the fingers there mimics the cockscomb . . . thereby cocking the snoot.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 06:03:14 AM
Which suggests that it's all an elaborate cognate for thumbing one's nose.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on December 21, 2011, 08:31:12 AM
Take the lazy way out. I always find myself saying al-yuh-min-yum.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on December 21, 2011, 09:31:34 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 05:43:46 AM
The use of the word dead in English idioms is an example of how difficult a language it is to learn for non-native speakers. That's perhaps what could be expected from a language that has nine different ways to pronounce 'ough'

Reminds me of Shaw's ghoti.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 11:36:05 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on December 21, 2011, 06:01:40 AM
Ok. That did make me laugh! :)

Then my work here is done.


Leave me, thou drear aluminum!
Begone! Thou dullard, drown in dumb defeat!
And come, O aluminium, light and fair,
Thy silv'ry sound surround us, passing sweet!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2011, 11:42:12 AM
Aluminimum
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on December 21, 2011, 12:03:26 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 21, 2011, 11:42:12 AM
Aluminimum

It remains now only for someone to invent alumaximum.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 23, 2011, 08:04:00 AM
No comment:

QuoteI have chosen to review The Mothers Of Invention's "Ahead Of Their Time" album, to which Zappa penned all of the music for.

Author appears to be Canadian (anglophone).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 28, 2011, 12:13:17 PM
Serious ouch, not really mitigated by its being a line in a pop song:

Quote. . . if me and you could be there, too . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 28, 2011, 07:18:52 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 28, 2011, 12:13:17 PM
Serious ouch, not really mitigated by its being a line in a pop song:

I have a particular weakness for the Backstreet Boys, but several of their songs have lyrics which are so grammatically bad that I cringe.  And usually they are intentional, because the lyricist apparently couldn't figure out a better way to make the punishment fit the crime, er, I mean, make the words fit the melody.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 01, 2012, 02:25:18 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 28, 2011, 07:18:52 PM
I have a particular weakness for the Backstreet Boys, but several of their songs have lyrics which are so grammatically bad that I cringe.  And usually they are intentional, because the lyricist apparently couldn't figure out a better way to make the punishment fit the crime, er, I mean, make the words fit the melody.

Lack of competence and inspiration is legion in the Elision Fields of popular prosody! 

And not just recently: those over a certain age might recall this monstrosity and Crime Against Hymnody:


In the desert,
You Can Remember Your Name
'Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain
   :o    ???   :o    ???    :o    ???

A line so inexplicable that it makes sense only in the context of the drug-addled '60's!   0:)

The "song" also contains one of my favorite phrases: "The heat was hot."   ;D

For those who want the full experience:

http://www.youtube.com/v/QRmvNMUEFZg
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 03, 2012, 03:46:00 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 01, 2012, 02:25:18 PM'60's!   0:)

One apostrophe too many?  :-*
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 03, 2012, 05:22:49 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 01, 2012, 02:25:18 PM

And not just recently: those over a certain age might recall this monstrosity and Crime Against Hymnody:


In the desert,
You Can Remember Your Name
'Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain
   

  0:)


O tempora! O mores! 

That seems to work out as a triple negative.

Although I always thought the line was "You Can't Remember Your Name"....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 04, 2012, 04:12:22 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 03, 2012, 05:22:49 PM
O tempora! O mores! 

That seems to work out as a triple negative.

Hey, so they stumbled onto the correct polarity, after all!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2012, 04:44:29 AM
Not a grumble, per se . . . .

Esteemed Britons! Colour and flavour, right?

Why not liquour?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 05, 2012, 04:48:57 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 05, 2012, 04:44:29 AM
Not a grumble, per se . . . .

Esteemed Britons! Colour and flavour, right?

Why not liquour?

Since when is English supposed to have a logically consistent orthography?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2012, 04:51:15 AM
Point taken; I just wondered if there was some . . . historical reason.  In England, they used to spell it musick, until Ben Franklin taught them to drop the k.

So if there's a tale in't, I'm interested : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on January 05, 2012, 05:01:46 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 05, 2012, 04:44:29 AM
Not a grumble, per se . . . .

Esteemed Britons! Colour and flavour, right?

Why not liquour?

It may be when transposed top the English tongue, it sounds more like "Lick her" which of course is bawdy.  Liquor just never caught on, despite its use in teenage movies where the getting of liquor was essential.  I know, poor excuses for not using 'liquor'.  If someone said they were going out to get some 'liquor' here in Glasgow, it may be that certain glances would be exchanged and pertinent questions asked.   :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 05, 2012, 05:02:57 AM
Quote from: John of Clydebank on January 05, 2012, 05:01:46 AM
It may be when transposed top the English tongue, it sounds more like "Lick her" which of course is bawdy.  Liquor just never caught on, despite its use in teenage movies where the getting of liquor was essential.  I know, poor excuses for not using 'liquor'.  If someone said they were going out to get some 'liquor' here in Glasgow, it may be that certain glances would be exchanged and pertinent questions asked.   :-\

:D ;D :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2012, 05:05:54 AM
Goodness knows I don't want to be in line for pertinent questions from a Scot! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 05, 2012, 05:52:57 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 05, 2012, 05:05:54 AM
Goodness knows I don't want to be in line for pertinent questions from a Scot! ; )

Even worse would be the impertinent questions from a Scot.

As to the original question--perhaps it's a case of two Us is a U too many.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2012, 05:56:00 AM
Mm, so no languour, either?  You may be right.  I kind of like the look of that -uou- though . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 05, 2012, 06:05:36 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 05, 2012, 05:56:00 AM
Mm, so no languour, either?  You may be right.  I kind of like the look of that -uou- though . . . .

It does give it an appropriately languourous look.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2012, 06:06:30 AM
Oh, louok out!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 05, 2012, 06:08:40 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 05, 2012, 06:06:30 AM
Oh, louok out!

Don't you mean

Ouh, lououk out!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 05, 2012, 06:09:51 AM
Uouh nouo!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 05, 2012, 06:14:00 AM
Pouring out the liquour's languourous humour...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 09, 2012, 03:32:23 PM
A radio show played an excerpt from the "debate" (such things are NOT debates at all, but that is another issue) among Republican candidates for president.

Governor Perry, following the W. Bush tradition of malapropisms, said something about Iranians moving into Iraq at "literally the speed of light."

Which reminded me of this scene:

http://www.youtube.com/v/TvlWZ3mODJA
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 10, 2012, 01:13:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 09, 2012, 03:32:23 PM
Governor Perry, following the W. Bush tradition of malapropisms, said something about Iranians moving into Iraq at "literally the speed of light."

- Mr. Einstein, how do you comment Gov. Perry's claim?

- He's literally exaggerating a bit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 10, 2012, 05:56:42 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 10, 2012, 01:13:24 AM
- Mr. Einstein, how do you comment Gov. Perry's claim?

- He's literally exaggerating a bit.

;D  Just a bit!

Today a news item told of a supposedly homeless man in a small Ohio town, who was seen paying cash for a 52-inch television set!  His "job" involves standing by gas stations near the freeway and begging for money.  It was discovered that although he occasionally hangs out at the local kitchens for the poor, he is ultimately a phony.

To which the lady in charge of the "soup kitchen" commented:

"All these people who are faking the funk are jerks!"   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 10, 2012, 05:58:40 AM
There are homeless people in Harvard Square who had smart phones before I did.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on January 10, 2012, 06:03:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 10, 2012, 05:56:42 AM
;D  Just a bit!
Today a news item told of a supposedly homeless man in a small Ohio town, who was seen paying cash for a 52-inch television set!  His "job" involves standing by gas stations near the freeway and begging for money.  It was discovered that although he occasionally hangs out at the local kitchens for the poor, he is ultimately a phony.
To which the lady in charge of the "soup kitchen" commented:
"All these people who are faking the funk are jerks!"   ;D

We have funking fakers in the UK too.  There are 'organised' beggars just like 'organised' crime.  Then they go home and play their X Boxes and check their laptops for mail.  Funking fake jerkers, they are.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 10, 2012, 06:45:19 PM
This is actually a very nice CD, but it deserves a place on this thread.
[asin]B005OJJJAE[/asin]
Because it describes itself as a

PURE HYBRID SACD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 11, 2012, 12:00:10 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 10, 2012, 06:45:19 PM
This is actually a very nice CD, but it deserves a place on this thread.
[asin]B005OJJJAE[/asin]
Because it describes itself as a

PURE HYBRID SACD

ROTFL
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on January 11, 2012, 02:01:52 AM
Re Affluent beggars, I rarely give, as I live in a country with a generous welfare system. I emphatically did not give to the lady who begged with her cup held out in one hand, whilst chatting on a phone held to her ear by the other.

At least she didn't have "hands free".


Quote from: karlhenning on January 05, 2012, 04:44:29 AM
Not a grumble, per se . . . .

Esteemed Britons! Colour and flavour, right?

Why not liquour?

Why not, indeed?

*glug glug*

Although I think you'll find we Anglos (and affiliates!) usually say "spirits".

*hic*


Off topic - Weird Victorian names:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMp_xGeQ2v0
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 11, 2012, 02:57:40 AM
Spirits in the material world...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 11, 2012, 04:58:38 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on January 11, 2012, 02:01:52 AM
Re Affluent beggars, I rarely give, as I live in a country with a generous welfare system. I emphatically did not give to the lady who begged with her cup held out in one hand, whilst chatting on a phone held to her ear by the other.

I'm on the phone. Your alms are important to us . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on January 12, 2012, 02:04:40 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 05, 2012, 05:56:00 AM
Mm, so no languour, either?  You may be right.  I kind of like the look of that -uou- though . . . .

Maybe you'll find it if you look in old novels. The following spellings were in existence around 1800:

Errour, and Terrour
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 12, 2012, 02:55:51 PM
"We have lots of programming to create and rolls to fill."

Hot dog!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 13, 2012, 11:41:31 AM
Not really a grumble . . . I like an amusing typo as well as (perhaps even better than) the next guy:

Quote. . . the specific consolidations being proposed would barley dent the number of . . . .

Emphasis mine ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on January 13, 2012, 12:12:26 PM
Mmm, barley, and not barely!

(http://www.thecastleinn-lulworthcove.co.uk/images/realales/large/harviestoun_bitter_and_twisted.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Why "Q" in Transliterations?
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2012, 11:46:29 AM
On a news show here in America, reporters with nothing else to do (apparently) were sent to interview Arabic speakers for the "proper pronunciation" of the countries "Qatar" and, one of my favorite places, "Iraq".   0:)   Some even were sent to Qatar itself.

The problem being: "Why a 'Q' instead of a 'K' in those words (and by implication in other transliterated words using an English 'Q')?"

Not one native speaker of Arabic used a "kw" sound for their pronunciation of the "Q" in "Qatar" or "Iraq."  Everything came out as a "K" or a "Kh" or even a "G" or "Gh" sound.

In German, "Qatar" is "Katar" and "Iraq" is "Irak."  Makes sense!

According to my daughter, worse is a system of transliterating Chinese: it uses "Q" for the "Ch" sound (as in Chinese).

Very odd!   :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 16, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Great grumble! Where on God's green English earth did that 'Q' come from!?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 16, 2012, 12:37:20 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 16, 2012, 11:53:05 AM
Great grumble! Where on God's green English earth did that 'Q' come from!?

Perhaps the Quinese people would know that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Why "Q" In Arabic Transliterations?
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2012, 12:54:01 PM
Okay, after spending not a few minutes on this, I have determined the following:

The sound being described is a "K," but pronounced even deeper in the throat than an English "K," which is why "Kh" or even "G(h)" came out when native Arabic speakers said "Qatar" in the interviews.

People prefer the old "Kh" idea, as in "Khadaffi" (R.I.P.).

A "kw" sound is NEVER involved!

None of the websites lists exactly which genius was responsible for the "Q" being used today.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Why "Q" In Arabic Transliterations?
Post by: chasmaniac on January 16, 2012, 01:11:40 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 16, 2012, 12:54:01 PM
Okay, after spending not a few minutes on this, I have determined the following:

The sound being described is a "K," but pronounced even deeper in the throat than an English "K," which is why "Kh" or even "G(h)" came out when native Arabic speakers said "Qatar" in the interviews.

People prefer the old "Kh" idea, as in "Khadaffi" (R.I.P.).

A "kw" sound is NEVER involved!

None of the websites lists exactly which genius was responsible for the "Q" being used today.

Is it a uvular stop? Old English had a uvular fricative in it, believe it or not, the source of some of our gh spellings, if memory serves. Oh, those japing Jutes!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 16, 2012, 03:17:30 PM
No wonder a sound known as the uvular fricative would be suppressed, hah!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Why "Q" in Transliterations?
Post by: The Six on January 16, 2012, 05:23:46 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 16, 2012, 11:46:29 AM
On a news show here in America, reporters with nothing else to do (apparently) were sent to interview Arabic speakers for the "proper pronunciation" of the countries "Qatar" and, one of my favorite places, "Iraq".   0:)   Some even were sent to Qatar itself.

The problem being: "Why a 'Q' instead of a 'K' in those words (and by implication in other transliterated words using an English 'Q')?"

Not one native speaker of Arabic used a "kw" sound for their pronunciation of the "Q" in "Qatar" or "Iraq."  Everything came out as a "K" or a "Kh" or even a "G" or "Gh" sound.

In German, "Qatar" is "Katar" and "Iraq" is "Irak."  Makes sense!

According to my daughter, worse is a system of transliterating Chinese: it uses "Q" for the "Ch" sound (as in Chinese).

Very odd!   :o

Probably to give the word some character. If you know certain words have unique spellings like that, it's a hint that it's a foreign word, and you might be able to figure out from where just from looking at it. Kind of like an identifier. There's no "u," so there shouldn't be any confusion as to whether it's pronounced "kw" or not.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Why "Q" In Arabic Transliterations?
Post by: kishnevi on January 16, 2012, 06:39:17 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 16, 2012, 12:54:01 PM
Okay, after spending not a few minutes on this, I have determined the following:

The sound being described is a "K," but pronounced even deeper in the throat than an English "K," which is why "Kh" or even "G(h)" came out when native Arabic speakers said "Qatar" in the interviews.

People prefer the old "Kh" idea, as in "Khadaffi" (R.I.P.).

A "kw" sound is NEVER involved!

None of the websites lists exactly which genius was responsible for the "Q" being used today.

It's probably done on parallel reasons with the usual system for transliterating Hebrew:  K for Kaph, Kh for Kaph sofit, Q for Qof, and H with a dot under it for Chet, in which the instructions suggest taking Scot loch or German Ich/Ach as approximations.

Kaph is the letter used, eg in Cohen;  Qof is the letter used in Qabalah/Kabbalah; Chet is the letter which leads off Chai and Chanukah. However, to add to the confusion, Kaph is actually a "double letter"; when a dot, called a dagesh, is inserted into the letter, it's sounded like Chet. Kaph sofit is the form of Kaph used when it's the final letter of a word, and is almost always used with the dagesh in that position.

Functionally in modern speech Kaph without dagesh sounds just like Qof; Kaph with dagesh sounds just like Chet, but K is the transliteration for both versions.  There is a grammatical rule which allows you to tell when you're dealing with a dagesh-Kaph or not. and because of that rule, Karl's name would be transliterated into Hebrew with Qof, and therefore transliterated back into English letters as QaRL.  (Dagesh is used when the Kaph is the first letter of a word or syllable.)

Cato would probably be QaiTV--where the V is a V used as a vowel to represent long O or long U.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 17, 2012, 09:33:52 AM
Oof, it's got to be a typo, though it happens twice in the same paragraph: winner take call for winner take all.

[ The source (http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/12/the-horserace-for-january-12-2012/) ]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on January 18, 2012, 05:46:23 AM
Dumb question #48844224567432: Does "Coke" have one or two syllables?

I notice that if I say it casually, it sounds like a cockney saying "coat" (the second two letters are ignored), but if I try to compensate, I put enough emphasis on the k to make it sound two-part. I suppose technically it is one syllable but the way it's spoken feels awkwardly like one and a half. Maybe it's my brain subconsciously pushing me towards the two bits in "Coca".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 05:47:56 AM
Quote from: Lethevich Dmitriyevna Pettersonova on January 18, 2012, 05:46:23 AM
Dumb question #48844224567432: Does "Coke" have one or two syllables?

I notice that if I say it casually, it sounds like a cockney saying "coat" (the second two letters are ignored), but if I try to compensate, I put enough emphasis on the k to make it sound two-part. I suppose technically it is one syllable but the way it's spoken feels awkwardly like one and a half. Maybe it's my brain subconsciously pushing me towards the two bits in "Coca".

I hear what you mean.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 18, 2012, 05:49:54 AM
FWIW . . . I've always pronounced it in one.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 05:59:49 AM
When your mouth breaks off the "k" sound, it makes an additional click.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 18, 2012, 06:02:41 AM
So the question is, Is the articulation of a voiceless consonant a syllable? : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 06:03:09 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 18, 2012, 06:02:41 AM
So the question is, Is the articulation of a voiceless consonant a syllable? : )

And I'd think the answer would be "no."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on January 18, 2012, 06:05:28 AM
Quote from: Lethevich Dmitriyevna Pettersonova on January 18, 2012, 05:46:23 AM
Dumb question #48844224567432: Does "Coke" have one or two syllables?

I notice that if I say it casually, it sounds like a cockney saying "coat" (the second two letters are ignored), but if I try to compensate, I put enough emphasis on the k to make it sound two-part. I suppose technically it is one syllable but the way it's spoken feels awkwardly like one and a half. Maybe it's my brain subconsciously pushing me towards the two bits in "Coca".

Is it a pair of demi-syllables (http://uclue.com/?xq=527)?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 06:06:54 AM
We need an "-oke" link.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 06:09:34 AM
And of course she's British so she's probably pronouncing it incorrectly.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 18, 2012, 06:13:47 AM
Yowch!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 18, 2012, 06:16:10 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 16, 2012, 06:39:17 PM
It's probably done on parallel reasons with the usual system for transliterating Hebrew:  K for Kaph, Kh for Kaph sofit, Q for Qof, and H with a dot under it for Chet, in which the instructions suggest taking Scot loch or German Ich/Ach as approximations.

Kaph is the letter used, eg in Cohen;  Qof is the letter used in Qabalah/Kabbalah; Chet is the letter which leads off Chai and Chanukah. However, to add to the confusion, Kaph is actually a "double letter"; when a dot, called a dagesh, is inserted into the letter, it's sounded like Chet. Kaph sofit is the form of Kaph used when it's the final letter of a word, and is almost always used with the dagesh in that position.

Functionally in modern speech Kaph without dagesh sounds just like Qof; Kaph with dagesh sounds just like Chet, but K is the transliteration for both versions.  There is a grammatical rule which allows you to tell when you're dealing with a dagesh-Kaph or not. and because of that rule, Karl's name would be transliterated into Hebrew with Qof, and therefore transliterated back into English letters as QaRL.  (Dagesh is used when the Kaph is the first letter of a word or syllable.)

Cato would probably be QaiTV--where the V is a V used as a vowel to represent long O or long U.

The catarrh on the cutter from Qatar . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 06:22:50 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 18, 2012, 06:13:47 AM
Yowch!

She can take a joke. Can't she?  :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on January 18, 2012, 06:26:10 AM
I'm afraid not - we are now mortal enemies!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 06:38:13 AM
Quote from: Lethevich Dmitriyevna Pettersonova on January 18, 2012, 06:26:10 AM
I'm afraid not - we are now mortal enemies!

(http://fc06.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2010/166/4/3/Hulk_vs__Superman_coloring_by_frostdusk.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 18, 2012, 06:40:54 AM
Quote from: Ataraxia on January 18, 2012, 06:22:50 AM
She can take a joke. Can't she?  :o

I've always believed she can.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 18, 2012, 08:22:46 AM
"Coke" - trust me on this - is one syllable.

I have heard people exaggerate their pronunciations, so that the silent "e" at the end of a word sounds closer to the pronounced final "e" in a German word. e.g. in their mouths "Name" = nay-muh.

A local priest, who according to legend had a childhood speech impediment, is infamous for over-pronouncing everything, which leads to ludicrous sounding sermons, of course, because one becomes distracted by the odd precision of everything.

"So precise it is wrong,"  e.g. he pronounces "God" so precisely that the final "d" comes out almost like a "t."  Or he will say "Godduh."

He also has a bizarre rhythm, where - for no obvious reason - he will speak rapidly, and then suddenly  h   e     w    i     l     l        taaaaallllllkkkk     sssssllloooowwwwlllllyyyyy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on January 22, 2012, 05:06:10 AM
(As this is the general language complaints thread, here we go... ;D)

I've noticed a technique that thriller type films use to make "it's a fake ID" sound much more impressive and potentially 'impossible':

"Either this guy doesn't exist or he's been wiped off the record."

His assumed identity may not be genuine, but it certainly exists, and I am fairly sure that the guy does too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2012, 05:38:16 AM
QuoteAfter finishing third in Iowa and second in New Hampshire, that was his worse showing yet.

One forgives the odd typo/error in on-line MSM.  But one cringes, even in the forgiving.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2012, 09:15:31 AM
Ouch!

QuoteCan Romney find a way to diffuse Newt's debate tactics?

I don't think of diffuse / defuse as a 'traditional' confusion.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: petrarch on January 23, 2012, 02:39:43 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2012, 09:15:31 AM
Ouch!

I don't think of diffuse / defuse as a 'traditional' confusion.

But it is very bazaar, anyway (saw this one not long ago).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 25, 2012, 05:47:20 AM
Tee-hee!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 25, 2012, 05:48:32 AM
Separately . . . I know, just a typo . . . but rather a funny one in the initial line of an extended review:

QuoteIn the pantheon of fantasy writers, no diety is treated with greater reverence than J.R.R. Tolkien . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 25, 2012, 03:04:10 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 25, 2012, 05:48:32 AM
Separately . . . I know, just a typo . . . but rather a funny one in the initial line of an extended review:

"No diety" - maybe the writer is an Austrylian!   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 28, 2012, 07:20:12 AM
So my wife was watching a show about Lawn Guyland (i.e. Long Island  0:)  )  doctors and the plot necessitated a woman trying to translate a German phrase into English.

So she goes to the Internet and types in "Es ist nicht ihr."   :o  The Internet brings: "It is not her."

"Ihr" can mean "her" in German, both as a possessive adjective (ihr Buch = her book) and a dative (ich gebe ihr ein Buch = I am giving her a book).

Okay, so very few Americans will not know that she should have typed in: "Es ist nicht sie" or "Sie ist es nicht."

This problem goes back to the use of the accusative in English after the intransitive verb to be:

"Who's there?"  "It's me!"  (Technically, one should say: "It is I."  But few people would, since it sounds (to American ears at least, odd and even arrogant).

The children's show of the good ol' days, MisterRogers, attempted to counteract this, as Mr. Rogers would say things e.g. (after a knock on the door): "Oh!  That must be he now!"   :o

In German "It's me" would be translated into normal German as "Ich bin es."  (Word for word: "I am it.")
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 28, 2012, 09:54:10 AM
Isn't that the response to "Tag!"...?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on January 28, 2012, 02:56:20 PM
Although the Oxford comma relates more directly to punctuation per se, this is quite amusing!

(http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/party-fails-after-grammar-saves-stag-parties.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on February 02, 2012, 08:46:07 AM
Question: iirc a lot of diacritic-heavy languages don't use the mark if it's on an upper-case letter. But do any English style guides have such a rule?

For example, the French I think would write "Quatuor Ebène", but if I were to follow my usual method of translating the framework into English but retaining the colour word untranslated (so becoming Ebène Quartet), as it's now an English context, should it become "Ébène Quartet"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on February 02, 2012, 05:47:16 PM
Completely unrelated to Sara's query, but it's been bugging me for the last few days, ever since I gave a first listen to Elgar's other choral works (meaning the non Gerontius stuff):

Dear Sir Edward:
Can you please refrain from treating the verb past tense suffix ("-ed") as a separate syllable.  To the best of my knowledge, on both sides of the Atlantic, "multiplied" is pronounced with three syllables, not four.  And that's not the only time you did it, but when you do it in the opening line of an oratorio it tends to linger longer in the memory.  It seriously detracted from my enjoyment of the music.  Please refrain from further offenses in this area.  I know Handel did it, but that is not a good precedent, since he was born in a country where they did not speak English as ihre Muttersprache.


Respectfully yours

Jeffrey Smith
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on February 02, 2012, 05:57:18 PM
More specific examples, please, Jeffrey. You are very learnd.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on February 02, 2012, 06:08:19 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on February 02, 2012, 05:57:18 PM
More specific examples, please, Jeffrey. You are very learnd.

Good on point example.

Learned as an adjective (which is how you used it) is pronounced with two syllables.

Learned as the past tense of the verb "to learn" is pronounced with one syllable.

The Elgar uses involved past tenses of verbs, not adjectives.

ETA: Oh, and that's pronounced with two syllables, not three, and involved with two syllables, not three.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on February 02, 2012, 07:19:48 PM
Alright, "Farmers Market" or "Farmers' Market," which is it? Surely it's not "Farmer's Market!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on February 02, 2012, 08:36:18 PM
Quote from: The Six on February 02, 2012, 07:19:48 PM
Alright, "Farmers Market" or "Farmers' Market," which is it? Surely it's not "Farmer's Market!"

Or worse -- it could be Farmers's Market!

;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on February 06, 2012, 06:44:45 AM
Someone really likes their commas at Vanity Fair.

The royal family of Qatar, does not comment on its purchases, however. And the tight circle of auction, houses, officials and dealers it is involved with, by and large, sign confidentiality agreements. But multiple sources confirm the record purchase of The Card Players.

[Source (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/02/qatar-buys-cezanne-card-players-201202?currentPage=all)]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 06, 2012, 01:49:50 PM
Quote from: The Six on February 02, 2012, 07:19:48 PM
Alright, "Farmers Market" or "Farmers' Market," which is it? Surely it's not "Farmer's Market!"

Oy!   :o

You are quite right: "Farmer's" would be wrong, unless somehow Mr. Farmer had opened a market!

I have seen both the plural possessive "Farmers' Market" and Farmers Market.  I like the former, but one could make a case for the latter.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 07, 2012, 01:49:27 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 06, 2012, 01:49:50 PM
Oy!   :o

You are quite right: "Farmer's" would be wrong, unless somehow Mr. Farmer had opened a market!

I have seen both the plural possessive "Farmers' Market" and Farmers Market.  I like the former, but one could make a case for the latter.

Plural adjectival nouns are only valid if there's cause for confusion, as in Plastics industry, for example. I'm not sure what confusion farmers might cause, unless they're going to release a bull. On the other hand, no one would say Farmer Market, but Farm Market would mean much the same.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 07, 2012, 09:22:58 AM
Normally, I'd not bat an eye at such a gaffe on Facebook . . . only it is an event to be held at NEC:

Spanning the breath of human experience . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: PaulSC on March 07, 2012, 10:32:12 AM
That would be bad breath, probably.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: PaulSC on March 07, 2012, 10:37:15 AM
How did the phrase "compare and contrast" become ubiquitous in contexts like exam instructions? It seems to me that "compare" by itself is already an invitation to describe differences as well as similarities. But now I don't dare formulate a question using only "compare," because students will protest that they weren't instructed to "contrast."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 07, 2012, 12:52:41 PM
Newspapers have enough pressures as it is, I am happy to spare the rod . . . still, worth observing:

Quote. . . but the victory was a hollow one, since neither Rick Santorum nor Newt Gingrich were on the ballot.

Neither Santorum nor Gingrich was on the ballot in The Old Dominion, to be sure.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on March 07, 2012, 07:58:54 PM
Quote from: PaulSC on March 07, 2012, 10:37:15 AM
How did the phrase "compare and contrast" become ubiquitous in contexts like exam instructions? It seems to me that "compare" by itself is already an invitation to describe differences as well as similarities. But now I don't dare formulate a question using only "compare," because students will protest that they weren't instructed to "contrast."

Here's where shades of meaning become important.
"Compare" often carries with it the implication that the person comparing A and B is looking for similarities first, and differences are secondary.  "Contrast" carries the implication, obviously, that the differences take priority over similarities.  So while a formal definition would say :"compare and contrast" contains a redundancy, the usual implications of the words make the redundancy only formal, not real.

"Compare and contrast", by the way, was in universal when I was in school thirty years and more ago.  It may simply have become one of those lingual fossils that are carried on because they always have been.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on March 07, 2012, 09:25:20 PM
Quotecom·pare (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/compare)  (km-pâr)
v.tr.
1. To consider or describe as similar, equal, or analogous; liken.
2. To examine in order to note the similarities or differences of.
3. Grammar To form the positive, comparative, or superlative degree of (an adjective or adverb).
v.intr.
1. To be worthy of comparison; bear comparison: two concert halls that just do not compare.
2. To draw comparisons.

The above entry goes on to note that the word derives from the Latin for "equal".

Anyway, "compare and contrast" has a nicely poetic alliteration and rhythm - these things are important!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: PaulSC on March 08, 2012, 10:33:22 AM
All good points. I appreciate the graceful alliteration of the phrase and am happy to use it in some contexts. But it becomes more cumbersome in a situation like the following: "Describe Berio's use of quotation in the third movement of his Sinfonia, and compare his methods and results with those of Bernd Alois Zimmermann in a work such as Dialogues."

Perhaps I shouldn't grumble...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on March 08, 2012, 03:29:00 PM
Quote from: PaulSC on March 08, 2012, 10:33:22 AM"Describe Berio's use of quotation in the third movement of his Sinfonia, and compare his methods and results with those of Bernd Alois Zimmermann in a work such as Dialogues."

This reminds me of why I dropped out...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 09, 2012, 08:39:10 AM
Here's a mild curiosity:

QuoteWe will confirm your appointment request with in the next 24 business hours.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 09, 2012, 08:41:01 AM
I meant the breaking up of within . . . but there's also the head-fake of 24 business hours. It gives off the impression of 24 hours, but in fact means three work-days.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on March 11, 2012, 04:50:26 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 09, 2012, 08:41:01 AMI meant the breaking up of within . . . but there's also the head-fake of 24 business hours. It gives off the impression of 24 hours, but in fact means three work-days.

Ooh, sneaky! Well caught, Karl.

I still remember a sign I saw in a dept store as a child: "Buy 2 for the price of 3".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on March 11, 2012, 08:33:26 PM
For those of you who live in the UK, can you please explain how you distinguish between that and which? I very rarely see that used as we do (or should) in the US. For instance, UK citizens would write, "Proper usage is a matter which we must always strive to achieve." US citizens would use that in such an instance. We use which when we refer back to a point: "I did not learn proper grammar, which I now see is a fault of my early education."  I will appreciate any enlightenment that/which you can provide.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on March 11, 2012, 09:01:15 PM
This is one of the more obscure corners of grammar.... My understanding is that, in UK usage (which I attempt to adhere to), "which" is used in subordinate clauses, and in referring to specific instances of a class. This also helps avoid ungainly repetition (e.g. "that book, that is on that shelf").

Which book do you prefer?
I prefer THAT WHICH is nearest at hand.

Note that this order cannot be reversed!
Title: "Reminiscent of the Voices of Angels!" Oh, Is That So?
Post by: Cato on March 19, 2012, 05:10:26 AM
This morning we saw a commercial for a concert called Celtic Woman, where maidens of supposedly Gaelic background fiddle around on stage, twirbling assorted reels, dirges, and maybe even soda-bread recipes.

Anyway, our ears started bleeding when we heard this claim in the commercial about the singers:

"...with voices reminiscent of the voices of angels..."   ???    :o    0:)   Really???

"Ah yes, I remember it well!"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on March 19, 2012, 05:33:08 PM
Oh yes, I've seen "Celtic woman" repeated on our public access channel. It is woeful kitsch. But hardly worse than the last night of the proms  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on March 19, 2012, 05:56:05 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on March 19, 2012, 05:33:08 PM
Oh yes, I've seen "Celtic woman" repeated on our public access channel. It is woeful kitsch. But hardly worse than the last night of the proms  >:D

It's much worse actually.  Last Night of the Proms doesn't get replayed for years on PBS (our public television network), and doesn't get marketed to death at Barnes and Noble.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on April 04, 2012, 06:13:21 PM
American Q: what does 'blowout' mean in the context of an exciting event - or, does it have a special context that makes its use more appropriate?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 04, 2012, 06:44:45 PM
Quote from: Lethevich on April 04, 2012, 06:13:21 PM
American Q: what does 'blowout' mean in the context of an exciting event - or, does it have a special context that makes its use more appropriate?

In sports, it means a lopsided victory: a baseball score of 10-0 or 12-1 would be a "blowout." 

I suppose it means that the losing team was "blown out" of the stadium (symbolically)  0:)  .

Transferred, it has come to mean things like a wild party or rock concert.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 04, 2012, 07:00:16 PM
I get annoyed at supposedly educated people misusing the expression "basket case". They seem to think it refers to a wastepaper basket, e.g. "Europe's economy is a basket case". As all here know (I hope), a "basket case" is a crazy person, this expression deriving from the 1920s, when basket weaving was popular as a therapy in mental institutions.


See also this film:
[ASIN]6305186677[/ASIN]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on April 04, 2012, 07:11:12 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 04, 2012, 06:44:45 PM
In sports, it means a lopsided victory: a baseball score of 10-0 or 12-1 would be a "blowout." 

I suppose it means that the losing team was "blown out" of the stadium (symbolically)  0:)  .

Transferred, it has come to mean things like a wild party or rock concert.

Danke :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 05, 2012, 05:13:13 AM
Quote from: Lethevich on April 04, 2012, 07:11:12 PM
Danke :)

Nichts zu danken!

Concerning the phrase "basket case" : yes, I recall it being slang for a mentally ill person, but according to Wikipedia ( 0:) ) it perhaps originally meant a "quadruple amputee" from World War I.  Since both such types of people need great help, the meaning seems to have transferred to badly run companies or countries.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 05, 2012, 05:15:50 AM
The American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms confirms the Wikipedia story about the WWI origin of "basket case."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 05, 2012, 08:01:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 04, 2012, 06:44:45 PM
In sports, it means a lopsided victory: a baseball score of 10-0 or 12-1 would be a "blowout." 

I suppose it means that the losing team was "blown out" of the stadium (symbolically)  0:)  .

Transferred, it has come to mean things like a wild party or rock concert.

I've heard an alternative origin for the word as applied to parties and concerts--that it suggests the idea that the music was so loud (and therefore, in the context of rock concerts/parties, suberbly festive*) that it blew out the speakers on the sound equipment.

*I was going to use the word "party-ific" but decides that perhaps I shouldn't do so in a thread devoted to grammar grumbles.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 05, 2012, 09:34:48 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 05, 2012, 08:01:19 AM
I've heard an alternative origin for the word as applied to parties and concerts--that it suggests the idea that the music was so loud (and therefore, in the context of rock concerts/parties, superbly festive*) that it blew out the speakers on the sound equipment.

*I was going to use the word "party-ific" but decides that perhaps I shouldn't do so in a thread devoted to grammar grumbles.

That origin theory makes a great deal of sense: possibly the same term arose, but from two different backgrounds.

"Party-ific" - You might have something there!  Maybe add an "r" - Partyrific :o  "party" + "terrific"

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 05, 2012, 09:40:53 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 05, 2012, 08:01:19 AM
I've heard an alternative origin for the word as applied to parties and concerts--that it suggests the idea that the music was so loud (and therefore, in the context of rock concerts/parties, suberbly festive*) that it blew out the speakers on the sound equipment.

http://www.youtube.com/v/QsX5PtVTfxg
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 05, 2012, 09:48:26 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 05, 2012, 09:40:53 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/QsX5PtVTfxg
That's disgusting  ;D
I mean of course how the hum isn't affected by the guitars volume knob, and the sound from the strummed chord doesn't sound loud at all...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2012, 06:48:32 AM
Thanks to Daniel Henninger in the April 5, 2012 Wall Street Journal we have this quotation from the debated "Health Care Law" now before the U.S. Supreme Court:

QuoteThe ACA calls the act of purchasing insurance a "required contribution." Naturally, many will wonder if they can get out of this. That depends on the meaning of "required contribution," as defined in "Chapter 48—Maintenance of Minimum Essential Coverage, (e) Exemptions, (B) Required contributions:

"For purposes of this paragraph, the term 'required contribution' means . . .: (ii) in the case of an individual eligible only to purchase minimum essential coverage described in subsection (f)(1)(C), the annual premium for the lowest cost bronze plan available in the individual market through the Exchange in the State in the rating area in which the individual resides (without regard to whether the individual purchased a qualified health plan though the Exchange), reduced by the amount of the credit allowable under section 36B for the taxable year (determined as if the individual was covered by a qualified health plan offered through the Exchange for the entire taxable year)."

::)   :P    ???

Okay, where is the VERB for "the annual premium," which would seem to be the subject of the verbiage following it?  If it is supposed to be "reduced," that is disallowed because of the "by" clause following it.  "Reduced" seems therefore to be an adjective, but what is it modifying?  The last noun is "Exchange" but how can that be "reduced" ?  Perhaps they mean "is reduced" or "will be" reduced?

And note the lack of the subjunctive in the parenthesis!

The entire bill runs close to 3,000 pages!  Sister Alda  0:)  would have taken out her yardstick and properly chastised any student for such a Crime Against Grammar!  No wonder Justice Scalia sourly joked that having to read the thing constituted "cruel and unusual punishment."   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 06, 2012, 08:48:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 06, 2012, 06:48:32 AM
Thanks to Daniel Henninger in the April 5, 2012 Wall Street Journal we have this quotation from the debated "Health Care Law" now before the U.S. Supreme Court:

::)   :P    ???

Okay, where is the VERB for "the annual premium," which would seem to be the subject of the verbiage following it?  If it is supposed to be "reduced," that is disallowed because of the "by" clause following it.  "Reduced" seems therefore to be an adjective, but what is it modifying?  The last noun is "Exchange" but how can that be "reduced" ?  Perhaps they mean "is reduced" or "will be" reduced?

And note the lack of the subjunctive in the parenthesis!



You have yourself all turned around and twisted here, I'm afraid,  but it's understandable.

"Required contribution means annual premium" is the bare bones version, to which all the rest is added on verbiage.  "Reduced" is indeed adjective,  and the noun it adjectivizes is the same term--"annual premium".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2012, 10:25:44 AM
I have been looking for the "..." before the section marked "ii" in the original document (Chapter 48) to see if a clue exists in there.

But my Lenten penance is technically over.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 09, 2012, 09:47:21 AM
Quote from: seen on imdb.comThe Best Movies of the 80s. Literally!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on April 09, 2012, 09:49:03 AM
Ooh! Literally...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 09, 2012, 01:31:25 PM
Perhaps it means books based on the best movies of the 80s.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 10, 2012, 02:46:58 PM
Seems like more and more people don't realize that there's a "d" at the end of some words, e.g. "You're not suppose to do that," "I use to shop there," etc. Man, we're getting dumber.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on April 10, 2012, 08:51:07 PM
Quote from: The Six on April 10, 2012, 02:46:58 PM
"You're not suppose to do that," "I use to shop there," etc. Man, we're getting dumber.

Just read it aloud, silly; there's a D-sound there, somewhere ;D...I think.  :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 11, 2012, 03:44:50 AM
Quote from: The Six on April 10, 2012, 02:46:58 PM
Seems like more and more people don't realize that there's a "d" at the end of some words, e.g. "You're not suppose to do that," "I use to shop there," etc. Man, we're getting dumber.

Quote from: Opus106 on April 10, 2012, 08:51:07 PM
Just read it aloud, silly; there's a D-sound there, somewhere ;D...I think.  :-\

Yes, I hope it is smeared into a contraction.  The real test would be to have the seeming offenders write down what they have said!

The Six (and are you referring to the composers or    $:)   to Patrick McGoohan?) fears we are getting dumber: the spread of things like "I could care less" which is replacing the correct "I could not care less" might indicate a widening stultification  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 11, 2012, 03:52:53 AM
Then, too, there are historical cases of the -d being dropped (iced cream -> ice cream). That said, not suppose to is entirely A.B. (Arrant Blockheaddom).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on April 11, 2012, 06:00:29 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 11, 2012, 03:44:50 AM
The real test would be to have the seeming offenders write down what they have said!

It's likely that The Six came across statements like these in writing, because, unless they were from someone with a clear pronunciation, it's hard to differentiate, for example, 'supposed to' and 'suppose to' in casual speech (the 'D' sound is there, you know ;D). And if that person was so careful about pronunciation, he or she probably wouldn't make such a silly mistake. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 11, 2012, 06:00:21 PM
could of
would of
should of
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 11, 2012, 06:35:21 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 11, 2012, 06:00:21 PM
could of
would of
should of

Oy!  Such schmendricks these days!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 11, 2012, 06:40:05 PM
The character Groucho never played: Marzipan Schmendrick.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 11, 2012, 07:23:01 PM
A new fact!

QuoteSchmendrick - "stupid person," from Yiddish Shmendrik, from the name of a character in an operetta by Avrom Goldfaden (1840-1908), Father of Yiddish Theater.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on April 15, 2012, 10:27:50 AM
(http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/mobile-phone-texting-autocorrect-autocowrecks-youve-brought-this-upon-yourself-grammar-heathen.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 16, 2012, 04:14:51 AM
Finally reading Albert Schweitzer's classic book on Bach!  I suppose this must be in translation, still . . . is The music among which Bach grew up good English?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 16, 2012, 12:16:59 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 16, 2012, 04:14:51 AM
Finally reading Albert Schweitzer's classic book on Bach!  I suppose this must be in translation, still . . . is The music among which Bach grew up good English?

It's more awkward* than incorrect.  Perhaps this is a case of translationitis?  We'd probably write it a completely different way ("the music Bach heard as he grew up...." or something similar), which is why this sounds wrong. 

*just realized how awkward the spelling of that word seems to me.  Which is, perhaps, fitting.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 16, 2012, 05:41:33 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 16, 2012, 04:14:51 AMFinally reading Albert Schweitzer's classic book on Bach!  I suppose this must be in translation, still . . . is The music among which Bach grew up good English?

Hmm... I would say "amidst", "amongst" at a pinch.

What's the difference between "among" and "amongst", apart from the spelling?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 16, 2012, 05:58:32 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 16, 2012, 05:41:33 PM
Hmm... I would say "amidst", "amongst" at a pinch.

What's the difference between "among" and "amongst", apart from the spelling?

From the sources I have available, they are equivalent.  I avoid "amongst" and prefer "among" just for the sake of simplicity.

Quote from: karlhenning on April 16, 2012, 04:14:51 AM
Finally reading Albert Schweitzer's classic book on Bach!  I suppose this must be in translation, still . . . is The music among which Bach grew up good English?

I would need to see the original Deutsch: is it possible Schweitzer wrote "unter"?  Besides meaning "under" it can also mean "among."  Perhaps implied is the influence of the music "under which" Bach grew up.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 16, 2012, 06:30:35 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 16, 2012, 05:41:33 PM
Hmm... I would say "amidst", "amongst" at a pinch.

What's the difference between "among" and "amongst", apart from the spelling?

Eureka!
That's why the sentence doesn't sound correct.  The wrong preposition was used.  It would better, albeit capable of improvement, if "amid" had been used instead of "among".

"X was among Y" suggests that X was a member of a set of Ys.  "X was amid Y" suggests that X was physically located somewhere in the middle of a group of Ys.

"Bach was among many musicians in his family"--Bach was one of several musicians in his family.
"Bach was amid many musicians in his family"--Bach was (at the time under discussion) physically located in a group of family members who were musicians.

"Bach was among the bushes"--Bach was part of a group of bushes,  Bach himself being one of the bushes.
"Bach was amid the bushes"--Bach was talking a stroll in the garden.

The sentence as translated therefore carries the mental image that Bach was one of the types or pieces of music under discussion., rather than the mental image the translator wanted to convey, which was that Bach was physically located in place where certain pieces or types of music were to be found.

Credit for the goal should go to eyeresist.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 17, 2012, 05:11:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 16, 2012, 05:58:32 PM
I would need to see the original Deutsch: is it possible Schweitzer wrote "unter"?  Besides meaning "under" it can also mean "among."  Perhaps implied is the influence of the music "under which" Bach grew up.

Interesting!  And . . . I think Schweitzer was Alsatian, so did he write originally in German or French?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on April 18, 2012, 03:08:58 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 17, 2012, 05:11:35 AM
Interesting!  And . . . I think Schweitzer was Alsatian, so did he write originally in German or French?

Interesting.  According to wikipedia, he originally wrote it in French, there was a demand for a German edition, but instead of just translating it, he decided to rewrite it.  Ernest Newman translated it into English from the German.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 20, 2012, 06:03:36 AM
Okay, so, here we go: last night we were at the "Bad" Wal-Mart (we live in between two of them, and the other is the "Good" Wal-Mart, i.e. the personnel and the clientele do not in general come from Planet On Niarb   ???  .

In the parking lot sits a long white and only slightly decrepit van with a sign on the door.

The sign says:

"Lest Thy BELIEVE ON THE LORD JESUS, Thy Will Be SAVED!"    ???    :o

I did not write down the Gospel passage cited, but there was one cited!   0:)

Needless, to say Cato will not be switching to such a church, mainly because I cannot quite understand what I should do to be saved!   0:)

"Thy" of course is an adjective, and I am not sure how you "believe on" somebody, and the "lest" is just very odd!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 20, 2012, 06:18:45 AM
That believe on may be an artifact from the KJV.  Or not . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 20, 2012, 06:20:56 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 20, 2012, 06:18:45 AM
That believe on may be an artifact from the KJV.  Or not . . . .

No time now, but I will look into that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on April 20, 2012, 06:34:10 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 20, 2012, 06:18:45 AM
That believe on may be an artifact from the KJV.  Or not . . . .

It's archaic. This from the Online Etymology Dictionary (a great site for those of us who can't afford access to the OED):

QuoteO.E. belyfan "to believe," earlier geleafa (Mercian), gelefa (Northumbrian), gelyfan (W.Saxon) "believe," from P.Gmc. *ga-laubjan "to believe," perhaps lit. "hold dear, love" (cf. O.S. gilobian "believe," Du. geloven, O.H.G. gilouben, Ger. glauben), ultimately a compound based on PIE *leubh- "to care, desire, love" (see belief). Spelling beleeve is common till 17c.; then altered, perhaps by influence of relieve, etc. To believe on instead of in was more common in 16c. but now is a peculiarity of theology; believe of also sometimes was used in 17c. Related: Believed (formerly occasionally beleft); believing. Expression believe it or not attested by 1874; Robert Ripley's newspaper cartoon of the same name is from 1918. Emphatic you better believe attested from 1854.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 20, 2012, 07:18:27 AM
Quote from: chasmaniac on April 20, 2012, 06:34:10 AM
It's archaic. This from the Online Etymology Dictionary (a great site for those of us who can't afford access to the OED): ...To believe on instead of in was more common in 16c. but now is a peculiarity of theology;

Many thanks for finding that information!

As a Catholic I grew up with the Douay-Rheims translation, and have only occasionally looked into the King James Version.

So our itinerant preacher is not really wrong about that!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 22, 2012, 05:34:54 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 20, 2012, 06:03:36 AM"Lest Thy BELIEVE ON THE LORD JESUS, Thy Will Be SAVED!"

This seems to be saying that I will be saved UNLESS I believe in Jebus....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 22, 2012, 05:41:58 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 22, 2012, 05:34:54 PM
This seems to be saying that I will be saved UNLESS I believe in Jebus....

Right, which is why I found the quote (along with the other curiosities) very odd!

Correcting my students' translations: a large minority of 7th Graders insist on writing - and this is after I have drawn and quartered a few as examples and given them a mnemonic device to avoid the error - "Soliders" or "Soilders" for "Soldiers" !!!   :o

I have told them unless the word "die" is in their version of the word, they are wrong, since a "soldier" could "Die."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on April 24, 2012, 10:02:23 AM
I'm surprised to find myself on this thread.  Would you believe it?  I read an article on grammar!  It literally made my head explode. ;)

http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-commonly-corrected-grammar-errors-that-arent-mistakes/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-commonly-corrected-grammar-errors-that-arent-mistakes/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 24, 2012, 10:05:05 AM
Quote from: DavidW on April 24, 2012, 10:02:23 AM
I'm surprised to find myself on this thread.  Would you believe it?  I read an article on grammar!  It literally made my head explode. ;)

http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-commonly-corrected-grammar-errors-that-arent-mistakes/ (http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-commonly-corrected-grammar-errors-that-arent-mistakes/)

Well, that site is blocked here at school, so I will need to wait until this evening to find out!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 24, 2012, 10:15:15 AM
Blocked here, too.

Sorry to be slow to enjoy your début, Davey!
: )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on April 24, 2012, 10:17:42 AM
Why did my post that showed the "autocowrecks [sic]" about "your/you're" get deleted? Does this thread forbid humor?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 24, 2012, 10:31:42 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on April 24, 2012, 10:17:42 AM
Why did my post that showed the "autocowrecks [sic]" about "your/you're" get deleted? Does this thread forbid humor?

Forbid it? Why, here we encourage it to run indecently clad.

Davey, I fergot that I could get there via the Droid! Like not a little Cracked, it winds up a bit heavy-handed for my taste
; )

That said, quite funny in places, really. I'll never believe that somewhat more than 99% of the population struggles with distinguishing nouns from verbs.

And if they do: WE GRUMBLE!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on April 24, 2012, 10:33:06 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on April 24, 2012, 10:17:42 AM
Why did my post that showed the "autocowrecks [sic]" about "your/you're" get deleted? Does this thread forbid humor?

No, it doesn't, as you can see by reading a plethora of humorous exchanges in the previous pages. In fact, if you go to the page just before the current one, you will come across the post you're referring to. ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 24, 2012, 10:59:33 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on April 24, 2012, 10:17:42 AM
Why did my post that showed the "autocowrecks [sic]" about "your/you're" get deleted? Does this thread forbid humor?

Impoceros!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on April 24, 2012, 12:32:47 PM
I certainly agree about the passive voice. To over use it becomes boring. to never use it becomes equally dull. It is a variation and variety is the spice of writing. Besides which if you examine the suggested alternatives supplied by Microsoft Word, some of them a ridiculously stilted.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on April 24, 2012, 03:22:04 PM
Quote from: Opus106 on April 24, 2012, 10:33:06 AM
No, it doesn't, as you can see by reading a plethora of humorous exchanges in the previous pages. In fact, if you go to the page just before the current one, you will come across the post you're referring to. ;)

That's weird--it was there for a day or two, but when I looked to see if anyone had replied to it, it was gone! And yes, I was looking at the right page. All's well now.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 24, 2012, 04:37:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 24, 2012, 10:05:05 AM
Well, that site is blocked here at school, so I will need to wait until this evening to find out!

Okay, given the obscenities in the essay, I can understand why the Diocese of Columbus blocked it at my Catholic school!  I found the writer's use of obscene language unnecessary: there are ways of being humorous and emphatic without being low-class.  Obscene language in one sense these days is its own cliche'.

Anyway...

A few comments: "To boldly go where no man has gone before:"  Star Trek splits not only infinity, but also the infinitive!

The blame for this being somehow cast upon Latin is odd: infinitives in Latin are one word!  They cannot be split! 

One must admit that rhythmically a split infinitive in English sometimes flows better: "Boldly to go where..."   "To go boldly..."  Not the best meter.

"They" as a generic pronoun does not upset me either.

I would like to preserve "less" vs. "fewer."

The Passive Voice can be used (!) now and then without reproach, and there are times when it must be used!   ;D

"Literally" forces this comment:

http://www.youtube.com/v/TvlWZ3mODJA


Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 24, 2012, 04:41:54 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 24, 2012, 04:37:50 PM
Okay, given the obscenities in the essay, I can understand why the Diocese of Columbus blocked it at my Catholic school!

And why it was blocked by the nannies by us, though we are no religious institution.

It's a legitimate (if not grammatical) grumble that some comedians think that gratuitous obscenity is amusing.
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 24, 2012, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 24, 2012, 04:41:54 PM
And why it was blocked by the nannies by us, though we are no religious institution.

It's a legitimate (if not grammatical) grumble that some comedians think that gratuitous obscenity is amusing.

Johnny Carson once commented that weak comedians have no trouble in bringing out the smut when they start bombing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 24, 2012, 05:21:16 PM
Watching The Dick van Dyke Show. How's this guy imagine he's funny?-- all his material is family-friendly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 24, 2012, 09:05:36 PM
"Less" vs. "fewer" seems rather pointless. The opposite of both is "more," so why do we suddenly need a distinction when talking about a smaller quantity?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 25, 2012, 04:37:09 AM
Quote from: The Six on April 24, 2012, 09:05:36 PM
"Less" vs. "fewer" seems rather pointless. The opposite of both is "more," so why do we suddenly need a distinction when talking about a smaller quantity?

I think "less" is for non-countable nouns: less pollution and unemployment would be fine and so would be fewer taxes and politicians.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 25, 2012, 04:55:09 AM
Andrei's post raises another good point:  there is a valuable distinction between less taxes (a lesser sum paid in tax) and fewer taxes (fewer classes of article subject to taxation).

Cracked making the point that if it's on supermarket signage, it must be okay is caveman talk.

Parenthetically: When I was a teenager (it amuses me now to recall), I read Mad magazine a great deal, and even quite a few of their trade paperback offerings.  Some of it made my eyes roll (a good deal of it, even) but some of it really tickled me mentally.  Still, overall, my impression was that it was rather roughcut.

One day, on a whim (since I had seen it so many times on the newsstand) I tried an issue of Cracked.  I could not have put this into words at the time, but once I had read Cracked, I realized just how subtle the humor was, in Mad ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 25, 2012, 04:56:56 AM
Cor, Mad magazine may just have been my first guilty pleasure . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 25, 2012, 08:16:21 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 25, 2012, 04:37:09 AM
I think "less" is for non-countable nouns: less pollution and unemployment would be fine and so would be fewer taxes and politicians.  ;D

Amen!   0:)
Quote from: karlhenning on April 25, 2012, 04:55:09 AM
Andrei's post raises another good point:  there is a valuable distinction between less taxes (a lesser sum paid in tax) and fewer taxes (fewer classes of article subject to taxation).

Cracked making the point that if it's on supermarket signage, it must be okay is caveman talk.

Parenthetically: When I was a teenager (it amuses me now to recall), I read Mad magazine a great deal, and even quite a few of their trade paperback offerings.  Some of it made my eyes roll (a good deal of it, even) but some of it really tickled me mentally.  Still, overall, my impression was that it was rather roughcut.

One day, on a whim (since I had seen it so many times on the newsstand) I tried an issue of Cracked.  I could not have put this into words at the time, but once I had read Cracked, I realized just how subtle the humor was, in Mad ; )

Oh yes!  I recall seeing the first issue of Cracked and like you knew it was a pale imitation of Mad

Friends had to show me the occasional issue of Mad, since my mother thought it was trash: I discovered in later years that it contains a subtle support of basic morality and is therefore not as subversive as one might think.  I recall seeing criticism of tobacco use as stupid, and of the idiocies coming out of Hollywood.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 25, 2012, 08:46:28 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 25, 2012, 04:55:09 AM
Andrei's post raises another good point:  there is a valuable distinction between less taxes (a lesser sum paid in tax) and fewer taxes (fewer classes of article subject to taxation).


Still, there is no such distinction for "more", and we seem to manage just fine.

Mad Magazine has had some brilliant stuff in the past. I picked up some compilations of stuff from the '50s-'80s and there's really clever stuff. Cracked was just a cheap rip-off, but looking through their website, it's actually pretty good now. It's pretty much nothing but lists, but there are some authors who are decent.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 25, 2012, 08:50:13 AM
Quote from: The Six on April 25, 2012, 08:46:28 AM
Still, there is no such distinction for "more", and we seem to manage just fine.

Well, in Russian there's one word serves for both "arm" and "hand," one word for "dove" and "pigeon," one word for "oil" and "butter."  They manage just fine, too.  Crazy of us to have six words where three will serve adequately, right?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 25, 2012, 09:35:04 AM
I wonder how you guys manage when you want to make that countable/non-countable distinction, but are talking about "more" of something. Must be rough.  :-*
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 25, 2012, 09:39:45 AM
Mime, mostly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on April 25, 2012, 10:13:08 AM
I liked Mad Magazine when I was a kid, I never knew about Cracked back then.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 25, 2012, 05:49:28 PM
One pair of usages that often get me confused are the expressions "a couple of..." and "a few", which are often used and abused to the point of utter distortion.  One would expect "a couple of" to mean two or (reasonable amplification) three or four, and "a few" to mean more than "a couple of" but not too many more (or else one would say "a bunch", which is vague but at least suggests a sizeable number)--say, in the neighborhood of five or six,  although context may make the number larger.  But vernacular English seems to feel that "a couple" and "a few" are synonymous, and often equivalent to "a bunch".  Result is that when someone says "I'll be back in a couple of minutes"  they may mean anything from two minutes up to the rest of the day, and "It's just a few dollars more" may really mean  a hundred dollars more.....and so when I hear those phrases,  I get no real information, and am annoyed no end...

[/rant]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 25, 2012, 06:28:44 PM
My own bugbear (well, one of them) is "who" vs. "that". "Who" is for people (and personified entities); "That" is for objects. I hate people that get that wrong! ;)

Quote from: Cato on April 24, 2012, 10:59:33 AMImpoceros!

Inconceivable!


Quote from: The Six on April 25, 2012, 09:35:04 AMI wonder how you guys manage when you want to make that countable/non-countable distinction, but are talking about "more" of something. Must be rough.  :-*

Well, yeah - why bother using words with meaning when we can just gesticulate and grunt?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 25, 2012, 06:47:52 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 25, 2012, 06:28:44 PM
Well, yeah - why bother using words with meaning when we can just gesticulate and grunt?

Not sure what this has to do with my point of view here, but OK.

We are headed down that road, by the way. Vocabularies aren't just shrinking, but also patience for lengthy means of communication. Shorthand isn't just for texting and message boards, anymore.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 25, 2012, 07:21:43 PM
tl;dr
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on April 25, 2012, 08:29:42 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s320x320/385757_221682614606921_100002955528868_385587_1116118438_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 26, 2012, 02:23:53 AM
Saw that on fb. Borrowing Chas Schultz's classic images to call people nasty names: how classy!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 26, 2012, 03:34:40 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 25, 2012, 06:28:44 PM
My own bugbear (well, one of them) is "who" vs. "that". "Who" is for people (and personified entities); "That" is for objects. I hate people that get that wrong! ;)


Well, yeah - why bother using words with meaning when we can just gesticulate and grunt?

When they are trying to sound smarter than they are, my less intelligent 6th, 7th, and 8th Graders too often choose "which" to refer to people.  One would think that it is an easy distinction to keep straight: one would be wrong!

The inarticulate nature of some of our young people, and middle-aged ones as well, with their constant: "Yeah, well, you know, it was kind of like, I don't knoooow, somethinnnnn', you know?  And so I was like, I don't knoooow, it was just...kind of ....weird...I guess."

That is an actual quote from one of 14-year old girls not long ago!  Again, she is not one of the higher wattage students, but there are a good number similar to her.



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 26, 2012, 03:46:38 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 25, 2012, 07:21:43 PM
tl;dr

I dig. (* grunt *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 26, 2012, 03:50:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 25, 2012, 08:16:21 AM
Friends had to show me the occasional issue of Mad, since my mother thought it was trash: I discovered in later years that it contains a subtle support of basic morality and is therefore not as subversive as one might think.  I recall seeing criticism of tobacco use as stupid, and of the idiocies coming out of Hollywood.

Curiously, I don't think I had paid all that much attention to (this will seem a non sequitur) Pogo, until after reading a Mad parody (not one of their more withering efforts).  Still, it's only this year that I am applying myself to reading Pogo . . . and the seed for this, I must own, was planted long decades ago by Mad.

Also: It is just possible that I should never have known the word schlemiel at all, were it not for reading it (and being sore puzzled by it) in Mad . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 26, 2012, 04:04:55 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 26, 2012, 03:50:37 AM
Also: It is just possible that I should never have known the word schlemiel at all, were it not for reading it (and being sore puzzled by it) in Mad . . . .

Oy!  Kids these days!  I should a stood in bed!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 26, 2012, 10:26:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 26, 2012, 03:34:40 AM
When they are trying to sound smarter than they are, my less intelligent 6th, 7th, and 8th Graders too often choose "which" to refer to people.  One would think that it is an easy distinction to keep straight: one would be wrong!

The inarticulate nature of some of our young people, and middle-aged ones as well, with their constant: "Yeah, well, you know, it was kind of like, I don't knoooow, somethinnnnn', you know?  And so I was like, I don't knoooow, it was just...kind of ....weird...I guess."

That is an actual quote from one of 14-year old girls not long ago!  Again, she is not one of the higher wattage students, but there are a good number similar to her.

"Which" in place of "who" can claim the authority of one of the most famous passages in the King James Bible--Luke 2:11

Quote
For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

The RV kept "which" while rewriting the first part of the verse in slightly more modern fashion, which means the RV revisors intentionally kept it in.

Quote
for there is born to you this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

Most other translations seem to stick to "who".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 26, 2012, 10:48:12 AM
QuoteGuitarists of the world 'Unite!'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 26, 2012, 11:25:30 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 26, 2012, 10:48:12 AM

QuoteGuitarists of the world 'Unite!'


......you have nothing to lose but your punctuation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 26, 2012, 05:59:49 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 26, 2012, 10:26:07 AM
For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

Admittedly the KJV has some expressions which wouldn't parse today. I think in this case we could say "Saviour" is an object rather than an entity, so technically correct?

BTW, a nice new annotated King James has been in my wish list for ages, but keeps getting bumped in favour of CDs and DVDs  :-[  (As a writer, I think a good bible is more vital than Shakespeare.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 26, 2012, 06:13:01 PM
So a generation of Americans are confused about which, in part, because as children they heard Linus cite the King Jas Version in Merry Christmas, Charlie Brown!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on April 27, 2012, 03:59:12 AM
Is there any way to more clearly distinguish these two works without using itallics?

"Dvořák - The Wild Dove and The Golden Spinning Wheel from these discs:"

I tried placing a comma before the 'and' but it looked odd. Maybe that is perfectly okay and my brain is simply not switched on today. It almost looks better if I remove the 'and' and use the comma.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on April 27, 2012, 06:16:33 AM
Quote from: Lethevich on April 27, 2012, 03:59:12 AM
Is there any way to more clearly distinguish these two works without using itallics?

"Dvořák - The Wild Dove and The Golden Spinning Wheel from these discs:"

I tried placing a comma before the 'and' but it looked odd. Maybe that is perfectly okay and my brain is simply not switched on today. It almost looks better if I remove the 'and' and use the comma.

Don't fret over it. Anyone who is likely to be a recipient of such a message will surely understand what you're referring to. 0:) ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2012, 07:14:11 AM
Quote from: Lethevich on April 27, 2012, 03:59:12 AM
Is there any way to more clearly distinguish these two works without using italics?

"Dvořák - The Wild Dove and The Golden Spinning Wheel from these discs:"

I tried placing a comma before the 'and' but it looked odd. Maybe that is perfectly okay and my brain is simply not switched on today. It almost looks better if I remove the 'and' and use the comma.

Is there some reason why you do not want to use italics?

You could try a different font, but that is more work than italics.

A comma after "Dove" and then after "Wheel" does seem clumsy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Lethevich on April 27, 2012, 07:42:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 27, 2012, 07:14:11 AM
Is there some reason why you do not want to use italics?

Non, just curiosity. I'm glad it isn't just me who noticed the awkwardness of trying to punctuate it, thanks! :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 27, 2012, 09:16:56 AM
Quote from: Lethevich on April 27, 2012, 03:59:12 AM
Is there any way to more clearly distinguish these two works without using itallics?

"Dvořák - The Wild Dove and The Golden Spinning Wheel from these discs:"

I tried placing a comma before the 'and' but it looked odd. Maybe that is perfectly okay and my brain is simply not switched on today. It almost looks better if I remove the 'and' and use the comma.

Quote marks around the the titles, or single quote marks if part of a larger quote.

"Dvořák - 'The Wild Dove' and 'The Golden Spinning Wheel' from these discs:"

That's how I was taught back in high school,  if the preferred alternatives of italics or underlining were not available.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: oyasumi on April 27, 2012, 09:28:18 AM
Fewer? I hardly know 'er!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2012, 09:33:07 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 27, 2012, 09:16:56 AM
Quote marks around the the titles, or single quote marks if part of a larger quote.

"Dvořák - 'The Wild Dove' and 'The Golden Spinning Wheel' from these discs:"

That's how I was taught back in high school,  if the preferred alternatives of italics or underlining were not available.

True: these days with a button and mouse-slide italics are preferred.

Last night, on my favorite local news station, which is infamous for grammatical curiosities, I heard:

"The company bidded on a state contract..."   :o

So I wonder whether they "losted" or "wonned" the contract!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on April 27, 2012, 09:39:20 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 27, 2012, 09:33:07 AM
"The company bidded on a state contract..."   :o

...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 27, 2012, 10:10:56 AM
As my sis is wont to say: Woof a doodle.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2012, 10:42:13 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 27, 2012, 10:10:56 AM
As my sis is wont to say: Woof a doodle.

Is it possible to doodle a woof?   $:) 

Actually, that sounds like dangerous territory!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 27, 2012, 12:07:15 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 27, 2012, 10:42:13 AM
Is it possible to doodle a woof?   $:) 

Actually, that sounds like dangerous territory!   0:)
That sounds like a beige alert. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DbAs203r3Y)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 27, 2012, 01:39:55 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 27, 2012, 09:33:07 AM
True: these days with a button and mouse-slide italics are preferred.


This was well before computer days:  we were taught to underline because our typewriters couldn't supply italics. 

At the time,  I had a manual typewriter and liquid white-out to cover the frequent typing mistakes.   Those kids from more affluent families had IBM Selectrics with the special white ribbon that allowed you to type corrections.  We thought that was technologically awesome, of course.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2012, 03:59:25 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 27, 2012, 01:39:55 PM
This was well before computer days:  we were taught to underline because our typewriters couldn't supply italics. 

At the time,  I had a manual typewriter and liquid white-out to cover the frequent typing mistakes.   Those kids from more affluent families had IBM Selectrics with the special white ribbon that allowed you to type corrections.  We thought that was technologically awesome, of course.

To quote Maurice Chevalier, "Ah yes!  I remember it well!"   8) 

Not to mention carbon paper for making copies!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on April 29, 2012, 07:32:45 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 27, 2012, 09:33:07 AM"The company bidded on a state contract..."   :o

So I wonder whether they "losted" or "wonned" the contract!   0:)

This sounds fine to me. I mean, you can't really say "bade" in this context :) 

"Bidded" is certainly preferable to "spit" used as a past tense verb IMO.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on May 01, 2012, 10:11:26 AM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/574540_349141411818604_268330443233035_951468_552150568_n.jpg)

;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 01, 2012, 10:13:35 AM
Cute! : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2012, 11:38:28 AM
I have not seen that one before: here is a classic.

A panda walks into a café. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then takes out a gun and fires it at the other patrons, who dive under the tables.

"Why did you do that?" asks a confused waiter, as the panda walks out.

The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"Well, I'm a panda," he says, at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the information on pandas in the manual and finds an explanation. "Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like animal, native to China. Eats, shoots, and leaves."   $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 01, 2012, 09:28:33 PM
.
[asin]1592402038[/asin]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 02, 2012, 03:31:39 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 01, 2012, 09:28:33 PM
.
[asin]1592402038[/asin]

Okay!  I will need to find that book!  I like the idea of a Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation: no prisoners!!!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 02, 2012, 03:56:20 AM
The story pre-dates the bestseller . . . composer Walter Ross told me that one in Charlottesville back when I was in hot pursuit of my Master's.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: chasmaniac on May 04, 2012, 08:36:29 AM
On the CBC News website, we read this regarding the negligible effect of an upcoming supermoon:

Quote"As far as the end of the world, not much risk of that," he said.

Lazy, lazy, lazy! No one says "as far as X is concerned" anymore?!

Grumble.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 04, 2012, 08:38:55 AM
As far as I, a righteous grumble.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on May 07, 2012, 08:58:19 AM
The panda story as originally highlighted is somewhat different: but has the same pay off. The version just quoted has been sanitised.

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 07, 2012, 06:23:32 PM
Quote from: chasmaniac on May 04, 2012, 08:36:29 AM
On the CBC News website, we read this regarding the negligible effect of an upcoming supermoon:

Lazy, lazy, lazy! No one says "as far as X is concerned" anymore?!

Grumble.

Quote from: karlhenning on May 04, 2012, 08:38:55 AM
As far as I, a righteous grumble.

Yea, verily, yea!

After being assaulted all day by adolescents - and fellow faculty members - wielding the now hackneyed non-word "majorly," I was just further annoyed by its use on a TV ad!

Enough!  Cease, I tell you!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on May 07, 2012, 07:13:13 PM
I have no problem with "majorly". It's a neologism, is all.

On another site, I posted a corrective to this sentence. Can you spot the problem?

QuoteSome characters speak in highly decorative, colloquial English, in sharp contrast to Ryner's modern slang
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 09, 2012, 04:21:06 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on May 07, 2012, 07:13:13 PM
On another site, I posted a corrective to this sentence. Can you spot the problem?

"Some characters speak highly decorative, colloquial English, in sharp contrast to Ryner's modern slang."

What might be the difference between "colloquial English" and Ryner's "modern slang" ?

Is "slang" being defined as somehow below "colloquial English" by the writer?  Does the writer perhaps consider things like "gonna" or "gotta" being "colloquial" but things like "majorly" or "grody" being transitory "slang" ?


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on May 09, 2012, 05:56:25 PM
In further discussion, the writer said she was trying to think of a word beginning with "c" meaning archaic. I couldn't think of anything, and suggested "anachronistic".



EDIT: Corrected for spelling. What a place to fumble!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 09, 2012, 09:11:19 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on May 09, 2012, 05:56:25 PM
In further discussion, the writer said she was trying to think of a word beginning with "c" meaning archaic. I couldn't think of anything, and suggested "anachronistic".

I would have suggested a thesaurus, instead. :D


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 10, 2012, 08:50:15 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on May 09, 2012, 05:56:25 PM
In further discussion, the writer said she was trying to think of a word beginning with "c" meaning archaic. I couldn't think of anything, and suggested "anachronistic".


"Creaky" comes to mind every time my archaic limbs need to be unstiffened!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 16, 2012, 04:38:33 AM
We expect better of the CSM:

QuoteAbout 1 out of every 8 people on the planet have a Facebook account.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 16, 2012, 04:46:53 AM
So, which peoples don't have Facebook accounts?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on May 16, 2012, 03:09:04 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/UowKa.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 17, 2012, 12:57:41 AM
Quote from: The Six on May 16, 2012, 03:09:04 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/UowKa.jpg)

:D ;D :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on May 23, 2012, 05:20:40 PM
Okay, experts.

When referring to the movie or story genre, is "western" capitalized? I have been capitalizing it but someone who should know better sent my text back to me and had made it lower case.

[I'm back. I think "Western literature" is correct but when using "western" as a noun, it is lower case. So...I was probably wrong capitalizing it.]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on May 25, 2012, 11:21:36 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on April 29, 2012, 07:32:45 PM
This sounds fine to me. I mean, you can't really say "bade" in this context :) 

"Bidded" is certainly preferable to "spit" used as a past tense verb IMO.

I missed this but fail to see what's wrong with the simple past tense: The company bid on the contract.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 28, 2012, 07:29:40 AM
Grumble over a Shed. Film at 7.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 29, 2012, 06:05:48 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 28, 2012, 07:29:40 AM
Grumble over a Shed. Film at 7.

The combination of the fading of any sense of the subjunctive (and of certain formulations therewith), irregular verbs, and pop singers: how ugly the result can often be.

Consider this (somewhat sentimental, but nonetheless laudable) line from "God Bless America":


America, America, God shed His grace on thee
And crown thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea.

It is a wish (or prayer, if you like), and thus both verbs are in the subjunctive mood;  an equivalent (and less ambiguous, in our days of darkened grammar) formulation (which would not scan for the verse, obviously) were: May God shed His grace . . . May He crown thy good . . . .

Well, not long before I posted above, I had occasion to hear a "classic" pop recording (Joe Cocker, I am guessing) in which some soulful improv by the singer betrays misunderstanding of the text.  He blathered to the effect of, "God done shed His grace on thee," misinterpreting the verb as the simple past . . . which makes nonsense of the subsequent wish that America's good may be crowned with brotherhood.

Content-wise, I suppose one can consider that God has shed his grace on America;  though (personally) I find that can trend a little uncomfortably complacent.  At times, outright smug.  And it could (in this case) be avoided simply with a small application of intelligence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 29, 2012, 07:33:51 AM
When do we reach the point where we can no longer say, We expect better of the Monitor?

Quote from: The CSMIn his short time as Commander in Chief he launched the space program, diffused the Cuban Missile Crisis, and introduced crucial Civil Rights legislation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 29, 2012, 03:35:48 PM
Quote from: MN Dave on May 23, 2012, 05:20:40 PM
Okay, experts.

When referring to the movie or story genre, is "western" capitalized? I have been capitalizing it but someone who should know better sent my text back to me and had made it lower case.

[I'm back. I think "Western literature" is correct but when using "western" as a noun, it is lower case. So...I was probably wrong capitalizing it.]

No, I would write both "Western literature" and "The Western is not as dead as people think."

Lower case for things like: "The western edge of the field needs mowing."

Quote from: karlhenning on May 29, 2012, 07:33:51 AM
When do we reach the point where we can no longer say, We expect better of the Monitor?


Soon I hope!  I have seen that mistake in newspapers before.

From an article about a computer-chip "flaw" :

Rik Ferguson, director of security research at the online security company Trend Micro, said: "This kind of flaw that gives somebody access right into the device has inherent flaws.


Hmmm!   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ataraxia on May 29, 2012, 06:09:41 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 29, 2012, 03:35:48 PM
No, I would write both "Western literature" and "The Western is not as dead as people think."

Thanks, Cato. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2012, 12:36:51 PM
This is not a grammar grumble per se, but deals more with what has been termed "innumeracy."   ???

A term which will become obvious when you see the following:

A local radio ad for a plastic surgeon has a perky female voice saying (and I am not making this up):

"Hey girls!  Tired of all the nicks and harsh creams to get rid of unwanted hair?  Remember these 4 words:

Never shave again!"   :o    ???     ::)    :-*

So ...how many hands and eyes and ears did this ad pass through, before being broadcast?  Did not even the perky female voice notice something wrong?   $:)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 30, 2012, 12:41:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 30, 2012, 12:36:51 PM
A local radio ad for a plastic surgeon has a perky female voice saying (and I am not making this up):

"Hey girls!  Tired of all the nicks and harsh creams to get rid of unwanted hair?  Remember these 4 words:

Never shave again!"   :o    ???     ::)    :-*

ROFL
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 30, 2012, 01:01:52 PM
This is the stuff of legends:
(http://static.iltalehti.fi/oulu/maranlaatta32805LS_ou.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2012, 03:52:32 PM
Quote from: North Star on May 30, 2012, 01:01:52 PM
This is the stuff of legends:
(http://static.iltalehti.fi/oulu/maranlaatta32805LS_ou.jpg)

Well, they could have inscribed: "NOBLE PIECE PRICE."   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on May 30, 2012, 05:55:09 PM
Quote from: North Star on May 30, 2012, 01:01:52 PM(http://static.iltalehti.fi/oulu/maranlaatta32805LS_ou.jpg)

Why do they have rodeo clowns at the Nobel prize-giving?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 30, 2012, 09:04:49 PM
That isn't the actual prize, it was presented at Ahtisaari's old sr. high, where they put in on the wall. Perhaps the workers didn't feel like wearing their tuxes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 31, 2012, 09:18:28 AM
I just hope they got that plaque at a reduced prize.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 20, 2012, 04:03:21 AM
Today's (June 20, 2012) Wall Street Journal has an article to appall all of you grammar gurus.


An excerpt:

Quote
"...Managers are fighting an epidemic of grammar gaffes in the workplace. Many of them attribute slipping skills to the informality of email, texting and Twitter where slang and shortcuts are common. Such looseness with language can create bad impressions with clients, ruin marketing materials and cause communications errors, many managers say...."

And perhaps my favorite section:

QuoteAt RescueTime, for example, grammar rules have never come up. At the Seattle-based maker of personal-productivity software, most employees are in their 30s. Sincerity and clarity expressed in "140 characters and sound bytes" are seen as hallmarks of good communication—not "the king's grammar," says Jason Grimes, 38, vice president of product marketing. "Those who can be sincere, and still text and Twitter and communicate on Facebook—those are the ones who are going to succeed."

(My emphasis)

I was like, well yeeaaaahhh, like "Jason" sure, I mean, he knows all kinda stuff, y' know? Sincerity, well, yeeaaahhh, like, ROFL & BMUD & kinda sorta y' know DIPUTS!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303410404577466662919275448.html?mod=ITP_personaljournal_0 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303410404577466662919275448.html?mod=ITP_personaljournal_0)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 20, 2012, 04:33:01 AM
Sincerity in 140 characters: my hallmark!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on June 20, 2012, 04:36:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 20, 2012, 04:03:21 AM
Today's (June 20, 2012) Wall Street Journal has an article to appall all of you grammar gurus.
An excerpt:
Fantastic or ridiculous! Not sure which to choose...(or maybe both)...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on July 11, 2012, 01:54:56 PM
An MIT linguistics professor was lecturing his class the other day. "In English," he said, "a double negative forms a positive. However, in many languages, such as Russian, a double negative remains a negative. But there isn't a single language, not one, in which a double positive can express a negative."

A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah, right."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 12, 2012, 09:24:38 AM
Quote from: The Six on July 11, 2012, 01:54:56 PM
An MIT linguistics professor was lecturing his class the other day. "In English," he said, "a double negative forms a positive. However, in many languages, such as Russian, a double negative remains a negative. But there isn't a single language, not one, in which a double positive can express a negative."

A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah, right."


;D ;D ;D

Good one!...  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 12, 2012, 09:33:20 AM
Quote from: The Six on July 11, 2012, 01:54:56 PM
An MIT linguistics professor was lecturing his class the other day. "In English," he said, "a double negative forms a positive. However, in many languages, such as Russian, a double negative remains a negative. But there isn't a single language, not one, in which a double positive can express a negative."

A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah, right."


Words do not always mean what they say, and tone is always important: this is why the Internet foments so many arguments and misunderstandings.   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 12, 2012, 09:42:10 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 12, 2012, 09:33:20 AM
Words do not always mean what they say, and tone is always important: this is why the Internet foments so many arguments and misunderstandings.   $:)

And this also why non idem est si duo dicunt idem.  That is, Graeca sunt, non leguntur...  ;D :D ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on July 12, 2012, 05:23:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 12, 2012, 09:33:20 AMWords do not always mean what they say, and tone is always important: this is why the Internet foments so many arguments and misunderstandings.   $:)

A handy excuse for some really terrible behaviour. :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 13, 2012, 04:13:35 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on July 12, 2012, 05:23:21 PM
A handy excuse for some really terrible behaviour. :D

Aye, EyeResist!  Very true!

My daughter, for example, was recently able during an Internet exchange to twist my wife's words in more ways than a Kentucky county road map and quickly fomented a family feud.   :o

This feud will take a while to untwist itself!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 08, 2012, 04:13:25 AM
Not that one expects elegant expression (even when enunciation is clear) in pop, pop, pop music ... but what is the consensus on the following line, from a Stygian singer:

"Is it any wonder I'm sane at all?"

One processes it, to be sure; but how does it parse out?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 08, 2012, 06:12:27 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 08, 2012, 04:13:25 AMNot that one expects elegant expression (even when enunciation is clear) in pop, pop, pop music ... but what is the consensus on the following line, from a Stygian singer:

"Is it any wonder I'm sane at all?"

One processes it, to be sure; but how does it parse out?

"I'm sane at all" is no problem, just a syntax inversion. "Is it any wonder" bugs me because it's one of those expressions which has gone slightly adrift of its literal meaning. Specifically, the use of the word "any" seems odd to me. Also, I'd prefer to see a "that" (or "if", at a stretch) in the middle of that sentence, just for the sake of completeness.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 09, 2012, 10:43:28 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on August 08, 2012, 06:12:27 PM
"I'm sane at all" is no problem, just a syntax inversion. "Is it any wonder" bugs me because it's one of those expressions which has gone slightly adrift of its literal meaning. Specifically, the use of the word "any" seems odd to me. Also, I'd prefer to see a "that" (or "if", at a stretch) in the middle of that sentence, just for the sake of completeness.

Agreed! 

The "question form" perhaps is Karl's bug: "It is a wonder that I'm sane at all."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 09, 2012, 01:00:11 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 12, 2012, 09:33:20 AM
Words do not always mean what they say, and tone is always important: this is why the Internet foments so many arguments and misunderstandings.   $:)
Is that why? I always thought it was because the internet is rife with shallow-thinking, self-absorbed, thin-skinned, perpetual adolescents too full of themselves and their ignorant prejudices to make the effort required to understand something outside the realm of their pre-existing beliefs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 09, 2012, 01:28:02 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 09, 2012, 01:00:11 PM
Is that why? I always thought it was because the internet is rife with shallow-thinking, self-absorbed, thin-skinned, perpetual adolescents too full of themselves and their ignorant prejudices to make the effort required to understand something outside the realm of their pre-existing beliefs.

Always a possibility!   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: The Jargon Junque Yard
Post by: Cato on August 15, 2012, 12:51:52 PM
Some time ago, I mentioned that I asked my banker son one day about his daily activities as a Senior Financial Analyst for a local billion dollar bank.

His reply was designed to stop all questioning.  He said that on this day he worked on: "Monotonic interpolation of cubic splines."   :o   ???   ::)   :o

Translation: he attempts to boil down a large amount of data to find a pattern obscured by the size of the data, so that a model can be made for computer projection of possible futures using the pattern.

On the weekend our other son arrived: a mathematician working for a computer firm in northern Ohio.

He had an interview with a company here in central Ohio: the interviewer was happy to discover that my son knew all about...

"Ruby cucumber in an agile scrum environment."   :o    ???    ::)    :o

Translation (I think this is right): "Cucumber" is a version of a programming language called "ruby" which is used to develop software in an evolutionary manner known as "agile scrum."  ("Scrum" is the rugby term where the playing starts over because of a minor infraction of the rules or the ball has gone out of bounds.)  Thus if a program produces an error, it will restart after the error is fixed and keep on going, until another error is found, "evolving" to an ever higher level to become error-free.

I discovered that "Cucumber" was chosen as the name of the language because fixed errors show up in green type on the screen.  "Green as a cucumber" means all systems are go!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 15, 2012, 02:57:29 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 08, 2012, 04:13:25 AM
Not that one expects elegant expression (even when enunciation is clear) in pop, pop, pop music ... but what is the consensus on the following line, from a Stygian singer:

"Is it any wonder I'm sane at all?"

One processes it, to be sure; but how does it parse out?

The expected answer to any rhetorical question beginning "Is it any wonder ...?" is, "No, it's not." But to say, "No, it's not a wonder you're sane at all," doesn't seem to be the answer he's going for. Don't know the song, but I'd bet that what he wants to say is, "It's a wonder I'm sane at all," or "It's a wonder I'm not insane," which aren't the answers you get with this question.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 15, 2012, 06:17:30 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 09, 2012, 10:43:28 AMAgreed! 

The "question form" perhaps is Karl's bug: "It is a wonder that I'm sane at all."

I wasn't familiar with the song. In context, the question is nonsensical.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: The Jargon Junque Yard
Post by: kishnevi on August 15, 2012, 07:34:40 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 15, 2012, 12:51:52 PM

His reply was designed to stop all questioning.  He said that on this day he worked on: "Monotonic interpolation of cubic splines."   :o   ???   ::)   :o


Well, at least it's not moronic interpolation of cubic splines,  which is all some bank analysts seem capable of producing....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: The Jargon Junque Yard
Post by: petrarch on August 16, 2012, 04:32:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 15, 2012, 12:51:52 PM

"Ruby cucumber in an agile scrum environment."   :o    ???    ::)    :o

Translation (I think this is right): "Cucumber" is a version of a programming language called "ruby" which is used to develop software in an evolutionary manner known as "agile scrum."  ("Scrum" is the rugby term where the playing starts over because of a minor infraction of the rules or the ball has gone out of bounds.)  Thus if a program produces an error, it will restart after the error is fixed and keep on going, until another error is found, "evolving" to an ever higher level to become error-free.

Allow me to clarify: Cucumber is a testing framework written in Ruby, and provides functionality to allow programmers to specify testing scenarios and expected outcomes. It also has the capability to execute the tests against the program (effectively running the program in an automated manner, simulating the relevant inputs and checking the corresponding outputs for each test), flagging any that fail. This leads to (especially in the context of having a large codebase that is being changed) incremental development of the programs ('evolutionary' is also a good word, but not in the sense that you inferred), whereby programmers fix the scenarios that fail one by one until the whole suite of tests runs successfully. It also is incremental in the sense that if there is new functionality that needs to be added to the program, this can be done in parallel with the corresponding tests--engaging in the same 'code-test-debug/fix' cycle.

Scrum and agile methodologies have to do with programmer activity, not program (it's a 'development process'): Daily short meetings (15 mins, typically) where each one reports what they accomplished the previous day, what they intend to do next and whether there are any blockers.

Hope this helps.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: The Jargon Junque Yard
Post by: Cato on August 16, 2012, 06:16:38 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 15, 2012, 07:34:40 PM
Well, at least it's not moronic interpolation of cubic splines,  which is all some bank analysts seem capable of producing....

My son's immediate superior was fired last Friday for "activities not connected to the bank."   :o  Moronism (NOT Mormonism) was probably involved.

Many thanks to Petrarch for further clarifying "Ruby cucumber in an agile scrum environment."   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 17, 2012, 02:23:50 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 16, 2012, 06:16:38 PM
Many thanks to Petrarch for further clarifying "Ruby cucumber in an agile scrum environment."   :o

Yes. For to the casual reader, it does look like the line that was excised from "Strawberry Fields Forever."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 17, 2012, 05:28:02 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 17, 2012, 02:23:50 AM
Yes. For to the casual reader, it does look like the line that was excised from "Strawberry Fields Forever."

More like "I Am the Walrus."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: The Jargon Junque Yard
Post by: Concord on August 17, 2012, 05:36:28 AM
Quote from: petrarch on August 16, 2012, 04:32:37 AM
Allow me to clarify: Cucumber is a testing framework written in Ruby, and provides functionality to allow programmers to specify testing scenarios and expected outcomes. It also has the capability to execute the tests against the program (effectively running the program in an automated manner, simulating the relevant inputs and checking the corresponding outputs for each test), flagging any that fail. This leads to (especially in the context of having a large codebase that is being changed) incremental development of the programs ('evolutionary' is also a good word, but not in the sense that you inferred), whereby programmers fix the scenarios that fail one by one until the whole suite of tests runs successfully. It also is incremental in the sense that if there is new functionality that needs to be added to the program, this can be done in parallel with the corresponding tests--engaging in the same 'code-test-debug/fix' cycle.


What hath God wrought? ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 20, 2012, 02:30:10 PM
And this one by a mystery author...
QuoteAs a very young man, I had a discussion about Schoenberg with Alexander Tcherepnin, some of whose later works dabble with the 12-tone method (e.g. the Fifth Piano Concerto), and I remember giving my opinion that the "atonal" works like Jakobsleiter and the Five Pieces for Orchestra seemed more interesting than the "method" works (e.g. Third String Quartet).

Anyway, the underlined part is what bugs me - I'm not saying that it's wrong, but it looks messy. Could 'whose some later works' work better?
E: Yeah, bad idea. The original makes sense really, but my brains forgot that this was English, not Finnish.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 20, 2012, 02:41:29 PM
No, that's assuredly not English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gold Knight on August 20, 2012, 04:00:34 PM
Misusing the word it's--instead of its--to indicate possession irks me no end!   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 20, 2012, 06:22:40 PM
Quote from: Gold Knight on August 20, 2012, 04:00:34 PMMisusing the word it's--instead of its--to indicate possession irks me no end!

To be fair, it's one of the more arbitrary grammatical rules.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gold Knight on August 20, 2012, 07:49:58 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on Today at 06:22:40 PM (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=10977.msg653469#msg653469)
To be fair, it's one of the more arbitrary grammatical rules.

I am not sure exactly what you mean by this; after all, aren't most rules--grammatical or otherwise--arbitrary by the very nature of their being guidelines formed by an unknown group of people? For me, the distinction between it's and its is very clear. I am continually amazed at how often well-educated people continue to confuse and get them wrong in everyday written usage.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 20, 2012, 08:04:40 PM
Quote from: Gold Knight on August 20, 2012, 07:49:58 PMQuote from: eyeresist on Today at 06:22:40 PM (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=10977.msg653469#msg653469)
To be fair, it's one of the more arbitrary grammatical rules.

I am not sure exactly what you mean by this; after all, aren't most rules--grammatical or otherwise--arbitrary by the very nature of their being guidelines formed by an unknown group of people? For me, the distinction between it's and its is very clear. I am continually amazed at how often well-educated people continue to confuse and get them wrong in everyday written usage.

The distinction is clear, but the rule is abitrary. Inverted commas are used to show contractions and possessives, except in this case; to differentiate the uses for "it's", someone decided to omit the comma from possessives, but there's no logic to the choice and it could as easily have been the other way around.

Here's an interesting quote:
QuoteThere is something to add here. You can tell a person's age with regard to this one, because older books use "it's" as a possessive. A friend, a few years older than I (I'm almost 50) showed me this in her college grammar book, dated about 1965 or so. The rule was updated somewhere around that time so that "its" became the sole possessive, while "it's" became a contraction only. When I see a good writer who frequently uses "it's" as the possessive, I check his/her age and am almost always correct that it is someone over the age of 60. It is often seen in the original unedited versions of classics. The online book "The Grammar of English Grammars," written c. 1852, agrees.

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/13148/why-is-there-a-distinction-between-its-and-its
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on August 21, 2012, 12:33:39 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on August 20, 2012, 08:04:40 PM
but there's no logic to the choice and it could as easily have been the other way around.

If there's (see what I did there?) something that the English language lacks, it's logic.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 21, 2012, 06:25:26 AM
So, here's a question: did they hold each other's hands or hold each other's hand? Sometimes the plural looks right to me, other times the singular. Or is it one of those cases where there is no rule and you go with personal preference? I lean toward singular, since only one hand of each is invovled, but 've seen the "each other's" construction both ways.

If you untwist the sentence, the singular is definitiely correct, as in "Each held the other's hand," but that's the only alternative construction I can think of, and in this case both the subject and the object are singalar, whereas in the first instance the subject ("They") is plural as well.

Discuss.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 21, 2012, 01:25:09 PM
Punctuation does matter:

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--SyEMqLlGxQ/TlGBXfp4kKI/AAAAAAAADlA/oyrG5SnFr9M/s1600/publix+003.JPG)

Not a problem, though, if boy syrup is what you're looking for ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 21, 2012, 01:27:51 PM
;D


And what exactly is this plaque trying to tell?
(http://mrbadak.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/suspicious-quotation-marks.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on August 21, 2012, 01:57:11 PM
Quote from: Concord on August 21, 2012, 06:25:26 AM
...did they hold each other's hands or hold each other's hand?

"Hold each others hands" would refer to a group of more than 2 people.
"Hold each others hand" references only two people.

EDIT:  Maybe not. :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 21, 2012, 05:24:48 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on August 20, 2012, 08:04:40 PM
The distinction is clear, but the rule is abitrary. Inverted commas are used to show contractions and possessives, except in this case; to differentiate the uses for "it's", someone decided to omit the comma from possessives, but there's no logic to the choice and it could as easily have been the other way around.


That quote goes in the bank of useful quotations.  But its and not it's as a possessive is not quite so illogical--wherever the change originated, it was probably intended to conform to all other pronouns--ours, yours, his, hers, theirs--which all lack the apostrophe.  (Or at least  I don't remember seeing them with one, no matter how old the source material.)

The true degradation occurred whenever 'twas that it's replaced 'tis in general use.  And I think that was before the 20th century....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gold Knight on August 21, 2012, 05:57:58 PM
@ eyeresist and Jeffrey Smith, Thank you both for your insights into this often annoying--at least for me--"misuse" of the two words. I had no idea that the other usage was acceptable before 1965; I have no recollection of being taught that it's could be used as a possessive, and I am 61 years old. Then again, maybe I just don't remember anymore!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 22, 2012, 01:35:22 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 21, 2012, 05:24:48 PMThat quote goes in the bank of useful quotations.  But its and not it's as a possessive is not quite so illogical--wherever the change originated, it was probably intended to conform to all other pronouns--ours, yours, his, hers, theirs--which all lack the apostrophe.

You're right - I thought of that later.

Last night I was going to make a lengthy post on the subject of em dash vs. en dash, but in the end thought better of it, and just added it to the blog.

Em dashes are weird! :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: petrarch on August 22, 2012, 05:18:59 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on August 22, 2012, 01:35:22 AM
Em dashes are weird! :)

I recommend the following, a very concise, well-written summary of the rules of typography and their historical roots--including em dashes:

[asin]0881792063[/asin]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 22, 2012, 08:26:27 AM
In an online article I read yesterday (or Monday, perhaps): "… the family asks that their privacy is respected."

Especially a hard death for the subjunctive, in that ritual phrase!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 22, 2012, 09:24:28 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 22, 2012, 08:26:27 AM
"... the family asks that their privacy is respected."

Replace "that" with "whether" and everything is allright...  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 22, 2012, 01:34:20 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 22, 2012, 08:26:27 AM
In an online article I read yesterday (or Monday, perhaps): "... the family asks that their privacy is respected."

Especially a hard death for the subjunctive, in that ritual phrase!

I have met English teachers - from high schools - who either did not know what the subjunctive mood was, or admitted to not bothering to teach it, because it was "too hard."

Yes, English lacks logic, as do languages in general, since they evolve and "happen" over time, and are not pre-planned.

Esperanto, I suppose, would be an exception.  But perhaps even there one might find problems?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 22, 2012, 01:42:58 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 22, 2012, 08:26:27 AM
In an online article I read yesterday (or Monday, perhaps): "... the family asks that their privacy is respected."

Especially a hard death for the subjunctive, in that ritual phrase!

Not a phrase that one tends to parse out. Now that I think about it, whether correct or not, I would write this;

"The family ask that their privacy be respected."

Even if it is incorrect, it just feels so much better to me. :)

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 22, 2012, 06:01:04 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 22, 2012, 01:34:20 PMI have met English teachers - from high schools - who either did not know what the subjunctive mood was, or admitted to not bothering to teach it, because it was "too hard."

I confess I have no idea what the subjunctive is - I steer largely by instinct.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2012, 02:15:53 AM
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on August 22, 2012, 01:42:58 PM
Not a phrase that one tends to parse out. Now that I think about it, whether correct or not, I would write this;

"The family ask that their privacy be respected."

Even if it is incorrect, it just feels so much better to me. :)

8)

It is correct; you have instinctively steered to the subjunctive!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2012, 02:22:38 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on August 21, 2012, 12:33:39 AM
If there's (see what I did there?) something that the English language lacks, it's logic.

But, you know, there is logic to it; just not the tidy, mathematical sort (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/literally-psyched/2012/08/10/humanities-arent-a-science-stop-treating-them-like-one/).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2012, 02:24:52 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 23, 2012, 02:15:53 AM
It is correct; you have instinctively steered to the subjunctive!

And you have instinctively steered to using a plural form of the verb for a noun singular in form, but for a collection of individuals: The family ask . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 23, 2012, 02:44:23 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 23, 2012, 02:24:52 AM
And you have instinctively steered to using a plural form of the verb for a noun singular in form, but for a collection of individuals: The family ask . . . .

Aren't they both correct, but the plural implies that they each ask individually?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2012, 02:47:03 AM
That's the rough idea.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on August 23, 2012, 07:06:04 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 23, 2012, 02:22:38 AM
...just not the tidy, mathematical sort.

Of course. And for the reasons stated, I also agree with Cato that English is not alone in this. Although the extent to which it makes even native speakers commit errors (be it in pronunciation or grammar; the reasons for this thread) and some of the ambiguities in sentence structures which, in my view, sets it apart from the few other languages with which I'm familiar (not counting the children/students and non-native speakers who are learning those).

Given the diversity among the members of this board, I'd like to know if there are Grammar Grumblers in other languages as well (IRL, on the webz, anywhere). :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 23, 2012, 07:29:38 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on August 23, 2012, 07:06:04 AM
Of course. And for the reasons stated, I also agree with Cato that English is not alone in this. Although the extent to which it makes even native speakers commit errors (be it in pronunciation or grammar; the reasons for this thread) and some of the ambiguities in sentence structures which, in my view, sets it apart from the few other languages with which I'm familiar (not counting the children/students and non-native speakers who are learning those).

Given the diversity among the members of this board, I'd like to know if there are Grammar Grumblers in other languages as well (IRL, on the webz, anywhere). :)

I don't think that native speakers are entitled to the same license which is granted to second-language persons. At least I can apply that to people with even a rudimentary formal education. I think (and possibly this is Cato's thesis in a nutshell) that it denotes laziness and lack of intellectual rigor when people won't take the time, at least in a more formal context, to frame their thoughts properly. Plus, it places the listener/reader in the position of carrying the burden of making the speaker's ideas intelligible. We all speak English, why should I have to translate your thoughts?  (It goes without saying that the lack of impersonal pronouns in our language makes this entire argument seem to be directed at you, Navneeth, when nothing could be further from the truth. :) )

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: petrarch on August 23, 2012, 08:07:16 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on August 23, 2012, 07:06:04 AM
Given the diversity among the members of this board, I'd like to know if there are Grammar Grumblers in other languages as well (IRL, on the webz, anywhere). :)

I'm one, be it in my native language or any that I write or speak, English included; I absolutely hate orthographical errors (they have a habit of jumping from the page and looking like a sore thereafter) and poor grammar. In my mind, they denote sloppiness and laziness.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on August 23, 2012, 08:14:40 AM
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on August 23, 2012, 07:29:38 AM
I think (and possibly this is Cato's thesis in a nutshell) that it denotes laziness and lack of intellectual rigor when people won't take the time, at least in a more formal context, to frame their thoughts properly.

My (largely unsubstantiated :D) argument being that the language, in its present state, is prone to abuse due to laziness. Or to put it in another way, the other languages don't offer as much leeway for such abuse.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 23, 2012, 08:37:50 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 23, 2012, 02:24:52 AM
And you have instinctively steered to using a plural form of the verb for a noun singular in form, but for a collection of individuals: The family ask . . . .

There's no hard and fast rule regarding use of plural verbs for collective nouns. The British tend to use it more than we do. AP style requires the singular, i.e., the family asks, and recommends consitency with prnouns and such, so that the family would ask that its privacy be respected. This can lead to some awkward constructions, esp. with small groups like couples or trios. (Is a couple really an it?) In cases where we're writing about a singular group but want to use plural pronouns, we have to add a plural subject,  such as "members of the committee."
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2012, 08:53:30 AM
Quote from: Concord on August 23, 2012, 08:37:50 AM
There's no hard and fast rule regarding use of plural verbs for collective nouns.

Spot on!

Reminds me of my favorite among Geo Orwell's Rules for Writers: "Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous."
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 23, 2012, 09:32:33 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 23, 2012, 08:53:30 AM
Reminds me of my favorite among Geo Orwell's Rules for Writers: "Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous."

I disagree with Orwell's absolute prohibition on the phrase "to serve as," as in "Truman served as president from 1945 to 1953." He would prefer a simple "was." For the most part, so do I, but getting so put out about a phrase simply because it uses two words instead of one strikes me as over the top. Oooo, two words instead of one: bad little boy.

"Serve as" is also useful when the thing being talked about is being employed in some way other than its original purpose, such as, "In my study, the window sill serves as a bookshelf." This is the best way to make the point. To say, as Orwell would suggest, "In my study, the window sill is a bookshelf" is unclear and ambiguous. I might have taken an old bookshelf and refashioned it as a window sill. It might or might not have books on it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 23, 2012, 10:18:12 AM
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on August 23, 2012, 07:29:38 AM
... I think (and possibly this is Cato's thesis in a nutshell) that it denotes laziness and lack of intellectual rigor when people won't take the time, at least in a more formal context, to frame their thoughts properly. Plus, it places the listener/reader in the position of carrying the burden of making the speaker's ideas intelligible. We all speak English, why should I have to translate your thoughts? 

Gurn is quite right: one of my favorite stupidities from the 1960's-1970's was the line: "I think you know what I'm trying to say."

But what if I don't?   ;D

It is frustrating listening to the struggles of some young (and middle-aged) people - some supposedly educated - uhhing, y'knowing, kinda-liking, sorta-liking, or just liking ( in every other sense except actually liking something), while stopping and stuttering more than a Chevy Vega, and never actually completing a sentence or a coherent thought.

You should hear the parents of some of my students!   :o   0:)

Speech classes - or at least "public speaking" as part of an English curriculum - seem to have fallen by the graveyard of grammar.  All kinds of money for extra Math tutoring, but little to none for the mastery of the language.
Title: Re: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2012, 10:34:12 AM
Quote from: Concord on August 23, 2012, 09:32:33 AM
I disagree with Orwell's absolute prohibition on the phrase "to serve as," as in "Truman served as president from 1945 to 1953." He would prefer a simple "was."

I agree with you; I find the distinction useful between the person, and the office.

(Of course, Orwell got things wrong. Most of us do.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 23, 2012, 10:40:34 AM
Quote from: Concord on August 21, 2012, 06:25:26 AM
So, here's a question: did they hold each other's hands or hold each other's hand? Sometimes the plural looks right to me, other times the singular. Or is it one of those cases where there is no rule and you go with personal preference? I lean toward singular, since only one hand of each is invovled, but 've seen the "each other's" construction both ways.

If you untwist the sentence, the singular is definitiely correct, as in "Each held the other's hand," but that's the only alternative construction I can think of, and in this case both the subject and the object are singalar, whereas in the first instance the subject ("They") is plural as well.

Discuss.

I would suggest that 'holding each other's hands' implies they were facing each other and both hands were in contact.
Otherwise 'they held hands' is much more logical, or, if you like, 'they were walking hand in hand'.
'Holding each other's hand' sounds as though they've just had a nasty accident with a meat cleaver.

I can't find any examples of 'it's' as a possessive in past writings, although it's possible.
I have a facsimile of the 1874 edition of Phantasmion and Sarah Coleridge definitely uses 'its'.
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 23, 2012, 10:40:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 23, 2012, 10:18:12 AM
Gurn is quite right: one of my favorite stupidities from the 1960's-1970's was the line: "I think you know what I'm trying to say"

So very much from that era to ... admire! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 23, 2012, 10:43:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 23, 2012, 10:18:12 AM
All kinds of money for extra Math tutoring, but little to none for the mastery of the language.

Mr. Gradgrind has won the day, hasn't he?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 23, 2012, 11:09:56 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 23, 2012, 10:40:34 AM
Otherwise 'they held hands' is much more logical, or, if you like, 'they were walking hand in hand'.

Probably would be better, but it doesn't answer the question about the "each other" construction. Forget about hands. It could apply to anything: They washed each other's car, or they washed each other's cars. They watched each other's back, or they watched each other's backs. 
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 23, 2012, 05:53:39 PM
Quote from: Concord on August 23, 2012, 09:32:33 AMI disagree with Orwell's absolute prohibition on the phrase "to serve as," as in "Truman served as president from 1945 to 1953." He would prefer a simple "was." For the most part, so do I, but getting so put out about a phrase simply because it uses two words instead of one strikes me as over the top. Oooo, two words instead of one: bad little boy.

Well, at the time the expression may have been a neologism.
I think Orwell was worried about people using expressions without thought for their meaning (and as a substitute for thought) - cliches, in other words. One I particularly hate is "for all intents and purposes". Such a strange, clunky, pretentious and anachronistic phrase.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 23, 2012, 10:53:49 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 23, 2012, 10:18:12 AM
Gurn is quite right: one of my favorite stupidities from the 1960's-1970's

I've never seen the need to put apostrophes after numbers like that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 24, 2012, 01:44:54 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 23, 2012, 10:53:49 PM
I've never seen the need to put apostrophes after numbers like that.

It's something to do with those turkey's in the butcher's window.
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 24, 2012, 09:26:11 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on August 23, 2012, 05:53:39 PM
Well, at the time the expression may have been a neologism.

A language lives on neologisms.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 24, 2012, 09:28:46 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 23, 2012, 10:18:12 AM
Gurn is quite right: one of my favorite stupidities from the 1960's-1970's was the line: "I think you know what I'm trying to say."0

Was this a real thing? I remember it only from Steve Martin's standup routine, that same one that included the line, "Let's face it: some people have a way with words, and other people ... uh ... um ... oh, not have way, I guess."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 24, 2012, 01:52:55 PM
In
Quote from: Concord on August 23, 2012, 11:09:56 AM
Probably would be better, but it doesn't answer the question about the "each other" construction. Forget about hands. It could apply to anything: They washed each other's car, or they washed each other's cars. They watched each other's back, or they watched each other's backs. 
In school long ago I learned to say "one another's," but hardly regard "each other's" as a hanging offense.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on August 24, 2012, 04:05:13 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 24, 2012, 01:52:55 PM
In In school long ago I learned to say "one another's," but hardly regard "each other's" as a hanging offense.

That's not the question ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 24, 2012, 06:27:44 PM
Quote from: Concord on August 24, 2012, 04:05:13 PM
That's not the question ...

No, it's a tangential observation. Re. the question to which you refer," it ought be "one another's back" (singular) -- unless one of these fellows is a Siamese twin with more than one back. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 24, 2012, 06:30:34 PM
Quote from: Concord on August 24, 2012, 09:26:11 AM
A language lives on neologisms.

A language (and culture) grows on neologisms representing new concepts indicating increased knowledge and understanding. A language (and culture) decays on neologisms spawned by intellectual slovenliness and illiteracy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 25, 2012, 01:01:59 AM
Quote from: Concord on August 23, 2012, 11:09:56 AM
Probably would be better, but it doesn't answer the question about the "each other" construction. Forget about hands. It could apply to anything: They washed each other's car, or they washed each other's cars. They watched each other's back, or they watched each other's backs.

In the cases you quote above, the singular is perfectly okay, they each only have one back. They could of course have more than one car each in which case the plural would be needed. However, most of us have two hands.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 25, 2012, 01:10:22 AM
This isn't a grumble. It's just my idiosyncrasy.
I like using apostrophes for truncations. It seems to me to be a feature of the English language.
Why then are they abandoned in modern idiom?
When I'm writing, I use:

wan'o, not wanna
go'n'o not gonna
cup o', not cuppa
i'n'it, not innit

etc.

Of course, if I ever find a publisher, he can do what he likes with these!



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 25, 2012, 07:34:41 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 25, 2012, 01:10:22 AM
wan'o,
go'n'o

I think it's because these look very confusing. People would think you're throwing Hawaiian (from Hawai'i) in there. We've also come to tend to favor phonetic spelling, which makes "wanna" more favorable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 25, 2012, 01:30:00 PM
"Wanna" is not a contraction of "want to," but rather represents the sound of speech. Likewise "cuppa," "gonna," "donno," & "shonuff!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 25, 2012, 01:51:34 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 25, 2012, 01:30:00 PM
"Wanna" is not a contraction of "want to," but rather represents the sound of speech. Likewise "cuppa," "gonna," "donno," & "shonuff!"

Yes, these are "word slurs," although one could call them a kind of contraction.  And yes, we do not want English to resemble Hawaiian.  0:)

Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 26, 2012, 05:37:16 PM
Quote from: Concord on August 24, 2012, 09:26:11 AM
A language lives on neologisms.

A cromulent observation!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 28, 2012, 01:54:04 PM
Reported as spoken at the GOP convention:

"Maine got screwed of half their delegates."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 28, 2012, 01:59:15 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 25, 2012, 01:30:00 PM
"Wanna" is not a contraction of "want to," but rather represents the sound of speech. Likewise "cuppa," "gonna," "donno," & "shonuff!"

As I said, I'm just being awkward.
On the other hand, do you really object to 'shan't'? and I've never ever heard anyone say 'donno', or 'dunno' for that matter, sounds like a dunny. If we must concoct compound words, at least they should be spelt right. For that reason, 'wanna' is okay by me but 'wan'o' follows the norms of English perfectly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 28, 2012, 02:06:37 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 28, 2012, 01:59:15 PM
I've never ever heard anyone say 'donno'
Then you aren't a school teacher. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2012, 02:27:06 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 28, 2012, 02:06:37 PM
Then you aren't a school teacher. ;)

Really! I'm not even a teacher and I've heard it all my life. Usually strung out as one word like 'I'dunno'. If one is attempting to convey in writing what people are actually saying, then it is nearly impossible to overlook and/or ban that sort of word. They may not be actual words, but bits of onomatopoeia that convey the actual sounds that people make in place of actual words.

I realize that logic is tortuous, but if you get away from the public speaking venues and actually listen to people in a casual setting, you will hear plenty of it!

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on August 28, 2012, 04:17:29 PM
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on August 28, 2012, 02:27:06 PM
Really! I'm not even a teacher and I've heard it all my life. Usually strung out as one word like 'I'dunno'. If one is attempting to convey in writing what people are actually saying, then it is nearly impossible to overlook and/or ban that sort of word. They may not be actual words, but bits of onomatopoeia that convey the actual sounds that people make in place of actual words.
I realize that logic is tortuous, but if you get away from the public speaking venues and actually listen to people in a casual setting, you will hear plenty of it!
8)

Oh God, I dunno...onomatopoeia...it is only a word I suppose.  But is it?   >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2012, 04:33:03 PM
Quote from: Scots John on August 28, 2012, 04:17:29 PM
Oh God, I dunno...onomatopoeia...it is only a word I suppose.  But is it?   >:D

Hell, lad, I don't know. I just like saying onomatopoeia. Or even writing it. It's sort of onomatopoetic, dont'cha know?   :D

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on August 28, 2012, 05:33:48 PM
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on August 28, 2012, 04:33:03 PM
Hell, lad, I don't know. I just like saying onomatopoeia. Or even writing it. It's sort of onomatopoetic, dont'cha know?   :D
8)

I am not into onomatapoeia myself.  But I too like writing it. Onomatopoeia.  And cutting and pasting it, as I cannot spell it in one sitting.
'Groan'... :-[
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 28, 2012, 05:40:06 PM
Quote from: Scots John on August 28, 2012, 05:33:48 PM
I am not into onomatapoeia myself.  But I too like writing it. Onomatopoeia.  And cutting and pasting it, as I cannot spell it in one sitting.
'Groan'... :-[

Aye, we're nuts, a pair of 'em... :D

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 28, 2012, 05:46:45 PM
Of course, some say onomatopœia ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on August 29, 2012, 01:26:05 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 28, 2012, 05:46:45 PMOf course, some say onomatopœia ....

Other say Onan alopecia?


Plenty of people say "dunno" and "wanna" (though usually pronounced "wonna"). They're not exactly contractions; I'm not sure what the technical term would be.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on August 29, 2012, 03:15:12 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on August 29, 2012, 01:26:05 AM
Other say Onan alopecia?


Plenty of people say "dunno" and "wanna" (though usually pronounced "wonna"). They're not exactly contractions; I'm not sure what the technical term would be.


Cato told us above:  word slurs.  The wikipedia article on the subject is titled "Relaxed pronunciation", but says "(also called condensed pronunciation or word slurs)".  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_pronunciation
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 29, 2012, 06:36:50 AM
"Hurricane Isaac is now coming ashore as a Category 1 storm. Maximum sustained winds are 75mph, but gusts are up to 90 and are continuous..."

Really? If they are continuous, are they really gusts then? Aren't they actually sustained winds? I propose that people (especially in the broadcast business) learn the difference between "continuous" which means non-stop, and "continual" which means time after time (as best I can describe it). That is right up there with 'infer' and 'imply' on my list of things deserving of a headslap. >:(   :)

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 29, 2012, 09:51:12 AM
On the phone today,  changing the name on the bill to my name from my mother. 

The FPL service rep, after I explained I was calling because my mother had passed away:

"Oh, I'm so sorry.  We apologize for your loss."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 31, 2012, 01:29:54 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on August 29, 2012, 01:26:05 AM



Plenty of people say "dunno" and "wanna" (though usually pronounced "wonna"). They're not exactly contractions; I'm not sure what the technical term would be.

As you say, plenty of "wonnas" but over here in the UK mostly you hear "dunnow", viz stress on second syllable.
We also say "nobbut" where I live.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on August 31, 2012, 02:57:56 PM
Quote from: Gurnatron5500 on August 29, 2012, 06:36:50 AM
"Hurricane Isaac is now coming ashore as a Category 1 storm. Maximum sustained winds are 75mph, but gusts are up to 90 and are continuous..."

Really? If they are continuous, are they really gusts then? Aren't they actually sustained winds? I propose that people (especially in the broadcast business) learn the difference between "continuous" which means non-stop, and "continual" which means time after time (as best I can describe it). That is right up there with 'infer' and 'imply' on my list of things deserving of a headslap. >:(   :)

8)

75mph in Scotland is nothing more than a wee bit windy. What do you 'infer' by this?
The one that gets my goat up is this...     "...on a daily basis."   People who say "...on a daily basis" are perhaps the most unimaginative orators ever to appear in human skin.  EG:  "I listen to Bruckner on a daily basis."  Ok. Let's examine that.
Your suggestion is that the 'basis' of your day is listening to Bruckner.  But what do you mean by 'basis'?
Merriam Webster offers a suggestion which if real-life  transposed would sound like this:  "I listen to Bruckner every day by a set of linearly independent vectors in a vector space such that any vector in the vector space can be expressed as a linear combination of them with appropriately chosen coefficients."
WRONG.  Only Lutoslawski wrote music like that.
On the other hand, Merrian Webster also offers the mainstream intrerpretation, here in transposition:  "I listen to Bruckner as the foundation of each day."
So, you who listen to Bruckner 'on a daily basis' are actually building your day upon his music.  Nothing else.  The 'basis' of your day is Bruckner.  Is it because the word 'basis' has the cache of someone who is established in their practice, or is it because using that expression solidifies your image as someone dependable and regular?
If I could turn the words 'daily bais' into a razor edged boomerang, I would toss it wildly at anyone who does anything, ever, on a daily basis.   I would do it on a daily 'basis' myself.  Basis my arse.    >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on August 31, 2012, 03:45:33 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 29, 2012, 09:51:12 AM
On the phone today,  changing the name on the bill to my name from my mother. 

The FPL service rep, after I explained I was calling because my mother had passed away:

"Oh, I'm so sorry.  We apologize for your loss."
They acknowledged responsibility?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 31, 2012, 04:41:13 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on August 31, 2012, 03:45:33 PM
They acknowledged responsibility?

As a Facebook friend commented when I posted it there:
"I didn't know she was electrocuted or died due to a power failure."
Me:  "Neither did I"

I assume she meant "offer condolences" or something similar, and let it slide by.  But it stuck in my head as an inane thing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 01, 2012, 05:03:29 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 31, 2012, 04:41:13 PM
I assume she meant "offer condolences" or something similar, and let it slide by.  But it stuck in my head as an inane thing.
Perhaps she's simply a victim of incompetent education and is trying to sound more formally correct. "We're sorry for your loss" seemed too common to her ears? "We apologize for your loss" seemed more elevated and serious?

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 01, 2012, 11:02:04 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 31, 2012, 01:29:54 PMAs you say, plenty of "wonnas" but over here in the UK mostly you hear "dunnow", viz stress on second syllable.

I'm not sure if the second syllable is stressed, or if the stresses are equal but we hear them as unequal. Either way, that's the way we pronounce it here too. Don't let the double-n fool you into thinking otherwise; it's just there to keep the u in line.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on September 02, 2012, 01:30:03 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 01, 2012, 11:02:04 PM
I'm not sure if the second syllable is stressed, or if the stresses are equal but we hear them as unequal. Either way, that's the way we pronounce it here too. Don't let the double-n fool you into thinking otherwise; it's just there to keep the u in line.

Yes, that is what double consonants are are for - to shorten the preceding vowel, but they don't alter the stress.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 05, 2012, 08:25:20 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 31, 2012, 04:41:13 PM

I assume she meant "offer condolences" or something similar, and let it slide by.  But it stuck in my head as an inane thing.

Quote from: DavidRoss on September 01, 2012, 05:03:29 AM
Perhaps she's simply a victim of incompetent education and is trying to sound more formally correct. "We're sorry for your loss" seemed too common to her ears? "We apologize for your loss" seemed more elevated and serious?


Yes, wanting to seem more elevated is precisely the problem with the phrase, as well as the "on a daily basis" preciosity mentioned earlier by John of Scotland.

Many people pick up these inane phrases without really thinking about them, and the virus "goes viral."   :o

On "dunno" for "don't know" -  Many, many, many moons ago when I read Donald Duck and Uncle Scrooge comic books at age 3 or 4 or so, I recall being puzzled by the "dunno" used now and then in the stories.  I also recall my mother not being able to figure it out: I had imagined the pronunciation of the "du" to be the same as the "su-" in e.g. "super," and so that made it sound like "do know," which meant that the slur confused the story a bit!   8)

Eventually it struck me to try a shorter "u" and then the solution hit my little ears.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 05, 2012, 12:08:21 PM
This topic is done, no?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on September 05, 2012, 02:00:16 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 05, 2012, 12:08:21 PM
This topic is done, no?

Done, no.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 05, 2012, 06:51:47 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 05, 2012, 08:25:20 AMMany, many, many moons ago when I read Donald Duck and Uncle Scrooge comic books at age 3 or 4 or so, I recall being puzzled by the "dunno" used now and then in the stories.

I remember the formal address "Unca" seemed weird to me. (Short for "uncle".)

I watched an episode of Charlie Sheen's new show the other night. Not terrible, but I cringed at an exchange that went something like this:

Dumb blonde: How could such a thing happen to me?
Sheen: (correcting her) How could such a thing happen to I.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 06, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 05, 2012, 06:51:47 PM
I remember the formal address "Unca" seemed weird to me. (Short for "uncle".)

I watched an episode of Charlie Sheen's new show the other night. Not terrible, but I cringed at an exchange that went something like this:

Dumb blonde: How could such a thing happen to me?
Sheen: (correcting her) How could such a thing happen to I.

Yes, Huey, Dewey, and Louie always said "Unca Scrooge." 

Child ducks have problems with "-le" ?

As to the Sheen's joke, the unfunny thing is that too many people today would not know which form is correct!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 06, 2012, 11:50:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 06, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
Yes, Huey, Dewey, and Louie always said "Unca Scrooge." 
Shut your fucking face, uncle Facka... anyone?  ;D (google it)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 06, 2012, 01:28:36 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 06, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
As to the Sheen's joke, the unfunny thing is that too many people today would not know which form is correct!   8)
But perhaps she'd hurt her eye?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on September 06, 2012, 02:38:42 PM
I think the point of the joke was that Charlie actually knew less about grammar than the dumb blonde.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 06, 2012, 05:16:04 PM
Sure, I don't see Sheen (any generation) doing a grammar finesse upon nary a one.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 06, 2012, 07:48:41 PM
Quote from: Concord on September 06, 2012, 02:38:42 PMI think the point of the joke was that Charlie actually knew less about grammar than the dumb blonde.

No, from the way the joke was presented, and the audience reaction, I think the writers genuinely thought Charlie was correct. (The audience, of course, had no idea either way.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 07, 2012, 04:27:42 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 06, 2012, 07:48:41 PM
No, from the way the joke was presented, and the audience reaction, I think the writers genuinely thought Charlie was correct. (The audience, of course, had no idea either way.)
And we once thought that television would be a powerful tool for educating or even enlightening the masses!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2012, 09:29:50 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 07, 2012, 04:27:42 AM
And we once thought that television would be a powerful tool for educating or even enlightening the masses!


;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :o :o :o :o :o ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) :o :o :o :o :o 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) :o :o :o

From a 1961 speech by Newton Minow, the Director of the Federal Communication Commission at that time:


Quote "When television is good, nothing — not the theater, not the magazines or newspapers — nothing is better.

    But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite each of you to sit down in front of your own television set when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day, without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper, without a profit and loss sheet or a rating book to distract you. Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland.

    You will see a procession of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly commercials — many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all, boredom. True, you'll see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, I only ask you to try it."

The speech - now 52 years old - became famous for calling television "a vast wasteland."

Minow is still quite correct, and he would be even more appalled today.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on September 07, 2012, 01:11:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 06, 2012, 08:57:57 AM
Yes, Huey, Dewey, and Louie always said "Unca Scrooge." 

Child ducks have problems with "-le" ?

I think the point is that when recording speech, one will come up with all kinds of weird and wonderful spellings, especially in dialect (one can start with ya and yer for you and your). This seems fine to me and is in some way essential but does not in any way justify inclusion of all these multifarious variations in the dictionary. The result can only be chaos.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 08, 2012, 12:29:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 07, 2012, 09:29:50 AMThe speech - now 52 years old - became famous for calling television "a vast wasteland."

Now it's also a vast waist land  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 08, 2012, 03:14:37 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 08, 2012, 12:29:31 AM
Now it's also a vast waist land  0:)

;D

Especially with shows where you watch people lose weight!  Imagine pitching such a show 30 years ago or more to a network!  Now with so many channels and the balkanization of the audience (The Golf Channel - watching little white balls fly through the air or roll around the grass??? - or The Pawn Shop Channel, where you watch people buy or sell junk???) we are due for The Toothpaste Channel or The Lawn Channel.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on September 09, 2012, 07:43:08 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on September 07, 2012, 01:11:50 PM
I think the point is that when recording speech, one will come up with all kinds of weird and wonderful spellings, especially in dialect (one can start with ya and yer for you and your).

Especially in a language like English that has weird pronunciation vs. spelling to begin with.  "Uncle" is "oncle" in French, "Onkel" in German, but they pronounce them as they're spelled.  We spell it "le", but pronounce it "el".  No wonder the poor baby ducks are confused!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 09, 2012, 08:12:27 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on September 09, 2012, 07:43:08 AM
Especially in a language like English that has weird pronunciation vs. spelling to begin with.  "Uncle" is "oncle" in French, "Onkel" in German, but they pronounce them as they're spelled.  We spell it "le", but pronounce it "el".  No wonder the poor baby ducks are confused!

Semi random observations:

1)Last night, while praying the Selichot service (a set of prayers for the period immediately preceding and following the Jewish High Holy Days), I encountered a pair of litanies in which the word "answer" featured very prominently, being repeated altogether perhaps a hundred times--the basic lines of the litanies being "Answer us, o Lord, answer us" and "As He answered X, may He answer us"--X changing from line to line, but always being some Biblical figure who prayed and whose prayer was answered.

All those repetitions of the words (and why I'm posting about them here) brought to my attention how non-phonetic the word "answer" is spelled.   At least in my "dialect"--New England based American--the w is completely silent and the word is pronounced "anser". 

2)Here in South Florida, we have essentially five main demographic groups in terms of linguistics.

1)Native US Southern pronounciation
2)Native US northern urban pronounciation (I'm in this group)
3)Native Spanish whose English fluency ranges from minimal to the level of "mother tongue" fluency.
4) Native Haitian Kreyol, with same range of fluency as the Native Spanish speakers
5) Native British West Indians (including Jamaica, Bahamas, and other Commonwealth Caribbean nations) who nominally speak  English as their native language, but often speak patois or have an accent heavily influenced by patois.

Interestingly, it's only the accent of the latter group which interferes with comprehension to any considerable degree--sometimes (especially in the case of Jamaicans who use patois far more frequently) to the point of being completely unintelligible. 

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 09, 2012, 08:25:57 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 09, 2012, 08:12:27 AM
All those repetitions of the words (and why I'm posting about them here) brought to my attention how non-phonetic the word "answer" is spelled.   At least in my "dialect"--New England based American--the w is completely silent and the word is pronounced "anser".

Does any group pronounce it in a way which would suggest that the W is not silent?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on September 09, 2012, 12:38:55 PM
Answer is certainly an oddity but it is not in general pronounced 'anser', which has a hard 's', but 'ancer' (as in 'dancer'). The answer does of course lie in the word's derivation. No doubt long ago when an answer was an 'andswaru', the w was pronounced.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 09, 2012, 06:20:54 PM
 
And of course it goes without saying that [goes on to say the allegedly unsayable] ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 10, 2012, 02:13:20 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on September 09, 2012, 12:38:55 PM
Answer is certainly an oddity but it is not in general pronounced 'anser', which has a hard 's', but 'ancer' (as in 'dancer'). The answer does of course lie in the word's derivation. No doubt long ago when an answer was an 'andswaru', the w was pronounced.

Hmm....around my way there's no difference between "anser" and "ancer"--for instance, the initial syllables of serpent and certain are pronounced identically.   The "s" in sure and the "c" in conquer are both entirely different from each other and from the sound in "answer"/"dancer", of course.  But the distinction you're pointing to I don't recall ever hearing.  Perhaps it's something confined to British English?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 10, 2012, 05:14:36 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on September 09, 2012, 12:38:55 PMAnswer is certainly an oddity but it is not in general pronounced 'anser', which has a hard 's', but 'ancer' (as in 'dancer').

Those two S's sound the same to me - where do you hail from again?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 05:30:08 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 09, 2012, 06:20:54 PM

And of course it goes without saying that [goes on to say the allegedly unsayable] ...
not unsayable, but unnecessary to say (at least among relatively sane, educated, adult human beings familiar with the general context of the indicated remarks)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on September 10, 2012, 06:53:10 AM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 10, 2012, 05:14:36 AM
Those two S's sound the same to me - where do you hail from again?

I dare say things are strange round your way, but do you really pronounce 'cans' like that?
Whether or not an S is hard or soft depends on its position in the word. An opening S is soft, so cannot be compared an S following an N, compare 'pansy' for instance.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 07:34:32 AM
cans = kanz

do you really say, "anzer" for "answer"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 10, 2012, 07:45:32 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 07:34:32 AM
cans = kanz

do you really say, "anzer" for "answer"?

I would like to know the answer or the anzer also!

In Latin, "anser" (AHN-ser) means "goose" and gives us "anserine" for certain people!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 10, 2012, 07:46:58 AM
By soft, do you mean unvoiced? One finds unvoiced S in all positions of words: sick, answer, backs. Many instances of voiceless S follow N, too: inside, onset, rinse ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 08:15:02 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 10, 2012, 07:46:58 AM
By soft, do you mean unvoiced? One finds unvoiced S in all positions of words: sick, answer, backs. Many instances of voiceless S follow N, too: inside, onset, rinse ....
...answer....
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 10, 2012, 08:18:31 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 08:15:02 AM
...answer....

Oh, indeed. I thought that ground had been covered already! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on September 10, 2012, 01:29:48 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 10, 2012, 07:45:32 AM
I would like to know the answer or the anzer also!

In Latin, "anser" (AHN-ser) means "goose" and gives us "anserine" for certain people!   0:)

Indeed not. That is probably why answer still has a W in it.
The answer to these pronunciations is not as simple as any of us here thinks, myself included.
I'm not going to do a full appraisal, or is that an appraizal?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 05:37:24 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on September 10, 2012, 01:29:48 PM
Indeed not. That is probably why answer still has a W in it.
The answer to these pronunciations is not as simple as any of us here thinks, myself included.
I'm not going to do a full appraisal, or is that an appraizal?
uh-pray-zul ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 10, 2012, 05:38:16 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 05:30:08 AMnot unsayable, but unnecessary to say (at least among relatively sane, educated, adult human beings familiar with the general context of the indicated remarks)

I can't figure out if this is an attempt at an insult. All I'm saying is people should think about the literal meaning of what they're saying, or else we get logical monstrosities like "I could give a damn" (meaning "I couldn't give a damn"), as well as my previous example.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 05:46:46 PM
Quote from: eyeresist on September 10, 2012, 05:38:16 PM
I can't figure out if this is an attempt at an insult.
Nope. Just correction of a misunderstanding--especially relevant on the grammar thread.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: eyeresist on September 10, 2012, 05:57:01 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 10, 2012, 05:46:46 PMNope. Just correction of a misunderstanding--especially relevant on the grammar thread.

I understand what is meant by the expression - it just troubles me that it doesn't exactly match what the words mean! Like a history teacher I had years ago who would say things like "It was literally the end of the world!"

(Sorry about two exclamation marks in a row, but the second one was part of the quotation.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 28, 2012, 07:30:27 PM
I've been meaning to post this for a couple of weeks, but kept forgetting or couldn't find the little paragraph I tore out of the newspaper.   

From the Miami Herald sports section.  Byline is Patrik Nohe, Herald Sports Writer.   The editors who muffed their jobs are of course not named, which is a shame, since the guilty ought to be publicly fingered.

Quote
Last year, for all intensive purposes, the Wake Forest Deacons ended Florida State's season.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gold Knight on September 28, 2012, 07:56:30 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on Today at 07:30:27 PM (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?topic=10977.msg663463#msg663463)
I've been meaning to post this for a couple of weeks, but kept forgetting or couldn't find the little paragraph I tore out of the newspaper.   

From the Miami Herald sports section.  Byline is Patrik Nohe, Herald Sports Writer.   The editors who muffed their jobs are of course not named, which is a shame, since the guilty ought to be publicly fingered.

Good one, Mr. Smith. Sort of like someone saying or writing "Cool, calm and collective".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 29, 2012, 01:12:40 AM
A clue in today's crossword: The auditor's plans are serious (7) ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 29, 2012, 03:28:21 AM
In an on-line newspaper:

"… whether its through …"

The angels are weeping.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 29, 2012, 04:43:55 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 29, 2012, 03:28:21 AM
In an on-line newspaper:

"… whether its through …"

The angels are weeping.
Could be a typeo

But ... dude! ... abuse of apostrophes is so common these days that I've found myself confused at times about using one or not!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 29, 2012, 05:10:49 AM
Well, and with all the stresses bearing upon the trade, one reads online articles with a grammatically charitable eye.

I couldn't suppress an involuntary wince at that one, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on September 29, 2012, 05:45:18 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 29, 2012, 05:10:49 AM
Well, and with all the stresses bearing upon the trade, one reads online articles with a grammatically charitable eye.

I couldn't suppress an involuntary wince at that one, though.
Look on the bright side: could've been "weather its threw." ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 03, 2012, 04:42:32 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on September 29, 2012, 05:45:18 AM
Look on the bright side: could've been "weather its threw." ;)

Woof! : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 03, 2012, 04:48:44 AM
Only incidental to the Grumble:

http://www.youtube.com/v/GdJ2jHii6Y0

So much of this act is well taken, and it is quite admirably well done, that my quibble is a mere footnote, lest I appear to carp at the whole.

I chafe a bit at the false dichotomy between kind and critical.  The problem with the rude e-mail wasn't that the sender was critical, but that he was an ass.  Why do I chafe?  This sloppy usage can trend to demonize critical faculties, yes?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on October 06, 2012, 10:58:38 AM
I need some confirmation here - "I like that one better" is bad grammar, right? You wouldn't say you like something "worse," so it should be "like it more/less."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: CriticalI on October 07, 2012, 05:05:19 PM
Quote from: The Six on October 06, 2012, 10:58:38 AMI need some confirmation here - "I like that one better" is bad grammar, right? You wouldn't say you like something "worse," so it should be "like it more/less."

Here's the test: if it sounds like something an 18th century farmer would say, it's generally taken to be "legitimate" English ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wakefield on October 07, 2012, 05:19:44 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 03, 2012, 04:48:44 AM
Only incidental to the Grumble:

http://www.youtube.com/v/GdJ2jHii6Y0

So much of this act is well taken, and it is quite admirably well done, that my quibble is a mere footnote, lest I appear to carp at the whole.

I chafe a bit at the false dichotomy between kind and critical.  The problem with the rude e-mail wasn't that the sender was critical, but that he was an ass.  Why do I chafe?  This sloppy usage can trend to demonize critical faculties, yes?


I agree; she confuses "critical" with "rude" or "ill-mannered", but just formally because the bottom of her argument is pretty clear. 

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: CriticalI on October 07, 2012, 05:52:15 PM
Quote from: Gordon Shumway on October 07, 2012, 05:19:44 PMI agree; she confuses "critical" with "rude" or "ill-mannered", but just formally because the bottom of her argument is pretty clear.

It's a case in which common usage has warped the meaning of the word. "Critical" is used to mean "unfairly critical", in the same way "coincidence" is used to mean "meaningless coincidence". Since most people don't care about the precise meanings of words, I'm afraid there's little we can do to remedy the situation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 08, 2012, 08:56:50 AM
Quote from: CriticalI on October 07, 2012, 05:52:15 PM
It's a case in which common usage has warped the meaning of the word. "Critical" is used to mean "unfairly critical", in the same way "coincidence" is used to mean "meaningless coincidence". Since most people don't care about the precise meanings of words, I'm afraid there's little we can do to remedy the situation.
Yes. Except to continue respecting our language and ourselves enough to use it properly instead of capitulating. And, recognizing that others often don't understand what they are really saying, asking for clarification when necessary.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: petrarch on October 08, 2012, 09:39:14 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 08, 2012, 08:56:50 AM
Yes. Except to continue respecting our language and ourselves enough to use it properly instead of capitulating.

This is a conundrum I find myself in rather frequently. Shall purity and correctness be upheld at all costs, even that of clarity to, and understanding from, the other parties? Sometimes some pragmatism is necessary to unequivocally get a point across.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 08, 2012, 10:06:05 AM
Quote from: petrarch on October 08, 2012, 09:39:14 AM
This is a conundrum I find myself in rather frequently. Shall purity and correctness be upheld at all costs, even that of clarity to, and understanding from, the other parties? Sometimes some pragmatism is necessary to unequivocally get a point across.
Aw, shucks -- y'all don't mean to suggest we shouldn't just talk like stiff prigs, do ya? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: CriticalI on October 08, 2012, 04:29:12 PM
Do some Americans still say "I could care less", or was that a brief fad, now over?


("Care less" being the most polite form of the expression ;) )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 08, 2012, 04:46:10 PM
Quote from: CriticalI on October 08, 2012, 04:29:12 PM
Do some Americans still say "I could care less", or was that a brief fad, now over?

("Care less" being the most polite form of the expression ;) )
While meaning the opposite? You betcha!

(Truncated version of somewhat less genteel but more graphic expression ;) )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 08, 2012, 07:06:52 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 08, 2012, 04:46:10 PM
While meaning the opposite? You betcha!

(Truncated version of somewhat less genteel but more graphic expression ;) )

My own preference is for "you bet your sweet bippy!"  Unless it's spelled "bippee".   And I'm probably dating myself severely.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 16, 2012, 03:44:43 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on October 08, 2012, 07:06:52 PM
My own preference is for "you bet your sweet bippy!"  Unless it's spelled "bippee".   And I'm probably dating myself severely.

;D ;D ;D

Good old Rowan and Martin!

Quote from: CriticalI on October 08, 2012, 04:29:12 PM
Do some Americans still say "I could care less", or was that a brief fad, now over?


("Care less" being the most polite form of the expression ;) )

Yes, unfortunately, despite my best efforts  ;)   one still hears this silly phrase, even from people who should know better.  TV scripts and the assorted talking heads on the screen use it also, but given the number of dunces employed in the entertainment "industry," this should not be a surprise.

Quote from: CriticalI on October 07, 2012, 05:52:15 PM
It's a case in which common usage has warped the meaning of the word. "Critical" is used to mean "unfairly critical", in the same way "coincidence" is used to mean "meaningless coincidence". Since most people don't care about the precise meanings of words, I'm afraid there's little we can do to remedy the situation.

Well, we can continue to tilt at the windmills!   0:) 

And that sums up my philosophy as a teacher right now!   ;D   The barbarians have breached the gates, and are milling around, mouths agape at the wonders they have inherited, and drooling and mewling about what to do.

Although wonders occasionally happen!  One of my 8th Graders came in this morning (he is a top Latin II student) for a clarification about the Pluperfect Tense.   :o   It seems he was tutoring a friend and suddenly had doubts about the distinction.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 17, 2012, 03:39:30 PM
Isn't gibberish spelled with a g?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 17, 2012, 03:41:06 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 17, 2012, 03:39:30 PM
Isn't gibberish spelled with a g?
Usually. I've seen variant spelling with a j. Right here in the jolly good music forum, in fact. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 17, 2012, 03:46:45 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 16, 2012, 03:44:43 AM
The barbarians have breached the gates, and are milling around, mouths agape at the wonders they have inherited, and drooling and mewling about what to do.
Bite the hand that feeds them, usually. Take the extraordinary blessings of capitalist, Christian, democratic civilization for granted, spit upon reason and history, and do their damnedest to destroy it all instead of preserving it for their children and grandchildren.
Title: Re: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 17, 2012, 05:21:54 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 17, 2012, 03:41:06 PM
Usually. I've seen variant spelling with a j. Right here in the jolly good music forum, in fact. ;)

Giolly good!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 17, 2012, 05:32:51 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 17, 2012, 03:46:45 PM
Bite the hand that feeds them, usually. Take the extraordinary blessings of capitalist, Christian, democratic civilization for granted, spit upon reason and history, and do their damnedest to destroy it all instead of preserving it for their children and grandchildren.

We shall see if this trend continues: the inability to do arithmetic among a large minority right now, and the belief that ex nihilo money creation has no consequences, may be mentioned in a eulogy for our times.

Ah well!

Today I happened to see this sign of the times:

"Mortgage Can't Pay? 
Call XXX-XXXX"   :o

I mean...it is easily comprehensible, but the sign was professionally printed!    ???

Perhaps the printer did not know English!  Or punctuation: "Mortgage: Can't Pay?" would work a little bit better.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 17, 2012, 08:14:06 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 17, 2012, 05:32:51 PM
We shall see if this trend continues: the inability to do arithmetic among a large minority right now, and the belief that ex nihilo money creation has no consequences, may be mentioned in a eulogy for our times.
I pray it's a minority. We'll see how many "adult" Americans can't even do third grade arithmetic in about three weeks.

I read long ago that the real reason Rome fell is because the rulers debased the currency -- and not because of the "barbarian" invasions.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 18, 2012, 04:57:35 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 17, 2012, 08:14:06 PM

I read long ago that the real reason Rome fell is because the rulers debased the currency -- and not because of the "barbarian" invasions.

Well, that idea has been around Roman History circles for some time.  Certainly the Roman economy had been damaged by inflation and confiscatory taxation, even as early as the 200's.  One sees the beginnings of the medieval manorial system at this period, when aristocrats at a certain level of wealth were able to isolate themselves and their tenant farmers from the chaos happening throughout the empire.  When tax collectors from the latest emperor came around, (and usually the latest emperor would be assassinated on an average of two years   :o   ), the "dominus" (lord) would have enough men at his disposal to ignore their demands.  This meant of course that people who were not protected by a local lord were squeezed even more for taxes, causing a breakdown in loyalty to the Roman state.  There is evidence that the barbarians were - at times - welcomed as liberators  :o  from the oppressive taxation of the Roman state, which - obviously - could not protect the citizens from barbarian attacks!

Therefore, why pay taxes to an incompetent government which cannot protect you?

But in the end, when tens of thousands of barbarians (in a sense, they were Rome's illegal immigrants, but with a military aspect) seize control of an area, it is not because of the currency.  The Germanic tribes had in fact better weaponry in the later 300's and 400's than the Romans, which gave them a definite edge.

Rome's collapse involves a complex web of problems all feeding on each other: no one problem was big enough to ruin Rome, but when they are taken together, one wonders, as historians have wondered since, how the empire lasted as long as it did!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 18, 2012, 05:02:26 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 18, 2012, 04:57:35 AM
. . . (and usually the latest emperor would be assassinated on an average of two years   :o   ) . . . .

It is good to be Cæsar — the first year or so . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 05:11:11 AM
Thanks, Cato. An excellent, succinct explanation, describing the linkage between fiscal irresponsibility and the collapse of the state, with burden of confiscatory taxation increasing on those not rich enough to protect themselves, further eroding confidence and cooperation, further weakening the state's ability to defend against the barbarian hordes.

Santayana's maxim is so pithy and memorable that it must take either extraordinary stupidity or extraordinary strength of will to ignore it!

Quote from: karlhenning on October 18, 2012, 05:02:26 AM
It is good to be Cæsar — the first year or so . . . .
;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 06:25:08 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 17, 2012, 05:32:51 PM
We shall see if this trend continues: the inability to do arithmetic among a large minority right now, and the belief that ex nihilo money creation has no consequences, may be mentioned in a eulogy for our times.

Granted.  But consider this.  They are running the money presses pretty hard right now (the Fed buying T-bills with newly created money).  But inflation is near zero.  What would happen if they stopped the presses?  Deflationary spiral?  That can't be good.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 06:38:43 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 06:25:08 AM
Granted.  But consider this.  They are running the money presses pretty hard right now (the Fed buying T-bills with newly created money).  But inflation is near zero.
Just wait.

And inflation near zero according to what? The lying consumer price index? Food and gas prices have gone up humongously over the past 3 years.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 06:50:21 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 06:38:43 AM
Just wait.

And inflation near zero according to what? The lying consumer price index? Food and gas prices have gone up humongously over the past 3 years.

Gas prices dropped dramatically after global demand collapsed when the financial crisis hit.  Gas is still below 2008 values.  Food?  I have not done quantitative comparisons, but my supermarket bill is about the same as it was 5 years ago.  I haven't seen a dramatic increase.  US currency has not moved noticeably against other world currencies. 

I appreciate that current expansion of the money supply is not sustainable in the long run, but it is not a good idea to turn off the ventilator until the patient can breath on his own.  On the other hand, maybe the US economy is terminally ill and we'd be better off putting it out of its misery.  But I'm in no rush to reach our destiny of becoming a third world country.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 07:41:51 AM
My statement was based solely on what I've seen in the grocery store and at the gas pumps in the past few years, Scarpia. (I do most of the cooking and grocery shopping for Chez Dave. ;) ) Nearly all of our basic commodity prices have increased substantially.

After seeing your post, I did a little checking to see how my local experience compares with the big picture. Turns out that they're consistent.

Here's gas buddy's chart of US average gas prices over the past 3 years that I specified:

(http://66.70.86.64/ChartServer/ch.gaschart?Country=Canada&Crude=f&Period=36&Areas=USA%20Average,,&Unit=US%20$/G)

Here's the chart for the past 8 years, showing the anomalous spike in mid-2008 at the peak of the oil shock caused by declining supply coupled with rapidly increasing demand:

(http://66.70.86.64/ChartServer/ch.gaschart?Country=Canada&Crude=f&Period=96&Areas=USA%20Average,,&Unit=US%20$/G)

Thus your "four years ago" point of comparison is an outlier that gives a false impression of the real trend.

And here is the FAO food price index since 1990, again showing the effect of the spike caused by the oil shock of 2007-8:

(http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/worldfood/images/home_graph_3.jpg)

This final chart shows my area's gas prices compared with the U.S. average, just for fun  :o  ???

(http://66.70.86.64/ChartServer/ch.gaschart?Country=Canada&Crude=f&Period=96&Areas=USA%20Average,Sacto,&Unit=US%20$/G)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 08:55:40 AM
Regarding oil, I was looking at the same data.  You call the 2008 peak an "oil shock" due to rapidly increasing demand and attribute the 2012 increase to inflation.  Global oil consumption dipped after the crisis and this year has finally exceeded 2008 levels, so the current rise in oil price can also be attributed to rapid rise in demand, particularly from developing economies.  Food prices have also experience global fluctuations (rising demand, crop failures, diversion of food to fuel production), and it is not clear how much currency inflation contributes to increases in food prices. 

In any case, to remain on-topic, I must concede your use of grammar in the post above was impeccable.
 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 09:33:29 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 08:55:40 AM
Regarding oil, I was looking at the same data.  You call the 2008 peak an "oil shock" due to rapidly increasing demand and attribute the 2012 increase to inflation.  Global oil consumption dipped after the crisis and this year has finally exceeded 2008 levels, so the current rise in oil price can also be attributed to rapid rise in demand, particularly from developing economies.  Food prices have also experience global fluctuations (rising demand, crop failures, diversion of food to fuel production), and it is not clear how much currency inflation contributes to increases in food prices. 

In any case, to remain on-topic, I must concede your use of grammar in the post above was impeccable.
 
;D
As was yours. ;)

"Oil Shock" is in common usage: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/ES/BPEA/2009_spring_bpea_papers/2009a_bpea_hamilton.pdf (http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/ES/BPEA/2009_spring_bpea_papers/2009a_bpea_hamilton.pdf)

I didn't "attribute the 2012 increase to inflation," but noted the increase as a probable indicator of inflation. Insofar as inflation is driven by commodity prices and not just increasing the money supply faster than economic growth, the price of oil is one of the chief culprits.

Most noteworthy are the steadily increasing trends shown in the 8 year gas price and 22 year food price charts.

Note also that fiscal irresponsibility on the part of government is a long term trend also -- though it has increased significantly in very recent years. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 10:40:22 AM
Then I would say we agree more than disagree.

My main objection is that too much emphasis is placed on financial data - currency expansion, sovereign debt, etc.  A country doesn't become wealthy by having more money.  It becomes wealthy because its citizens are highly skilled and work hard on things that are valuable.  The glory of the market economy is that it draws skilled people towards work that is valued.  No dictator or central committee will ever manage an economy as efficiently as the incentives created by a wisely regulated market economy.  Of course, financial or government abuse or mismanagement can create distortions that wreck havoc (the housing bubble, for example).   The problem in the US is not, in my view, sovereign dept, balances of trade, or currency expansion.   The problem is that the US is disintegrating as a civilization.  I don't know what the future holds.  In 1981, was anyone seriously predicting that in 10 years there would be no Soviet Union?  Was anyone buying up Rand McNally stock in those days?

But perhaps we have wandered too far from the topic at hand, Grammar.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 11:22:49 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 10:40:22 AM
Then I would say we agree more than disagree.

My main objection is that too much emphasis is placed on financial data - currency expansion, sovereign debt, etc.  A country doesn't become wealthy by having more money.  It becomes wealthy because its citizens are highly skilled and work hard on things that are valuable.  The glory of the market economy is that it draws skilled people towards work that is valued.  No dictator or central committee will ever manage an economy as efficiently as the incentives created by a wisely regulated market economy.  Of course, financial or government abuse or mismanagement can create distortions that wreck havoc (the housing bubble, for example).
Exactly. Thus when McCain said during the 2008 election that the U.S. economy was fundamentally still strong, he was absolutely right--and if the mainstream  press corps didn't consist essentially of ignorant partisan bigots, they would have understood and explained and helped contain the damage, instead of ridiculing him and fear-mongering to exploit the financial crunch for partisan political purposes -- which made everything far worse.

And you're absolutely right about the housing bubble being caused by politics -- specifically the policies of the Clinton administration, from prosecuting banks for prudent mortgage lending practices, to pandering for Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, to repealing Glass-Steagal, to fighting for deregulation of derivatives.

QuoteThe problem in the US is not, in my view, sovereign dept, balances of trade, or currency expansion.   The problem is that the US is disintegrating as a civilization.  I don't know what the future holds.  In 1981, was anyone seriously predicting that in 10 years there would be no Soviet Union?  Was anyone buying up Rand McNally stock in those days?

But perhaps we have wandered too far from the topic at hand, Grammar.
The abysmal grammar that's common these days not only indicates shoddy reasoning and the failure of our press and public education systems, but also the rapid decay of our civilization. Language embodies culture. When a culture dismisses its own language, it's acting out a death wish.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 11:36:51 AM
I'm not sure how you reached the conclusion that Bill Clinton had a monopoly on dumb ideas.

In any case, have you seen this little gem?

What Happens in Vagueness Stays in Vagueness
The decline and fall of American English, and stuff
Clark Whelton

http://www.city-journal.org/2011/21_1_snd-american-english.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 12:14:36 PM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 18, 2012, 11:36:51 AM
I'm not sure how you reached the conclusion that Bill Clinton had a monopoly on dumb ideas.
I've never said--or suggested--anything even remotely like that.

QuoteIn any case, have you seen this little gem?

What Happens in Vagueness Stays in Vagueness
The decline and fall of American English, and stuff
Clark Whelton

http://www.city-journal.org/2011/21_1_snd-american-english.html
No, I had not. Thanks for calling it to my attention. This seemed particularly pertinent (emphasis added):
QuoteIn 1988, my elder daughter graduated from Vassar. During a commencement reception, I asked one of her professors if he'd noticed any change in Vassar students' language skills. "The biggest difference," he replied, "is that by the time today's students arrive on campus, they've been juvenilized. You can hear it in the way they talk. There seems to be a reduced capacity for abstract thought." He went on to say that immature speech patterns used to be drummed out of kids in ninth grade. "Today, whatever way kids communicate seems to be fine with their high school teachers."
That last sentence suggests that long before the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Soviet Union had already successfully planted the seeds of America's destruction where they would do the most damage: in our public schools. Those seeds have born fruit in the vapidity, venality, and arrogant bigoted idiocy rampant in our beleaguered nation today.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gold Knight on October 18, 2012, 12:26:28 PM
Why blame it on the Russians when we have rap music, which we "developed " all on our own?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 18, 2012, 01:33:58 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 11:22:49 AM
The abysmal grammar that's common these days not only indicates shoddy reasoning and the failure of our press and public education systems, but also the rapid decay of our civilization. Language embodies culture. When a culture dismisses its own language, it's acting out a death wish.

I once discussed this with someone very much in favor of continuing the status quo, who pointed out that America did just fine in the 19th century, when illiteracy was widespread and education hard to come by, when free whiskey was used to buy votes as early as George Washington, etc. 

The sociology of America, however, was quite different: read the Lincoln-Douglas debates.  Are they full of sound-bites and "dumbed-down" English?  Did Lincoln or Douglas fake an accent with dropped "g's" when "talkin' " to their constituents in southern Illinois?  The politicians expected their uneducated, possibly even illiterate audience to listen for hours (!) and remember what had been said in Part I for the rebuttals after supper.

The letters of Civil War soldiers, which were famously used in the Ken Burns documentary about that conflict, shocked people: why?  The elegance of the language, the range of vocabulary, and the poetic atmosphere in many of the letters stood in stark contrast to what is coming out today from people..and a good number of those Civil War soldiers had seen at most 6 to 8 years of education in a one-room school-house.

So does the deterioration in language symbolize deeper problems?  Gibbon famously commented that the popularity of the poems of Ausonius (c. 350 A.D.) condemned the taste of his age, and Ausonius was in no way on the doggerel level of a "rap artist."  The point is that Gibbon thought Ausonius - a learned man of great accomplishments outside of poetry - symbolized the last decaying years of empire.

Neil Postman worried about the abuse of language throughout his career: if you can find Crazy Talk, Stupid Talk, one of his early treatises from c. 1970, you will be amazed and appalled by his prescience, e.g.:

Quote"The problem of crazy talk...is not in what it does for you but in what it does to you. Crazy talk, even in its milder forms, requires that we be mystified, suspend critical judgment, accept premises without question, and (frequently) abandon entirely the idea that language ought to be connected with reality...

For example:

Quote...a specimen taken from Red Stocking's Manifesto:

'Women are an oppressed class. Our oppression is total, affecting every facet of our lives. We are exploited as sex objects, breeders, domestic servants, and cheap labor...We identify the agents of our oppression as men. Male supremacy is the oldest, most basic form of domination. All other forms of exploitation (racism, capitalism, imperialism, etc.) are extensions of male supremacy.
..'

And so Postman comments:


Quote"One way (Crazy Talk) achieves this is through the construction of a massive metaphor which permeates every sentence and does not allow for any perceptions that go beyond the bounds of the metaphor. In the foregoing instance, we are presented with a vicious and uncompromising paradigm: Man-woman relationships are a war between master and slave. It follows from this that a woman who gives birth to a child is a 'breeder.' And a woman who stays home with children while her husband works is a 'domestic servant' and 'cheap labor.' It follows, as well, that there can be no such thing as 'mutual dependency' or 'love' or even a 'family,' since such transactions do not arise in a class war. It also follows that it is only an illusion that some men have sacrificed their own well-being for their families, since masters do not do such things for slaves.

"In short, to talk this way is to distort, beyond recognition, a complex situation as it is actually experienced by most men and women...

What would Postman say today about our "sound-bite" kulcher?   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: CriticalI on October 18, 2012, 05:00:52 PM
I don't know that ignorance and disordered thinking have actually increased beyond what they were in the past - they have certainly become more noticable, thanks to recent communications developments. Does Twitter have any purpose other than spreading stupid thoughts to vulnerable minds? The other factor is that in the past the general functional intelligence level didn't matter so much, whereas now it seems we need more good minds at every level, in order to make best use of the technology invented by the best and brightest.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 05:25:03 PM
Quote from: CriticalI on October 18, 2012, 05:00:52 PM
I don't know that ignorance and disordered thinking have actually increased beyond what they were in the past - they have certainly become more noticable, thanks to recent communications developments. Does Twitter have any purpose other than spreading stupid thoughts to vulnerable minds? The other factor is that in the past the general functional intelligence level didn't matter so much, whereas now it seems we need more good minds at every level, in order to make best use of the technology invented by the best and brightest.
If you were around to witness popular culture in the '50s and '60s, you would know that ignorance and irrationality have increased significantly in the past several decades. From discussions with people of my parents and grandparents' generations, it's clear that the average American high school graduate in the 1930s and '40s was better educated than the average U.S. college graduate today -- however, the college grad is more likely to have taken on an enormous debt burden for the sake of vocational training qualifying him for an entry-level position as a techno-serf.

I learned long ago that humanity is not handicapped by technological insufficiency, but by spiritual poverty. Think about it.

P.S. Those who regard themselves as "the best and the brightest" seldom are.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 18, 2012, 05:36:00 PM
Quote from: CriticalI on October 18, 2012, 05:00:52 PM
I don't know that ignorance and disordered thinking have actually increased beyond what they were in the past - they have certainly become more noticeable, thanks to recent communications developments. Does Twitter have any purpose other than spreading stupid thoughts to vulnerable minds? The other factor is that in the past the general functional intelligence level didn't matter so much, whereas now it seems we need more good minds at every level, in order to make best use of the technology invented by the best and brightest.

Yes, the odds are that the percentages of not very bright people, average people, and above average people are fairly constant.  Without technology, the influence of silliness remains fairly local.  Now, however, thanks to technology it is harder to ignore the silly people and any influences they may spread, and so it may seem as if the general intelligence has declined.

I suspect that "Twittering" will not end civilization as we know it!   0:)  And yet...I have seen mass/group psychology at work in the schools for 5 decades, and the idiot "cool kid" will at times be followed off a roof by his followers with I.Q.'s of 130+.

"Twittering" may, however, end spelling as we know it!   ;D


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: CriticalI on October 18, 2012, 05:44:28 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 18, 2012, 05:36:00 PMI suspect that "Twittering" will not end civilization as we know it!   0:)  And yet...I have seen mass/group psychology at work in the schools for 5 decades, and the idiot "cool kid" will at times be followed off a roof by his followers with I.Q.'s of 130+.

"Twittering" may, however, end spelling as we know it!   ;D

A friend of mine has a T-shirt which says "U is not a word". That's pretty cool  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 18, 2012, 07:52:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 18, 2012, 05:36:00 PM
Yes, the odds are that the percentages of not very bright people, average people, and above average people are fairly constant.  Without technology, the influence of silliness remains fairly local.  Now, however, thanks to technology it is harder to ignore the silly people and any influences they may spread, and so it may seem as if the general intelligence has declined.

I suspect that "Twittering" will not end civilization as we know it!   0:)  And yet...I have seen mass/group psychology at work in the schools for 5 decades, and the idiot "cool kid" will at times be followed off a roof by his followers with I.Q.'s of 130+.
Speaking of which -- here are some numbers that should sober us up fast! http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx (http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqtable.aspx)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on October 22, 2012, 12:49:13 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 18, 2012, 01:33:58 PMThe sociology of America, however, was quite different: read the Lincoln-Douglas debates.  Are they full of sound-bites and "dumbed-down" English?  Did Lincoln or Douglas fake an accent with dropped "g's" when "talkin' " to their constituents in southern Illinois?

One fact about the 19th century that is often overlooked is that in those days, public speaking was a form of  entertainment. People would travel for miles to hear a famous orator or a good debate, and in-demand speakers like Dickens and Twain could made pretty good money just standing at a podium. We read today about how pithy Lincoln's Gettysburg Address is and how long-winded Edward Everett's oration was in contrast, but Everett did what was expected of him. He spoke about the battle for two hours, and the crowd hung on every word. Anyone raised rhetoric will learn to imitiate it, even if they are illiterate. We who were raised on TV speak like TV, and those raised on other electronic media that have nothing to do with speech have probably suffered even more.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Concord on October 22, 2012, 12:57:03 PM
And I'm not sure I agree with Postman. If the relationship of men to women is in fact one of exploitation (and I'm not saying it is), then it's words like "love" and "mutual dependence" that are the crazy talk, disguising the  reality in high-sounding sentiments. The slave owers of the 19th century were probably good, grammatical debaters, too, but they used their skills to defend the indefensible. If you don't believe me, read the speeches of Jefferson Davis.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 23, 2012, 08:01:24 AM
Quote from: Concord on October 22, 2012, 12:57:03 PM
And I'm not sure I agree with Postman. If the relationship of men to women is in fact one of exploitation (and I'm not saying it is), then it's words like "love" and "mutual dependence" that are the crazy talk, disguising the  reality in high-sounding sentiments.

Not in my house!!! :o

If I tried anything even close to "exploitation," I would not be in the doghouse, as my grandfather used to say, I would be in the morgue!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 23, 2012, 08:25:33 AM
Enjoying the inherent oxymoron in the tempo designation (used more than once by Sibelius) of Allegro molto moderato . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 23, 2012, 09:49:39 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 23, 2012, 08:25:33 AM
Enjoying the inherent oxymoron in the tempo designation (used more than once by Sibelius) of Allegro molto moderato . . . .

Moderately happy doesn't strike me as terribly self-contradictory.  Sort of like a Neville Marriner version of Allegro.  Moderato non troppo (moderately but not too much) strikes me a much more problematic.  Does "less moderately" mean "slower than moderately" or "faster than moderately?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 23, 2012, 11:32:35 AM
It's the "very moderately" which strikes my ear as odd. Agreed that Moderato non troppo is odd, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 23, 2012, 08:45:45 PM
Wouldn't "moderato non troppo"  have to be interpreted contextually?  I would hazard that if it followed a faster section, the composer intended it to be on the faster side of moderate, and if it followed a slower section,  the intent was to be on the slower side of moderate--a sort of "not as fast/slow as before".   Or it might refer, if the musical material at that point was a repeat of some sort, to the first appearance of the material, and mean "not as fast/slow as you played this the first time".


It's the sort of thing where the conductor's judgment is important.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 23, 2012, 10:57:06 PM
200 years of this and no one's figured it out? ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 24, 2012, 05:34:15 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on October 23, 2012, 08:45:45 PM
Wouldn't "moderato non troppo"  have to be interpreted contextually?  I would hazard that if it followed a faster section, the composer intended it to be on the faster side of moderate, and if it followed a slower section,  the intent was to be on the slower side of moderate--a sort of "not as fast/slow as before".   Or it might refer, if the musical material at that point was a repeat of some sort, to the first appearance of the material, and mean "not as fast/slow as you played this the first time".


It's the sort of thing where the conductor's judgment is important.

The first bar of the first movement of Schubert's last piano sonata is marked "molto moderato"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 06:34:58 AM
Well, truth is we will never know what this or that composer had in mind when marking the tempo, unless a strict metronome value is specified. For instance, Beethoven wrote "Allegretto" for the 2nd mvt of the 7h Symphony but I am not convinced he really meant it. The most impressive version I've heard so far (George Georgescu conducting the "George Enescu" Philharmonic Orchestra) is much slower than that.  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 24, 2012, 06:57:44 AM
Quote from: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 06:34:58 AM
Well, truth is we will never know what this or that composer had in mind when marking the tempo, unless a strict metronome value is specified. For instance, Beethoven wrote "Allegretto" for the 2nd mvt of the 7h Symphony but I am not convinced he really meant it. The most impressive version I've heard so far (George Georgescu conducting the "George Enescu" Philharmonic Orchestra) is much slower than that.  :D

It is also possible — I don't claim that it is the case in this instance with Beethoven — that a piece will "work" at a variety of tempi, and that the composer is "good" with that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 24, 2012, 07:16:07 AM
Quote from: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 06:34:58 AM
Well, truth is we will never know what this or that composer had in mind when marking the tempo, unless a strict metronome value is specified. For instance, Beethoven wrote "Allegretto" for the 2nd mvt of the 7h Symphony but I am not convinced he really meant it. The most impressive version I've heard so far (George Georgescu conducting the "George Enescu" Philharmonic Orchestra) is much slower than that.  :D

It is my understanding that "Allegretto" does not specify a tempo, it specifies a mood, and it is up to the performer to decide what tempo best conveys that mood.   Specifying a metronome rate (and Beethoven did, I believe) does not make "Allegretto" redundant.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:38:07 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 24, 2012, 06:57:44 AM
It is also possible — I don't claim that it is the case in this instance with Beethoven — that a piece will "work" at a variety of tempi, and that the composer is "good" with that.

I agree. See below.  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:39:33 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on October 24, 2012, 07:07:43 AM
I've felt that this movement is often taken too slow.

Talk about "de gustibus"...  :D For me it's exactly the opposite: too often a too quick tempo ruins it.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:46:09 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 24, 2012, 07:16:07 AM
It is my understanding that "Allegretto" does not specify a tempo, it specifies a mood

Well, for me a mood is specified by cantabile or con fuoco or lugubre or patetico or malinconico or alla Turca...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:47:49 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on October 24, 2012, 08:43:29 AM
When it is slower I feel it is too somber and takes on a heaviness

Exactly... this is what fate is all about... an implacable, somber and heavy fate...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 24, 2012, 08:50:02 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on October 24, 2012, 08:43:29 AM
When it is slower I feel it is too somber and takes on a heaviness, which I think what the marking is meant to avoid.  To each his own - something I very much advocate.

:D

Which reading(s) pace(s) the movement to your satisfaction?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:55:46 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on October 24, 2012, 08:51:12 AM
Fate does not always mean somber and heavy.  Sometimes, it is light and pleasant. 

According to one of Murphy's Laws, if you can keep your head when all around you are losing theirs it means you are completely unaware of the current situation.  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 24, 2012, 08:56:42 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on October 24, 2012, 08:43:29 AM
To each his own - something I very much advocate.
Bravo. Especially in matters of nothing but aesthetic taste. (But the latent philosopher withing me immediate questions whether our fundamental values are implicit in our tastes, conditioned, of course, by education, experience, and capacity...?)

Quote from: sanantonio on October 24, 2012, 08:51:12 AM
Fate does not always mean somber and heavy.  Sometimes, it is light and pleasant.  But then again, I live in the US.
There will be nothing light and pleasant about the fate of our children, our grandchildren, and a world that has benefited enormously from the Pax Americana IF American voters don't derail the current rush to national suicide and put us back on the path to sanity in a couple of weeks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:58:44 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 24, 2012, 08:56:42 AM
Pax Americana

What do you mean by that?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 24, 2012, 09:04:19 AM
Quote from: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:46:09 AM
Well, for me a mood is specified by cantabile or con fuoco or lugubre or patetico or malinconico or alla Turca...

Allegro is literally translated as "happy."   Allegretto is "a little happy"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 09:11:40 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 24, 2012, 09:04:19 AM
Allegro is literally translated as "happy."   Allegretto is "a little happy"

Fine, but then again what's the difference between "Allegro moderato" (moderately happy), "Allegretto" (a little happy) and "Allegro ma non troppo" (happy but not too much)?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scarpia on October 24, 2012, 10:14:34 AM
Quote from: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 09:11:40 AM
Fine, but then again what's the difference between "Allegro moderato" (moderately happy), "Allegretto" (a little happy) and "Allegro ma non troppo" (happy but not too much)?

If you are the performer, you get to decide for yourself.  You would also get to decide if Allegro assai is more happy than Allegro molto.  I suspect it depends on the composer.  If you were preforming Mozart you would be aware of the fact that Mozart, unlike Brahms, spoke Italian and knew what he was writing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 24, 2012, 12:07:34 PM
Quote from: Florestan on October 24, 2012, 08:58:44 AM
What do you mean by that?
The term has been in common usage for decades, referring to the post-War period of relative peace and prosperity due to the projection of largely beneficent American power throughout the world. ( See http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/the-end-of-pax-americana-how-western-decline-became-inevitable/256388/ ) (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/the-end-of-pax-americana-how-western-decline-became-inevitable/256388/%20))  That's not to say that there haven't been small regional conflicts--such as the perpetual strife in the Middle East, or the 3rd World proxy warfare between the US and USSR during the Cold War--but they have been comparatively modest and contained and have not erupted into full-scale conflagrations of the Great Powers as had long been the case.

Ironically, it was the Pax Americana that transferred most of the world's security costs from Europe to the American taxpayer, subsidizing Europe's short-lived and superficially "successful" welfare states--the bill for which is coming due, putting an end to the myth of sustainable socialism. (The only people who get economic history even more wrong than Marx's prognostications are the short-sighted fools still mired in denial about the failure of socialism to transfer from imaginary ideal to functional reality.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gold Knight on October 24, 2012, 12:39:32 PM
Putting politics aside for a moment, and getting back to the original topic of this thread, I would like to nominate for one of my major "grumbles" the misuse of the phrase "could of"  instead of "could have". One may substitute either would or should with the "of" and I'd have the same grumble!  >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on October 24, 2012, 12:43:33 PM
Quote from: Gold Knight on October 24, 2012, 12:39:32 PM
Putting politics aside for a moment, and getting back to the original topic of this thread, I would like to nominate for one of my major "grumbles" the misuse of the phrase "could of"  instead of "could have". One may substitute either would or should with the "of" and I'd have the same grumble!  >:(
Yep. One of the clearest indicators of a victim of mal-education.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on October 24, 2012, 06:56:25 PM
There's also the increasingly-common "I seen," as opposed to "I have seen" or "I saw."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 25, 2012, 12:18:15 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on October 24, 2012, 10:14:34 AM
If you are the performer, you get to decide for yourself.  You would also get to decide if Allegro assai is more happy than Allegro molto.  I suspect it depends on the composer.  If you were preforming Mozart you would be aware of the fact that Mozart, unlike Brahms, spoke Italian and knew what he was writing.

Plus, Mozart rarely felt the need to add a qualification to his Allegro's, Adagio's or Andante's.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 25, 2012, 12:48:40 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 24, 2012, 12:07:34 PM
The term has been in common usage for decades, referring to the post-War period of relative peace and prosperity due to the projection of largely beneficent American power throughout the world.

I hope you apply this term only to that part of the world where the US had effective military and economic influence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on October 25, 2012, 01:54:17 AM
Quote from: Florestan on October 25, 2012, 12:18:15 AM
Plus, Mozart rarely felt the need to add a qualification to his Allegro's, Adagio's or Andante's.  :)

He didn't add an apostrophe to his Allegros, Adagios, or Andantes, either  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 29, 2012, 10:48:21 AM
I heard a couple of people on TV using the phrase "hit landfall" today. One was Obama, and the other a British BBC reporter stationed in Brooklyn. Does this get along well with "to make landfall"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 29, 2012, 05:40:53 PM
Quote from: Opus106 on October 29, 2012, 10:48:21 AM
I heard a couple of people on TV using the phrase "hit landfall" today. One was Obama, and the other a British BBC reporter stationed in Brooklyn. Does this get along well with "to make landfall"?

I've heard "landfall" used as a semi-technical term for the place or time at which the eye of a tropical storm system passes over the coast from ocean to dry land, and not merely the general act of coming ashore that is more usually meant.   So in that sense of the term, "hit landfall" has a sensible meaning;  but the more usual term is indeed "make landfall" (or more colorfully, "hit location X"), and I suspect Obama and the BBC reporter, not having much first hand experience of hurricanes/tropical storms,  merely combined the two more usual locution.

Semi relevant tangential question for you, Nav:  do cyclones/tropical systems affect the Indian Ocean coast of India, or only the Bengal/Bangladesh side of India.  Every couple of years (at least) we hear of a Bengali cyclone wreaking havoc, but I don't recall anything similar for the western coast.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on October 30, 2012, 12:28:51 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on October 29, 2012, 05:40:53 PM
I've heard "landfall" used as a semi-technical term for the place or time at which the eye of a tropical storm system passes over the coast from ocean to dry land, and not merely the general act of coming ashore that is more usually meant.   So in that sense of the term, "hit landfall" has a sensible meaning;  but the more usual term is indeed "make landfall" (or more colorfully, "hit location X"), and I suspect Obama and the BBC reporter, not having much first hand experience of hurricanes/tropical storms,  merely combined the two more usual locution.

Thanks.

Quote
Semi relevant tangential question for you, Nav:  do cyclones/tropical systems affect the Indian Ocean coast of India, or only the Bengal/Bangladesh side of India.  Every couple of years (at least) we hear of a Bengali cyclone wreaking havoc, but I don't recall anything similar for the western coast.

The west coast doesn't generally witness cyclones as often as the east does. Heavy rains, yes; especially during the monsoon season, but not cyclones. Incidentally, we in the south-east coast are in the middle of our cyclone season, with the met predicting that the present one will cross the coast in a day or so. But it's much milder compared to last year, when there was a lot of damage and loss of life along coastal areas in the state. The situation in Bangladesh is usually much worse with flooding on a large scale.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on November 05, 2012, 09:43:57 AM
Seeing the word "yeah" typed out as an affirmative on this forum drives me nuts.  EG:

"Bruckners 9th by Metha is brilliant."
"Yeah, I got it in 1972."

There is no need for the word 'yeah' when 'yes' is not only shorter, it is more polite.  "Yeah" is a slack arsed elongated word for the impertinent or badly bred.   >:(

Yeah, it really is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on November 05, 2012, 09:58:50 AM
Quote from: Scots John on November 05, 2012, 09:43:57 AM
Seeing the word "yeah" typed out as an affirmative on this forum drives me nuts.  EG:

"Bruckners 9th by Metha is brilliant."
"Yeah, I got it in 1972."

There is no need for the word 'yeah' when 'yes' is not only shorter, it is more polite.  "Yeah" is a slack arsed elongated word for the impertinent or badly bred.   >:(

Yeah, it really is.
Shouldn't "slack arsed" be hyphenated? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on November 05, 2012, 10:28:53 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on November 05, 2012, 09:58:50 AM
Shouldn't "slack arsed" be hyphenated? ;)

Yeah Dave, it should.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 05, 2012, 02:03:29 PM
"Yes" sounds too formal. This is an internet message board, not a job interview!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on November 05, 2012, 03:10:16 PM
Quote from: Scots John on November 05, 2012, 10:28:53 AM
Yeah Dave, it should.

;D

You betcha!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2012, 10:16:19 AM
Anyone else care about aggravation misused for irritation?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on November 12, 2012, 10:31:03 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 12, 2012, 10:16:19 AM
Anyone else care about aggravation misused for irritation?

It is quite aggravating,  isn't it?

Seriously, I've heard that usage so often I think we simply have to accept the fact that aggravation has acquired another meaning, and run away from any medical type who refers to rashes as "aggravations of the dermis".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 14, 2012, 06:14:04 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 12, 2012, 10:16:19 AM
Anyone else care about aggravation misused for irritation?

Aggravation causes irritation, or that used to be the idea.

As the heads of our people become mushier, so must the language become oatmealier.   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 15, 2012, 04:10:35 PM
(http://oi45.tinypic.com/15drnt0.jpg)

So a podium is pretty much anything now?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 15, 2012, 04:20:37 PM
Yeah, ever since a chair talked to an empty podium . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on November 16, 2012, 03:54:45 AM
On Veteran's Day, there was a story about a band playing all of the various service branch songs as "one big melody".   I wrote them to point out it should be "medley".  The reply:



QuoteI certainly see your point. I was the editor on that piece of copy, and felt "melody" was as much in the spirit that the writer meant as "medley."

So, any infraction there was mine!

::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 16, 2012, 09:09:31 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on November 16, 2012, 03:54:45 AM
On Veteran's Day, there was a story about a band playing all of the various service branch songs as "one big melody".   I wrote them to point out it should be "medley".  The reply:

QuoteI certainly see your point. I was the editor on that piece of copy, and felt "melody" was as much in the spirit that the writer meant as "medley."

So, any infraction there was mine!

::)

Must be a Wagnerian!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 19, 2012, 04:04:06 AM
This is not necessarily a grumble, but I heard a rather astonishing statement on the CBS Sunday news yesterday (November 18th).

A report about a "peanut butter restaurant" in New York City featured a New York Times writer who was hooked on a (I am not making this up) "peanut butter and pickles" sandwich  :P   :o  offered by the restaurant.

Perhaps satirizing the inflated language of the wine world, perhaps not, he said with a straight face, and with the earnestness of a proselytizer trying to convert someone to the cause:

"The pickle has a sardonic aspect, which meets the Stoicism of the peanut butter in this great ironic way."   8) 

Sardonic pickles lollygagging on a bed of Stoic peanut butter to produce irony: well, why not?!

The reporter, after biting into the sandwich, remained unconverted to the cause.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 19, 2012, 04:55:16 AM
From ghoulies and ghosties and long-leggity beasties and pickles of sardonic aspect, good Lord, deliver us.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 19, 2012, 06:29:27 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 19, 2012, 04:55:16 AM
From ghoulies and ghosties and long-leggity beasties and pickles of sardonic aspect, good Lord, deliver us.

"Bitterly scornful" pickles?  Hmmm! 

I have discovered that the word alludes to a plant found on the island of Sardinia.  If one ate the plant, one would be convulsed first by laughter, and then would fall down dead.   :o

Still wondering about that "Stoic" peanut butter, although a Stoic was supposed to be a stiff upper-lipped type, so that was probably the connection.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on November 19, 2012, 05:29:16 PM
I'm imagining something from the casebooks of Mycroft Holmes (he seems to have been the gourmand of the family)

The Curious Case of the Sardonic Pickle
The Interesting Incident of the Stoic Sandwich
The Mysterious Misadventure of the Platonic Pie
The Entertaining Episode of the Eleatic Salad
The Artistic Adventure of the Epicurean Antipasto


etc. etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2012, 02:17:02 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 12, 2012, 10:31:03 AM
It is quite aggravating,  isn't it?

Seriously, I've heard that usage so often I think we simply have to accept the fact that aggravation has acquired another meaning, and run away from any medical type who refers to rashes as "aggravations of the dermis".

Quote from: Cato on November 14, 2012, 06:14:04 AM
Aggravation causes irritation, or that used to be the idea.

As the heads of our people become mushier, so must the language become oatmealier.   :o

FWIW, I see that a (working-class) character in David Copperfield so uses aggravation, so please you both.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 26, 2012, 10:34:03 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 19, 2012, 05:29:16 PM
I'm imagining something from the casebooks of Mycroft Holmes (he seems to have been the gourmand of the family)

The Curious Case of the Sardonic Pickle
The Interesting Incident of the Stoic Sandwich
The Mysterious Misadventure of the Platonic Pie
The Entertaining Episode of the Eleatic Salad
The Artistic Adventure of the Epicurean Antipasto


etc. etc.

;D ;D ;D 

I had no chance to review things here at GMG over Thanksgiving and am glad to find this!

The Entertaining Episode of the Eleatic Salad intrigues me the most!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2012, 10:39:49 AM
The Cockamamie Conundrum of the Crusty Kombu
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 04, 2012, 04:08:40 AM
My "favorite" local TV station did it again this morning with a blurb at the bottom of the screen:

"The Dutchess  :o  of Cambridge is expecting a baby:
the child will be third in line to the Brittish  :o :o  thrown."  :o :o :o

:-\  Another microcosmic signal that Oswald Spengler might have been right after all.

"Dutchess" in one sense might be right, since the DNA of William of Orange might be lurking in her marrow.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 04, 2012, 04:19:05 AM
Sock-ray vache!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 04, 2012, 09:59:04 AM
QuoteAll of that comes at a time when those who identify with the tea party is close to historic lows.

The right sentiment but the wrong grammar ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 04, 2012, 05:21:41 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 04, 2012, 04:08:40 AM
My "favorite" local TV station did it again this morning with a blurb at the bottom of the screen:

"The Dutchess  :o  of Cambridge is expecting a baby:
the child will be third in line to the Brittish  :o :o  thrown."  :o :o :o

Let's hope some one is there to catch it.
And what exactly does Brittish mean.  Possibly deriving from Brit(t)any of the Valley?
Quote
:-\  Another microcosmic signal that Oswald Spengler might have been right after all.
It's not so much the signal of a decline as the signal of going over a (non-fiscal) cliff.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 08, 2012, 05:15:25 AM
Again, my "favorite" local TV news offered this bit of creative vocabulary.  In describing an accident where a car hit a utility pole, the reporter said:

"As you can see, the wires are spewed across the street."

Well they were strewn across the street...possibly they were in fact spewed, but...  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 17, 2012, 06:40:30 AM
Quotemakeuped human actors

Makeuped rather than made-up?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on December 17, 2012, 08:03:55 AM
Well then people might think that they're imaginary.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 17, 2012, 08:09:02 AM
Yes, I see that. Actors in make-up is the obvious, streamlined solution. Makeuped (and if we accept this, needn't the p be doubled?) is barbarous. IMO, I suppose I ought to add.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 17, 2012, 08:58:08 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 17, 2012, 06:40:30 AM
Makeuped rather than made-up?

You're on the wrong track.  Obviously they are referring to actors who don't have the normal legs and feet, and therefore are not bipeds,  but whose type of limbs are called makeus, and therefore qualify as makeupeds.
We therefore only need to determine what type of limb a makeu is, and the entire matter will be clear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 17, 2012, 09:35:46 AM
(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2012, 04:56:29 AM
By-line for an online article about the Church of England's debate over female bishops:

QuoteThe debate over female bishops forces the church to ask: Should religion enforce tradition in increasingly secular society or adapt?

Note the deliciously tendentious use of the verb enforce, where preserve might have suited.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2012, 09:50:51 AM
One of the choicest mistaken breaks mid-word I've seen in all my puff:

Quote from: An Amazon reviewerOf course the Zappa tour of '88 is the stuff of leg ends

Normally, we call the end of the leg a foot, but let that slide.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2012, 11:03:22 AM
QuoteFormer US marine Jon Hammar was imprisoned in August for carrying an antique gun into Mexico. Despite record levels of violence, such arms are prohibited without permission from the government.

I fail utterly to understand despite, there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 21, 2012, 11:10:24 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 21, 2012, 11:03:22 AM
I fail utterly to understand despite, there.
And does the government really not support the prohibition of the guns?  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 21, 2012, 05:25:12 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 21, 2012, 11:03:22 AM
I fail utterly to understand despite, there.

The writer seems to have gotten all turned around and convoluted the sentence rather strangely.  I think the intended meaning would reverse the clauses:  that despite government bans on weapons,  Mexico is experiencing record levels of violence.

But I must admit both familiarity with the rhetoric of the gun control debate and some Kreskin like mind reading was necessary to divine that meaning.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on December 23, 2012, 09:38:03 AM
You know what the NRA says: The only thing that stops bad guys with guns is good guys with guns. How is that ex-marine supposed to protect himself?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 24, 2012, 08:32:13 AM
From the Wikipedia article on the Elgar Op.47:

QuoteIntroduction and Allegro was composed in a neo-resurrected form of the Baroque concerto grosso.

Neo-resurrected?  Apart from its superfluity, it looks (to my eye) like a barbaric mis-use of neo-.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 26, 2012, 05:36:41 AM
The lost art of parallelism:

QuoteOnly 19% of women have determined the amount of income they'll need in retirement compared to 28% of males.

Now, I agree that it is hideous to use female as a substitute for women.  But the æsthetic horror applies to my own sex, as well, thank you very much.  No particular need not to have used men here, is there?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 26, 2012, 06:27:31 AM
A case of translationese found in the liner notes to Harmonia Mundi's most recent re-issue of  Ecole de Notre Dame: Messe du Jour de Noel--Ensemble Organum/Marcel Peres

Actually, two slips, although the first one has a poetry of its own which made me check the French version to make sure it wasn't intended.

Quote
A certain formula, bound to a particular movement, was linked to another, and so on, until the mosaic witch was thus put together formed a whole that was harmonious in its proportions.
It is true that music can be bewitching....

Quote
Leonin was celebrated for its polyphonic compositions for two voice....
Is there perhaps a sneaking suspicion that Leonin was not human?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 26, 2012, 06:53:25 AM
(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 26, 2012, 08:02:20 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 26, 2012, 06:27:31 AM
A case of translationese found in the liner notes to Harmonia Mundi's most recent re-issue of  Ecole de Notre Dame: Messe du Jour de Noel--Ensemble Organum/Marcel Peres

Usually cpo is guilty of that, although in many cases the original German is lächerlich anyway.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 26, 2012, 06:27:31 AM

Is there perhaps a sneaking suspicion that Leonin was not human?


That has been a suspicion about many composers...especially Stockhausen!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 03, 2013, 08:31:29 AM
So we are in the check-out line of our favorite cut-rate, rock-bottom, we-sell-only-slightly-damaged-stuff discount store, and I overhear the following exchange:

Manager: "Yew chaycked in those buxes in All Ite yayut?"   :o
(Translation: "Have you checked in those boxes in Aisle 8 yet?"  Yes, she is a native-born American, but from south of the Ohio River, where such speech impediments abound.)

Cashier: "Yeah, but they ain't bin stickerdid yet."   :o 8)

"Stickerdid" apparently equals "priced with a sticker showing the cost."   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 03, 2013, 08:37:47 AM
I knowed that! ; )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 16, 2013, 08:27:41 AM
QuoteDisseler is a stay-at-home mom to her two boys and takes courses online through a Pell Grant. But if worse comes to worse, she'll try to get a job.

Even CNN doesn't understand the idiom!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 09:13:18 AM
Quote from: The Six on January 16, 2013, 08:27:41 AM
Even CNN doesn't understand the idiom!

Random House Dictionary online has a nice explanation:

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19980713 (http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19980713)

I was just lamenting the lack of basics this morning, when I gazed appalled at some quizzes from my students.

I was accosted by monstrosities galore (not the brother of the James Bond character) e.g. "heared, "brung," "seeked," "greated," "has ran," "has ate," and others I have tried to forget.

When I read back their illiterate attempts to them, and asked "Does that make any sense to you?", I received shrugs and "I don't know" as a response.  To which I replied: "Well, who would know?  This is your sentence!"  They just kept shrugging "I don't know."

These are 7th and 8th Graders, and not all of the culprits are from the nether regions of the I.Q. scale.

Oh well! I keep tilting at those windmills!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 16, 2013, 09:28:54 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 16, 2013, 09:13:18 AM
Random House Dictionary online has a nice explanation:

http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19980713 (http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19980713)

I was just lamenting the lack of basics this morning, when I gazed appalled at some quizzes from my students.

I was accosted by monstrosities galore (not the brother of the James Bond character) e.g. "heared, "brung," "seeked," "greated," "has ran," "has ate," and others I have tried to forget.

When I read back their illiterate attempts to them, and asked "Does that make any sense to you?", I received shrugs and "I don't know" as a response.  To which I replied: "Well, who would know?  This is your sentence!"  They just kept shrugging "I don't know."

These are 7th and 8th Graders, and not all of the culprits are from the nether regions of the I.Q. scale.

Oh well! I keep tilting at those windmills!

To be perfectly fair,  that was about the age when I actually came to grips with grammar and figured out what cases and tenses were all about, and I remember being rather hazy about the relationship of "bring" and "brought" and "seek" and "sought". (ETA: and "bring" is further confusticated by the existence of "sing/sang/sung" and "ring/rang/rung"

"Greated" is intriguing; it has so many possibilities.    Did the student mean "greeted",  "grated", or "made great", or was the context so messy it was impossible to tell the intended meaning?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 10:07:43 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 16, 2013, 09:28:54 AM
To be perfectly fair,  that was about the age when I actually came to grips with grammar and learned figured out what cases and tenses were all about, and I remember being rather hazy about the relationship of "bring" and "brought" and "seek" and "sought". (ETA: and "bring" is further confusticated by the existence of "sing/sang/sung" and "ring/rang/rung"

"Greated" is intriguing; it has so many possibilities.    Did the student mean "greeted",  "grated", or "made great", or was the context so messy it was impossible to tell the intended meaning?

confusticated - Great word!

"Greated" is supposed to be "greeted."

We DO teach phonics in the beginning years.  One problem: the diocese does not like grades (part of the egalitarianism creeeeping into society), and so too often parents are not specifically aware that their kid is really not doing all that well...unless the teacher specifically tells them at a meeting. 

Even then, the parents do not always pay attention or care!  The deliberately vague "Progress Report" somewhat masks the below average performance of a student, which helps nobody of course!  Too many parents therefore labor under the "my child is a winner" delusion, when the reality is that their child is a wiener.   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on January 16, 2013, 10:17:08 AM
Recognizing poor grammar/diction and a lack of specifics can save one from a "phishing" email! I just received this obvious scam:

Our Valued Customer,


For your security, Wells Fargo Online has safeguard your account when there is a possibility that someone other than you is attempting to sign on to your online banking. You now need to verify your Identity.

To verify your identity, kindly follow reference below and take the directions to instant activation.


https://online.wellsfargo.com/login/verification/


Thank you for helping us to protect you.

Security Advisor
© 1999 - 2013 Wells Fargo & Co., Member FDIC
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 16, 2013, 10:48:07 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on January 16, 2013, 10:17:08 AM
Recognizing poor grammar/diction and a lack of specifics can save one from a "phishing" email! I just received this obvious scam:

Our Valued Customer,

For your security, Wells Fargo Online has safeguard your account when there is a possibility that someone other than you is attempting to sign on to your online banking. You now need to verify your Identity.

To verify your identity, kindly follow reference below and take the directions to instant activation.

Crooks usually did not pay complete attention in school, which is why they are crooks now, although this text is not as bad as others I have seen.

Another big clue to such scams:  .cn  .ng  .hk
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 20, 2013, 08:17:43 PM
Someone explain the need for people to say flu-like symptoms. Why not just flu symptoms? The like doesn't seem to add anything, in my view.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 21, 2013, 10:26:04 AM
One of my pet peeves: "heighdth"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 21, 2013, 10:56:47 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 21, 2013, 10:26:04 AM
One of my pet peeves: "heighdth"

??????  Really!  I have not yet heard such a monster around my parts!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: petrarch on January 21, 2013, 04:24:55 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 21, 2013, 10:26:04 AM
"heighdth"

Looks like someone playing it really safe, just in case they get it wrong :).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on January 22, 2013, 05:44:48 AM
Quote from: The Six on December 23, 2012, 09:38:03 AM
You know what the NRA says: The only thing that stops bad guys with guns is good guys with guns.
A simplification, but not far off the mark. History, sadly, bears this out. Most gun control advocates would agree, I suspect, the difference being that they trust government alone to be the good guys, and prefer wringing their hands over murder victims' fates to empowering citizens to defend themselves and thus not to become victims in the first place.

Common sense is in short supply. So is rational, dispassionate analysis of the facts. These are symptoms of the same shoddy excuse for thinking manifested in the poor grammar discussed throughout this thread, the blame for which lies mostly with the celebration of mediocrity that's become the mission of the public schools over the past several decades.

Kurt Vonnegut recognized this trend more than 50 years ago. Some of us are very slow learners, indeed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 22, 2013, 05:53:05 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 21, 2013, 10:56:47 AM
??????  Really!  I have not yet heard such a monster around my parts!

Quote from: petrarch on January 21, 2013, 04:24:55 PM
Looks like someone playing it really safe, just in case they get it wrong :).

I ought to have said, it peeves me in native speakers, recalling as it does the slovenly speech of Leo Gorcey & al. of The Bowery Boys. Cato, it certainly seems to me more a Brooklyn / Joisey City thing than a Midwestern ailment.

Petrarch, your point is good, the occasion for my mentioning this was a forgiveable mistake by a Polish (apparently) technician in the Beghin DVD feature.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 28, 2013, 09:00:53 AM
This is the chief editor of an online journal/blog congratulating his editorial team on surpassing 2,000 posts (I am not making this up (http://classical-scene.com/2013/01/28/congratulation/)):

Quote from: Lee EisemanWhen the team of Robert Levin, Bettina A. Norton and I began the journal in September . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on January 28, 2013, 09:52:25 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=g1ULAuX5Jug#t=1086s
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 28, 2013, 10:30:44 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 28, 2013, 09:00:53 AM
This is the chief editor of an online journal/blog congratulating his editorial team on surpassing 2,000 posts (I am not making this up (http://classical-scene.com/2013/01/28/congratulation/)):

Ego often trips people up, grammatically and otherwise.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 28, 2013, 10:39:40 AM
Alack, the day!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 29, 2013, 07:04:31 AM

Okay, so, here we go!   

Today in the 8th Grade we came across a Latin phrase which could not be translated literally.  I explained that it was an idiom e.g. "He's sawing logs" for snoring, in which nobody is sawing logs, but someone sounds like that while snoring, and I gave an exaggerated example, which led to this unexpected conversation among my girls (the boys were gone on a field trip):

Girl 1: "Oh my gosh!  You sound just like Abby when she snores!"
Girl 2:  "Yeah, that does sound like Abby!  She's the worst ever!"
Girl 3: (sitting right where I am standing and looking up at me) "Yeah!  She's awful:
        You don't ever want to sleep with Abby!"    :o :o :o

At which comment the girls around her have mouths as big as the Carlsbad Caverns and eyes bigger than pizzas, and are inhaling with difficulty.  So I said very properly:

"You are quite right, Miss Smith!  0:)   That will never happen!"  ;)

And then they were all laughing to the point of gasping...except for Miss Smith, who at first was not sure what her friends found so funny...and then came the dawning!  0:)

Grammar point: at times the impersonal "you" can be mistaken for "you."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 29, 2013, 07:06:21 AM
One never knows, do one?
Title: You vs. You vs. Yew
Post by: Cato on January 29, 2013, 07:27:14 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 29, 2013, 07:04:31 AM
Okay, so, here we go!   

Today in the 8th Grade we came across a Latin phrase which could not be translated literally.  I explained that it was an idiom e.g. "He's sawing logs" for snoring, in which nobody is sawing logs, but someone sounds like that while snoring, and I gave an exaggerated example, which led to this unexpected conversation among my girls (the boys were gone on a field trip):

Girl 1: "Oh my gosh!  You sound just like Abby when she snores!"
Girl 2:  "Yeah, that does sound like Abby!  She's the worst ever!"
Girl 3: (sitting right where I am standing and looking up at me) "Yeah!  She's awful:
        You don't ever want to sleep with Abby!"    :o :o :o

At which comment the girls around her have mouths as big as the Carlsbad Caverns and eyes bigger than pizzas, and are inhaling with difficulty.  So I said very properly:

"You are quite right, Miss Smith!  0:)   That will never happen!"  ;)

And then they were all laughing to the point of gasping...except for Miss Smith, who at first was not sure what her friends found so funny...and then came the dawning!  0:)

Grammar point: at times the impersonal "you" can be mistaken for "you."

Quote from: karlhenning on January 29, 2013, 07:06:21 AM
One never knows, do one?

;D

Speaking of "you," the pronunciation of the pronoun as if it were a member of the Taxus family of greenery, is something I am finding among some adults now, especially women.

Perhaps it is the 80's "Valley Girl" nonsense at work!
Title: Re: You vs. You vs. Yew
Post by: kishnevi on January 29, 2013, 06:26:05 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 29, 2013, 07:27:14 AM
;D

Speaking of "you," the pronunciation of the pronoun as if it were a member of the Taxus family of greenery, is something I am finding among some adults now, especially women.

Perhaps it is the 80's "Valley Girl" nonsense at work!

I have to confess that I'm guilty of that in reverse:  on those occasions when I mention the yew (admittedly not often),  I pronounce it the same as "you".  And there's an even chance I will pronounce the word "Jew" as "Ju" even though, being one myself,  I should know better.

And for many years I used think people were "misl-ed" (mizzl'd), until it eventually dawned on me that they were actually "mis-led". 

BTW, it's probably a good thing the boys were on a field trip when Miss Smith made her remark.
Title: Re: You vs. You vs. Yew
Post by: Cato on January 30, 2013, 08:51:20 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 29, 2013, 06:26:05 PM

BTW, it's probably a good thing the boys were on a field trip when Miss Smith made her remark. 

;D  And the remark never came back to me!  Nobody came around with "I heard what happened..." 

Perhaps to spare "Miss Smith" from further comments, the girls just let it drop!  They are a nice group.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 06, 2013, 06:10:06 AM
In an effort to prevent Bruckner's Abbey from being thrown off topic, I will comment here about "pop writer" Sydney Sheldon (creator of I Dream of Jeanie).

By "Googling" his name and the phrase "bad writing," I found the following:

From an essay by Charles Petzold:

Quote...Here then is Sidney Sheldon's A Stranger in the Mirror, the story of comic Toby Temple:

"The Friars Club gave a Roast with Toby Temple as the guest of honor. A dozen top comics were on the dais, along with Toby and Jill, Sam Winters and the head of the network that Toby had signed with. Jill was asked to stand up and take a bow. It became a standing ovation.

They're cheering me, Jill thought. Not Toby. Me!

The master of ceremonies was the host of a famous nighttime television talk show. "I can't tell you how happy I am to see Toby here," he said. "Because if we weren't honoring him here tonight, we'd be holding this banquet at Forest Lawn."

Laughter.

"And believe me, the food's terrible there. Have you ever eaten at Forest Lawn? They serve leftovers from the Last Supper."

Laughter.

He turned to Toby. "We really are proud of you, Toby. I mean that. I understand you've been asked to donate a part of your body to science. They're going to put it in a jar at the Harvard Medical School. The only problem so far is that they haven't been able to find a jar big enough to hold it."

Roars.

When Toby got up for his rebuttal, he topped them all.

Everyone agreed that it was the best Roast the Friars had ever had."

For 35 years, this sentence has given me hope. I know I'm a mediocre writer, but I also know that I would never ever write a sentence as bad as that one.

In addition to the last Sydney Sheldon sentence in the excerpt, I do wonder about the joke using the word "big": would it not be funnier to write that "they haven't found a jar small enough..." ?   :laugh:

But...such is the nature of bad writing!

See:

http://www.charlespetzold.com/blog/2011/11/Very-Bad-Writing.html (http://www.charlespetzold.com/blog/2011/11/Very-Bad-Writing.html)

I should mention that some of the worst writing one can find today is by the teachers and professors who pen textbooks for schools! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 06, 2013, 10:53:24 AM
A friend found the opening lines of Sidney Sheldon's Bloodline:


Quote
He was seated in the dark, alone, behind the desk of Hajib Kafir, staring unseeingly out of the dusty office window at the timeless minarets of Istanbul...His waiting had the patience of a hunter, the quiet stillness of a man in control of his body and his emotions. He was Welsh, with the dark, stormy good looks of his ancestors. He had black hair and a strong face, and quick intelligent eyes that were a deep blue. He was over six feet tall, with the lean muscular body of a man who kept himself in good physical condition. The office was filled with the odors of Hajib Kafir, his sickly sweet tobacco, his acrid Turkish coffee, his fat, oily body. Rhys Williams was unaware of them. He was thinking about the telephone call he had received from Chamonix an hour earlier.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 06, 2013, 10:57:06 AM
What a twit Rhys must have been, not to be aware of that fœtid atmosphere, fooey!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 06, 2013, 01:06:26 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 06, 2013, 10:57:06 AM
What a twit Rhys must have been, not to be aware of that fœtid atmosphere, fooey!

And being Welsh, and in a bad novel, he just had to look "dark" and "stormy" ! ;D

Shades of Bulwer-Lytton!   ???

http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/ (http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on February 06, 2013, 01:09:03 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 06, 2013, 10:53:24 AM
A friend found the opening lines of Sidney Sheldon's Bloodline:

:o  Shame on Sheldon.  What a bloody awful writer.  One doesn't have to read too much into that paragraph to smell the sweat of a racist.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on February 06, 2013, 05:54:07 PM
I've read one Sidney Sheldon novel in my life.  I don't remember the title, or any particular quote from it, cringe worthy or otherwise:  but I do remember that I could see how the plot would develop, including the identify of the supposed mystery villian that is not "revealed" until the last chapter, by about half way through the first chapter.

Another bad writer is probably Tom Clancy, of whose novels I have read only Hunt for Red October.  Clancy had the merit of coming up with a non formulaic plot that was literally a page turner--I read it as fast as I could to see what would happen next, and how everything would come out.  (It's actually much more interesting than the film version.)   But his descriptive abilities were about the level of one of Cato's students, and his talent for characterization was non existent.  Let me put it this way: the most vividly realized, completely fleshed out character in the novel is the KGB officer who gets killed off within the first three pages of the novel.

And then of course there is Dan Brown.  I once tried to read the DaVinci Code, and threw it across the room in disgust by about the time I got to the end of the second chapter. And I'm not even a Catholic.  Haven't read a single word by him ever since.  Bad prose,  bad plot, bad characterization.....He probably deserves a Bulwer Lytton award for Special Lifetime Achievement.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 07, 2013, 12:27:23 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on February 06, 2013, 05:54:07 PM
And then of course there is Dan Brown.  I once tried to read the DaVinci Code, and threw it across the room in disgust by about the time I got to the end of the second chapter. And I'm not even a Catholic.  Haven't read a single word by him ever since.  Bad prose,  bad plot, bad characterization.....

I read the whole crap. That is the only book I've ever regretted buying.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 07, 2013, 07:15:03 AM
I came across all kinds of venom yesterday about James Patterson being a popular yet ultimately terrible writer.

Alfred Hitchcock once gave an interview where he mentioned that mediocre or even bad novels can sometimes be turned into a great movie, whereas it is very difficult to take a good or great book and make a good or great movie, because the successful book by definition is much more complex and interesting than a movie can ever be.

e.g.

Psycho was something of a drugstore potboiler by Robert Bloch, who wrote mysteries and science fiction.  I recall that studios were not interested in the book because it was too violent, and so Hitchcock snapped up the rights at a cheap price (c. $10,000).   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 07, 2013, 04:17:15 PM
"We sale 4G Fones"

This monstrosity was seen at a telephone store: "Fones" is bad enough, but "sale" ??? ??? ??? instead of "sell" ?

Residents of certain southern states are known to mangle short "e's" and and turn them into long "a's".

Perhaps the manager "hails" from "Kaintucky" or thereabouts.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on February 07, 2013, 07:37:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 07, 2013, 04:17:15 PM
"We sale 4G Fones"

This monstrosity was seen at a telephone store: "Fones" is bad enough, but "sale" ??? ??? ??? instead of "sell" ?

Residents of certain southern states are known to mangle short "e's" and and turn them into long "a's".

Perhaps the manager "hails" from "Kaintucky" or thereabouts.   0:)

Au contraire, you northerners mangle words by shortening the vowel from a long a into a short e, which shows what mistakes can be made by insisting on following orthography.  >:D

But perhaps this store was using sale as a quasi intensive form of "to sell".  To sale an object is not merely to sell it, but to sell it at a discount that makes it cheaper compared to one's competitors.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on February 08, 2013, 12:08:50 AM
I know what Santa Cato will be giving everyone this Christmas! ;D

http://www.gizmag.com/lernstift-digital-pen/26113/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2013, 07:10:51 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on February 08, 2013, 12:08:50 AM
I know what Santa Cato will be giving everyone this Christmas! ;D

http://www.gizmag.com/lernstift-digital-pen/26113/

So the Germans are at it again!   ;D

Many thanks for the link!

The name of the device is a pun in German:

"Bleistift means "pencil."

Blei = lead (the metal)   Lernen = learn  Stift = stick or writing instrument

(Stift is related to steif, the word for stiff.)

So, as the article states, the invention is a "learning pencil."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on February 08, 2013, 03:21:10 PM
Are there any Americans who aren't too lazy to pronounce their Ts? Center has become cenner, Toyota is Toyoda, entertainment is ennertainmen, etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2013, 03:33:57 PM
Quote from: The Six on February 08, 2013, 03:21:10 PM
Are there any Americans who aren't too lazy to pronounce their Ts? Center has become cenner, Toyota is Toyoda, entertainment is ennertainmen, etc.

It is sad, I agree.  Part of the problem is that oratory has disappeared from the schools, and that what passes for oratory today is lamentable, especially when one hears e.g. certain politicians, actors, and commentators lionized as eloquent geniuses, when they are nothing of the sort.

From a semiotic aspect, such slovenly pronunciation may be a sign of deeper problems.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on February 08, 2013, 08:11:19 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2013, 03:33:57 PM
From a semiotic aspect, such slovenly pronunciation may be a sign of deeper problems.
Isn the guvermin gonna ban semiotics?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 11, 2013, 07:56:59 AM
Delicious Typo Dept.:

QuoteWhen one has heard the unstoppable drive of Mravinsky or the opulence of the Berliners under Von Karajan, this performance of the 10th bares little repeat listening.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2013, 03:43:38 PM
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 08, 2013, 08:11:19 PM
Isn the guvermin gonna ban semiotics?

Say wha' ?   :D

Quote from: karlhenning on February 11, 2013, 07:56:59 AM
Delicious Typo Dept.:

QuoteWhen one has heard the unstoppable drive of Mravinsky or the opulence of the Berliners under Von Karajan, this performance of the 10th bares little repeat listening.

Actually, that would be right, you know!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 15, 2013, 07:08:59 AM
Here's a painful one, and the title of an episode to boot, in The Complete Avengers by Dave Rogers: "The Bird Who Knew To Much."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on February 15, 2013, 01:29:11 PM
That's the one about the hungry bird, right? It's just a typo, leaving out the "n" in the last word.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 15, 2013, 01:47:00 PM
One of the worst errors in a title involved a mistake in geography, rather than spelling.

Krakatoa, East of Java was one of the last Cinerama movies, and was a waste of the talents of Maximilian Schell, Brian Keith, and Sal Mineo.

The problem: Krakatoa, you see, is west of Java!  When it was re-released, it was renamed Volcano!

A crappy movie, and yes, I sat through it!

The score is dreadful, done by TV composer and erstwhile comedian Frank DeVol.  I had to wonder if the score was not supposed to be a satire of scores for incompetent movies:

http://www.youtube.com/v/y1wWALEU5GU

Frank DeVol played bandleader "Happy Kine" of "Happy Kine and the Mirthmakers" on Fernwood 2Night with Martin Mull and Fred Willard.

http://www.youtube.com/v/XkrvnyW8h0o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 18, 2013, 01:37:28 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 15, 2013, 07:08:59 AM
Here's a painful one, and the title of an episode to boot, in The Complete Avengers by Dave Rogers: "The Bird Who Knew To Much."

Perhaps they wanted to say "The Bard..."  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2013, 07:38:37 AM
From today's Wall Street Journal:

Quote"Computer scientist David Gelernter answering the 2013 annual question of Edge.org, "What should we be worried about?"


"If we have a million photos, we tend to value each one less than if we only had ten. The internet forces a general devaluation of the written word: a global deflation in the average word's value on many axes. As each word tends to get less reading-time and attention and to be worth less money at the consumer end, it naturally tends to absorb less writing-time and editorial attention on the production side. Gradually, as the time invested by the average writer and the average reader in the average sentence falls, society's ability to communicate in writing decays. And this threat to our capacity to read and write is a slow-motion body-blow to science, scholarship, the arts—to nearly everything, in fact, that is distinctively human, that muskrats and dolphins can't do just as well or better.

The internet's insatiable demand for words creates global deflation in the value of words. The internet's capacity to distribute words near-instantly means that, with no lag-time between writing and publication, publication and worldwide availability, pressure builds on the writer to produce more. Global deflation in the value of words creates pressure, in turn, to downplay or eliminate editing and self-editing. When I tell my students not to turn in first-drafts, I sometimes have to explain, nowadays, what a first draft is."


(My emphasis above)
A version of this article appeared February 25, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Notable & Quotable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2013, 10:35:31 AM
Quote"Computer scientist David Gelernter answering the 2013 annual question of Edge.org, "What should we be worried about?"

I just discovered that Gelernter was injured by a bomb from the "Unabomber" in the 1980's, and that he teaches at Yale...some of whose students do not know what a "first draft" is supposed to be.   ;) ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2013, 11:33:58 AM
Woof
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 26, 2013, 04:42:45 AM
Rather an embarrassing typo on Amazon for the soundtrack of The Blues Brothers:

QuoteTheme from Rawride.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 26, 2013, 12:48:18 PM
A wonderful malapropism... chap meant to say "the plaintive noodle" (personally, I'm not mad about calling an active clarinet figure "noodling," but let that pass), but typed "the plaintiff noodle."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 26, 2013, 01:02:37 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 26, 2013, 12:48:18 PM
A wonderful malapropism... chap meant to say "the plaintive noodle" (personally, I'm not mad about calling an active clarinet figure "noodling," but let that pass), but typed "the plaintiff noodle."

If the plaintiff is Noodle, then the defendant must be...?   0:)

And Rawride!!!  All I can say is, cowboys probably would agree that there is more than one kind!  8)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on February 26, 2013, 10:02:39 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 26, 2013, 12:48:18 PM
A wonderful malapropism... chap meant to say "the plaintive noodle" (personally, I'm not mad about calling an active clarinet figure "noodling," but let that pass), but typed "the plaintiff noodle."

Plaintive is the transliteration of the Russian that sounds Plaintiff.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Fun With Nouns and Adjectives
Post by: Cato on March 01, 2013, 01:11:38 PM
Okay, here we go!  For new people, I teach grade-school (6th, 7th, 8th) Latin...yes, I know, I am lucky to be employed!

The Latin sentence is supposed to equal: "The Romans praised the bravery of the enemy."

The Seventh Grade boy, by breaking practically every rule of the language, comes up with:

The enemy praises the brave Romans.

After I begin some Socratic questioning, the boy, who is normally not dull, deduces that "Romans" should be the subject, and "enemy" the direct object, and that the verb tense is wrong.

But wait!  There's more!!!   0:)

He: So it should be..."The brave Romans praised the enemy."
I: No, look more carefully.
He: "The brave Romans have praised the enemy."
I: No, the verb is fine.  There is a problem with this word (and I indicate fortitudinem i.e. "bravery.")
He: "The very brave Romans praised the enemy."
I: No, you don't need a superlative.  The problem is that you're making an adjective out of a noun.
He: (not thinking at all) The Romans bravely praised the enemy.
I: No, "bravely" is an adverb.  I will repeat: you are making an adjective out of a noun.

And now, with my next questions, I make a mistake, because the question is not quite posed properly for the rather concrete   ;)  7th Grade brain.

I: What's the noun for "brave"?
He: Fortitudinem.
I: In English!
He: Romans.
I: No, I mean what is the noun that comes from "brave."
He: (Puzzled) Romans?
I: No, again, brave is an adjective.  It describes a noun.  I need "brave" as a noun.
He: Oh, it's the same!
I: No it isn't!
He: Yeah: like the Atlanta Braves.   :'(   ???
I: Well, that is a noun, but it's "brave" as a person. Look, I need the idea of brave.
He: Oh!  Courage!

And I should have stopped and said: "Close enough!"

But I suffer from rampant Don-Quixote Syndrome!   0:)

I: Well, we're getting closer!  Now give me a synonym for "courage" from "brave."
He: (Silence)
I: Just add two letters!
He: Oh! Bravest!
I: No, that's a superlative adjective again! I need the noun, the idea of "brave" as a noun!  Just add two letters, but not "st"!
He: Bravely?
I: No, that's still an adverb.  Look, let's go back to the sentence: "The Romans praised the ____ of the enemy."  Now if we put in "brave" - will that make sense?
He: No.
I: Good!  Why?
He: (not sure) Because it's an adjective?
I: Yes, great!  Now, put in the noun that comes from "brave."
He: Courage.   

To quote Clint Eastwood's   $:)   Dirty Harry: "A man's got to know his limitations!"  :laugh:

Finally I wrote out B-r-a-v-e-r-y and asked him if he knew the word "bravery." 

No, he claimed that he had never seen it before.

So, today he learned a new word!   :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on March 01, 2013, 01:24:57 PM
Come to think of it, I don't remember the last time I've seen the word "bravery" used in anything a member of the general public would be expected to read on a regular basis.   Hero/heroism seems to have pushed it out the door--I suppose it just sounds more, er, heroic, to refer to someone's heroism instead of someone's bravery....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: vandermolen on March 01, 2013, 02:13:43 PM
Very popular amongst my students is 'could of' when they mean 'could have'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Fun With Nouns and Adjectives
Post by: Cato on March 01, 2013, 03:28:35 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 01, 2013, 01:11:38 PM
Okay, here we go!  For new people, I teach grade-school (6th, 7th, 8th) Latin...yes, I know, I am lucky to be employed!

The Latin sentence is supposed to equal: "The Romans praised the bravery of the enemy."

The Seventh Grade boy, by breaking practically every rule of the language, comes up with:

The enemy praises the brave Romans.

After I begin some Socratic questioning, the boy, who is normally not dull, deduces that "Romans" should be the subject, and "enemy" the direct object, and that the verb tense is wrong.

But wait!  There's more!!!   0:)

He: So it should be..."The brave Romans praised the enemy."
I: No, look more carefully.
He: "The brave Romans have praised the enemy."
I: No, the verb is fine.  There is a problem with this word (and I indicate fortitudinem i.e. "bravery.")
He: "The very brave Romans praised the enemy."
I: No, you don't need a superlative.  The problem is that you're making an adjective out of a noun.
He: (not thinking at all) The Romans bravely praised the enemy.
I: No, "bravely" is an adverb.  I will repeat: you are making an adjective out of a noun.

And now, with my next questions, I make a mistake, because the question is not quite posed properly for the rather concrete   ;)  7th Grade brain.

I: What's the noun for "brave"?
He: Fortitudinem.
I: In English!
He: Romans.
I: No, I mean what is the noun that comes from "brave."
He: (Puzzled) Romans?
I: No, again, brave is an adjective.  It describes a noun.  I need "brave" as a noun.
He: Oh, it's the same!
I: No it isn't!
He: Yeah: like the Atlanta Braves.   :'(   ???
I: Well, that is a noun, but it's "brave" as a person. Look, I need the idea of brave.
He: Oh!  Courage!

And I should have stopped and said: "Close enough!"

But I suffer from rampant Don-Quixote Syndrome!   0:)

I: Well, we're getting closer!  Now give me a synonym for "courage" from "brave."
He: (Silence)
I: Just add two letters!
He: Oh! Bravest!
I: No, that's a superlative adjective again! I need the noun, the idea of "brave" as a noun!  Just add two letters, but not "st"!
He: Bravely?
I: No, that's still an adverb.  Look, let's go back to the sentence: "The Romans praised the ____ of the enemy."  Now if we put in "brave" - will that make sense?
He: No.
I: Good!  Why?
He: (not sure) Because it's an adjective?
I: Yes, great!  Now, put in the noun that comes from "brave."
He: Courage.   

To quote Clint Eastwood's   $:)   Dirty Harry: "A man's got to know his limitations!"  :laugh:

Finally I wrote out B-r-a-v-e-r-y and asked him if he knew the word "bravery." 

No, he claimed that he had never seen it before.

So, today he learned a new word!   :laugh:

I should mention that the student came in during lunch to write an assignment so that he could raise a "D" on a recent quiz to a "C." 


Quote from: vandermolen on March 01, 2013, 02:13:43 PM
Very popular amongst my students is 'could of' when they mean 'could have'.

I just read an Amazon review full of "of" instead of "have" or " 've" along with monstrosities like "had took."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 01, 2013, 04:58:38 PM
Cato, that could become the new "Who's on first" routine!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 01, 2013, 05:45:49 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 01, 2013, 04:58:38 PM
Cato, that could become the new "Who's on first" routine!

After reflecting on the conversation, Abbot and Costello were the first ones I thought of!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on March 02, 2013, 05:33:08 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 01, 2013, 02:13:43 PM
Very popular amongst my students is 'could of' when they mean 'could have'.

I didn't know that this was a 'phenomenon' in the UK as well.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 02, 2013, 06:52:34 AM
Lazy English is not a purely American pastime, you see.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on March 02, 2013, 06:57:46 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 02, 2013, 06:52:34 AM
Lazy English is not a purely American pastime, you see.

True; but I assumed that this usage was from a dialect of Lazy English. ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 02, 2013, 08:48:22 AM
Quote from: vandermolen on March 01, 2013, 02:13:43 PM
Very popular amongst my students is 'could of' when they mean 'could have'.

Do they also get 'off of' their chairs?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 07, 2013, 10:41:16 AM
QuoteRemove any of the Tracks you aren't comfortable with by selecting the Track(s) and pressing <Delete>. This will not delete any Tracks from the Library, it simply removes them from the Playlist.

Tracks you aren't comfortable with? You have got to bloody be kidding me . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 07, 2013, 01:15:30 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 07, 2013, 10:41:16 AM
Tracks you aren't comfortable with? You have got to bloody be kidding me . . . .
:laugh:

They should have written 'Remove bad music by...'  ::)
But then again, you'd want to remove those from the library, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 07, 2013, 02:44:25 PM
QuoteRemove any of the Tracks you aren't comfortable with by selecting the Track(s) and pressing <Delete>. This will not delete any Tracks from the Library, it simply removes them from the Playlist.

Quote from: karlhenning on March 07, 2013, 10:41:16 AM
Tracks you aren't comfortable with? You have got to bloody be kidding me . . . .

This could be a preciosity from the anti-bullying mania now sweeping the country.  Children are being told to tell the bully "I'm not comfortable with what you said," and of course any 10-year old bully will be shocked and start crying that s/he has made the recipient of her/his attention "uncomfortable."

A haymaker to the choppers, as history has shown, would do much more to stop bullying!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 07, 2013, 03:02:51 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 07, 2013, 02:44:25 PM
This could be a preciosity from the anti-bullying mania now sweeping the country.  Children are being told to tell the bully "I'm not comfortable with what you said," and of course any 10-year old bully will be shocked and start crying that s/he has made the recipient of her/his attention "uncomfortable."

A haymaker to the choppers, as history has shown, would do much more to stop bullying!   $:)

In an article from CBS New York about how "80% of NYC high school graduates can't read," we find things like "emersion" for "immersion,"  "classrom,"  "groulp," et al.

I almost thought it had to be a satire!  But...no.   :o

See:

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/officials-80-percent-of-recent-nyc-high-school-graduates-cannot-read/ (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/officials-80-percent-of-recent-nyc-high-school-graduates-cannot-read/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 08, 2013, 01:43:44 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 07, 2013, 03:02:51 PM
In an article from CBS New York about how "80% of NYC high school graduates can't read," we find things like "emersion" for "immersion,"  "classrom,"  "groulp," et al.

I almost thought it had to be a satire!  But...no.   :o

See:

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/officials-80-percent-of-recent-nyc-high-school-graduates-cannot-read/ (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/officials-80-percent-of-recent-nyc-high-school-graduates-cannot-read/)

Update from New York Magazine, which comments on the badly written article from CBS:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/03/80-of-nyc-high-school-grads-not-illiterate.html (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/03/80-of-nyc-high-school-grads-not-illiterate.html)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 04, 2013, 06:26:12 AM
Quote from: Shakespeare
The man that hath no music in himself,
Nor is not mov'd with concord of sweet sounds,
Is fit for treasons, stratagems, and spoils.

That double negation in the second verse, is it okay? And "the man that' ?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 04, 2013, 06:43:31 AM
As has been said: the Elizabethans were eloquent, before they were grammarians : )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 04, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 04, 2013, 06:43:31 AM
As has been said: the Elizabethans were eloquent, before they were grammarians : )

Nor had they greate regard for the maxims of Orthographie. 

It's probably better to say that the English language, in so far as it had fixed rules of grammar, did not have the same exact rules as we do.  It is four hundreds years and more, after all, and vernacular languages were just establishing themselves as something more than the language for every day affairs, and local dialects were of more importance.  Grammar as we know it, along with orthography, didn't really get formulated for English until the 18th century, when intellectuals were intent on creating some equivalent of an "academic" language--academic here being a reference not to higher learning but to such groups as the French Academy.  The concept of a double negative probably had no real meaning for Shakespeare.  And, of course, it's poetry.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on April 06, 2013, 06:40:27 AM
Being shown to a restaurant table this week, the young woman dealing with bookings said, "Would you please follow myself?"

Mike
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 06, 2013, 09:38:23 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 04, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
Nor had they greate regard for the maxims of Orthographie.

:)

Quote
It's probably better to say that the English language, in so far as it had fixed rules of grammar, did not have the same exact rules as we do.  It is four hundreds years and more, after all, and vernacular languages were just establishing themselves as something more than the language for every day affairs, and local dialects were of more importance.  Grammar as we know it, along with orthography, didn't really get formulated for English until the 18th century, when intellectuals were intent on creating some equivalent of an "academic" language--academic here being a reference not to higher learning but to such groups as the French Academy.  The concept of a double negative probably had no real meaning for Shakespeare.  And, of course, it's poetry.

Quite so.

As an aside, the double negation is the norm in Romanian, so "nor is not moved" makes perfect sense to me.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 07, 2013, 07:55:14 PM
Found on a blog I generally read every day>  Not all grammar related, but enough to make it on-topic here

1. WHAT IF THERE WERE NO HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS?

2. IS THERE ANOTHER WORD FOR SYNONYM?

3. WHERE DO FOREST RANGERS GO TO "GET AWAY FROM IT ALL"?

4. WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU SEE AN ENDANGERED ANIMAL EATING AN ENDANGERED PLANT?

5. WHY DO THEY LOCK GAS STATION BATHROOMS? ARE THEY AFRAID SOMEONE WILL BREAK IN AND CLEAN THEM?

6. IF A TURTLE DOESN'T HAVE A SHELL, IS HE HOMELESS OR NAKED?

7. WHAT WAS THE BEST THING BEFORE SLICED BREAD?

8. ONE NICE THING ABOUT EGOTISTS: THEY DON'T TALK ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE.

9. DOES THE LITTLE MERMAID WEAR AN ALGEBRA?

10. WOULD A FLY WITHOUT WINGS BE CALLED A WALK?

11. IF YOU ATE BOTH PASTA AND ANTIPASTO, WOULD YOU STILL BE HUNGRY?

12. IF YOU TRY TO FAIL, AND SUCCEED, WHICH HAVE YOU DONE?

13. WHOSE CRUEL IDEA WAS IT FOR THE WORD 'LISP' TO HAVE 'S' IN IT?

14. DO INFANTS ENJOY INFANCY AS MUCH AS ADULTS ENJOY ADULTERY?

15. IF YOU SPIN AN ORIENTAL MAN IN A CIRCLE THREE TIMES, DOES HE BECOME DISORIENTED?

Found here: http://thewoundedbird.blogspot.com/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 12, 2013, 05:06:39 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 07, 2013, 07:55:14 PM
Found on a blog I generally read every day>  Not all grammar related, but enough to make it on-topic here

1. WHAT IF THERE WERE NO HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS?

2. IS THERE ANOTHER WORD FOR SYNONYM?

3. WHERE DO FOREST RANGERS GO TO "GET AWAY FROM IT ALL"?

4. WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU SEE AN ENDANGERED ANIMAL EATING AN ENDANGERED PLANT?

5. WHY DO THEY LOCK GAS STATION BATHROOMS? ARE THEY AFRAID SOMEONE WILL BREAK IN AND CLEAN THEM?

6. IF A TURTLE DOESN'T HAVE A SHELL, IS HE HOMELESS OR NAKED?

7. WHAT WAS THE BEST THING BEFORE SLICED BREAD?

8. ONE NICE THING ABOUT EGOTISTS: THEY DON'T TALK ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE.

9. DOES THE LITTLE MERMAID WEAR AN ALGEBRA?

10. WOULD A FLY WITHOUT WINGS BE CALLED A WALK?

11. IF YOU ATE BOTH PASTA AND ANTIPASTO, WOULD YOU STILL BE HUNGRY?

12. IF YOU TRY TO FAIL, AND SUCCEED, WHICH HAVE YOU DONE?

13. WHOSE CRUEL IDEA WAS IT FOR THE WORD 'LISP' TO HAVE 'S' IN IT?

14. DO INFANTS ENJOY INFANCY AS MUCH AS ADULTS ENJOY ADULTERY?

15. IF YOU SPIN AN ORIENTAL MAN IN A CIRCLE THREE TIMES, DOES HE BECOME DISORIENTED?

Found here: http://thewoundedbird.blogspot.com/

1. Then there would be no hypothetical answers!

2. Yes, cinnamon.

3. The desert.

4. Offer the animal an environmentalist to eat instead.

5. No, they are afraid someone will start living there.

6. Yes.

7. Unsliced bread.

8. Amen.

9. No, she wears brachiopods.  Really! 

10. No, it would be dead.

11. I would be: I hate both.

12. Both.

13.  Thpeech therapiththth

14. Adultery is not fun: it's infantile.

15. Yes, his disorientation will be very occidental.

Today I saw an ad in Ohio Magazine (of all places) for a love emporium in a Columbus suburb, offering "special lingerie" and also...

"romantic equipment."   ???  Interesting turn of phrase!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 12, 2013, 05:16:08 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 12, 2013, 05:06:39 PM
1. Then there would be no hypothetical answers!

2. Yes, cinnamon.

3. The desert.

4. Offer the animal an environmentalist to eat instead.

5. No, they are afraid someone will start living there.

6. Yes.

7. Unsliced bread.

8. Amen.

9. No, she wears brachiopods.  Really! 

10. No, it would be dead.

11. I would be: I hate both.

12. Both.

13.  Thpeech therapiththth

14. Adultery is not fun: it's infantile.

15. Yes, his disorientation will be very occidental.

;D
Quote
Today I saw an ad in Ohio Magazine (of all places) for a love emporium in a Columbus suburb, offering "special lingerie" and also...

"romantic equipment."   ???  Interesting turn of phrase!

To be perfectly honest,  the phrase love emporium has some interesting resonances....

There's a Hustler superstore in Fort Lauderdale.  Big box stores for everything, it seems!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 13, 2013, 03:44:35 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 07, 2013, 07:55:14 PM
Found on a blog I generally read every day>  Not all grammar related, but enough to make it on-topic here

1. WHAT IF THERE WERE NO HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS?

2. IS THERE ANOTHER WORD FOR SYNONYM?

3. WHERE DO FOREST RANGERS GO TO "GET AWAY FROM IT ALL"?

4. WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU SEE AN ENDANGERED ANIMAL EATING AN ENDANGERED PLANT?

5. WHY DO THEY LOCK GAS STATION BATHROOMS? ARE THEY AFRAID SOMEONE WILL BREAK IN AND CLEAN THEM?

6. IF A TURTLE DOESN'T HAVE A SHELL, IS HE HOMELESS OR NAKED?

7. WHAT WAS THE BEST THING BEFORE SLICED BREAD?

8. ONE NICE THING ABOUT EGOTISTS: THEY DON'T TALK ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE.

9. DOES THE LITTLE MERMAID WEAR AN ALGEBRA?

10. WOULD A FLY WITHOUT WINGS BE CALLED A WALK?

11. IF YOU ATE BOTH PASTA AND ANTIPASTO, WOULD YOU STILL BE HUNGRY?

12. IF YOU TRY TO FAIL, AND SUCCEED, WHICH HAVE YOU DONE?

13. WHOSE CRUEL IDEA WAS IT FOR THE WORD 'LISP' TO HAVE 'S' IN IT?

14. DO INFANTS ENJOY INFANCY AS MUCH AS ADULTS ENJOY ADULTERY?

15. IF YOU SPIN AN ORIENTAL MAN IN A CIRCLE THREE TIMES, DOES HE BECOME DISORIENTED?

Found here: http://thewoundedbird.blogspot.com/

Quote from: Cato on April 12, 2013, 05:06:39 PM
1. Then there would be no hypothetical answers!

2. Yes, cinnamon.

3. The desert.

4. Offer the animal an environmentalist to eat instead.

5. No, they are afraid someone will start living there.

6. Yes.

7. Unsliced bread.

8. Amen.

9. No, she wears brachiopods.  Really! 

10. No, it would be dead.

11. I would be: I hate both.

12. Both.

13.  Thpeech therapiththth

14. Adultery is not fun: it's infantile.

15. Yes, his disorientation will be very occidental.

Today I saw an ad in Ohio Magazine (of all places) for a love emporium in a Columbus suburb, offering "special lingerie" and also...

"romantic equipment."   ???  Interesting turn of phrase!

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 12, 2013, 05:16:08 PM
;D
To be perfectly honest,  the phrase love emporium has some interesting resonances....

There's a Hustler superstore in Fort Lauderdale.  Big box stores for everything, it seems!

Germany for years had a chain-store operation of "love emporia" for "romantic equipment" and (I assume) pornography run by a grandmotherly dominatrix called Beate Uhse.

Perhaps it was more of a whips-and-chain-store operation.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on April 13, 2013, 01:39:14 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 13, 2013, 03:44:35 AM
Germany for years had a chain-store operation of "love emporia" for "romantic equipment" and (I assume) pornography run by a grandmotherly dominatrix called Beate Uhse.
Wonderful. Like the New Orleans bankruptcy lawyer named Robin Cheatham.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 13, 2013, 05:41:49 PM
Quote
Germany for years had a chain-store operation of "love emporia" for "romantic equipment" and (I assume) pornography run by a grandmotherly dominatrix called Beate Uhse.

Perhaps it was more of a whips-and-chain-store operation.   0:)

Quote from: DavidRoss on April 13, 2013, 01:39:14 PM
Wonderful. Like the New Orleans bankruptcy lawyer named Robin Cheatham.

The joke only works in English: "Bay-ah-tuh" is the German pronunciation of the first name, although "Ooh-suh" could be a sound caused by "romantic equipment."   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 18, 2013, 10:52:46 AM
Quote from: PaulR on April 15, 2013, 10:23:46 AM
Cadenza's to Shostakovich 1st violin concerto and 1st cello concerto
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 29, 2013, 06:03:03 AM
Quote"A set which, like the Bible and Shakespeare, ought rightly to accompany any thnking person to a desert island."
Gramophone

A typo for the ages.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 17, 2013, 05:36:48 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on May 17, 2013, 05:24:32 AM
It is not such an uncommon mistake.  It reminds of another thing I have heard more than I wish, "I borrowed him $100 and he never paid me back."

Oh well, it's just rock 'n' roll.

That reminds me . . . .

Loan as a verb?  Has it become . . . acceptable?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 17, 2013, 10:26:23 AM
Not precisely ungrammatical, but the name chosen for this gift shop must induce some groans.
http://www.lexingtonhistory.org/shop.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 17, 2013, 10:35:21 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 17, 2013, 05:36:48 AM
That reminds me . . . .

Loan as a verb?  Has it become . . . acceptable?


My Random House dictionary from the 1970's says yes.  Odd to my ears does it sound.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 17, 2013, 10:26:23 AM
Not precisely ungrammatical, but the name chosen for this gift shop must induce some groans.
http://www.lexingtonhistory.org/shop.html

??? 8) 0:)

Well, some jokes are just too tempting!   :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 17, 2013, 10:57:38 AM
Woof
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on May 18, 2013, 02:30:55 AM
'The likes of' always amuses me. It suggests that those referred to are not the real people.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidRoss on May 18, 2013, 03:33:42 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 17, 2013, 05:36:48 AM
That reminds me . . . .

Loan as a verb?  Has it become . . . acceptable?


Never.

Question 2: Have objective pronouns completely disappeared from common speech?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 18, 2013, 04:42:40 AM
Quote from: DavidRoss on May 18, 2013, 03:33:42 AM
Never.

Question 2: Have objective pronouns completely disappeared from common speech?

Why no!  Just yesterday one of my not unintelligent 8th Grade boys came up to me and said:

"Can me 'n' him take down the flag?"    ??? ??? ???

To which I responded: "Where are Mr. Mi and Mr. Hymn?  They sound rather musical?"

The boy's bewildered face was a sight to behold.   :laugh:

So for some people "me" and "him" and "her" and "them" are Subject Pronouns!

And "I" is now an Object Pronoun, and it is becoming really annoying!  It seems that whenever people are using a double object which includes themselves, they instantly become dullards.

"I just bought some Chinese food for my and wife and I."   ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o :o :o

I tell my students: Would you ever say "I just bought some Chinese food for I?"

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 18, 2013, 08:54:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 18, 2013, 04:42:40 AM
!

And "I" is now an Object Pronoun, and it is becoming really annoying!  It seems that whenever people are using a double object which includes themselves, they instantly become dullards.

"I just bought some Chinese food for my and wife and I."   ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o :o :o

I tell my students: Would you ever say "I just bought some Chinese food for I?"

That's not a new trend;   people (not just juveniles) were confused about the proper use of me vs. myself when I was a kid.   I think the basic problem is the Decline and Fall of the Reflexive.

For a lot of people,  "myself" sounds wrong in the ear, but they know that "me" is somehow not correct, so they put in the only other first person pronoun they know
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 18, 2013, 11:15:56 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 18, 2013, 08:54:38 AM
That's not a new trend;   people (not just juveniles) were confused about the proper use of me vs. myself when I was a kid.   I think the basic problem is the Decline and Fall of the Reflexive.

True!  It just seems more widespread these days!

Me vs. Myself

"She bought me some socks."  vs.  "I bought myself some socks."

Then there is the Southern version: "I got me some socks!"   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on May 18, 2013, 02:18:52 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 17, 2013, 05:36:48 AM
Loan as a verb?  Has it become . . . acceptable?[/font]

Recently received a very comprehensive bundle of tourist information in the post from the Commonwealth of Virginia, ordered for our summer trip (c'mon Maryland and Delaware, where's the stuff I requested from you?).  Apparently there's a great deal to do in Virginia - hiking, riding, driving, dining, sightseeing, antiquing.  Now there's a verb.

I hear on the radio news that British expressions are becoming popular in the US - a whole new grumble area, perhaps?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 18, 2013, 04:30:30 PM
Quote from: DaveF on May 18, 2013, 02:18:52 PM
Recently received a very comprehensive bundle of tourist information in the post from the Commonwealth of Virginia, ordered for our summer trip (c'mon Maryland and Delaware, where's the stuff I requested from you?).  Apparently there's a great deal to do in Virginia - hiking, riding, driving, dining, sightseeing, antiquing.  Now there's a verb.

I hear on the radio news that British expressions are becoming popular in the US - a whole new grumble area, perhaps?

I assume that means visiting antique shops?  Here in Ohio it would mean that one is deliberately refinishing a piece of furniture to look antique!

And speaking of British influences, benign or malign...

I have been hearing certain middle consonants either disappear or almost disappear among the younger generation, making them sound like a bunch of Cockneys   :o ???  : e.g.  among my own students I too often hear monstrosities like "Bri'ain" for "Britain," "La'in" for "Latin,"  and "Mi'll" for "Middle."    :P



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 22, 2013, 08:46:44 AM
I think the regulars will enjoy this clip.  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/v/1IvWoQplqXQ
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 22, 2013, 12:44:57 PM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 22, 2013, 08:46:44 AM
I think the regulars will enjoy this clip.  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/v/1IvWoQplqXQ

The Red Mist of Bad-Grammar Rage!

"It's 'whomever'!"   ;D

Many thanks!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 22, 2013, 12:51:20 PM
Brilliant, Nav!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on May 22, 2013, 12:55:27 PM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 22, 2013, 08:46:44 AM
I think the regulars will enjoy this clip.  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/v/1IvWoQplqXQ

Ah, I feel better already!   :)

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 23, 2013, 05:44:07 AM
From an essay by Daniel Henninger in today's (May 23, 2013) Wall Street Journal:


Quote
Both these new laws are—in an awful but apt word—un-implementable.

I guess "infeasible" was not specific enough.

The laws referred to are c. 2,000 + page monstrosities, which Congressmen admit they have not read ("We have to pass the law, so we can find out what's in it" - yes, a former Speaker of the House actually said that).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 23, 2013, 05:46:14 AM
Right! Implement first, understand later . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 23, 2013, 06:25:03 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 23, 2013, 05:46:14 AM
Right! Implement first, understand later . . . .

The word actually is Latin for "to fill in."  The "ple-" root ("full") is the same as in "plenty."

Maybe we can find (or even coin) a neater word than "unimplementable"  ???.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 23, 2013, 06:37:23 AM
Explement!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 23, 2013, 08:45:39 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 23, 2013, 06:37:23 AM
Explement!

All kinds of jokes are possible from that idea!   0:)

Just came across the word "Twitterati" !  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 23, 2013, 08:48:13 AM
A fine, super-fine neologism!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 23, 2013, 08:57:45 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on May 22, 2013, 08:46:44 AM
I think the regulars will enjoy this clip.  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/v/1IvWoQplqXQ

Some of the irregulars, too, I shouldn't wonder.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 26, 2013, 06:25:25 PM
From this AmazonUS listing
[asin]B00165QONU[/asin]

Quote
Editorial Reviews
"Clearly one of the supreme Bach keyboard exponents of our time!" -- Chicago Tribune

Vladimir Feltsman has a very personal view of the much-recorded Goldberg Variations, likely to illicit strong reactions. For some people this recording might come as a shock. There's no question that his interpretation is extremely unusual, and he is ready to take any blame or glory for it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on May 27, 2013, 01:08:56 AM
This thread should be a sticky, all thinking people are interested in grammar.

Don't mind if I post a topic on English lingua franca mistakes separately...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: knight66 on May 27, 2013, 01:15:37 AM
It stays towards the top of the board without needing to be helped there.

Knight
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on May 27, 2013, 01:19:32 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 26, 2013, 06:25:25 PM
[asin]B00165QONU[/asin]

Well, if it's so revolutionary that it makes me do something illegal, I gotta hear it!  (Sorry - grammar thread - I anticipate listening to it keenly.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on May 27, 2013, 01:48:54 AM
Links to files on English phrases and a vocabulary builder I put together, also posted a few years back but since revised.

https://www.box.com/s/zxa55ezmhveuct0vka2d

https://www.box.com/s/ck9tk0tays62dn3obpfs
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 27, 2013, 04:16:42 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 26, 2013, 06:25:25 PM

From Amazon reviews:


Vladimir Feltsman has a very personal view of the much-recorded Goldberg Variations, likely to illicit strong reactions. For some people this recording might come as a shock.




Quote from: DaveF on May 27, 2013, 01:19:32 AM
Well, if it's so revolutionary that it makes me do something illegal, I gotta hear it!  (Sorry - grammar thread - I anticipate listening to it keenly.)

;) ;) ;)

So "illicit" is a verb now?! 

And Dave F's reaction makes one wonder about the ancient belief that music can affect one's free will!   :laugh:

Tell us what kind of illegality tempts you as a result of this interpretation!   $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on May 27, 2013, 05:52:00 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 27, 2013, 04:16:42 AM
Tell us what kind of illegality tempts you as a result of this interpretation!   $:)

Bach on piano, to start with. >:D ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on May 27, 2013, 10:55:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 27, 2013, 04:16:42 AM
So "illicit" is a verb now?! 

Strictly, this belongs in the "Spelling Grumble" thread - the reviewer just couldn't spell "elicit".

I've had a listen to some of Feltsman's Bach on Spotify and it's all perfectly pleasant, tasteful and uncontroversial.  I feel as far as ever from a crime spree...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on May 27, 2013, 11:07:54 AM
Quote from: knight66 on May 27, 2013, 01:15:37 AM
It stays towards the top of the board without needing to be helped there.

Sure thing Mike.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on May 28, 2013, 03:06:14 AM
Notes from my teaching files- the response to the negative question got me thinking for months...

Negative questions & statements The pasting loses my italics...

The responses required for showing agreement or disagreement to negatively phrased questions and statements-

It's a matter of using yes and no correctly in simple conversations so is of great importance, if somewhat difficult to convey because of its fundamental position in the language.

It remains a major source of confusion throughout the world where English is spoken by learners and is probably the most misunderstood aspect of the entire language.

It's an easy mistake to make but if wrong, native speakers will struggle or in many cases be entirely unable to understand answers to simple questions (and unfortunately it tends to seem bizarre, hearing yes when someone means no).

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

What is agreement?

It's when two people think the same thing.

So, if I say Yes and you agree, you also say Yes. This is easy.

However, if I say No you also say No.

Unfortunately, learners will say Yes when they hear No to mean yes I agree.
Don't do this.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo


A sequence of positives, of course, stays positive, eg-

+2  x  +4  (= +8)  x  +2  (= +16)  x  +3  (= +48)  x  +2  (= +96)...

But a sequence of negatives alternates between positive and negative, because two negatives make a positive Eg-

-2  x  -4  (= +8)  x  -2  (= -16)  x  -3  (= +48)  x  -2  (= -96)...

(By this logic you'd only need one negative, plus any number of positives to say that the negative is true.)

However, negatives in English responses aren't like this.
Instead they work the same as the positives- and simply stay negative. Eg-

-2  x  -4  (= -8)  x  -2  (= -16)  x  -3  (= -48)  x  -2  (= -96)...

Additional negatives just reinforce the message, not change it.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

These are the words to listen out for-

no,  nobody,  nothing,  never,  or  not 

including-

doesn't,  wasn't,  isn't,  don't,  won't,  can't, shouldn't, wouldn't, hasn't, aren't  etc

When you hear these and you want to agree with the question or statement, the rule is to agree with its content, not whether it's true or not.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

To show agreement you match negative with negative.

There can be double, triple or many more negatives in a question or statement, but they only reinforce not reverse the meaning: this is a convention and isn't logical.

If you want to agree-

When the speaker is saying yes, you say yes.

And if they're saying no, you say no.

These questions are expecting you to to agree and say no.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

For instance-

If you do not have a pet tiger, you answer no to both these questions-

A. Do you have a pet tiger?

B. No

A. Don't you have a pet tiger?

B. No

Ie match no (not) with no to show assent/ agreement


oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Always say, for instance

No she won't, no.

Never

Yes she won't, yes.

& never

No she won't, yes.

& never
Yes she won't, no.     

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Or

Didn't you sleep well last night?

No, I didn't.   Not   Yes, I didn't


Or

Won't she get back by Monday?

No, she won't.  Not  Yes, she won't

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

If you want to agree with someone who is saying yes, you say yes.

And similarly if you want to agree with someone who is saying no, you say no (not yes)

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Some expressions in describing things (just read out)-

It's not too cold, no.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No, it won't work, no.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

There's nobody there, no.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No, it's never too late.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

She wouldn't come, no.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No, there's nothing there.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The service in the shop isn't good, no not at all.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Similarly, you respond to negative preferences by matching the sentiment-

A. I like it.

B. Me too.

Or

A. I don't like it.

B. Me neither.   (Don't say 'Yes!')

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

You just keep saying no ie whether it's for the truth of a positive statement or the content of a negative statement-

This passage has 16 nos in it-
(read with shake head with nos & the doesn't, none, never, isn't & nobody)-

There's no rainy season in England; it doesn't have one, no; no, none at all; no, no rainy season, no; no, never a rainy season, no; no, there's no season; no there isn't one, no indeed; no season anywhere in England; no, nobody speaks of a rainy season; there is no such thing, no.

Learners wrongly change 11 of the 16 nos to yess!-
(Shake and nod head with nos (& doesn't, none, never, isn't & nobody) and nod with yess- showing it's wrong)

There's no rainy season in England; it doesn't have one, yes; yes, none at all; yes, no rainy season, yes; yes, never a rainy season, yes; yes, there's no season; yes there isn't one, yes indeed; no season anywhere in England; yes, nobody speaks of a rainy season; there is no such thing, yes.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Say No to agree to someone saying No. Don't add Yes.

Don't mix Yes and No in your answers.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Other examples-

Have you been to Beijing? No?
Don't say- No. (- when you have been to Seoul, ie thinking that 'No- it's not true that I haven't been')

You don't fly a helicopter do you?
Don't say- Yes, no. (or nod then shake your head) (!!)

People won't know what you mean.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

The rest here are examples of the basic form. In the first one for instance, 'Susan doesn't like it' is true, but you say no.

A. John likes soccer.

B. Yes.

A. But Susan doesn't like it.

B. No.
.                                                      .
'At immigration eg at the airport'-
A. You're entering the country at this point. Do you have any illegal foods in your baggage?

B. No.

A. No knives?

B. No.

A. Guns?

B. No.

A. Drugs?

B. No.
                                                               
.                                                         .

A. What's happening early next week?

B. Monday is a school holiday.

A. Oh, so there are no classes on Monday?

B. No.
.                                                         .

A. He was drinking beer in a bar last night.

B. How old is he?

A. 23. He wasn't breaking the law was he?

B. No.
.                                                         .

A. Is Julia coming here?

B. Yes.

A. But Steve isn't coming, you say?

B. No.

.                                                      .

A. I'm tired- I'm going to sit down.

B. That's the boss's chair, only for him.

A. Oh, can't I use it?

B. No.

.                                                         .

A. The work needs to be finished by Friday.

B. They'll never get it done by then.

A. Don't you think so?

B. No.

A. No?

B. No.
.                                                         .

A. We'll park on the car park.


B. Well, it doesn't look like we'll be able to.

A. Oh, there are no spaces left?

B. No.
. .                                                         .

A. I'd like a drink if there is one.

B. Sure, there's tea or juice.

A. There's no coffee?

B. No.

A. No?

B. No.
.                                                         .

A. What did you do last night?

B. I went to a bar, but it was empty.

A. There was nobody else there?

B. No

A. No?

B. No.

.                                                         .

A. We're going to the mountain on Saturday.

B. You know, I've already been there many times, so it's not so interesting for me now.

A. Oh, don't you want to go this time?

B. No.
.                                                                .

A. I'm waiting for some DVDs in the mail.

B. I think there's some mail arrived for you today- it's a letter.

A. Oh, not a parcel?

B. No.

.                                                      .
A. Take a look at my work.

B. The first part of it has got to be wrong.

A. Oh. Isn't it okay?

B. No.

A. No?

B. No.
.                                                      .

A. Is your computer okay?

B. I don't think it's working.

A. You don't?

B. No.


.                                                      .

A. What do you think of it?

B. Hey, this is awful!

A. You don't think it's good enough?

B. No.

A. No?

B. No.
.                                                      .

A. 13 times 13 is 169, I think.

B. Yes, it looks right.

A. I'm not wrong am I?

B. No.


.                                                      .

A. Is there something wrong with the phone?

B. I think it's broken.

A. Doesn't it work?

B. No.

A. No?

B. No.
.                                                      .

A. Is there something wrong with this bus?

B. I think it's broken down.

A. Can't it take us then?

B. No.

.                                                              .
A. Don't you wear a hat at university?

B. No.

A. No?

B. No.



.                                                              .

A. You don't come to university by train?

B. No.

A. No?

B. No.
.                                                              .

A. Is there life on other planets?

B. Well I suppose there could be.

A. So, you're not sure?

B. No.


.                                                              .
A. I see you have no swimming bag with you.

B. No.

A. So, you're not going swimming today?

B. No.
.                                                              .

A. Have a look for my pen where I was sitting, would you?

B. I can't see it.

A. It's not on the desk?

B. No.


.                                                              .
A. Could you go a week with no food?

B. No.

A. So, you wouldn't like it?

B. No.
.                                                              .

A. I'm trying to understand the response to the negative question.

B. It makes you think hard at first.

A. It's not easy.

B. No.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Example of just shaking head (not nodding)

A. She never laughs or similes.

B. You're right. She's not happy here.

A. (Shake head)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This negative question formation is where a speaker is asking for confirmation of what seems to be a negative situation.

If there the situation is not negative however and there's been a misunderstanding then the other speaker should still not say Yes. and stop.

Instead they should begin again to explain the situation:


A. Is there something wrong with this bus?

B. I think it's broken down.

A. Can't it take us then?

B. Oh I think it can but we'll have to
     wait for it to be repaired.

.                                                              .

A. I'd like a drink if there is one.

B. Sure, there's tea or juice.

A. There's no coffee?

B. Yes yes there is but you have to
     go next door for it.

.                                                         .

A. Take a look at my work.

B. The first part of it has got to be
     wrong.

A. Oh. Isn't it okay?

B. Well the content is okay but it
     needs to be written differently.


oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 28, 2013, 04:25:15 AM
A major source of confusion, because (obviously) the mindset is often somewhat different among speakers of many languages other than English.

A bit amusingly, there is a Russian phrase in fairly solid currency, да нет (i.e., yes no), which is a little au contraire-ish.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 28, 2013, 04:41:23 AM
QuoteYou have selected a ADVANCE PURCHASE ticket

Would programming in the indefinite article an have killed them?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 28, 2013, 05:04:34 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 28, 2013, 04:25:15 AM
A major source of confusion, because (obviously) the mindset is often somewhat different among speakers of many languages other than English.

A bit amusingly, there is a Russian phrase in fairly solid currency, да нет (i.e., yes no), which is a little au contraire-ish.

A similar phrase in Finnish, too. (joo ei, yeah, no)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on May 28, 2013, 03:06:53 PM
Quote from: Sean on May 27, 2013, 01:08:56 AM
This thread should be a sticky, all thinking people are interested in grammar.

Ah, a nice example of incorrect comma usage! Clever!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 28, 2013, 06:32:34 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 28, 2013, 04:25:15 AM
A major source of confusion, because (obviously) the mindset is often somewhat different among speakers of many languages other than English.

A bit amusingly, there is a Russian phrase in fairly solid currency, да нет (i.e., yes no), which is a little au contraire-ish.


There's a phrase I use--usually mean to inject some humor into a matter of fact conversation--but it's something I picked up years ago from other people.

"It's a definite maybe"

Useful in situations at the job in which (for example) a customer has requested a shoe in white.  I go into the stockroom and discover we don't have size in white, but do have it in another color, perhaps beige. Or we have the desired color, but only in a half size up or down.  It's possible the second color will work for the customer, or that the not quite the right size will fit well enough to work for her,  so I bring it for her to look at and try one,  starting off the necessary explanation with "Well, it's a definite maybe".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on May 29, 2013, 12:35:21 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 28, 2013, 04:25:15 AM
A major source of confusion, because (obviously) the mindset is often somewhat different among speakers of many languages other than English.

A bit amusingly, there is a Russian phrase in fairly solid currency, да нет (i.e., yes no), which is a little au contraire-ish.


Australians are into this as well...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on May 29, 2013, 10:04:21 PM
Quote from: The Six on May 28, 2013, 03:06:53 PM
Ah, a nice example of incorrect comma usage! Clever!

I can't agree, my use of commas has widened in recent years.

I tend to use them where previously I'd have put in a more blatant dash or even colon.

However I also keep them to a minimum- sentences have weak and strong pauses and I try to avoid commas for the weak altogether.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on May 30, 2013, 12:11:52 AM
The issue about the comma isn't so much about whether it's 'correct' or 'incorrect', but a matter of
(a) considering the attentive reader; and
(b) responding to the opportunity for accurate and musical expression.

The comma is an indicator of a certain kind of pause, and to use it indiscriminately tends to produce a leaden dullness and false rhythm to the prose. Dashes, colons, and semicolons all help to introduce a musical variety and offer enhanced opportunities for expression. So, for example, if we start with the original version, one feels immediately its clunky awkwardness of rhythm and dullness of expression:

This thread should be a sticky, all thinking people are interested in grammar.

The awkward form of the sentence jars with the content, and has the paradoxical effect of making one question why anyone should take an interest in grammar at all. Now let's look at alternatives:

This thread should be a sticky; all thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky. All thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky: all thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky - all thinking people are interested in grammar.


Every one of the above has a differently nuanced expressive effect on a reader who is reading attentively. It's up to the writer to punctuate his sentence with delicate precision, in a way which best guides the reader towards his meaning.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Definitely Wrong Articles!
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2013, 06:34:35 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on May 30, 2013, 12:11:52 AM
The issue about the comma isn't so much about whether it's 'correct' or 'incorrect', but a matter of
(a) considering the attentive reader; and
(b) responding to the opportunity for accurate and musical expression.

The comma is an indicator of a certain kind of pause, and to use it indiscriminately tends to produce a leaden dullness and false rhythm to the prose. Dashes, colons, and semicolons all help to introduce a musical variety and offer enhanced opportunities for expression. So, for example, if we start with the original version, one feels immediately its clunky awkwardness of rhythm and dullness of expression:

This thread should be a sticky, all thinking people are interested in grammar.

The awkward form of the sentence jars with the content, and has the paradoxical effect of making one question why anyone should take an interest in grammar at all. Now let's look at alternatives:

This thread should be a sticky; all thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky. All thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky: all thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky - all thinking people are interested in grammar.


Every one of the above has a differently nuanced expressive effect on a reader who is reading attentively. It's up to the writer to punctuate his sentence with delicate precision, in a way which best guides the reader towards his meaning.

Excellent summation, especially the comment on musicality!

On a local NPR station this morning, I hear a fledgling broadcaster from Ohio State University reading various news items.

And he mispronounces practically every definite and indefinite article!   ???

Again and again I hear things like: "Thee bill will be up for eh vote in thee House today."  Or: "Thee police said thee man was eh white male driving eh late-model van."

When I have time later, WOSU will be receiving a (not "eh" since we are not in Canada...eh?!) politely incensed letter about thee errors!    0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on May 30, 2013, 07:19:14 AM
"The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong."

What's with that comma?  To my ear, it produces leaden dullness and false rhythme.   :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2013, 07:33:16 AM
Quote from: Parsifal on May 30, 2013, 07:19:14 AM
"The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong."

What's with that comma?  To my ear, it produces leaden dullness and false rhythme.   :(

I like it!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on May 30, 2013, 08:08:57 AM
Quote from: Parsifal on May 30, 2013, 07:19:14 AM
"The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong."

What's with that comma?  To my ear, it produces leaden dullness and false rhythme.   :(

Interesting example: there's a 'rule' about not using a comma before 'and', but of course the rule is only a guideline. I prefer to take each situation on a case by case basis, and sometimes one needs the comma before 'and' just to let a touch of air into a long sentence. A useful guide, I find, is to read the sentence aloud and get the feel of it as spoken. In this present example, we can play with the punctuation thus:

The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner; and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner. And nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner - and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.

If there's no comma at all, there's a rather clumsy coming-together of two words that don't quite fit comfortably - 'corner' is followed by 'and' so they tend to run together as 'cornerand'. Of the various options I think I prefer the comma - but none of the options is as clunky and horrible as this would be:

The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on May 30, 2013, 08:20:06 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on May 30, 2013, 08:08:57 AM
Interesting example: there's a 'rule' about not using a comma before 'and', but of course the rule is only a guideline. I prefer to take each situation on a case by case basis, and sometimes one needs the comma before 'and' just to let a touch of air into a long sentence. A useful guide, I find, is to read the sentence aloud and get the feel of it as spoken. In this present example, we can play with the punctuation thus:

The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner; and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner. And nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner - and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.

If there's no comma at all, there's a rather clumsy coming-together of two words that don't quite fit comfortably - 'corner' is followed by 'and' so they tend to run together as 'cornerand'. Of the various options I think I prefer the comma - but none of the options is as clunky and horrible as this would be:

The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, nobody stops to ask what is wrong.

Your last violates what I was taught about punctuation.  I would actually prefer

QuoteThe Truth stands sobbing on a street corner; nobody stops to ask what is wrong.

Taking out the "and" gives the second thought more emphasis.  Two independent sentences would be too choppy.  Two sentence fragments which could stand as sentences are separated by a semicolon.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on May 30, 2013, 08:30:12 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on May 30, 2013, 08:29:07 AM
I don't like the sentence in any form.  Sobbing "Truth" standing around is an overwrought and ridiculous image, IMO.

Well, there's that...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on May 30, 2013, 09:13:13 AM
Quote from: Parsifal on May 30, 2013, 08:20:06 AM
Your last violates what I was taught about punctuation.

Yes exactly. That was the kind of misuse of the comma that caused me to join in this discussion in the first place.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on May 30, 2013, 09:14:30 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on May 30, 2013, 08:29:07 AM
I don't like the sentence in any form.  Sobbing "Truth" standing around is an overwrought and ridiculous image, IMO.

Of course it is - but that's a completely different discussion. The issue was: given the sentence, how might one best punctuate it?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: dave b on May 30, 2013, 09:24:10 AM
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner; and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner. And nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner - and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
================================================
As given above---yes, the imagery itself is absolutely ridiculous...but the question being: Which seems best to use, I guess I would pick that second one. Seems to make it more compelling.

I can't believe a new guy like me just jumped in here with forum veterans on a 125 page thread....oh, well.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on May 30, 2013, 04:39:11 PM
Elgarian

Hi there, I must say I disagree and suggest you're behind the times a little. Commas are understated punctuation marks that can begin to suggest more than a pause and instead avoid the more disruptive use of colons, semicolons and dashes- if there's no better word for dashes?

We're getting used to not putting dots after abbreviations when everyone knows what eg or ie or viz means- even though the spellchecker here is still putting red lines under these for me... Keep things to an unsuperfluous minimum.

By the way unsuperfluous isn't in the COD, but it ought to be...

QuoteThis thread should be a sticky, all thinking people are interested in grammar.

The awkward form of the sentence jars with the content, and has the paradoxical effect of making one question why anyone should take an interest in grammar at all. Now let's look at alternatives:

This thread should be a sticky; all thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky. All thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky: all thinking people are interested in grammar.

This thread should be a sticky - all thinking people are interested in grammar.


Every one of the above has a differently nuanced expressive effect on a reader who is reading attentively. It's up to the writer to punctuate his sentence with delicate precision, in a way which best guides the reader towards his meaning.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Definitely Wrong Articles!
Post by: Sean on May 30, 2013, 04:45:16 PM
Cato

QuoteWhen I have time later, WOSU will be receiving a (not "eh" since we are not in Canada...eh?!) politely incensed letter about thee errors

Kiwis among others can't say a, the short version of the long A vowel. The morons can only say e.

There's no difference between bed and bad, or guess and gas.

How do these stupid accents take hold? Does the Kiwi bird sound like this?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 30, 2013, 04:54:51 PM
Quote from: sanantonio on May 30, 2013, 08:29:07 AM
I don't like the sentence in any form.  Sobbing "Truth" standing around is an overwrought and ridiculous image, IMO.

Thus, I think it suits (and helps to characterize) the fictitious character speaking/writing it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on May 30, 2013, 06:44:57 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 30, 2013, 04:54:51 PM
Thus, I think it suits (and helps to characterize) the fictitious character speaking/writing it.

Sort of an Elmer Fudd character?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 30, 2013, 07:06:21 PM
To me it sounded like an interesting evocation, or perhaps merely a badly remembered misquotation, of Proverbs 8.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on May 31, 2013, 12:43:03 AM
Quote from: Sean on May 30, 2013, 04:39:11 PM
Hi there, I must say I disagree and suggest you're behind the times a little.

Just to be clear: it's nothing to do with the times, nothing to do with being dogmatic about rules, and nothing to do with resistance to change - but everything to do with what the writer may need in order to express him (or her) self with appropriate nuance and musicality.

Those other things you mention (the use of stops to indicate abbreviation etc) are indeed subject to the variations of fashion, but they have no comparable role in the conveyance of expression.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Elgarian on May 31, 2013, 12:53:15 AM
Quote from: Dave B. on May 30, 2013, 09:24:10 AM
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner; and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner. And nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner - and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.
================================================
As given above---yes, the imagery itself is absolutely ridiculous...but the question being: Which seems best to use, I guess I would pick that second one. Seems to make it more compelling.

I can't believe a new guy like me just jumped in here with forum veterans on a 125 page thread....oh, well.

Welcome to the swimming pool. You help to make the point very nicely, actually: that you have such a preference nicely demonstrates that each of the options presents different expressive characteristics.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 31, 2013, 03:38:16 AM
Quote from: Elgarian on May 31, 2013, 12:53:15 AM
Welcome to the swimming pool. You help to make the point very nicely, actually: that you have such a preference nicely demonstrates that each of the options presents different expressive characteristics.

Thank you, Elgarian!

The quotation in question is written by a 14-year old character.  It is the culmination of a fulmination about dishonesty and hypocrisy in teenagers, who often complain about those same failings in adults!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 31, 2013, 04:28:22 AM
A matter of times, taste, and perspective, I should think. From one angle, Truth sobbing on a street corner is no more ridiculous (questions of absolutism aside) than Patience on a monument.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: dave b on May 31, 2013, 04:31:13 AM
I did not know the character uttering that sentence is 14 years old---that makes all the difference in the world, and it is not ridiculous imagery, to a child---so I stand corrected. Age makes a lot of difference, as we all know.
Like Holden Caulfield, a young person has his or her way of saying things.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: dave b on May 31, 2013, 04:38:15 AM
:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 31, 2013, 08:56:01 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 31, 2013, 04:28:22 AM
A matter of times, taste, and perspective, I should think. From one angle, Truth sobbing on a street corner is no more ridiculous (questions of absolutism aside) than Patience on a monument.

Quote from: Dave B on May 31, 2013, 04:31:13 AM
I did not know the character uttering that sentence is 14 years old---that makes all the difference in the world, and it is not ridiculous imagery, to a child---so I stand corrected. Age makes a lot of difference, as we all know.
Like Holden Caulfield, a young person has his or her way of saying things.

Many thanks for the interest!

For any still following the mini-controversy, here is what precedes the "Truth" sentence:

Referring to what used to be known as Armistice Day, The Unknown Narrator writes:

QuoteBut in honor of our American doughboys, I decided to take today off.  Thinking of soldiers from the good old days made me compare them to the guys and dolls walking the halls at school: the comparison wasn't pretty!  Of course, whether I'm a boy or a girl, and you probably have decided one way or the other, I wasn't very admirable either!  Lying about my physical condition today, lying in bed, lying on the couch in front of the TV, lying on the floor with a game controller: American kids are the greatest liars in the world!  School is just one big lie: no homework?  Lost it, forgot it, somebody took it, never heard what it was, didn't see what it was, I did it, but it's at home: the truth is that they just don't care.  Test time?  Cheating time, and that's assuming that you care for some reason!  Teachers lie too: prepared for class?  Always!  Interesting things to teach in an interesting way?  Always!  Ever inflate grades to make yourself look good?  Always, whoops, uh, Never!  Ever not changed a grade to make sure an athlete is never ineligible?  Never, uh, or is it always?  Yeah, triple negatives are a bummer!

The Truth stands sobbing on a street corner, and nobody stops to ask what is wrong.


I should probably add some salient details: The Unknown Narrator is complaining specifically that Armistice Day is no longer celebrated on November 11th unless that happens to be a Monday.  S/he is also an aficionado of old movies (hence the "guys and dolls" reference).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 01, 2013, 05:58:39 AM
Call it hell, call it heaven,
It's a probable twelve-to-seven
That the guy's only doin' it for some doll . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 06, 2013, 11:42:07 AM
(http://s18.postimg.org/x45rc7ddl/Untitled.png)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 06, 2013, 05:20:44 PM
Quote from: The Six on June 06, 2013, 11:42:07 AM
(http://s18.postimg.org/x45rc7ddl/Untitled.png)

Very Interesting!

This website has a somewhat clearer survey of the results:

http://www4.uwm.edu/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_56.html (http://www4.uwm.edu/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_56.html)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 06, 2013, 05:50:57 PM
http://www4.uwm.edu/FLL/linguistics/dialect/maps.html (http://www4.uwm.edu/FLL/linguistics/dialect/maps.html)

fact, the above-mentioned website has many interesting "dialect maps" e.g.

http://www4.uwm.edu/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_98.html (http://www4.uwm.edu/FLL/linguistics/dialect/staticmaps/q_98.html)

"By accident" vs. "on accident"  ???  (Here in Ohio kids tend to say it: they see it as the opposite of "on purpose.")

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 07, 2013, 02:10:19 AM
Cato, dude! You're living on the edge!

The pronunciation of "caramel" starts disregarding vowels once you go west of the Ohio River (http://www.businessinsider.com/22-maps-that-show-the-deepest-linguistic-conflicts-in-america-2013-6#the-pronunciation-of-caramel-starts-disregarding-vowels-once-you-go-west-of-the-ohio-river-1)

Disregarding for the time being the pathetic fallacy that a pronunciation can regard anything . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 07, 2013, 01:16:54 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 07, 2013, 02:10:19 AM
Cato, dude! You're living on the edge!

The pronunciation of "caramel" starts disregarding vowels once you go west of the Ohio River (http://www.businessinsider.com/22-maps-that-show-the-deepest-linguistic-conflicts-in-america-2013-6#the-pronunciation-of-caramel-starts-disregarding-vowels-once-you-go-west-of-the-ohio-river-1)


First, I had to wonder just for a second about "west of the Ohio River," since the Ohio River runs east to west...except for the extreme eastern part, which does run north to south, before heading westward.

True: I have rarely heard "caramel" with 3 syllables. 

Quote from: karlhenning on June 07, 2013, 02:10:19 AM

Disregarding for the time being the pathetic fallacy that a pronunciation can regard anything . . . .

A pronunciation with a mind of its own!   ??? $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 07, 2013, 01:26:09 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 07, 2013, 01:16:54 PM
First, I had to wonder just for a second about "west of the Ohio River," since the Ohio River runs east to west...except for the extreme eastern part, which does run north to south, before heading westward.

True: I have rarely heard "caramel" with 3 syllables. 


So the correct title of S. Jaun de la Cruz's work should be The Ascent of Mt. Caramel.
Well,  I suppose for many people a piece of chocolate can be a foretaste of heaven....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 07, 2013, 01:48:37 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 07, 2013, 01:26:09 PM
So the correct title of S. Jaun de la Cruz's work should be The Ascent of Mt. Caramel.
Well,  I suppose for many people a piece of chocolate can be a foretaste of heaven....

Here in the center of Ohio we have a "Mount Carmel" Hospital, where after a visit for something very minor I received no candy of any kind!   >:(

Speaking of candy:

https://www.facebook.com/pencescarmelcornshoppe (https://www.facebook.com/pencescarmelcornshoppe)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: The Apostrophe War
Post by: Cato on June 11, 2013, 06:02:15 AM
I forgot to mention this article when it appeared a few weeks ago, due to all sorts of  ??? :P :o >:( :-\ :'( happening at my school!

A war is being waged against apostrophes...by the source of much idiocy today...our government of course:

Quote THURMAN, N.Y. -  The Domestic Names Committee of the U.S. Board on Geographic Names doesn't like apostrophes. Visitors to Harpers Ferry or Pikes Peak might not realize it, but anyone aspiring to name a ridge or a swamp after a local hero will soon find out.

In this Adirondack town, pop. 1,219, a move is on to put a mountain on the map in honor of James Cameron, who settled here in 1773. There is some dispute as to which mountain, and whether to call it Jimmy's Peak, Jimmie's Peak or James' Peak. But there is no opposition to the apostrophe—except from the government

"Without it, Jimmys looks plural, not possessive," Evelyn Wood, Thurman's town supervisor, said one morning upstairs in the Town Hall. She is 35 years old and has a college degree in English. The Domestic Names Committee, citing her "Jimmy's Peak" proposal in a letter, added "[sic]" after each "Jimmy's."

For punctuation sticklers, this official apostrophe aversion is a sad comment on a useful mark in serious trouble...

The no-apostrophe rule has been reaffirmed five times, yet punctuationists fight on. At a 2009 meeting with place namers from the states, the names committee was flayed for its "isolationist stance" toward "the perpetually punished apostrophe."

"The apostrophe has a function," says Thomas Gasque, an English professor who spent years on South Dakota's Geographic Names Authority. "It can imply things other than possession," he says. "We talk about a winter's day. The day doesn't belong to winter."
.


Wait!  There's a South Dakota Geographic Names Authority?!

One of the arguments being made: the Internet doesn't like apostrophes!

See:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324244304578471252974458308.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324244304578471252974458308.html)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 11, 2013, 06:11:58 AM
Useful punctuation in grave peril
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 11, 2013, 06:50:47 AM
Neil Postman among others often warned that technology will affect not only the style, but also the content of our communications.

This specific war on the apostrophe, according to the article, goes back to the 1880's, and deals with fears about legal issues of property ownership being raised over an area's apostrophied (Sic Sic!) name.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 11, 2013, 06:55:51 AM
Zappa was ahead of the game, naming an album after that now-beleaguered punctuation!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 11, 2013, 10:03:26 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 11, 2013, 06:50:47 AM
This specific war on the apostrophe, according to the article, goes back to the 1880's,

Speaking of war, I'd battle over whether the apostrophe is needed when citing years. "1880s" is perfectly understandable without it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 11, 2013, 03:27:47 PM
You must love the bureaucrats, when they get in a bind!

Concerning James Clapper, director of national intelligence:

QuoteOn Thursday, Clapper claimed, "What I said was, the NSA does not voyeuristically pore through U.S. citizens' e-mails. I stand by that." Of course, that's not what he said, and everyone knows it, because (of) video. So now Clapper says that he simply has a different definition of collect than most humans, and this (definition) allowed him to answer in the "least untruthful manner." He admits that this explanation is probably "too cute by half."

(To be fair, the man was not allowed to reveal publicly the top-secret operations...because they were top-secret operations!  If the question had been posed in closed session, then he could have answered truthfully, rather than in the "least untruthful manner.")

Anyway, concerning the language...

"Too clever by half" might have been a better choice: "cute" and bureaucrats just don't go together!   0:)

See:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/clapper-wyden-least-untruthful-too-cute-half.html (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/clapper-wyden-least-untruthful-too-cute-half.html)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 11, 2013, 06:30:40 PM
Quote from: The Six on June 11, 2013, 10:03:26 AM
Speaking of war, I'd battle over whether the apostrophe is needed when citing years. "1880s" is perfectly understandable without it.

Before Cato's post, I have never (that I can recollect) seen anyone use a apostrophe such as that. 
Nor do I think it should be used.  We don't say the "Gay Ninety's.


To the main point--my 1994 Hammond Explorer Atlas (now probably in need of replacement, if only because it's falling apart) shows Pikes Peak, but Martha's Vineyard.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on June 11, 2013, 08:03:00 PM
My apostrophe notes, I think also posted a few years back; unfortunately all the italics and colouring are lost here.

The Apostrophe

This is the most complex punctuation mark and has two main functions- abbreviation or indicating missing letters and possession or indicating belonging.

Abbreviation

For example, did not becomes didn't, they will becomes they'll, he would becomes he'd, and would have becomes would've. Also the same word can abbreviate different words, eg it's abbreviates it is or it has, and what's abbreviates is, has and does in for example what's it called?, what's he done? and what's it mean?; further, 's can abbreviate has, or is, as in the food's gone or she's finished. The abbreviated word is joined to the word before to make one word.

Can not, shall not and will not have the special contractions of can't, shan't and won't, where the first word is also abbreviated and won't changed; will not becomes won't not willn't, as this is easier to say, but am not doesn't become am't as this is hardly easier to say.

Some abbreviations, such as would've or nothing similar's been done are less accepted in written form, and although in speaking more than one word in succession may be abbreviated, this isn't done in writing- eg you can say they'll've gone by now, or he'd've done it, but must write they'll have or he'd have.

There are formations where words can't be abbreviated, eg I have to go, She's as good as I am or There it is don't become I've to go, She's as good as I'm or There it's. and conversely there are formations where abbreviated words are used but their unabbreviated forms aren't, eg Don't you think so? or Won't you go? don't appear as Do not you think so? or Will not you go?.

Longer words can be abbreviated often for written purposes, eg government can become gov't or boulevard blvd, or Johannesburg Jo'burg written or spoken; o'clock is short for of the clock, no longer used, and also the apostrophe is fixed in some names, eg O'Reilly.

Also apostrophes for missing letters or numbers at the ends or beginnings of words can be omitted if the meanings are still clear, eg phone, net, Feb 08, but retaining in non-standard English like 'bout (for about) or 'twas (for it was).

A dot after words can also denote abbreviation, eg Ltd. for limited, i.e. for that is to say (in Latin), Rev. for Reverend or Prof. for Professor but dots are increasing seen as unnecessary, particularly when the first and last letters are still in place, as in Mr, Dr or Sgt.

Possession

For example, Sue's book, or the table's legs. When the possessor's name already ends in an s (or s sound ie z, x, se, ce, ze or xe), the 's is usually retained but can be omitted if it makes the word or phrase awkward to say, ie James's or Julius's but Williams' or especially Moses' or Socrates' where there's already an es type sound at the end of the word; however Chris's and Jesus's are used.

When the possessor is plural the s after the apostrophe is always omitted, eg the tables' legs, boys' game or bosses' room.

The words its, theirs, ours, yours, whose and hers (also his and mine, from hes and mys) are already fixed as possessive and don't have apostrophes: hence it's and who's are always abbreviations. The singular one's, somebody's, nobody else's and also everyone's however take apostrophes, but never s'.

Men, women and children are also plural and to make them possessive, 's is added, eg women's hats. s' is never added, and chilrens, mens and womens also aren't words. However though people is likewise already plural, s' is used in refering to a number of peoples, eg the African peoples' languages- and peoples is a word, as though a plural plural; persons' is also possible.

An s of course is also added to verbs without an apostrophe to denote third person possession, eg she thinks, he takes or it begins.

Names of companies may or may not use the apostrophe, eg Lloyds Bank doesn't but Sainsbury's does- it may be removed when there's no association with the company's originators and the word becomes just a title; similarly the apostrophe is usually omitted in geographical names, eg Smiths canyon.

Possessors ending in a letter of an s sound that isn't sounded can have an apostrophe without an s after it to indicate that the previous letter should be sounded, eg Descartes' ideas.

In eg for convenience' sake or for goodness' sake the s after the apostrophe can be omitted because although these possessors aren't plural they end with the s sound and are followed by a word beginning with s sound; proper nouns however, eg James's sake, still retain it.

Plural nouns without an s ending can have one added to indicate possession eg
Those oxen's saddles.
Where there is more than one possessor the apostrophe goes only after the last one mentioned, eg John and Sue's party.

Apostrophes are needed in one hour's work, two weeks' holiday, and five dollars' worth.

Abbreviating the i in is and leaving only the s at the end of the previous word can look superficially like possession, eg My name's Sean.

Apostrophes are usually omitted when letters are removed from the start of a word, eg phone for telephone or net for internet, other than when the shortening is less standard English, eg 'bout for about, or 'less for unless.

The apostrophe is not used to mark plurality, apart from cases like capital S's or number 1's, being clearer than Ss or 1s, even though this would normally denote possession by the S or 1; similarly dot your i's and cross your t's, grade A's or yes's, no's, do's and ex's.

Ways of life, crossings out, passers-by, Attorneys General or rites of passage are examples of a possessor where the plural s is not placed on the end word, complicating placing of apostrophes.

The apostrophe is distinct from the same 9-shaped punctuation mark for closing a quotation, or marking feet and inches or minutes and seconds of degrees.

The apostrophe has other minor uses.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 12, 2013, 03:30:50 AM
Quote from: The Six on June 11, 2013, 10:03:26 AM
Speaking of war, I'd battle over whether the apostrophe is needed when citing years. "1880s" is perfectly understandable without it.

I suppose I use it out of habit, and because (for me at least) it seems to imply "1880 and the years through 1889."

Since those years are implied, the apostrophe seems necessary, in the same way that the implied "o" is represented in the word "don't."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 24, 2013, 07:53:41 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on June 24, 2013, 06:58:34 AM
The people is ...

The people are ...

?

The people are...

My classic American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language edited by William Morris gives no singular.

And people therefore might seem to have a "double plural" in sentences e.g. "The peoples of sub-Saharan Africa..."  meaning assorted tribes or language groups.

This dictionary has a special warning about using "people" for a "specific and relatively small number" e.g. "Ten persons died in the accident" is considered proper, not "Ten people..."

That distinction is probably a losing, or already lost, battle!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on June 24, 2013, 08:49:57 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on June 24, 2013, 08:22:34 AM
That's what I thought, still, I persistently see the other from time to time.

Thanks.

I don't think I have ever seen "the people is" written.  You see phrases like "meeting people is easy" but the verb is conjugated to match "meeting."  (Meeting salesmen is easy.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 24, 2013, 09:21:40 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on June 24, 2013, 08:49:57 AM
I don't think I have ever seen "the people is" written or spoken by someone who has a function education beyond third grade.  You see phrases like "meeting people is easy" but the verb is conjugated to match "meeting."  (Meeting salesmen is easy.)

Written?  I also have never seen it written.  Man-on-the-street interviews might elicit such things ("He was drivin' all over the place.  People's just crazy these days!"), but...

Tangentially the above reminds me of the ancient gag line from a comic named Lew Lehr, which is heard in Warner Bros. cartoons: "Monkeys is the cwaziest people!"   ;)

Quote from: sanantonio on June 24, 2013, 09:05:24 AM
Now that I think of it, I've only seen it in translations of Scripture, which is trying to express a theological concept of unity: "the people is one", I've also seen it used in political rhetoric for the same reason.

Populus in Latin is a collective singular, but should not be translated as a plural.  Ancient Greek has several possibilities, two are collective singulars, one is plural.  And, Hebrew also, I believe, has several possibilities.

"The people are one" sounds much better to my ear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on June 24, 2013, 09:30:00 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2013, 09:21:40 AM"The people are one" sounds much better to my ear.

Genesis, 11:6, King James translation

QuoteAnd the LORD said, Behold, the people is one

But they said a lot of things in 1611 that they don't say anymore.  If someone asked you "what street is this?" and you replied "The name of it is called 'Main Street'" you'd get some funny looks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 24, 2013, 09:32:37 AM
Quote from: Scarpia on June 24, 2013, 09:30:00 AM
Genesis, 11:6, King James translation

But they said a lot of things in 1611 that they don't say anymore.

Aye, I wouldn't consider that binding  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 24, 2013, 10:47:16 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 24, 2013, 09:32:37 AM
Aye, I wouldn't consider that binding  0:)

Aye aye!  0:)

And yet, a quick visit to Shakespeare's Coriolanus shows only plural verbs with "the people."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on June 24, 2013, 11:30:31 AM
Tynedale bible:

QuoteAnd the LORde sayd: See the people is one and haue one tonge amonge them all.

circa 1530

Of course, William Tyndale was burned at the stake for his efforts so perhaps his grammar is suspect. :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 24, 2013, 11:38:50 AM
QuoteAnd the Lorde sayd: See the people is one and haue one tonge amonge them all.


Quote from: Scarpia on June 24, 2013, 11:30:31 AM
Tynedale bible:

circa 1530

Of course, William Tyndale was burned at the stake for his efforts so perhaps his grammar is suspect. :(

In the same sentence, he treats "people" as singular and plural.  Perhaps the singular is emphatic for the "oneness" idea.

Perhaps such inconsistency is what riled his assassins!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Parsifal on June 24, 2013, 11:44:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2013, 11:38:50 AM

In the same sentence, he treats "people" as singular and plural.  Perhaps the singular is emphatic for the "oneness" idea.

Perhaps such inconsistency is what riled his assassins!   $:)

Fascinating, never noticed that.  But going back to King James:

QuoteAnd the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language

Same anomalous verb conjugations. 

As a teacher, Cato, you know there is no better evidence of cheating as when two students sitting next to each other have identical errors!  Poor Tydesdale, they offed him, then stole his work!

On another note, how can we claim that students are not as good as in the old days.  In the old days there were grammar errors in the bible!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 24, 2013, 06:55:18 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2013, 09:21:40 AM

Populus in Latin is a collective singular, but should not be translated as a plural.  Ancient Greek has several possibilities, two are collective singulars, one is plural.  And, Hebrew also, I believe, has several possibilities.


The usual Hebrew word for "people" is singular and can be made a plural following the normal rules, in which case it should be translated "peoples".

The actual Hebrew text of Genesis 11:6 uses the singular form.

V'omar     And said
Ad-nai      The L-rd
hain         Behold
am           people
echod      one
v'sapha   and language
achat       one
v'culam     for them all


And the L-rd said, Behold, one people and one language for them all.

Note that the 'inconsistency' is found in the original Hebrew.

Am is a masculine, sapha a feminine noun, so the form of the word meaning one differs to reflect that.  It's also normal Hebrew usage for the noun to precede the adjective. 
For instance, this phrase is found in the first verse of Chapter 11 :u'dvarim echadim,  meaning (in modern English) and united purposeDvarim has several meanings*--here the translation is "purpose"--and is a masculine noun with the suffix appropriate to plural forms of masculine nouns (-im).  (The corresponding feminine suffix is -ot.)  The adjective which is attached to it is therefore given in masculine plural form as well: echad-im, or, in other words, the word for one given a plural form.

*the two chief meanings are "things" and "words"; and from its appearance in Deuteronomy 1:1, it has become the usual Hebrew name for the fifth book of the Torah.  The singular form is d'var.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 24, 2013, 07:12:16 PM
Many thanks, Jeffrey!

What is your view of Thou shalt not kill being a mistranslation of the original Hebrew?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 24, 2013, 07:43:38 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 24, 2013, 07:12:16 PM
Many thanks, Jeffrey!

What is your view of Thou shalt not kill being a mistranslation of the original Hebrew?

"Do not murder" would be reflect the meaning of the Hebrew more closely;  after all, the Torah recognizes the right of self defense and imposes death sentences for various crimes and sins.   Modern Hebrew, at least, uses another word for the more general "kill", and uses the word involved here to mean "murder".

And this is before one wanders off into the byways of Rabbinic tradition,  which find in this commandment a condemnation of insulting, slandering and gossiping about other people, on the premise that those acts are the equivalent of murder, because they result in the "spilling" of blood (the victim's face turns red from shame, anger and embarrassment).

"Do not steal" is another trap for the unwary:  the Rabbis viewed it as a ban on kidnapping and enslaving others (ie,stealing a person),  because normal theft of property is forbidden elsewhere in the Torah, and is not a capital offense, unlike the other sins listed in this part of the Decalogue (which implies that the "theft" forbidden here is also a capital offense).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on July 01, 2013, 07:50:29 AM
Stephen Fry Takes A Firm Stance On Grammar. He Doesn't Go The Way You'd Think.
"It's only ugly because it's new and you don't like it. Ugly in the way Picasso, Stravinsky and Eliot were once thought ugly and before them Monet, Mahler and Baudelaire."

(title from: http://www.upworthy.com/stephen-fry-takes-a-firm-stance-on-grammar-he-doesnt-go-the-way-youd-think-2)
http://www.youtube.com/v/J7E-aoXLZGY
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 01, 2013, 08:45:38 AM
Interesting; that's one tack, of course  :D

I still spell it doughnut, though I don't think donut is "ugly"  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 01, 2013, 09:09:13 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 01, 2013, 08:45:38 AM
Interesting; that's one tack, of course  :D

I still spell it doughnut, though I don't think donut is "ugly"  0:)

True: and it saves space on signs!   ;)  e.g. on the sign for the "Drive-Thru" lane!

At times Stephen Fry comes close to sounding like John Cleese!   0:)

Creativity demands that language be stretched, so that it can grow.

It is all a matter of how it is stretched!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 01, 2013, 09:11:09 AM
I suspect Stephen Fry may agree that Kwik-Mart is both ugly and unnecessary  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on July 01, 2013, 09:17:37 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 01, 2013, 09:11:09 AM
I suspect Stephen Fry may agree that Kwik-Mart is both ugly and unnecessary  $:)

I say it's appropriate even if ugly
It's the speedy version of Quick Market, getting the point across even in its name.
Of course, having never stepped into a Kwik-Mart, I have no idea if it lives up to what its name promises.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 06, 2013, 07:52:28 AM
Zowie, was July practically a grumble-free zone?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 06, 2013, 01:14:31 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 06, 2013, 07:52:28 AM
Zowie, was July practically a grumble-free zone?

One could grumble about instrusive or inappropriate adverbs.  But since one is among friends, one doesn't. >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 13, 2013, 10:39:02 AM
"got another thing coming" VS. "got another think coming" . . . is it utterly nerdy of me to care?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 13, 2013, 11:24:06 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 13, 2013, 10:39:02 AM
"got another thing coming" VS. "got another think coming" . . . is it utterly nerdy of me to care?
[/i]

No!  Guardians of the Language are perhaps at times nervy, but never nerdy!   0:)

Quote from: karlhenning on August 06, 2013, 07:52:28 AM
Zowie, was July practically a grumble-free zone?

Actually no.  A few things I found were already topics in recent months, so I did not bother.  Other things have remained in my head and needed only the time for me to grumble about them.

Since I have most appropriately just returned from purchasing a throne for "the smallest room in my house," as Max Reger once wrote, I now have a few minutes to present some gremlins.

A few weeks ago I twice came across an odd use of semi-colons in a political text in the local newspaper.  Possibly nobody noticed the curiosity.  The exact sentence I no longer recall, but here is something similar:


"And so the bill is dead in the House; which could pose a problem for the Senate."
   ???

There was a similar sentence later on.  I am not a great fan of semi-colons, and use them mainly (and rarely) as devices for tempo, i.e. whenever I want a pause longer than a comma.  Here, however, I suspect the author thought a semi-colon would allow the "which" to refer to the entire clause as an antecedent, rather than "House."

What say ye?

Overheard while in line at a gas station near I-75, aka God's Concrete Umbilical Cord for Bumpkins of All Kinds:

(Talking on a cell phone): "Yeah, ah hadda woulda callja y'all, but ah warnt gittin' no sigganal."



(Deep breaths!) Translation for the non-Americans here: "Yeah, I would have called you, but I wasn't getting a signal."

Two of my former students are now professors in Linguistics, and probably would have loved (or "hadda woulda")  to follow this character around with a microphone for a few months to see if such warped things were actual patterns or occasional lapses.

In the South (e.g. Georgia) one can hear among less educated people constructions called "double modals" i.e. "might should" or "might could."

Transposing the "would" and the double use of "you" (i.e. the "-ja" and then the "y'all") were new to me!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 13, 2013, 12:03:34 PM
One does need grumbling time, truly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 16, 2013, 09:04:59 AM
The O.E.D. hath the sharke y-jumpen. (http://leeds.tab.co.uk/2013/08/15/oed-literally-redefine-literally-to-mean-literally-and-not-literally-at-literally-the-same-time/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 16, 2013, 09:06:17 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on August 13, 2013, 12:21:50 PM
If not for regional dialects and colloquialisms, I would find American English so much poorer.  Growing up in the South, I am very familiar with this kind of talk, and appreciate an author or filmmaker's good job with dialog that utilizes it.  However, more often than not, they exaggerate it, creating a parody of the style.

Hence Twain's note on the various dialects faithfully reproduced in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 16, 2013, 01:00:53 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 16, 2013, 09:06:17 AM
Hence Twain's note on the various dialects faithfully reproduced in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

And a reason to read the work aloud!

Today's (August 16th)  Wall Street Journal has a grumble about the over-use and misuse of "existential."

Some excerpts from An Existential Threat to Plain Speaking:

QuoteWhen I was in graduate school, I always felt on the verge of understanding the word "existential" without quite grasping it. The term "existentialism" supposedly encompassed writers as different from each other as Soren Kierkegaard and Jean Paul Sartre, the governing concept having something to do with "existence" preceding "essence." Or, lived human experience being more important than abstract reasoning as a guide to truth.

Or something...

Robin Wright, in an Aug. 8 post for ForeignPolicy.com, thinks "Iran's baby boomers reflect the regime's almost existential conundrum—and the nexus between economic and nuclear policies." That Ms. Wright qualifies the word with "almost" suggests she knows exactly what it means. I don't.

A few queries on Lexis-Nexis bear out my suspicion that the adjective "existential" has exploded in popularity over the past two or three decades.... In 1992, the (New York Times) featured the word 75 times; in 2000, 152 times; in 2005, 181 times; in 2010, 250 times...

What gave rise to this existentializing of everything? Not, I think, a rediscovery of Sartre or fellow existentialist Albert Camus. My guess is that it began with descriptions of the danger posed to Israel by its Arab neighbors as an "existential threat." That phrase began life in the early 1990s, and at least it's defensible: "a threat to Israel's existence" is wordier and less memorable, and Israel's neighbors would literally make the country nonexistent if they could...

In a 1997 article about the German economy, a New York Times reporter told readers that "there is an existential debate centering on the so-called American model of deregulation and market forces." To modify a word with existential by then merely meant that it was important or that it pertained to fundamental principles...

...a highly regarded point guard for the Brooklyn Nets, Deron Williams, wasn't playing as well as his team needed him to play. "If this sounds like an existential crisis," a newspaper sportswriter explained, "it is." 
.

See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324769704579008471228709190.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion&cb=logged0.051091959806464304 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324769704579008471228709190.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion&cb=logged0.051091959806464304)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Bad Music in Writing: Cozzens
Post by: Cato on August 17, 2013, 08:38:04 AM
Probably most of you have never heard of James Gould Cozzens or read even one of his clumsy sentences.

My memory went back to him recently via some meandering thoughts on how bad a good deal of modern writing is.  Still, the past was certainly not immune from it!

Case in point, James Gould Cozzens, a major writer in the 1930's-1950's, who garnered both a Pulitzer Prize and his picture on the cover of Time (which was a much bigger deal 60 years ago than it is today, because people actually bought and read the magazine).

Not everyone agreed that his books were wonderful: from a review in Commentary by Dwight Macdonald of a Cozzens book (By Love Possessed) lionized by many others. 

Quote(A sentence from the novel)

"Thinking last night of Ralph's 'Joanie,' those Moores, all unsuspecting;
whose 'shame' or 'disgrace' of the same kind (if more decent in
degree) stood accomplished, waiting merely to be discovered to them, Arthur Winner had
felt able to pre-figure, following the first horrified anger, the distraught recriminations,
the general fury of family woe, a bitter necessary acceptance."


I find such prose almost impossible to read, partly because of an inexpressive, clumsy use of words,
partly because the thought is both abstract and unclear, but chiefly because the rhythms are all wrong.
Instead of carrying one forward, they drop one flat, and one must begin anew with each phrase.

An artist creates a world, bit added to bit; each addition of Cozzens' destroys what has gone before.

Macdonald was on target. 

Of course, there are many other writers from that era whose works had better style, but have not persisted (Thomas Costain, Howard Fast, Lloyd Douglas, Edna Ferber).  Their works were made into movies and so on, but...

Anyway, I thought the unmusical prose would be of interest here at GMG.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 19, 2013, 03:32:13 AM
Seen on Amazon:

For several decades, the Talich Quartet has been recognized internationally as one of Europes finest chamber ensembles . . . .

Apostrophes be damned!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Bad Music in Writing: Cozzens
Post by: Sergeant Rock on August 19, 2013, 03:53:08 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 17, 2013, 08:38:04 AM
Probably most of you have never heard of James Gould Cozzens By Love Possessed

The title is very familiar. It's a book I knew in my youth; I may have even owned it, but I don't believe I read it all. That excerpt may offer an explanation: I doubt I would have had the desire or patience to slog my way through that muddy prose. God-awful.

Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Bad Music in Writing: Cozzens
Post by: Cato on August 19, 2013, 09:41:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 17, 2013, 08:38:04 AM
Probably most of you have never heard of James Gould Cozzens or read even one of his clumsy sentences.

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on August 19, 2013, 03:53:08 AM
The title (By Love Possessed) is very familiar. It's a book I knew in my youth; I may have even owned it, but I don't believe I read it all. That excerpt may offer an explanation: I doubt I would have had the desire or patience to slog my way through that muddy prose. God-awful.

Sarge

Apparently William Buckley wrote an equally negative review, but I have not had the time to track it down.

In my more advanced Latin classes I have shown the students examples of bad Latin style, e.g. the longest Latin epic poem is the Punica written by Silius Italicus, a Roman aristocrat and government official.  He worked on the poem during his retirement, and hoped to become a second Vergil.

He failed.  One contemporary said that the Punica, which deals with Hannibal and the Second Punic War, showed "a modest amount of talent."  Most of the time it shows incompetence and a tin ear.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sef on August 19, 2013, 10:51:48 AM
Although I shouldn't grumble about a favourite blog of mine, I find the "without further Adieu" impossible not to comment on.

http://allanpettersson100.blogspot.com/2013/08/guest-blog-entry-alun-francis.html (http://allanpettersson100.blogspot.com/2013/08/guest-blog-entry-alun-francis.html)

The proper form is "without further ado"; an ado is a hubbub, bustle, flurry, or fuss, as in "much ado about nothing."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 19, 2013, 10:57:29 AM
Without further adieu is an amusing error.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sef on August 19, 2013, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 19, 2013, 10:57:29 AM
Without further adieu is an amusing error.
Yes, I wondered at first whether it was purposefully done, but a quick google assured me that it is quite a common mistake. Personally I had neither heard nor seen it before now.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 19, 2013, 11:27:41 AM
Sounds to me like it's much adieu about nothing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Opus106 on September 04, 2013, 12:30:04 AM
Via Richard Wiseman (http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2013/09/03/the-importance-of-punctuation/)

(http://richardwiseman.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/image001.png?w=620)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on September 04, 2013, 12:38:26 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on September 04, 2013, 12:30:04 AM
Via Richard Wiseman (http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2013/09/03/the-importance-of-punctuation/)

(http://richardwiseman.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/image001.png?w=620)
Just awesome!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 04, 2013, 03:24:40 AM
Quote from: Opus106 on September 04, 2013, 12:30:04 AM
Via Richard Wiseman (http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2013/09/03/the-importance-of-punctuation/)

(http://richardwiseman.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/image001.png?w=620)

Ah!  So punctuation is important after all!

The Wall Street Journal had an essay yesterday (September 3, 2013) by a professor making the case that the de-emphasis on grammar, punctuation, etc.,has wrought our present situation: nearly two generations whose grasp of the language is mediocre to below.

An excerpt on the political agenda behind de-emphasizing good writing:

Quote

You're going to come away (from college) with many opinions—and a desire to write down those opinions and to have them taken seriously. But they'll never be taken seriously if your reader keeps getting sidetracked by your faulty pronoun antecedents. That's why it's absurd to claim that teaching students standard grammatical rules and expecting students to abide by them is a form of oppression. There are "other" grammars, or so the argument goes: grammars of the victimized, the ostracized, the marginalized.

Please. Nothing prolongs the socioeconomic struggles of historically victimized people more than an inability to communicate effectively with the broader culture. They have a desperate incentive to make themselves heard—not in ways that grammatically underscore generations of hardship but on the precise linguistic terms of that broader culture.

Frederick Douglass understood this point; his writings are a testament to it. So did Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. Du Bois and Martin Luther King Jr
.

See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324591204579039544005041908.html?KEYWORDS=ungrammatical+students (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324591204579039544005041908.html?KEYWORDS=ungrammatical+students)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 04, 2013, 05:53:58 PM
For some reason, repeating "is" has become very common. It's usually in the form of "the thing about that is, is." Those darn double copulas.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 14, 2013, 03:37:52 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 04, 2013, 05:53:58 PM
For some reason, repeating "is" has become very common. It's usually in the form of "the thing about that is, is." Those darn double copulas.

I have been noticing the same thing: in print it looks very curious indeed!

Yesterday I heard an ad on the radio from a "financial advising" firm, which asked a series of questions.

One of the questions was:  "Did you suffer from an uncivilized divorce?"  :o ???

Wow!  I suspect some people have suffered from divorces that were not not particularly civil, when love became full of tumors transforming it into hate. 

But unless they married a Pict princess or an unvarnished Vandal, I would say that the very act of divorcing in a court is a hallmark of civilized behavior.   $:) 

The Gesualdo Method of Divorce would indeed be uncivilized, but if you had suffered from that type of divorce, you would not be listening to a radio ad!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 14, 2013, 03:48:35 AM
;^)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 17, 2013, 05:26:36 PM
Hey, you shouldn't correct people's grammar. It makes you a bully!

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2013/09/language_bullies_pedants_and_grammar_nerds_who_correct_people_all_the_time.single.html#pagebreak_anchor_2

Didn't you know that when you correct someone, no matter what the error or the context of it, you're just trying to show off and assert your superiority over that person? It must be true because those psychologists said so!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on September 18, 2013, 03:28:08 AM
Those psychologists are bullies.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sef on September 18, 2013, 11:45:27 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 17, 2013, 05:26:36 PM
Hey, you shouldn't correct people's grammar. It makes you a bully!

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_good_word/2013/09/language_bullies_pedants_and_grammar_nerds_who_correct_people_all_the_time.single.html#pagebreak_anchor_2

Didn't you know that when you correct someone, no matter what the error or the context of it, you're just trying to show off and assert your superiority over that person? It must be true because those psychologists said so!
So for years you get bullied for being smaller than them, sometimes physically but mostly mentally, suffer from poor self-esteem, even grow an inferiority complex, then when everyone grows out of that, in order to heal yourself of that complex you build a superiority complex by telling those stupid b'stards just how f'ing stupid they are! Sounds fair to me. Psychologists - chew on that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sef on September 18, 2013, 01:29:12 PM
Sorry - having a really shit day.  :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 18, 2013, 01:32:34 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on September 18, 2013, 03:28:08 AM
Those psychologists are bullies.

0:) Amen!

Quote from: Sef on September 18, 2013, 11:45:27 AM
Psychologists - chew on that!


0:)  Another big Amen!

Speaking of attacking those trying to preserve language that makes sense...

One of the catch phrases of the 1960's is "I think you know what I'm trying to say."

Remember that the 1960's were some of the stupidest times in recent history: the phrase was meant to evoke sympathy from the listener, especially when the speaker was stuttering forth opinions full of bleary-eyed, bleary-minded, and possibly drug-dappled cliches. 

I have mentioned the following before, but for those who do not know about it:

Neil Postman, the late media and society critic, analyzed "stupid talk" and its cousin "crazy talk" with this example:

Quote"The 'problem' of crazy talk is...very close to uncorrectable. It does not involve a momentary loss of judgment, subject to review in a more rational moment. Crazy talk usually puts forward a point of view that is considered virtuous and progressive. Its assumptions, metaphors, and conclusions are therefore taken for granted, and that, in the end, is what makes it crazy. For it is language that cannot get outside of itself. It buries itself in its own foundations.

"Here, for example, is a specimen taken from Red Stocking's Manifesto:

'Women are an oppressed class. Our oppression is total, affecting every facet of our lives. We are exploited as sex objects, breeders, domestic servants, and cheap labor...We identify the agents of our oppression as men. Male supremacy is the oldest, most basic form of domination. All other forms of exploitation (racism, capitalism, imperialism, etc.) are extensions of male supremacy...'

"If you talk about men as 'total oppressors' and women as 'totally exploited,' you have constructed a context that bears almost no relation to the actual experience of men and women. Crazy talk is, in fact, almost always characterized by simple-minded conceptions of complex relationships.

"One way it achieves this is through the construction of a massive metaphor which permeates every sentence and does not allow for any perceptions that go beyond the bounds of the metaphor. In the foregoing instance, we are presented with a vicious and uncompromising paradigm: Man-woman relationships are a war between master and slave. It follows from this that a woman who gives birth to a child is a 'breeder.' And a woman who stays home with children while her husband works is a 'domestic servant' and 'cheap labor.' It follows, as well, that there can be no such thing as 'mutual dependency' or 'love' or even a 'family,' since such transactions do not arise in a class war. It also follows that it is only an illusion that some men have sacrificed their own well-being for their families, since masters do not do such things for slaves.

"In short, to talk this way is to distort, beyond recognition, a complex situation as it is actually experienced by most men and women...

(from Crazy Talk, Stupid Talk )

http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Archives/Crazy%20Talk,%20Stupid%20Talk.htm (http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Archives/Crazy%20Talk,%20Stupid%20Talk.htm)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 11, 2013, 09:00:33 AM
Quote from: Wikipedia. . . an immense orchestra in this work, requiring well over one hundred musicians. This, combined with the extreme technical and emotional demands placed on the performers . . . .

O, merciful heavens! Emotional demands upon the performers!!! Extreme emotional demands!!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 11, 2013, 02:35:04 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 11, 2013, 09:00:33 AM
O, merciful heavens! Emotional demands upon the performers!!! Extreme emotional demands!!!!

Isn't everything extreme these days?   :o :o :o

Which means that nothing is extreme!  0:)

Hey Karl!  How about some EXTREME CLARINET music?!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 11, 2013, 03:24:49 PM
Have to wear safety goggles while playing....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 11, 2013, 07:27:57 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 11, 2013, 03:24:49 PM
Have to wear safety goggles while playing....
And earmuffs!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: listener on October 11, 2013, 11:50:52 PM
headline in a local community paper:
"Homeless population remains stable"
    Deceased homeless people own horses?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 11, 2013, 11:59:00 PM
Quote from: listener on October 11, 2013, 11:50:52 PM
headline in a local community paper:
"Homeless population remains stable"
    Deceased homeless people own horses?
Pray tell me what is wrong with this headline? Any better ideas?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 12, 2013, 03:28:59 AM
Quote from: North Star on October 11, 2013, 07:27:57 PM
And earmuffs!

EXTREME Earmuffs!!!

And now for a comment on the nature of grammar:

A priest was reminiscing recently about a rather ancient "old maid" English teacher he had endured and enjoyed in high school.

She called grammar "the morality of language."  0:)

I think the grand old lady was correct!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 12, 2013, 03:32:08 AM
Quote from: North Star on October 11, 2013, 07:27:57 PM
And earmuffs!

Karlo, you sure know how to hurt a guy!

(j/k)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 13, 2013, 01:31:00 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 12, 2013, 03:28:59 AM

A priest was reminiscing recently about a rather ancient "old maid" English teacher
he had endured and enjoyed in high school.

I should mention an elderly nun (born in the Rutherford B. Hayes administration) from my days in the Sixth Grade, who was wonderful, but who had a dislike of "is" (or any form of the verb "to be") followed by "when."

I recall one of the most intelligent boys in the class explaining something:

Larry: "Photosynthesis is when..."
Sister Servatia: "Ahem: 'is when,' Lawrence?!"
Larry: (shifting his weight) "Uh, that's when..."
Sister Servatia: "Contracting it does not solve the problem!"
Larry: "Uh, photosynthesis..."  (blanks out on what the problem is)
Sister Servatia: "...occurs, Lawrence, or happens, but 'photosynthesis' can NEVER be a 'when'!"   0:)

Undoubtedly such a fight is doomed to fail in our increasingly anti-literate age, but...  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 23, 2013, 05:33:37 AM
So far so good, has done everything they said it wood, I am very imprest with it, Have been useing it as a Kindle reader.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on October 25, 2013, 09:52:20 AM
I've basically become resigned to the fact that "song" now refers to any piece of music. There's no turning back. "Hey Jude" is a song just as much as "Take Five" is, which is just as much a song as the Eroica is. There's no use correcting people anymore, because they don't care and you'll just be accused of being pretentious. Plus, "piece" isn't really an attractive catch-all term, anyway, so there's nothing you can suggest as an alternative.

My favorite Debussy song is Le cathédrale engloutie.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on October 25, 2013, 05:56:45 PM
Quote from: The Six on October 25, 2013, 09:52:20 AM
My favorite Debussy song is Le cathédrale engloutie.

That's a good song.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 25, 2013, 06:11:33 PM
Oh well. Thank goodness 'lyrics' hasn't lost its original meaning.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on October 25, 2013, 06:52:40 PM
Speaking of which, do you use lyric or lyrics when referring to the words of a song? I've heard both, and I wonder if this is just a matter of regional difference. I use the plural.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 27, 2013, 05:29:03 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on October 25, 2013, 06:52:40 PM
Speaking of which, do you use lyric or lyrics when referring to the words of a song? I've heard both, and I wonder if this is just a matter of regional difference. I use the plural.

I've only heard lyric used as an adjective, and almost only as an adjective for one word, at that--lyric poetry (or lyric poet).  (I suppose it could be used to modify other nouns,  but I don't remember hearing/seeing an particular use--only lyrical used that way.)  But we only speak of lyricists who write song texts, not lyricsists.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on October 27, 2013, 08:17:53 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on October 27, 2013, 05:34:17 AM
It is used that way all the time here, where I live, In Nashville.  For example, a publisher often will ask a songwriter for a copy of the lyric(s) of a song.

I see now that my use of "or" was ambiguous.

I wasn't actually asking if lyric(s) can be used as a noun (I'm a native speaker, and I know that it can). I meant to ask whether you people in GMG Land use the singular lyric in such situations or the plural lyrics. I've always used the latter (I really dig those lyrics, Mr. Dylan), but I've heard the former also (let's discuss the lyric of this song), which sounds weird to me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on November 01, 2013, 12:18:00 PM
From an e-mail I just received from Pensacola Opera Artistic Director Kyle Marrero:

QuoteWe are in the throws of mainstage preparations

:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 01, 2013, 12:57:53 PM
Oof!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 20, 2013, 08:53:50 AM
Here's the latest trend that's sure to make English language purists' heads explode, because grammar.

http://mashable.com/2013/11/19/because-internet-preposition/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 20, 2013, 09:27:52 AM
Englisc ágenspræc purism, cool!  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on November 20, 2013, 10:25:45 AM
Quote from: The Six on November 20, 2013, 08:53:50 AM
Here's the latest trend that's sure to make English language purists' heads explode, because grammar.

http://mashable.com/2013/11/19/because-internet-preposition/

I think these are examples of truncation rathe than usage as preposition. Truncation is quite common in informal language.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 21, 2013, 05:10:25 AM
He cannot buy drinks, because not of legal age.

What;s wrong with the above?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2013, 05:16:58 AM
It does not directly answer your question; but to be correct, we should say:

He cannot buy drinks, because he is not of legal age.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2013, 05:19:31 AM
The conjunction because needs to be followed by a complete sentence or clause, I suppose.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 21, 2013, 05:23:18 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 21, 2013, 05:16:58 AM
It does not directly answer your question; but to be correct, we should say:

He cannot buy drinks, because he is not of legal age.

Quote from: karlhenning on November 21, 2013, 05:19:31 AM
The conjunction because needs to be followed by a complete sentence or clause, I suppose.

You are of course right. But there is more: he can buy drinks all right, even if he's not of legal age; that he may not is a different matter altogether...  :D :D :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2013, 05:26:09 AM
Ah, there is that.  A combination of not being all that awake, and focused on one bit . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2013, 05:27:03 AM
And anyway, if the barkeep abides by the law, the young man cannot buy a drink  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 21, 2013, 05:29:05 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 21, 2013, 05:27:03 AM
And anyway, if the barkeep abides by the law, the young man cannot buy a drink  ;)

I'd go further and say that he even must not...  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 21, 2013, 07:15:43 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 21, 2013, 05:10:25 AM
He cannot buy drinks, because not of legal age.

What;s wrong with the above?

It's not quite the correct way of using the New Because....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 21, 2013, 09:33:55 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 21, 2013, 05:16:58 AM
It does not directly answer your question; but to be correct, we should say:

He cannot buy drinks, because he is not of legal age.

Right!  The only other way is to write: "...because of his age."

Not a grammar point, but a matter of reading things carefully: on Sunday one of the readers at the Mass announced the Bible passage which he would be reading.

"A reading from the Letter of Saint Paul to the Theologians."  ??? ??? ???

Well, to be charitable, I thought that, in one sense, all of Saint Paul's letters are for the theologians! 

The passage was of course to the "Thessalonians."   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 21, 2013, 09:41:32 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 21, 2013, 09:33:55 AM
Right!  The only other way is to write: "...because of his age."

Not a grammar point, but a matter of reading things carefully: on Sunday one of the readers at the Mass announced the Bible passage which he would be reading.

"A reading from the Letter of Saint Paul to the Theologians."  ??? ??? ???

Well, to be charitable, I thought that, in one sense, all of Saint Paul's letters are for the theologians! 

The passage was of course to the "Thessalonians."   0:)

I assume it was a Concilar Mass; in the Tridentine I presume it is the priest only who announces the readings, just as in the Greek Orthodox Mass. Or am I wrong?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 21, 2013, 09:49:07 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 21, 2013, 09:41:32 AM
I assume it was a Concilar Mass; in the Tridentine I presume it is the priest only who announces the readings, just as in the Greek Orthodox Mass. Or am I wrong?

Lay people read the first two passages (usually one from the Old Testament and one from the New), but only the priest (or a deacon) reads the Gospel itself.

In the old days, yes, only the priest read things.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2013, 11:41:35 AM
"I apologize about that." Guy on the phone said this, in just this way, more than once yesterday.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on November 21, 2013, 11:46:37 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 21, 2013, 11:41:35 AM
"I apologize about that." Guy on the phone said this, in just this way, more than once yesterday.

I wonder if he did it on accident.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on November 24, 2013, 05:47:13 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 21, 2013, 05:16:58 AM
It does not directly answer your question; but to be correct, we should say:

He cannot buy drinks, because he is not of legal age.

I believe the rule is if the subordinate clause is the second part of a sentence, then do not use a comma.

He cannot buy drinks because he is not of legal age.

Conversely, if the subordinate clause is first, then use a comma.

Because he is not of legal age, he cannot buy drinks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 26, 2013, 07:46:22 AM
What do you do when the learned are the ones who need the teaching?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BZ-t7WyIcAALahj.jpg:large)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 26, 2013, 07:55:24 AM
It's funny how they won't know anything about the subject they have studied. would perhaps be better ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2013, 08:18:24 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on November 26, 2013, 08:05:14 AM
Does spelling really matter?

Sure it does.  Not absolutely every word, not in absolutely every context.  But of course it really matters.

It matters now, in ways which it did not in Shakespeare's day.  Probably, that is one of the changes we should consider accepting ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2013, 08:25:19 AM
I'll give you two.

The President of the US writes a letter of condolence to a war widow.  How many misspellings before it really matters?

Every week my mom-in-law writes me out a grocery list.  She wants to know if she happens to misspell words.  She is very conscious, if she were to misspell a word which a native speaker outside of the family should read, what that person will think poorly of her as an immigrant.  (Of course, no one outside the family reads these shopping lists;  she is a person of education and artistic achievement.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 26, 2013, 08:40:10 AM
Yeah, it's not such a big deal, or maybe it is.
(http://uutzbll1vsma5gxg.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/oxford-comma-in-use.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2013, 09:08:43 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on November 26, 2013, 08:48:51 AM
If there was no conception of "misspellings" then it would not matter.

How's that working out? :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on November 26, 2013, 09:48:04 AM
This site cracks me up: http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/

Probably my favorite on that site: http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/2008/06/youre-so-loving.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 26, 2013, 10:02:28 AM
People who are in favor of grammatical anarchy should realize that the rules actually make things easier. You may call them arbitrary, but it's a lot simpler for everyone to conform to one set of rules than to expect everyone to understand you. It's actually quite selfish to think you should be able to write however you want. Just learn the same rules everyone else did. They're not that hard.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2013, 10:08:04 AM
That first day you got mail meant for someone else (and he got yours) because the postman ruled that spelling doesn't really matter . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2013, 10:13:51 AM
Ah, so spelling for email addresses doesn't really matter, either, eh? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2013, 10:23:21 AM
That is a fairly consistent failing of mine.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 26, 2013, 10:26:37 AM
Separately: We highly suggest ? ? ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 26, 2013, 02:20:50 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 26, 2013, 10:26:37 AM
Separately: We highly suggest ? ? ?

How high were they when they made the suggestion?

Concerning the rules of English:

Thuh kaes for prahper spelling iz eezee tu maek.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 28, 2013, 08:09:08 AM
We're go-with-the-flow improvisatory . . . we'll eat when the bird is ready :)

Happy Thanksgiving, mate!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on November 28, 2013, 08:21:28 AM
In my family--offspring of Russian Jewish immigrants who settled in Boston--the big meal of the day was served at about 2 or 3 in the afternoon, with snacks for us hungry kids beforehand, and usually no supper because we always ate at my aunt's, so it was always rather late by the time my parents and Igot home, usually still full from dinner.  When we moved to Florida,  my mother kept the basic early afternoon timing.  In both Boston and South Florida,  midday turkey seemed to be the norm--at least I don't remember anyone mentioning eating an evening dinner.

Of course, part of it may have been simply Karl's pragmatica:  when the bird's ready to come out of the oven, we'll be ready to go into the dining room!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 28, 2013, 09:18:26 AM
Here in Ohio, Thanksgiving Dinner (most people would say) would be held in the evening only if relatives from out-of-town were arriving late.

Breakfast, lunch, and supper for the everyday terms: "dinner" is for something special (e.g. Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on November 28, 2013, 11:37:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 28, 2013, 09:18:26 AM
Here in Ohio, Thanksgiving Dinner (most people would say) would be held in the evening only if relatives from out-of-town were arriving late.

Breakfast, lunch, and supper for the everyday terms: "dinner" is for something special (e.g. Christmas, Thanksgiving, Easter).

In my family, dinner was always understood to mean the main meal of the day, the one where my parents and I would sit down at the same table and eat; and then after my parents divorced,  my mother and I together;  restaurant meals were always going out to dinner only if they were for the evening  never for the daytime--but over time my mother's usage changed, supper replacing dinner, which became reserved for going out to restaurants, while  for me the two terms were always interchangeable.   But this should be measured in the context of the fact that Thanksgiving was the only day of the year on which the major meal of the day was not eaten at approximately 6-7 PM, and on the other 364 days of the year, dinner was supper.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 28, 2013, 11:48:32 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 28, 2013, 11:37:19 AM
In my family, dinner was always understood to mean the main meal of the day, the one where my parents and I would sit down at the same table and eat; and then after my parents divorced,  my mother and I together;  restaurant meals were always going out to dinner only if they were for the evening  never for the daytime--but over time my mother's usage changed, supper replacing dinner, which became reserved for going out to restaurants, while  for me the two terms were always interchangeable.   But this should be measured in the context of the fact that Thanksgiving was the only day of the year on which the major meal of the day was not eaten at approximately 6-7 PM, and on the other 364 days of the year, dinner was supper.

Interesting: and you lived in Boston at that time?  Certainly you can also find people in the Midwest who use "supper" and "dinner" interchangeably.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 28, 2013, 03:08:36 PM
In a story about a NASA scientist looking into warp drive, we find a monstrosity:

QuoteDr. White told the New York Times that since nature can travel at warp speeds, there is a chance that humans can figure out how to do it too.

"Space has been expanding since the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago," Dr. White told the Times. "And we know that when you look at some of the cosmology models, there were early periods of the universe where there was explosive inflation, where two points would've went receding away from each other at very rapid speeds."

Whether or not such a grammatical monstrosity symbolizes the future failure of warp drive by "Dr. White" remains to be seen.

See:

http://rt.com/usa/nasa-warp-engine-light-488/ (http://rt.com/usa/nasa-warp-engine-light-488/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 30, 2013, 04:29:42 PM
(http://markkuperala.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/grammar.jpg?w=660)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 30, 2013, 04:58:42 PM
See the above, ye who say about spelling: "What difference does it make?"   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on December 01, 2013, 12:14:33 AM
So I'm working at a university in southern China, I do American culture but also a range of English courses.

Here's one question-

Why can we say It's really good or It's very good, but we must say only I really like it, not I very like it.

I very much like it is okay, but what's going on here?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on December 01, 2013, 12:16:46 AM
Any why must we say The big red bus not The red big bus?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on December 01, 2013, 12:20:00 AM
One more, why should abbreviations in writing like I've or she'll be okay, but not would've or they'll've, when they're perfectly normal in speech?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: douglasofdorset on December 01, 2013, 02:40:24 AM
Quote from: Sean on December 01, 2013, 12:14:33 AM
Why can we say It's really good or It's very good, but we must say only I really like it, not I very like it.

I very much like it is okay, but what's going on here?

According to Macmillan 'very' is only used as an adverb before adjectives and other adverbs, or as an adjective before nouns.
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/very
This means, I think, that 'very' is not a 'true' adverb.

And why must we say The big red bus not The red big bus?

Apparently the usual order of adjectives in English moves from the more general (first) to the more specific (last) - but it's much more complicated than that - see http://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/en/english-grammar/adjectives/order-adjectives

As for the accepted abbreviations, that's just a matter of convention, I think - though the convention is always changing, of course.  (I think modern novels do have would've, etc.)

(I also used to teach EFL, but usually not to students who could've coped with such advanced concepts!  As I recall I like it much was a frequent mistake!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 01, 2013, 05:18:29 AM
Quote from: douglasofdorset on December 01, 2013, 02:40:24 AM
According to Macmillan 'very' is only used as an adverb before adjectives and other adverbs, or as an adjective before nouns.
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/very
This means, I think, that 'very' is not a 'true' adverb.

And why must we say The big red bus not The red big bus?

Apparently the usual order of adjectives in English moves from the more general (first) to the more specific (last) - but it's much more complicated than that - see http://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/en/english-grammar/adjectives/order-adjectives

As for the accepted abbreviations, that's just a matter of convention, I think - though the convention is always changing, of course. (I think modern novels do have would've, etc.)

(I also used to teach EFL, but usually not to students who could've coped with such advanced concepts!  As I recall I like it much was a frequent mistake!)

Many thanks for the nice response!  I see nothing against "would've."  In my 6 decades in America I have never heard and have never read "they'll've."  If it does indeed occur somewhere, then the contraction would be correct for dialogue in a novel.  It would not be acceptable in formal writing.

I have noticed that such double contractions are disliked by Microsoft Word/Works, along with things e.g. "Some teachers're tougher 'n others."



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on December 01, 2013, 05:26:53 AM
Many many thanks for those details Douglas, greatly aiding my meagre understanding. My job's vaguely interesting... I sometimes feel like Arthur Sullivan, thinking through small scale stuff to a fair standard but with intentions far beyond, then having to settle for what was and wasn't achieved...

The work here generates plenty of thought, maybe talk more another time.

Beats plenty of other jobs anyway; appreciate the links.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on December 01, 2013, 05:31:32 AM
How do Cato...
Quote
I have never heard and have never read "they'll've."

Not sure I'm reading you right but of course you've heard They'll've left by now/ They'll've had enough by then/ They'll've disappeared from view after so much grammar...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 01, 2013, 05:57:30 AM
Quote from: Sean on December 01, 2013, 05:31:32 AM
How do Cato...
Not sure I'm reading you right but of course you've heard They'll've left by now/ They'll've had enough by then/ They'll've disappeared from view after so much grammar...

Absolutely not!  The future perfect is rare enough, but that contraction I have neither heard nor read.  I might have come across e.g. "They will've arrived by now." 

Most people (here in the Midwest of America) for that sentence would more likely say: "They must've arrived by now," which of course is not quite as definite, but...that is what I would hear much more often than the future perfect.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 01, 2013, 06:09:27 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 01, 2013, 05:57:30 AM
Absolutely not!  The future perfect is rare enough, but that contraction I have neither heard nor read.  I might have come across e.g. "They will've arrived by now." 

Most people (here in the Midwest of America) for that sentence would more likely say: "They must've arrived by now," which of course is not quite as definite, but...that is what I would hear much more often than the future perfect.

I've never heard they'll've, and I think  I know why:   It's harder to pronounce than they'll have, and in trying to pronounce it, the mouth more or less produces the full form of have instead of the abbreviated 've.   And my experience here in Florida matches Cato--the preferred version seems to be must've, or more precisely must of, except when ordering a meal at restaurants ("He'll have the veal parmegiana and I'll have the shrimp molinari.")
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on December 01, 2013, 06:25:06 AM
I see what you're saying.

Got to've get some sleep over here.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 01, 2013, 07:36:47 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 01, 2013, 06:09:27 AM
I've never heard they'll've, and I think  I know why:  It's harder to pronounce than they'll have, and in trying to pronounce it, the mouth more or less produces the full form of have instead of the abbreviated 've And my experience here in Florida matches Cato--the preferred version seems to be must've, or more precisely must of, except when ordering a meal at restaurants ("He'll have the veal parmegiana and I'll have the shrimp molinari.")

Right!  A contraction is supposed to make things smoother, not harder, for the speaker: so yes, "they'll've" to my mouth is much harder than "they'll have."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on December 01, 2013, 08:18:13 AM
Thehluv
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2013, 04:15:06 AM
I'm feeling they'll've . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2013, 05:56:57 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 02, 2013, 04:15:06 AM
I'm feeling they'll've . . . .

Heh heh!   ;D

Concerning contractions: "mize" came up in conversation last night.   ???

e.g.

"Since it's raining, we mize well go home: no baseball today."

"Mize" = "might as"


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on December 02, 2013, 10:04:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 02, 2013, 05:56:57 AM
Heh heh!   ;D

Concerning contractions: "mize" came up in conversation last night.   ???

e.g.

"Since it's raining, we mize well go home: no baseball today."

"Mize" = "might as"

Indeed, that's how it goes, but if people can't be bothered with consonants, why not 'we mize well gome'?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2013, 11:23:01 AM
Not a Grumble, strictly speaking: 24 kinds of American English (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/12/02/what-dialect-to-do-you-speak-a-map-of-american-english/?hpid=z4).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2013, 12:54:17 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 02, 2013, 11:23:01 AM
Not a Grumble, strictly speaking: 24 kinds of American English (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/12/02/what-dialect-to-do-you-speak-a-map-of-american-english/?hpid=z4).

Thanks for the link,Karl

When I was in college, I was told that America basically had hardly any "dialects."  The definition was that a dialect needed a certain number of actual grammatical and vocabulary oddities, so that a standard speaker would not completely understand what the dialect speaker was saying.

What America has is a variety of accents i.e. different ways of pronouncing words, which will not really prohibit complete understanding.

Only if an accent is very off kilter will it qualify as a dialect.

We were also told by the professors that "null-grade" English was spoken throughout most of central and northern Ohio, with the Cleveland suburb of Shaker Heights having the purest, unaccented English.

That claim would not be true today, since Shaker Heights is quite different from what it was half a century ago!

Linguists have maps which will delineate the most minute things, e.g. parts of cities where one accent or even word is heard vs. another.  (I suspect Nyoo Yawk Siddy alone has more than 24 kinds of English!   ;)   )

Interesting to see Ohio split in half: I have lived all over the state, however, and have never heard "doughnuts" called either "fatcakes" or "dunkers."

"Dunkards" however were the Mennonites, i.e. people who are "Amish lite" !   One hears the term very seldom these days.



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2013, 02:15:04 PM
It may just be that I grew up in a bit of a melting-pot, but I've heard a number of terms which the article pins to one or another distant part of the country.

I sure do remember the porch being called a stoop from my earliest days, and at some point I did connect that with the old Dutch settlers of Nieuw Nederland.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2013, 02:23:10 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 02, 2013, 02:15:04 PM
It may just be that I grew up in a bit of a melting-pot, but I've heard a number of terms which the article pins to one or another distant part of the country.

I sure do remember the porch being called a stoop from my earliest days, and at some point I did connect that with the old Dutch settlers of Nieuw Nederland.

That was also not unknown in German-immigrant sections of Dayton, "stoop" (as a noun) is most probably related to "Stufe" in German which is the word for "step."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on December 04, 2013, 04:38:07 AM
Cato, here's another reason we should take pride in being Buckeyes  :D

According to a Study People In Ohio Curse More Than Anyone Else In The Country (http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/according-to-this-map-of-swearing-habits-people-in-ohio-curs)

New Jersey's response: "I got yer fuckin' study right here."

Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 04, 2013, 04:40:34 AM
Fie on Jersey, I say!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: On Coprolalia
Post by: Cato on December 06, 2013, 05:25:30 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on December 04, 2013, 04:38:07 AM
Cato, here's another reason we should take pride in being Buckeyes  :D

According to a Study People In Ohio Curse More Than Anyone Else In The Country (http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/according-to-this-map-of-swearing-habits-people-in-ohio-curs)


Well, I am skeptical, although the nature of my life isolates me from people who might tend to suffer from coprolalia.  (Ancient Greek for "potty mouth.")

My wife and my brother say that I intimidate people in general, especially when I talk: this seems not to have affected my students' reaction to me, as the lazy ones tend to be unintimidated and therefore stay lazy, unless placed under the greatest psychological stress from their parents, which these days is unlikely.

On the other hand, I have noticed that certain people who tend toward coprolalia (like my late father-in-law, my brother-in-law, and others) affect a higher tone in my presence and try to avoid their regrettable habit.

I have always thought that the loosening of censorship in the 1960's and 1970's in movies (and later on television) catalyzed more cursing among the populace, who too often imitate what they see and hear in movies.  Certainly growing up 60 + years ago in a lower-class neighborhood I heard very little cursing from anyone in public.  The idea that one ought to control one's mouth in public - especially in front of children - was still widely believed. 

Observing the spread of public crudity since then has been one of the most depressing aspects of my life.


Quote from: karlhenning on December 04, 2013, 04:40:34 AM
Fie on Jersey, I say!

Amen!  0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 06, 2013, 05:34:16 AM
I wonder how Joannes Chrysostomus (yeah, right ;)) Theophilus Mozart would have felt in your company, Cato :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2013, 05:43:56 AM
Hadn't noted that irony ere now, Karlo! G'day!  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 06, 2013, 05:57:48 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 06, 2013, 05:43:56 AM
Hadn't noted that irony ere now, Karlo! G'day!  :)
Good day, Karl!
I noticed that earlier when Amadè's name was discussed a while ago.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2013, 06:04:08 AM
I knew of the extensive baptismal name from my Charlottesville days . . . never 'connected' it with the, well, you know . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 06, 2013, 06:09:40 AM
... Coprolalia - pardon my Greek ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: On Coprolalia
Post by: Wanderer on December 06, 2013, 06:22:27 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 06, 2013, 05:25:30 AM
...people who might tend to suffer from coprolalia.  (Ancient Greek for "potty mouth.")

In modern Greek, the term used for the language of those foul mouths is athyrostomia (aischrologia, vomolochia). Coprolalia is used to describe the involuntary cursing and foul language connected with medical conditions such as Tourette's syndrome (I don't know if it's used as a medical term worldwide).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: On Coprolalia
Post by: Cato on December 06, 2013, 06:47:51 AM
Quote from: Wanderer on December 06, 2013, 06:22:27 AM
In modern Greek, the term used for the language of those foul mouths is athyrostomia (aischrologia, vomolochia). Coprolalia is used to describe the involuntary cursing and foul language connected with medical conditions such as Tourette's syndrome (I don't know if it's used as a medical term worldwide).

And used for any "obsession with swearing": whether an obsession is "involuntary," well...

The multiple names of Herr Mozart: I knew he had several, but could not have told you that Chrysostom was one of them!   0:)

For absolutely epic cursing, I am not sure this TV series has an equal!  :o :o :o

[asin]B0006FO5LO[/asin]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 06, 2013, 07:02:37 AM
Not a contender for the absolutely epic cursing palme d'or, but notable (in a sense) for the sheer volume of F-bombs:

[asin]B000A7DVR2[/asin]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: On Coprolalia
Post by: North Star on December 06, 2013, 07:07:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 06, 2013, 06:47:51 AM
For absolutely epic cursing, I am not sure this TV series has an equal!  :o :o :o
I guess you haven't seen BBC's The Thick of It (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIPxLzfw6wU). Nice use of tmeses there, too
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: On Coprolalia
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2013, 07:43:06 AM
Quote from: North Star on December 06, 2013, 07:07:49 AM
I guess you haven't seen BBC's The Thick of It (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIPxLzfw6wU). Nice use of tmeses there, too

In my own experience, far from the the academic world, but not from the madding crowd, your Malcolm Tucker is just a regular guy speaking in a regular way. Of course he's funny, that's the point, isn't it? But his language doesn't shock me nor even attract my attention particularly outside of this context, a discussion of tasty language. I have to work very hard to avoid offending when I am here, and I am not particularly coprolalic, as compared to many of the people I know. :)

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 06, 2013, 07:49:27 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2013, 07:43:06 AM
In my own experience, far the the academic world, but not from the madding crowd, your Malcolm Tucker is just a regular guy speaking in a regular way. Of course he's funny, that's the point, isn't it? But his language doesn't shock me nor even attract my attention particularly outside of this context, a discussion of tasty language. I have to work very hard to avoid offending when I am here, and I am not particularly coprolalic, as compared to many of the people I know. :)

8)
I think we pretty much agree here.

Since this is the CGG, I want to know if you meant tasteful or tasty. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 06, 2013, 08:06:18 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2013, 07:43:06 AM
... outside of this context, a discussion of tasty language.

Quote from: North Star on December 06, 2013, 07:49:27 AM

Since this is the CGG, I want to know if you meant tasteful or tasty. :)

Heh-heh!  Tasteful language can be tasty, but tasty language might not be particularly tasteful!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: On Coprolalia
Post by: Florestan on December 06, 2013, 08:09:37 AM
Quote from: Wanderer on December 06, 2013, 06:22:27 AM
In modern Greek, the term used for the language of those foul mouths is athyrostomia (aischrologia, vomolochia). Coprolalia is used to describe the involuntary cursing and foul language connected with medical conditions such as Tourette's syndrome (I don't know if it's used as a medical term worldwide).

Wasn't this exactly Mozart's condition?  ;D

Quote from: Cato on December 06, 2013, 05:25:30 AM
Certainly growing up 60 + years ago in a lower-class neighborhood I heard very little cursing from anyone in public.  The idea that one ought to control one's mouth in public - especially in front of children - was still widely believed. 

Lower class? Wasn't this supposed to be "bourgeois hypocrisy" ?  ;D



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2013, 08:12:38 AM
Quote from: North Star on December 06, 2013, 07:49:27 AM
I think we pretty much agree here.

Since this is the CGG, I want to know if you meant tasteful or tasty. :)

Clearly tasty. Tasteful and Gurn are pretty much strangers.   :)

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 06, 2013, 08:14:44 AM
Mozart was probably as much a coprolaliac as Napoleon was a small person.

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on December 06, 2013, 08:12:38 AM
Clearly tasty. Tasteful and Gurn are pretty much strangers.   :)

8)
I don't know if it's in good taste to always be tasteful.. (or is it the other way round   :laugh:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: On Coprolalia
Post by: Cato on December 06, 2013, 08:23:33 AM

Quote from: Cato on Today at 06:25:30 AM

QuoteCertainly growing up 60 + years ago in a lower-class neighborhood I heard very little cursing from anyone in public.  The idea that one ought to control one's mouth in public - especially in front of children - was still widely believed. 

Quote from: Florestan on December 06, 2013, 08:09:37 AM

Lower class? Wasn't this supposed to be "bourgeois hypocrisy" ?  ;D

"Supposed to be," but it was nothing of the kind!  0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on December 06, 2013, 03:13:02 PM
My favorite cursing scene is from The Wire (NSFW, naturally): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO0WW2QXIYc
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 10, 2013, 04:34:47 AM
From a sub-headline via The Guardian: the topic is the growth of government surveillance in the era of terrorism, and how having cameras on every street corner - and letting government supercomputers scan emails, etc. - do not necessarily make us safer.

QuoteOne of the writers who signed a letter demanding an international bill of digital rights, says 'our masters are in the grip of a delusionary nightmare'

My dictionaries do not list "delusionary," although some on-line dictionaries say it is an alternate to "delusional."

I also pondered the redundancy of a "delusionary nightmare," and the most charitable thing I can say is that the writer must think it emphatic.

And perhaps even worse: after scanning the article and clicking on various links, I can find neither the author of the curious statement above, nor the complete copy of the letter!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2013, 04:39:00 AM
It seems to me that "an international bill of [any] rights" is in part delusional, as there is no such international governing body to covenant to any such thing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2013, 04:39:24 AM
Hey! It's a pretty good idea!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 10, 2013, 05:41:00 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 10, 2013, 04:39:00 AM
It seems to me that "an international bill of [any] rights" is in part delusional, as there is no such international governing body to covenant to any such thing.

Right!  And who will enforce such a law in e.g. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, etc?

And certainly (I would think) the "free democracies" would not want to subordinate themselves to the U.N. for such legislation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 10, 2013, 07:37:31 AM
There is the International Criminal Court, of course...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 10, 2013, 07:01:38 PM
Quote from: North Star on December 10, 2013, 07:37:31 AM
There is the International Criminal Court, of course...

to which the US is not a signatory, because of the possibility of Americans being harrassed by unfounded war crimes charges  (the possibility of American politicians being charged with well founded war crimes charges of course makes no appearance in the public explanations of the American stance on this question).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Todd on December 10, 2013, 07:26:34 PM
Quote from: North Star on December 10, 2013, 07:37:31 AMThere is the International Criminal Court, of course...



Yes, but enforcing imaginary international bills of rights are outside its purview.  It's too busy hearing cases on African leaders, and nothing but African leaders.




Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 10, 2013, 07:01:38 PMto which the US is not a signatory, because of the possibility of Americans being harrassed by unfounded war crimes charges  (the possibility of American politicians being charged with well founded war crimes charges of course makes no appearance in the public explanations of the American stance on this question).


Bipartisanship in action.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 11, 2013, 02:00:45 AM
Quote from: Todd on December 10, 2013, 07:26:34 PM
Bipartisanship in action.

Yes, we can!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on December 12, 2013, 12:12:13 AM
Punctuation is important  ;D

(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/nov2013/ObamaCastroDateSet.jpg)


Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 12, 2013, 05:46:20 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on December 12, 2013, 12:12:13 AM
Punctuation is important  ;D

(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/nov2013/ObamaCastroDateSet.jpg)


Sarge

Highly disturbing! 

Another case where the "Oxford comma" is necessary!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 12, 2013, 05:50:25 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/jxjhq5K.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 18, 2013, 06:03:38 AM
This is just... sad!

Our dear 30-something principal reads from the Lives of the Saints every day, many of which are what a priest I knew called "pious fictions."  Last week the principal read something about a Council of Constantinople which put the Mass into the basic form we know today.

"And because the Council was in Greece, that's why one part of the Mass was left in Greek,

(hesitating... hesitating... )

the Kai Ree."  :o :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? ???

(Sigh!)  I would have hoped that a Catholic adult, even though born after 1965, would still know how to pronounce "Kyrie."

Or would have asked the eldest member of his faculty, a classicist who knows Ancient Greek, how to pronounce the word!!!

Today, the good man speaks of a certain Saint Flannan of Ireland, who preached the Gospel in Ireland and Scotland ...

"... and even on the Hee Brides Islands."

(SIGH!)

Okay, it does look like "Hee Brides," but again...


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 18, 2013, 06:10:08 AM
Ahead of their time.  They were all she-brides, in my day . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on December 18, 2013, 07:06:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 18, 2013, 06:03:38 AMLast week the principal read something about a Council of Constantinople which put the Mass into the basic form we know today.

Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople (still a Turkish delight on a moonlit night, though).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on December 21, 2013, 08:25:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 18, 2013, 06:03:38 AM
This is just... sad!

Our dear 30-something principal reads from the Lives of the Saints every day, many of which are what a priest I knew called "pious fictions."  Last week the principal read something about a Council of Constantinople which put the Mass into the basic form we know today.

"And because the Council was in Greece, that's why one part of the Mass was left in Greek,

(hesitating... hesitating... )

the Kai Ree."  :o :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? ???

(Sigh!)  I would have hoped that a Catholic adult, even though born after 1965, would still know how to pronounce "Kyrie."

Or would have asked the eldest member of his faculty, a classicist who knows Ancient Greek, how to pronounce the word!!!

Your principal is as ignorant as it gets and then some...  ;D

First, there has been no Council ever, in Constantinople or elsewhere, to "put the [Roman Catholic] Mass into the basic form we know today".

Second, "the basic form we know today" of the "Roman Catholic Mass" is not older than the Second Vatican Council --- and many (myself included) would argue that (1) it is neither Roman, nor Catholic, nor Mass and (2) it is theologically and aesthetically offensive.

Third, a Council held in Constantinople (as there were many) did not take place "in Greece", but in the Roman Empire, and in its very political, theological and cultural heart for that matter; by the time of the First Council of Constantinople (381), which had absolutely nothing to do with the Mass, Rome had long since lost its political, theological and cultural importance; its 476 sack was absolutely nothing like "the fall of the Roman Empire" (save. perhaps, for people like your principal  ;D )

Look, Leo, I'm not a Roman Catholic but a Greek Orthodox and I'm currently unemployed; should your principal be dismissed I'd like to apply for the position.  :D :D :D

QuoteToday, the good man speaks of a certain Saint Flannan of Ireland, who preached the Gospel in Ireland and Scotland ...

"... and even on the Hee Brides Islands."

(SIGH!)

Okay, it does look like "Hee Brides," but again...

What's his Alma Mater, if I may ask?

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 22, 2013, 04:55:46 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 21, 2013, 08:25:16 AM
I'm currently unemployed; should your principal be dismissed I'd like to apply for the position.  :D :D :D


What's his Alma Mater, if I may ask
?

Yes, I sighed at everything you mentioned!  $:)

There is ultimately no excuse for him, because I am right next door to his office, and if he cared at all, if he prepared at all for his daily readings, he could always ask me how to pronounce things, or whether something is historically accurate.

But "planning" is a foreign word to him!

Somewhat in his defense, he is reading a children's "Lives of the Saints" which I am sure has streamlined and simplified away the objections you mentioned.

On the other hand, the book occasionally contains some rather brutal descriptions of martyrdom, and recently he blurted out a line (about Saint Lucy?) about how the female saint went off to a convent "where she would not be molested."   ??? :o

Our English teacher came running out into the hall, waved at me, and mouthed "WHAT IS HE THINKING?"   ;)

I explained to my 8th Graders, who also were not a little shocked, that in Latin "molestus" means "annoying, or bothersome."

Florestan, I would love it if you could be our principal!!!  Unfortunately, it seems "Fearless Leader" will be around for a while.

And "Fearless Leader" has an education degree (the worst degree in America, next to Sociology  :D   ) from a famous football college known as Notre Dame.   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 22, 2013, 02:06:46 PM
An education degree from Notre Dame . . . sounds like a punch-line . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on December 23, 2013, 06:03:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 22, 2013, 04:55:46 AM
"Fearless Leader" has an education degree (the worst degree in America, next to Sociology  :D   )

It seems to me that Education today is about preventing children from getting any education at all and their parents from remedying the situation, while Sociology is about promoting whatever ideas and behaviors are guaranteed to destroy the social fabric...  ;D

Quote
from a famous football college known as Notre Dame.   0:)

IIRC, that is the college that once boasted Jacques Maritain as one of its professors. O tempora, o mores!...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on December 23, 2013, 06:08:06 AM
Quote from: The Six on December 18, 2013, 07:06:52 AM
Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople (still a Turkish delight on a moonlit night, though).

The most beautiful moonlight I've ever seen was in Istanbul. I'm sure that, had it been in Constantinople still, it would have been even more beautiful yet...  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 23, 2013, 08:00:29 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 23, 2013, 06:03:37 AM
It seems to me that Education today is about preventing children from getting any education at all and their parents from remedying the situation, while Sociology is about promoting whatever ideas and behaviors are guaranteed to destroy the social fabric...  ;D

IIRC, that is the college that once boasted Jacques Maritain as one of its professors. O tempora, o mores!...

Jacques Maritain!!!  I feasted on his books... (does calculations)  ???  ... 40-45 years ago!   ???

Marvelous thinker and writer!

And yes, I have never battled so many parents who are preventing their children from maturing and learning, because they are 1. convinced that their children are over-worked geniuses,  2. convinced that we are too obtuse to realize that we are over-working these geniuses, and 3. are therefore convinced they must "help" their students by doing homework for them, making excuses, and believing the lies their children tell about how overworked they are!

And then we have moronic bureaucrats (although Catholic schools have few in comparison to public ones) and administrators to handle and ignore!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 23, 2013, 08:55:39 AM
Was it Maritain who did the Latin translation of Œdipus Rex for Stravinsky?  Or do I misremember?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 23, 2013, 09:08:02 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 23, 2013, 08:55:39 AM
Was it Maritain who did the Latin translation of Œdipus Rex for Stravinsky?  Or do I misremember?

No, the historian (and Cardinal) Jean Danielou translated the text into Latin.  I have a multi-volume History of the Church which he helped to write and edit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 23, 2013, 09:08:43 AM
That's right;  just a mish-mash between my ears  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 23, 2013, 02:42:33 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 23, 2013, 09:08:43 AM
That's right;  just a mish-mash between my ears  :)

Blame it on French, a language similar to the scyphozoa when it comes to gelatinous pronunciation!  ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on December 28, 2013, 10:21:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 22, 2013, 04:55:46 AM
"Fearless Leader" has an education degree (the worst degree in America, next to Sociology  :D   )

Education schools are such a danger to education that they should all be closed immediately. People with doctorates in "education" should be banned from any involvement in education, until they do some real academic work. (People with actual PhD's in education might be considered on a case by case basis.) Despite the constant failure of their methods and theories, educrats never learn better. (http://www.friesian.com/public.htm)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 29, 2013, 03:33:31 AM
Quote from: Florestan on December 28, 2013, 10:21:31 AM
Education schools are such a danger to education that they should all be closed immediately. People with doctorates in "education" should be banned from any involvement in education, until they do some real academic work. (People with actual PhD's in education might be considered on a case by case basis.) Despite the constant failure of their methods and theories, educrats never learn better. (http://www.friesian.com/public.htm)

Florestan!  Thanks for the link to a most fascinating website!  And the sentiment above is in agreement with "Cato's Rule of Education #17" i.e. All educational bureaucrats should be fired and sent to do real work commensurate with their talents, like bagging groceries.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 29, 2013, 06:44:36 AM
At one point, I was considering becoming a teacher, and took courses at FIU's College of Education here in Miami, (This was somewhat over twenty years ago.)   I didn't follow through once I perceived the amount of bureaucratization that accumulated around public schools--at the state and local level, and not to forget the added input of the teacher's union, which merely increased the paperwork level.

But my experience of the College of Education was also not encouraging.  You may remember the quote attributed to George Bernard Shaw--those that can, do; those that can't teach (probably not the precise phrasing).  Well, consider what the quote implies about those who teach courses on how to teach, and you well get an excellent representation of the CoE.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 29, 2013, 07:23:38 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 29, 2013, 06:44:36 AM
At one point, I was considering becoming a teacher, and took courses at FIU's College of Education here in Miami, (This was somewhat over twenty years ago.)   I didn't follow through once I perceived the amount of bureaucratization that accumulated around public schools--at the state and local level, and not to forget the added input of the teacher's union, which merely increased the paperwork level.

... Well, consider what the quote implies about those who teach courses on how to teach, and you well get an excellent representation of the CoE.

One of the advantages of Catholic schools, or private schools in general, is the (in general) absence of bureaucrats trying to prove the necessity of their existence by giving you forms to fill out and reports to write, which they then file and believe that something has happened to improve education!

We have a few bureaucrats in my diocese: after 6 years here, not one has ever visited my classroom or those of my colleagues!

And teachers everywhere will agree that the most miserable courses they have ever taken were in the Education Department!  Worse, Education Departments have colluded with government bureaucrats to force teachers back into their classrooms every so often "to improve their skills."

And thereby to give bureaucrats more papers to file and also to fatten the bank accounts of the universities!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble + "That British Language"
Post by: Cato on December 31, 2013, 03:30:41 PM
So today we went to see a British movie called...


(http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/88/d6/88d6b45af6786ed7d9322639cd94e4d4.jpg?itok=tL5LK1da)

A large 30-something woman, bleached blond, well-candied and popcorned with a "smart phone" glued into her palm, plopped down next to us.  I feared she would be badly behaved, since she refused to turn off her "smart phone" during the previews.  Fortunately she eventually turned it off, so I did not need to cause an incident!   0:)

At the end of the movie, she leans over toward us and says:

"You must be British, or watch the BBC all the time!"   ??? ??? ???

I: "Oh?  Well, no, we are Ohioans and watch only a few shows from the BBC.  Why?"

She: "Because you really seemed to understand all that British language by the way you were laughing and nodding.  I couldn't understand what they were talking about most of the time!"

I: "Well, maybe if you watch the movie again, your ear will get attuned to everything."

Yes, what is it with "that British language" anyway?  :D ;) 0:)  Something needs to be done about it!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 31, 2013, 03:58:18 PM
Those damn Brits, why can't they speak English?!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 31, 2013, 04:14:59 PM
They do their level best!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: Cato on January 02, 2014, 04:51:13 AM
On commercial TV (yes, I know, stop watching it!   ;)   ) here in America there is a highly annoying jingle for an insurance company (Safe Auto), where some YouTube musical genius pronounces the company's name as "Safe Oddo."

No attempt is made to pronounce the "Au" correctly, and obviously the "T" just takes too much energy to hit properly.   :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 02, 2014, 05:15:23 AM
Grand Eft Oddo!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: aquablob on January 02, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 02, 2014, 04:51:13 AM
No attempt is made to pronounce the "Au" correctly, and obviously the "T" just takes too much energy to hit properly.   :(

Do unstressed T's pronounced as D's really bother you? They sound quite normal—even "proper"—to my (Midwestern) ears. I'd expect to hear "auTomobile" or "Harry PoTTer" from a Brit, but "auDomobile" and "Harry PoDDer" strike me as perfectly acceptable pronunciations in American English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: The Six on January 02, 2014, 11:02:28 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 02, 2014, 04:51:13 AM
No attempt is made to pronounce the "Au" correctly,

????
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: Cato on January 02, 2014, 11:23:52 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on January 02, 2014, 11:00:16 AM
Do unstressed T's pronounced as D's really bother you? They sound quite normal—even "proper"—to my (Midwestern) ears. I'd expect to hear "auTomobile" or "Harry PoTTer" from a Brit, but "auDomobile" and "Harry PoDDer" strike me as perfectly acceptable pronunciations in American English.

Yes: and to be sure, the "D" = "T" is becoming more common.  One used to hear a mid-level "T" in words such as "butter," where the double "T" was not yet a "D" sound.

Mrs. Cato says it is a losing battle: perhaps just part of the general slovenliness growing throughout the culture.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 02, 2014, 11:52:33 AM
Do they pronounce the T in nineteen but not in ninety?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: petrarch on January 02, 2014, 11:54:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 02, 2014, 11:23:52 AM
Mrs. Cato says it is a losing battle: perhaps just part of the general slovenliness growing throughout the culture.

Indeed a losing baddle! Upon first moving to the US, after living in the UK, Mrs. Petrarch and I had a significant amount of trouble being understood in the most mundane activities. Asking for a glass of wohTer at a café was invariably met with quizzical looks... We soon learned to adopt the more easily communicable wohdder.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: mn dave on January 02, 2014, 11:58:11 AM
Quote from: petrarch on January 02, 2014, 11:54:37 AM
Indeed a losing baddle! Upon first moving to the US, after living in the UK, Mrs. Petrarch and I had a significant amount of trouble being understood in the most mundane activities. Asking for a glass of wohTer at a café was invariably met with quizzical looks... We soon learned to adopt the more easily communicable wohdder.

Forget about country to country, pronunciation varies from county to county.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: petrarch on January 02, 2014, 12:12:15 PM
Quote from: mn dave on January 02, 2014, 11:58:11 AM
Forget about country to country, pronunciation varies from county to county.

Yes, it is worth noting that this was in NYC. Another interesting contrast was how quietly we spoke, contributing to the confusion. And here's another infuriating habit in these lands: "Thank you" Reply: "Mmm-mm".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 02, 2014, 12:14:18 PM
That is certainly grumble-worthy  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on January 02, 2014, 02:39:53 PM
This I've never understood.

Mmm-hmm is a casual way of saying you're welcome, and that's been the case for some time now.

Granted, context matters, and if the mmm-hmm comes with an eye-roll or some other body language that clearly signals impatience or annoyance, then sure, be offended. But if a stranger has already done something kind enough to warrant a passing thank-you (like holding a door open), isn't it a bit prim to get one's feathers ruffled over what is now a standard reply, even though you don't like it? (Or is it the inflection you're criticizing? That I understand, but I'd group it with body language at the top of this paragraph, and I still insist that mmm-hmm is typically intended as a casual but not impolite you're welcome.)

I've even heard people grumble about a friendly no problem or sure thing. I hope they aren't the same people who grumble about this generation's sense of entitlement.

In many places, you're welcome simply has a formal or stodgy ring to it these days. That's why it's often avoided in casual contexts, and the alternatives aren't inherently rude.

Of course, there are two sides to "rude": the intention of the actor and the eyes and ears of the beholder. But shouldn't the beholder consider the actor's intention? If you don't like mmm-hmm but know that people who use it aren't trying to be rude, shouldn't you give them the benefit of the doubt and grumble over something less trivial? I mean, somebody is wrong on the internet at this very moment!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: petrarch on January 02, 2014, 04:04:48 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on January 02, 2014, 02:39:53 PM
This I've never understood.

Mmm-hmm is a casual way of saying you're welcome, and that's been the case for some time now.

Granted, context matters, and if the mmm-hmm comes with an eye-roll or some other body language that clearly signals impatience or annoyance, then sure, be offended. But if a stranger has already done something kind enough to warrant a passing thank-you (like holding a door open), isn't it a bit prim to get one's feathers ruffled over what is now a standard reply, even though you don't like it? (Or is it the inflection you're criticizing? That I understand, but I'd group it with body language at the top of this paragraph, and I still insist that mmm-hmm is typically intended as a casual but not impolite you're welcome.)

I've even heard people grumble about a friendly no problem or sure thing. I hope they aren't the same people who grumble about this generation's sense of entitlement.

In many places, you're welcome simply has a formal or stodgy ring to it these days. That's why it's often avoided in casual contexts, and the alternatives aren't inherently rude.

Of course, there are two sides to "rude": the intention of the actor and the eyes and ears of the beholder. But shouldn't the beholder consider the actor's intention? If you don't like mmm-hmm but know that people who use it aren't trying to be rude, shouldn't you give them the benefit of the doubt and grumble over something less trivial? I mean, somebody is wrong on the internet at this very moment!

I know it is an informal way of saying you're welcome, though it took some time to understand that was the intention, based on how common it was (though that commonality did not extend to any other countries I have visited or lived in, hence the surprise).

I'm sorry, but if I am at a restaurant and I thank the the server or host I definitely do not expect an informal reply, and this (or similar situations) is where I frequently encountered it.

I understand there is no intended rudeness; it does smack of lack of care, effort and attention, and that is what makes it infuriating.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 02, 2014, 04:26:33 PM
Quote from: petrarch on January 02, 2014, 04:04:48 PM
I know it is an informal way of saying you're welcome, though it took some time to understand that was the intention, based on how common it was (though that commonality did not extend to any other countries I have visited or lived in, hence the surprise).

I'm sorry, but if I am at a restaurant and I thank the the server or host I definitely do not expect an informal reply, and this (or similar situations) is where I frequently encountered it.

I understand there is no intended rudeness; it does smack of lack of care, effort and attention, and that is what makes it infuriating.

Yes, it seems dismissive: "I don't have the time or energy to respond properly."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: The Six on January 02, 2014, 05:09:04 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 02, 2014, 11:23:52 AM
Yes: and to be sure, the "D" = "T" is becoming more common.  One used to hear a mid-level "T" in words such as "butter," where the double "T" was not yet a "D" sound.


That's a shiddy way to talk.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 02, 2014, 05:24:01 PM
Quote from: The Six on January 02, 2014, 05:09:04 PM
That's a shiddy way to talk.

Don't you wish it were otherwise?   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What's an "Oddo" ?
Post by: kishnevi on January 02, 2014, 06:21:36 PM
Quote from: petrarch on January 02, 2014, 12:12:15 PM
Yes, it is worth noting that this was in NYC. Another interesting contrast was how quietly we spoke, contributing to the confusion. And here's another infuriating habit in these lands: "Thank you" Reply: "Mmm-mm".

I've always associated the D instead of T as signaling Brooklyn-Bronxian origin.  Though indeed I never heard anyone talk about going to a New York Meds game.  But like many New York memes, it perhaps doesn't go down as smooth as buddah  in other places.

As for "mm-mm", I've always thought of it being used (and sometimes use it myself) as a sort of genial agreement when the person doing the agreeing is focused on some other task (as in,  "Yes, you're right, but if you don't mind I'm trying to make sure this coffee pours into the cup and not onto your lap" or "Yes, you're right,  but if you don't mind I'm trying to make sure this bit of wiring gets done right so you don't get electrocuted when you try to turn on the lamp.")   When not in that situation--it just suggest the person doing the "mm-mm" is not really interested in you or whatever you have to say.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on January 02, 2014, 06:23:10 PM
Quote from: petrarch on January 02, 2014, 04:04:48 PM
I'm sorry, but if I am at a restaurant and I thank the the server or host I definitely do not expect an informal reply, and this (or similar situations) is where I frequently encountered it.

Okay, we're in agreement here. Again, context matters, and certainly a server at a restaurant should go the formal route.

In the past when I've heard this particular grumble the situation described has typically been more of the stranger-holding-a-door-open variety. That kind of informal setting is what I had in mind.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 03, 2014, 12:54:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 29, 2013, 03:33:31 AM
Florestan!  Thanks for the link to a most fascinating website!

Mmm-mm.  :D ;D

Yes, the website is great.

http://www.friesian.com/decdenc1.htm (http://www.friesian.com/decdenc1.htm)

http://www.friesian.com/decdenc2.htm (http://www.friesian.com/decdenc2.htm)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 06, 2014, 06:01:15 AM
I told you guys it was coming! "Because" has been voted the Word of the Year by the American Dialect Society!

http://www.americandialect.org/because-is-the-2013-word-of-the-year

Quote"This past year, the very old word because exploded with new grammatical possibilities in informal online use," Zimmer said. "No longer does because have to be followed by of or a full clause. Now one often sees tersely worded rationales like 'because science' or 'because reasons.' You might not go to a party 'because tired.' As one supporter put it, because should be Word of the Year 'because useful!'"

Take that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mn dave on January 06, 2014, 06:02:35 AM
Because lazy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 06, 2014, 06:30:20 AM
Quote from: mn dave on January 06, 2014, 06:02:35 AM
Because lazy.

You forgot to add "morons" after "lazy."

My head hurts!   ;)   Because!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 06, 2014, 06:39:42 AM
Quote from: mn dave on January 06, 2014, 06:02:35 AM
Because lazy.

You could say the same about contractions. Casual speech is all about convenience.

Quote from: Cato on January 06, 2014, 06:30:20 AM
You forgot to add "morons" after "lazy."

Looks like someone feels threatened!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mn dave on January 06, 2014, 06:47:52 AM
Quote from: The Six on January 06, 2014, 06:39:42 AM
You could say the same about contractions. Casual speech is all about convenience.

Totes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: douglasofdorset on January 06, 2014, 08:18:41 AM
My father (British) married an American (my mother) and caused great amusement among his in-laws when he first went to the States, specially because (or so he always said) he used to mix up "unh-hunh" ('yes') and "unh - unh" ('no') [glottal stop after each syllable]. He could never remember which was which!   :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 06, 2014, 08:37:07 AM
Quote from: The Six on January 06, 2014, 06:39:42 AM
Y cld sy th sm bt cntrctns. Csl spch s ll bt cnvnnc.

Lks lk smn fls thtnd!

Vwls r ovrrtd

dnt nd thm
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on January 06, 2014, 10:51:30 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 06, 2014, 08:37:07 AM
Vwls r ovrrtd

dnt nd thm

There's nothing convenient about disemvowelment, for writer or reader.

Because reasons.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 06, 2014, 10:57:52 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on January 06, 2014, 10:51:30 AM
There's nothing convenient about disemvowelment, for writer or reader.

Because reasons.

:D  Nice word! 

If you dropped its consonants, you would have "ieoee" !

Probably somebody has invented a game where you have the vowels (in order) for a word or words, and need to supply the consonants!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on January 06, 2014, 11:13:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 06, 2014, 10:57:52 AM
:D  Nice word! 

Wish I could claim it! http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disemvowel

Quote from: Cato on January 06, 2014, 10:57:52 AM
If you dropped its consonants, you would have "ieoee" !

Dropping the consonants—what should we call that? Dissonance?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 06, 2014, 12:26:38 PM
Hvae you nticeod taht mssiplleigns in the mddlie of wrods dno't darsctlliy dceraese radeelbity?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 06, 2014, 12:37:50 PM
Quote from: North Star on January 06, 2014, 12:26:38 PM
Hvae you nticeod taht mssiplleigns in the mddlie of wrods dno't darsctlliy dceraese radeelbity?

On.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 06, 2014, 12:44:35 PM
Quote from: The Six on January 06, 2014, 12:37:50 PM
On.
Waht prat of mddlie did you not udnsrentad?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 06, 2014, 04:19:07 PM
Quote from: North Star on January 06, 2014, 12:44:35 PM
Waht prat of mddlie did you not udnsrentad?

Ho.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 06, 2014, 05:25:32 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 06, 2014, 08:37:07 AM
Vwls r ovrrtd

dnt nd thm

Hebrew and Arabic are often written/printed without vowels (it is in fact the preferred form for Hebrew books);  in the case of Hebrew at least (not sure about Arabic) vowel signs (under, over or after the consonant) are a relatively new fangled invention,  from the very early medieval period (meaning about 600-900CE), and Torah scrolls and other manuscripts used for ritual purposes do not have vowels.  There has developed a system of inserting certain consonants (mainly vav and yod) to indicate certain vowels, and two consonants are effectively place holders for vowels (aleph and ayin).   (Thus CaTo would be probably be written CTV, with the V(vov) being a placeholder for the 'o' vowel.  In cases where different vowels can lead to different meanings, context or memory of Biblical texts usually comes to the aid of the reader.   (DeNT NoD THeM or DoNT NeeD Them?)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 07, 2014, 10:35:07 AM
The pronouncing of Ts as Ds is nothing new. It's possible a certain company here has never pronounced its name correctly...


http://www.youtube.com/v/YC6ErD7KRyc
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 13, 2014, 04:40:50 PM
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/b880a53e0050730d6c57ea33dcc84673/tumblr_my27rcHZ2B1qil3kvo1_1280.png)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on January 13, 2014, 05:35:10 PM
Ken M is an excellent troll.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on January 30, 2014, 12:17:09 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on January 13, 2014, 05:35:10 PM
Ken M is an excellent troll.

There's trolling... and there's gently poking fun at po-faced members, who don't realise they're having fun poked at them - very funny.

Anyway, the real point of the message was to have a grumble about Microsoft's "Smart Quotes" - which most of the time are very smart (converting the straight single- and double-quotes to the curly ones, Alt-145 to 148 inclusive).  But how to stop Word getting it wrong with archaic contractions like 'tis, 'twas, 'twould etc.?  The software sees a quote with a word immediately following it and puts in an open-quote (Alt-145), when what I want is a close-quote, an apostrophe to indicate contraction/omission, Alt-146.  Even doing a search for Alt-145 and replace with Alt-146 doesn't work, as the smart function intervenes and puts it "right" for you instantaneously.  Short of turning off smart quotes completely, does anyone know an automatic way around this one?

DF
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 30, 2014, 05:24:46 AM
Thank you for grumbling about that! :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 30, 2014, 05:59:06 AM
Quote from: DaveF on January 30, 2014, 12:17:09 AM
.  Short of turning off smart quotes completely, does anyone know an automatic way around this one?

DF

Over-riding a program, or evading its "thought" process, is difficult, as we all know, but at times not impossible.

I will check with my Mathematician/Computer Scientist son about this tonight, if nobody else has solved it by then.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 30, 2014, 06:04:45 AM
My last 2 versions of Word (2003 & 2010) both put a tiny mark, a sort of little line, next to where they have made a 'smart' correction. If you click on it, there is a short menu that says 'undo the smart correction', 'stop making this smart correction', or smart properties. So you can choose from the list at each instance. It isn't automatic, I know, but the instances of needing it must be rather uncommon, yes? If not, I would simply choose 'stop making this correction'. :)

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on January 31, 2014, 08:17:41 AM
My old 1998 version gave up on correcting when I insisted. The most annoying 'correction' was converting to upper case after ? or ! when small case is required, i.e. when the tone indicator replaces a comma, colon or semi-colon.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 31, 2014, 08:20:43 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on January 31, 2014, 08:17:41 AM
My old 1998 version gave up on correcting when I insisted. The most annoying 'correction' was converting to upper case after ? or ! when small case is required, i.e. when the tone indicator replaces a comma, colon or semi-colon.
Where? does that happen? I must have seen this use somewhere, but can't think of an example at the moment.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on January 31, 2014, 12:18:58 PM
Thanks for all the thoughts, folks.

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on January 30, 2014, 06:04:45 AM
My last 2 versions of Word (2003 & 2010) both put a tiny mark, a sort of little line, next to where they have made a 'smart' correction.

I can't see it in 2013, to which I've recently upgraded.  I'll have a look at 2010 on the old laptop, when I have half-an-hour to spare to wait for it to boot up.

I think the "solution" is to do the smart search-and-replace on apostrophes (which I do a lot; I copy quite a lot of poetry and prose from websites for displays in the library where I work), then turn off "smart correction" and to a global search-and-replace on Alt-145 followed by lower-case t (which all these words seem to begin with), replacing with Alt-146.

Quote from: North Star on January 31, 2014, 08:20:43 AM
Where? does that happen? I must have seen this use somewhere, but can't think of an example at the moment.

I write like that quite a lot! because putting the exclamation mark at the end of the sentence would risk having the reader forget what I'd been exclaiming about in the first place.

DF
Title: A Conjugation for Cato
Post by: kishnevi on February 13, 2014, 05:11:32 PM
Seemed to be the best place to put this link.
Found via a friend's FB page.
http://imgur.com/r/latin/rO1PQmj
(http://i.imgur.com/rO1PQmj.png)

I suppose from the perspective of absolute accuracy, it should really be iolo, iolas, iolat
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 14, 2014, 05:27:04 AM
A mild orthographic grumble, that last.

Very nice!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on February 18, 2014, 12:24:27 PM
Here's a conversation an English learner posted between him and his teacher.

QuoteMe: When I was cooking dinner, she was reading a book.
Teacher: We can't use "WHEN" here because we can only use WHEN in a sentence when there are two actions in a sentence that happened at DIFFERENT TIMES.

What.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 18, 2014, 01:04:32 PM
Quote from: The Six on February 18, 2014, 12:24:27 PM
Here's a conversation an English learner posted between him and his teacher.

What.
When you're wrong, you're wrong.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 18, 2014, 01:29:27 PM
Quote from: North Star on February 18, 2014, 01:04:32 PM
When you're wrong, you're wrong.

:D  Amen!   0:)

As far as "Yolo" being Latin to equal "you only live once:"

Hmmm!

You
Only
Live
Once.

;)  What are the odds?   :D

Tell it to James Bond!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 26, 2014, 07:32:22 AM
Cringed a bit (well, more than a bit) as I overheard a co-worker say on the phone, "Literally, they will walk you through it . . . ."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 03, 2014, 10:30:35 AM
Quote from: North Star on January 31, 2014, 08:20:43 AM
Where? does that happen? I must have seen this use somewhere, but can't think of an example at the moment.

The commonest occurrence is in any hymnbook: Hark! the herald angels sing.

If you use colons and semicolons to separate connected sentences, it is bound to crop up from time to time.
Another instance is the list of questions, which would have been separated by commas with a final 'and' - not And!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 05, 2014, 03:46:55 PM
In a report on how Putin, everybody's favorite dictator these days, has hired lobbying firms in Washington D.C. to improve his image (and Russia's in general), a news reporter mentioned that the Putin regime hired a firm called Maslansky, whose specialty for this curious client was "language massaging."   ???   ;)

How exactly do you "massage" a phrase like "We have illegally invaded the Ukraine!"   ;)

Maybe you knead that nasty sentence into "We have protected Russians living in the Ukraine!"   8)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mookalafalas on March 06, 2014, 01:33:57 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 26, 2014, 07:32:22 AM
Cringed a bit (well, more than a bit) as I overheard a co-worker say on the phone, "Literally, they will walk you through it . . . ."

  Perhaps he's in the national guard and was talking about this weekend's minefield training session.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 08, 2014, 03:49:47 PM
"less well-versed"

A less badly written text would be a joy to read.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 17, 2014, 06:16:19 AM
Quote from: North Star on March 08, 2014, 03:49:47 PM
"less well-versed"

A less badly written text would be a joy to read.

Amen!

"SHOP LOCAL" is a campaign by the "local" Chamber of Commerce.  One also sees "BUY LOCAL" or "WE BUY LOCAL" at Sprawl-Mart.

Some people believe such signs should read:

(http://www.theamericanconservative.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/get-attachment-22.jpeg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on March 17, 2014, 09:27:55 AM
"Buy locally" is kind of awkward. It's very terse and direct, and not very good for a campaign. It's better to just assume that a word like "products" is left out on the end. Buy local goods
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 17, 2014, 10:30:40 AM
Or maybe "buy" is being used copulatively, and "local" modifies the subject.

"Buy in such a way that you are local!"

;D

I jest, of course, but it's actually not always clear whether an adjective or an adverb should follow a verb/noun. For instance, does one hold a camera vertical or vertically when snapping a "tall" photo? Does one slice steak thin or thinly? Those examples come from a short but interesting discussion of the subject here: http://books.google.com/books?id=n0IJ8GcdJ6IC&pg=PA77 (it's worth reading pp. 77–79)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 17, 2014, 10:31:36 AM
Oh, and Happy St. Paddy's Day.

http://paddynotpatty.com/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 17, 2014, 10:53:23 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on March 17, 2014, 10:31:36 AM
Oh, and Happy St. Paddy's Day.

http://paddynotpatty.com/

Heh-heh! 

I have been noticing that some of my (less talented and slovenly) students are saying the word "Latin" as if they lived in Liverpool   ??? ??? ??? ???  i.e. "La' in" with no "T" whatsoever!

Others contract away the "i" i.e. "Latn" where one hears a quasi-nasalized "n" at the end.  The "T" is there, but just barely.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 19, 2014, 02:08:17 PM
Does the overuse of the word "absolutely" drive anyone else as crazy as it does me?  I believe it should be used only in certain circumstances where enthusiasm or an overwhelming assertion of fact or agreement is intended to be conveyed.  Instead, it is now tendered so casually and often with little or no display of affect, it makes me suspicious of anyone who uses it.  I am absolutely weary of the word. >:( 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 19, 2014, 02:20:11 PM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 19, 2014, 02:08:17 PM
Does the overuse of the word "absolutely" drive anyone else as crazy as it does me?  I believe it should be used only in certain circumstances where enthusiasm or an overwhelming assertion of fact or agreement is intended to be conveyed.  Instead, it is now tendered so casually and often with little or no display of affect, it makes me suspicious of anyone who uses it.  I am absolutely weary of the word. >:(
Oh, most certainly.  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 19, 2014, 04:12:31 PM
Quote from: North Star on March 19, 2014, 02:20:11 PM
Oh, most certainly.  0:)

I could live with that.  At least for a while as a pleasant change.  I'm not the only one to be annoyed, see:  http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/wayoflife/07/14/absolutely/index.html?_s=PM:LIVING

And it's spreading to other languages as well, esp. Italian assolutamente!, according to my sources.  Let's hope they are using it with a little more expression.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 19, 2014, 04:47:20 PM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 19, 2014, 02:08:17 PM
Does the overuse of the word "absolutely" drive anyone else as crazy as it does me?  I believe it should be used only in certain circumstances where enthusiasm or an overwhelming assertion of fact or agreement is intended to be conveyed.  Instead, it is now tendered so casually and often with little or no display of affect, it makes me suspicious of anyone who uses it.  I am absolutely weary of the word. >:(

Yes!  It is ubiquitous on PBS cooking and home-improvement shows, especially those from the East Coast, and from the Canadian shows about buying houses or renting houses or fixing houses.

I do not intentionally watch these things, but my oldest son is hooked on them   ??? , and so when he visits, we are inundated with "Absolutely!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 19, 2014, 06:06:48 PM
It absolutely doesn't annoy me as much as two spaces after a period, you damn dirty typewriter nostalgics. I invited you all to the 21st century.

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2011/01/space_invaders.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on March 19, 2014, 06:22:10 PM
Whoops! I thought it was always two spaces. This will take me along to break that habit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on March 19, 2014, 06:38:03 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on March 19, 2014, 06:06:48 PM
It absolutely doesn't annoy me as much as two spaces after a period, you damn dirty typewriter nostalgics. I invited you all to the 21st century.

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2011/01/space_invaders.html

Two spaces after a period is a convention that was the rule of thumb for much of the twentieth century; it's a rule I learned when I first started to type forty years ago.   Like all conventions, it may be arbitrary, but the argument for abandoning it is equally arbitrary and based on nothing more than a bland good taste.  Moreover, it is not completely arbitrary, because a sentence is ideally one single complete thought, and double space after the period marks the end of the thought, while single spaces mark only the pauses we associate with commas, semi-colons, etc.   That is also the reason why a double space should come after a colon.  (A paragraph,  by the bye, is ideally a complete idea, which is why it should either start with an indentation or be followed by at least a single empty line.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 19, 2014, 07:33:51 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 19, 2014, 06:38:03 PM
Two spaces after a period is a convention that was the rule of thumb for much of the twentieth century; it's a rule I learned when I first started to type forty years ago.

That much I agree with.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 19, 2014, 06:38:03 PM
Like all conventions, it may be arbitrary,

Still with you, although I wouldn't say that the two-space convention was entirely arbitrary for typists during much of the twentieth century (does . this . kind . of . thing . ring . a . bell?).

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 19, 2014, 06:38:03 PM
but the argument for abandoning it is equally arbitrary and based on nothing more than a bland good taste.

The argument for abandoning it is that typographers and publishers have stuck with the one-space convention for some time, and nobody's still using machines that make the discrepant two-space convention necessary. An appeal to authority, yes, but I'm not saying this is how it must be—I'm saying this is how it is.

I grant that it's arbitrary and really doesn't matter in most contexts (e.g., on an online forum  ;) ). Yet I see no reason not to teach young people the industry standard now that monospace typewriters are a thing of the past. For the same reason, (American) students should be taught that a period or comma goes before a closing quotation mark, even when logic would suggest otherwise.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 19, 2014, 06:38:03 PM
Moreover, it is not completely arbitrary, because a sentence is ideally one single complete thought, and double space after the period marks the end of the thought, while single spaces mark only the pauses we associate with commas, semi-colons, etc.   That is also the reason why a double space should come after a colon.

Typographers and publishers don't see it that way, and neither do I. It's the period that "marks the end of the thought." Similarly, the colon doesn't need an extra space to convey its meaning.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 19, 2014, 06:38:03 PM
(A paragraph,  by the bye, is ideally a complete idea, which is why it should either start with an indentation or be followed by at least a single empty line.)

Can't argue with that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on March 19, 2014, 07:41:50 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on March 19, 2014, 07:33:51 PM

Typographers and publishers don't see it that way, and neither do I. It's the period that "marks the end of the thought." Similarly, the colon doesn't need an extra space to convey its meaning.


Double space after the period is an important cue to the eye.   For a convenient example, look at your own post--to the eye it looks like a single sentence that doesn't end until the paragraph ends.

Re: quotation marks after end of sentence punctuation--what you said should be the correct practice is how I was taught to do it in school, unless logic dictated otherwise (meaning, usually, a phrase or short quote which was set off inside the sentence by quotation marks).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 19, 2014, 08:15:37 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 19, 2014, 07:41:50 PM
Double space after the period is an important cue to the eye.   For a convenient example, look at your own post--to the eye it looks like a single sentence that doesn't end until the paragraph ends.

Maybe to your eye! But I think you're just "used to" the two-space convention. That said, do you have the same reaction when you pick up a book published within the last several decades? The one-space convention has been standard for a while now.

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 19, 2014, 07:41:50 PM
Re: quotation marks after end of sentence punctuation--what you said should be the correct practice is how I was taught to do it in school, unless logic dictated otherwise (meaning, usually, a phrase or short quote which was set off inside the sentence by quotation marks).

Well, again, all I can say is that American style guides, typographers, and publishers are virtually unanimous on this point—commas and periods come before the closing quotation mark, even where logic would dictate otherwise.

In any case, I'd like to clarify that I was only kidding around about being annoyed by two-spacers. And I certainly don't agree with the Slate author that two-spacing is "wrong." (But I wasn't kidding when I said that I think we should teach young people the industry standards.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2014, 06:14:09 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on March 19, 2014, 08:15:37 PM
Maybe to your eye! But I think you're just "used to" the two-space convention. That said, do you have the same reaction when you pick up a book published within the last several decades? The one-space convention has been standard for a while now.

Well, again, all I can say is that American style guides, typographers, and publishers are virtually unanimous on this point—commas and periods come before the closing quotation mark, even where logic would dictate otherwise.


Then follow the logic!

e.g. 

Harry said: "That man is a schmuck!"

What makes better sense if quoted directly?

Did you know that Harry said: "That man is a schmuck?"

Did you know that Harry said: "That man is a schmuck!" ?

Did you know that Harry said: "That man is a schmuck!?"

Or just avoid the issue!   0:)  Did you know Harry thinks that man is a schmuck?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 20, 2014, 07:38:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2014, 06:14:09 AM
Then follow the logic!

e.g. 

Harry said: "That man is a schmuck!"

What makes better sense if quoted directly?

Did you know that Harry said: "That man is a schmuck?"

Did you know that Harry said: "That man is a schmuck!" ?

Did you know that Harry said: "That man is a schmuck!?"

Or just avoid the issue!   0:)  Did you know Harry thinks that man is a schmuck?

I'll take "Harry thinks that man is a schmuck" for 2, Alex.

The convention is to follow the logic for all punctuation except for commas and periods, which come before the closing quotation mark regardless. Exclamation points, question marks, colons, semicolons, and interrobangs are handled according to logic.

The Chicago Manual of Style has a great example that yours reminded me of:

Quote
"Don't be absurd!" said Henry. "To say that 'I mean what I say' is the same as 'I say what I mean' is to be as confused as Alice at the Mad Hatter's tea party. You remember what the Hatter said to her: 'Not the same thing a bit! Why you might just as well say that "I see what I eat" is the same thing as "I eat what I see"!' "
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: EigenUser on March 20, 2014, 07:38:49 AM
Interesting thread. I can definitely sympathize with you here. At the same time I can't help but wonder if it is all part of the evolution of language that must be constantly taking place.

In any case, poor grammar can definitely be annoying. If anything, it shows a lack of care on the part of the speaker/writer.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2014, 08:02:41 AM
Quote from: DavidW on March 19, 2014, 06:22:10 PM
Whoops! I thought it was always two periods. This will take me along to break that habit.

Absolutely! ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 20, 2014, 08:19:29 AM
Quote from: EigenUser on March 20, 2014, 07:38:49 AM
Interesting thread. I can definitely sympathize with you here. At the same time I can't help but wonder if it is all part of the evolution of language that must be constantly taking place.

In any case, poor grammar can definitely be annoying. If anything, it shows a lack of care on the part of the speaker/writer.
Of course everything in the way language is used is a part of its evolution, but language has to be understandable to others and some fundamental rules are not to be disregarded at will.

Language must always change, for better or for worse. There is most certainly a difference between changes in language caused by journalists' incompetence or by authors inventing/popularizing words or their new meanings, though - but then again, penicillin was discovered by accident, too.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 20, 2014, 08:39:18 AM
Quote from: North Star on March 20, 2014, 08:19:29 AM
Of course everything in the way language is used is a part of its evolution, but language has to be understandable to others and some fundamental rules are not to be disregarded at will.

Language must always change, for better or for worse. There is most certainly a difference between changes in language caused by journalists' incompetence or by authors inventing/popularizing words or their new meanings, though - but then again, penicillin was discovered by accident, too.  ::)

Totes. Totes magotes.

In all seriousness, I agree with you. Language and writing certainly have a substantial artistic component, but they're not "just another art form." Communication is at the very heart of our big, interconnected, technologically advanced (and -advancing) society. For cold practical reasons, we need a literate populace and we need agreed-upon standards:

(http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ae/37/e2/ae37e2c98e04b59a4a33a7b863e21edf.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 20, 2014, 08:52:26 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on March 20, 2014, 08:39:18 AM
For cold practical reasons, we need a literate populace and we need agreed-upon standards:
Indeed.



Quote from: Cato on December 06, 2013, 06:47:51 AM
And used for any "obsession with swearing": whether an obsession is "involuntary," well...

For absolutely epic cursing, I am not sure this TV series has an equal!  :o :o :o
[Deadwood]

For an absolutely brilliant scene with the highest possible percentage of curse words (and lowest number of different words), I'm pretty sure nobody has bested this:
https://www.youtube.com/v/1lElf7D-An8
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 20, 2014, 08:54:43 AM
Dude, didn't I post that same clip? Great minds...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 20, 2014, 09:01:32 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on March 20, 2014, 08:54:43 AM
Dude, didn't I post that same clip? Great minds...
Hey, so you did. Oh well, it deserves to be posted twice.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 20, 2014, 09:12:09 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 20, 2014, 08:02:41 AM
Absolutely! ;)

You...you, absolutist! :'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 20, 2014, 09:15:00 AM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 20, 2014, 09:12:09 AM
You...you, absolutist! :'(
Absolutely!

(http://www.liquorlockerla.com/wp-content/uploads/Absolut-Vodka-80-Proof1.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2014, 09:21:44 AM
Tee-hee!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2014, 09:22:26 AM
Quote from: North Star on March 20, 2014, 09:15:00 AM
Absolutely!

(http://www.liquorlockerla.com/wp-content/uploads/Absolut-Vodka-80-Proof1.jpg)

When in doubt, blame the vodka!

I think that is a rule... somewhere!   8)

Many thanks for the comments: for The Wire excerpt, I will need (delicately) to experience that at home, and not in the classroom of my Catholic school!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 20, 2014, 09:29:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2014, 09:22:26 AM
When in doubt, blame the vodka!

I think that is a rule... somewhere!   8)

Many thanks for the comments: for The Wire excerpt, I will need (delicately) to experience that at home, and not in the classroom of my Catholic school!   0:)

It would be wise not to watch it there, especially with sound on.  0:)

You've forggoten where it is a rule? Could this be just a coincidence?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2014, 09:29:53 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2014, 09:22:26 AM
When in doubt, blame the vodka!

I think that is a rule... somewhere!   8)

Many thanks for the comments: for The Wire excerpt, I will need (delicately) to experience that at home, and not in the classroom of my Catholic school!   0:)

Tee-hee! II
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 20, 2014, 10:29:21 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2014, 09:22:26 AM
When in doubt, blame drink the vodka!

FTFY
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2014, 11:01:38 AM
Quote from: North Star on March 20, 2014, 09:29:24 AM
It would be wise not to watch it there, especially with sound on.  0:)

You've forgotten where it is a rule? Could this be just a coincidence?  ;)

Hmmm!   0:)

(Actually, even a small glass of wine is a rarity happening only every couple of years.)

And I am intrigued as to how The Wire excerpt could be worse than any episode of Deadwood!   ??? ??? ??? 

I will let you know!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2014, 11:17:47 AM
You don't mean it's denser of F-bombs than The Big Lebowski?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 20, 2014, 11:20:37 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 20, 2014, 11:17:47 AM
You don't mean it's denser of F-bombs than The Big Lebowski?
Deadwood or that scene from The Wire?
(the latter has maybe one word that doesn't begin with the letter f...)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2014, 02:21:04 PM
Quote from: North Star on March 20, 2014, 11:20:37 AM
Deadwood or that scene from The Wire?
(the latter has maybe one word that doesn't begin with the letter f...)

Okay: certainly the scene from The Wire is idiosyncratic - and just a little awkward now and then - in its "singular" use of the obscenity.   :laugh:

Keep in mind, however, that Deadwood had a character named Swearengen!   0:)

e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/v/VtObLJ1yXvU
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 21, 2014, 09:03:03 AM
Cross-post ;)

Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2014, 04:34:29 AM
Just spotted on the bulletin board outside the Music Teacher's Room:

RECORDER KARATE

??? ??? ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o :o :o :o

And then underneath: "Ode to Joy," "Oh Susannah," "Dvorak's Largo," "Three Blind Mice."

To quote W.C. Fields: "It baffles Science!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 21, 2014, 09:04:16 AM
And what I just read:

QuoteMassachusetts, who squares off against Tennessee [...], is only a shell of its
former self [....]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 21, 2014, 09:46:07 AM
QuoteMassachusetts, who squares off against Tennessee [...], is only a shell of its
former self [....]

So, how is everyone in Massachusetts feeling?  Maybe a little... empty?  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 21, 2014, 09:51:13 AM
Well, all the clams that have been chowdered are certainly only shells of their former self!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 21, 2014, 10:37:55 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 21, 2014, 09:51:13 AM
Well, all the clams that have been chowdered are certainly only shells of their former self!

They must have been Yale clams!   ??? ??? ??? ???

Chowderization would never happen to Hahvahd clams!

And what were Yale clams doing in Massachusetts?!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on March 22, 2014, 02:23:30 PM
QuoteSummary:Financial risk as an objective existence's risk that is the enterprise have to face to the realistic question in the course of management through finance.If the enterprise want to be victorious under increasingly fierce market competition situation that the financial risk prevent and control seems more and more important to it.From the corporation financial risk,this paper analyzes the present situation of enterprise financial risk as well as the reasons.In the end,the paper also puts forward the corporation financial risk prevention measures.

This is the kind of stuff I face in correcting papers from people learning English as a second language.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 22, 2014, 02:35:01 PM
Quote from: The Six on March 22, 2014, 02:23:30 PM
This is the kind of stuff I face in correcting papers from people learning English as a second language.

You should see the sentences from supposedly native-born American 7th and 8th Graders.  I have lost count how many times I have asked certain of my students, after I have read their sentences aloud to them: "Does that make sense?"  (And it doesn't!)

The scariest part comes when they shrug!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mookalafalas on March 22, 2014, 05:46:39 PM
Quote from: The Six on March 22, 2014, 02:23:30 PM
This is the kind of stuff I face in correcting papers from people learning English as a second language.

  Me too.  I teach ESL in Taiwan, and moonlight as a proofreader.  That example is the hardest kind to correct--you actually can figure out what they are trying to say. They are trying a high-brow approach, but it's beyond them, so to "fix" it you literally have to rewrite the whole sentence--translating it from sort-of-English to English.  When I taught in Korea it was often just word salad. I had no idea what they were trying to say. My students here in Taiwan haven't been exposed to academeze, so they write simple sentences with simple (although frequent and egregious) errors.  Unfortunately, they have no reasoning skills whatsoever :'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 27, 2014, 12:42:53 PM
From the Brian Ferneyhough "Plough" comes a blurb for the promotion of a CD with the composer's string quartets:

From the website for the new Arditti CD:

QuoteOn the occasion of its 40th anniversary (1974-2014), the Arditti Quartet, one of the most famous groups in contemporary music, has chosen to record, for the second time — and this is an occurrence sufficiently rare that it bears emphasizing —, the complete string quartets of Brian Ferneyhough. The pieces on these discs immediately weave an auditory spell and well illustrate this composer's brand of complexity, i.e., writing reputed to be unplayable for the instrumentalists but providing a definite pleasure for the listener, caught up in the headiness of a universe without limits or vanishing point.

(My emphasis above.)

So what say ye, Fellow Grumblers?  Do you understand the paragraph to mean that the "writing" is what is "caught up" - or is it the "listener" who is "caught up" - in that heady universe?

The comma would I believe throw the reference back to the "writing."  Is it possible they mean the listener is sent into that universe by the music?

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: John Copeland on March 27, 2014, 12:51:40 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2014, 12:42:53 PM
From the Brian Ferneyhough "Plough" comes a blurb for the promotion of a CD with the composer's string quartets:

From the website for the new Arditti CD:

(My emphasis above.)

So what say ye, Fellow Grumblers?  Do you understand the paragraph to mean that the "writing" is what is "caught up" - or is it the "listener" who is "caught up" - in that heady universe?

The comma would I believe throw the reference back to the "writing."  Is it possible they mean the listener is sent into that universe by the music?

>:(
That is dreadful.  The blurb writer clearly has his own Universes in collision.  His appraisal is badly written, badly punctuated, incomprehensible and nto vyre godo at lal.  What serious Arditti Qtt listener is interested in woven auditory spells?  The writers paragraph does well to illustrate his brand of complexity...

Thanks for posting that Leo, that kind of thing gets my goat up no edn.   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 27, 2014, 01:03:56 PM
Hmm, maybe it's referring to text before the first comma, i.e. ...illustrate this composer's brand of complexity caught up in the headiness of a universe without limits or vanishing point.

The first sentence isn't a lesser monstrosity, sporting more commas than there are in the Bodleian:
QuoteOn the occasion of its 40th anniversary (1974-2014), the Arditti Quartet, one of the most famous groups in contemporary music, has chosen to record, for the second time — and this is an occurrence sufficiently rare that it bears emphasizing —, the complete string quartets of Brian Ferneyhough.

I'd say that the writer was caught up in the headiness of their limitless pomposity.

Perhaps the treasures from this thread should be compiled in a Grammar Grumble book..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 27, 2014, 01:07:18 PM
Quote from: Scots John on March 27, 2014, 12:51:40 PM
>:(
That is dreadful.  The blurb writer clearly has his own Universes in Collision*.  His appraisal is badly written, badly punctuated, incomprehensible and nto vyre godo at lal.  What serious Arditti Qtt listener is interested in woven auditory spells?  The writers paragraph does well to illustrate his brand of complexity...

Thanks for posting that Leo, that kind of thing gets my goat up no edn.   :o

Heh-heh!  Sometimes the advertising people do go overboard... or the writer is just really enthusiastic about Ferneyhough String Quartets!

* Inside joke: thanks, Scots John!   0:)

Quote from: North Star on March 27, 2014, 01:03:56 PM
Hmm, maybe it's referring to text before the first comma, i.e. ...illustrate this composer's brand of complexity caught up in the headiness of a universe without limits or vanishing point.

The first sentence isn't a lesser monstrosity, sporting more commas than there are in the Bodleian:
I'd say that the writer was caught up in the headiness of their limitless pomposity.

Perhaps the treasures from this thread should be compiled in a Grammar Grumble book..

I never thought the Grammar Grumble would reach this many pages: is it the nature of our era to be ungrammatical?   0:)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 27, 2014, 01:21:00 PM
Quote from: North Star on March 27, 2014, 01:03:56 PM

I'd say that the writer was caught up in the headiness of their limitless pomposity.


I agree with North Star (as I always do) - the truly sad aspect of this is that I would bet the writer actually knew better but was "caught up..." in his own wordy web as North Star says.  The Arditti Q. deserves better.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 27, 2014, 01:23:06 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 27, 2014, 01:07:18 PM
I never thought the Grammar Grumble would reach this many pages: is it the nature of our era to be ungrammatical?   0:)
'Tis the nature of our era that everything anybody writes will be preserved on the Internet. And despite of the abundance of it, information is valued more than ever, at the cost of knowledge and wisdom.
Democracy and equality seem to exist more and more where it ought not, and vice versa.

Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on March 27, 2014, 01:21:00 PM
I agree with North Star (as I always do).
:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on March 27, 2014, 03:12:37 PM
I think it's supposed to be the listener that is "caught up..."—grammatically it's ambiguous, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 19, 2014, 07:37:58 AM
Through a tangent, I came across a reference to a "film-trailer composer" named Chris Field.

From Wikipedia I found this curious statement"

Quote"He learned how to compose music by in-putting compositions of Ludwig van Beethoven and Sergei Prokofiev into the computer."

How curious! And not just the "in-putting...into" !!!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 20, 2014, 06:22:08 PM
As reposted by someone on Facebook,  originally from a Twitterfeed,  some journalism from the Times.

Not the New York one, but the original one, the paper of papers, the Times of London.


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 20, 2014, 06:58:10 PM
Our MPs are just as bad.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on April 20, 2014, 07:35:20 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 20, 2014, 06:22:08 PM
As reposted by someone on Facebook,  originally from a Twitterfeed,  some journalism from the Times.

Not the New York one, but the original one, the paper of papers, the Times of London.

What is this error called? I see it so frequently nowadays, but I don't remember what it's called.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 21, 2014, 03:46:27 AM
Misplaced modifier, IIRC.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on April 21, 2014, 05:20:54 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 21, 2014, 03:46:27 AM
Misplaced modifier, IIRC.

Thanks, Karl. That's what I thought.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: douglasofdorset on April 22, 2014, 07:21:09 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 20, 2014, 06:22:08 PM
As reposted by someone on Facebook,  originally from a Twitterfeed,  some journalism from the Times.

Not the New York one, but the original one, the paper of papers, the Times of London.
I think it is intended to be humorous, but I would have to see the context to be sure. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 22, 2014, 08:42:24 AM
Quote from: douglasofdorset on April 22, 2014, 07:21:09 AM
I think it is intended to be humorous, but I would have to see the context to be sure. ;)

Almost too good, so yes, probably an error on purpose!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 22, 2014, 09:33:55 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 22, 2014, 08:42:24 AM
Almost too good, so yes, probably an error on purpose!  ;)
It is certainly deliberate, and droll. Notice the period on the middle. There is no way to rearrange either sentence alone to "unmisplace the modifier", hence there is no misplaced modifier. Aside from that no paper in un-PC enough to describe Vikings so.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 24, 2014, 05:33:55 AM
A deliciously incompetent comma found by chance via Google:

Quote from: The Way We WereMemories, may be beautiful and yet what's too painful to remember we simply choose to forget.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 24, 2014, 05:48:12 AM
Let's put it this way:

Memories

May be beautiful, and yet,
What's too painful to remember,
We simply choose to forget.


Nice little poem, ain't it?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 24, 2014, 05:54:49 AM
Content, B+
Rhythmic flow, C-

;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 24, 2014, 06:10:17 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 24, 2014, 05:54:49 AM
Content, B+
Rhythmic flow, C-

;)

You're absolutely right on rythm. How about this version?

Memories

May be beautiful, and yet,
What's too painful to remember,
We choose simply to forget.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Szykneij on April 24, 2014, 06:11:30 AM
Beautiful mem'ries
Too painful to remember
We choose to forget
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mn dave on April 24, 2014, 06:17:15 AM
MEMORIES!

PAAAAIN!

Ah, forget it!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 24, 2014, 06:25:48 AM
Quote from: mn dave on April 24, 2014, 06:17:15 AM
MEMORIES!

PAAAAIN!

Ah, forget it!

Exactly!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 24, 2014, 07:34:41 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 24, 2014, 05:48:12 AM
Let's put it this way:

Memories

May be beautiful, and yet,
What's too painful to remember,
We simply choose to forget.


Nice little poem, ain't it?  ;D
Hmm..

Memories
May be beautiful,
    and yet,
What's too painful to
    remember
We simply choose
    to forget
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 24, 2014, 07:37:45 AM
Excerpted from a listener's review, on Amazon, of the Stones' Let It Bleed:

QuoteThese two songs is one of the many reasons to buy this cd.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 24, 2014, 07:41:28 AM
Quote from: North Star on April 24, 2014, 07:34:41 AM
Memories
May be beautiful,
    and yet,
What's too painful to
    remember
We simply choose
    to forget


As a Romanian, I give this version an A-Okay as far as pure rythm is concerned.   8)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on April 24, 2014, 07:56:59 AM
Quote from: Szykneij on April 24, 2014, 06:11:30 AM
Beautiful mem'ries
Too painful to remember
We choose to forget


Haiku!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 25, 2014, 03:27:39 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on April 24, 2014, 07:56:59 AM
Haiku!

Gesundheit!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 25, 2014, 03:39:04 AM
Hah!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2014, 11:45:35 AM
From the Biography of The Beatles on Amazon:

QuoteThe story began in Harold Macmillan's "never had it so good" '50s Britain. It should be fiction: four teenagers with no more than eight O'Levels between them, running and biking and busing and busking all over Liverpool in search of new chords and old guitars and half-decent drum kit and any gig at all.  They were determined to amount to something – [....]

Curiously redolent of the Irish Sea, that O'Levels.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 16, 2014, 03:54:05 AM
So last night on comes a commercial for "Myrbetriq."  ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o :o :o

The first thing I thought of was:

(http://www.collectorsquest.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/mxyzptlk_comic.jpg)

This must be something from Mr. Mxyzptlk from The Fifth Dimension!

The commercial went on to detail that "Myrbetriq"  ??? ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o :o :o

is for a certain unpleasant condition below the waist.

Can drug names get any stupider?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on May 17, 2014, 07:29:25 AM
The American pronunciation of "mobile" sucks. "mo-bull" ugh. The Brits have this one right.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on May 19, 2014, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: The Six on May 17, 2014, 07:29:25 AM
The American pronunciation of "mobile" sucks. "mo-bull" ugh. The Brits have this one right.

Yeah, that song on Who's Next would sound alot different
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 22, 2014, 08:07:15 AM
Not that we look to politicians as exemplars of good English . . . As a Roman Catholic, the traditional teaching of my faith has not w​​avered.  That's simply wrong, isn't?--the initial phrase can only refer to the first-person possessive pronoun my.  Sloppy, sloppy.  But of course: typical of our politicians these days.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 28, 2014, 06:36:46 AM
"Trying to win the war of correct English usage is the labor of Sisyphus and would drive me over the edge. So I choose one battle at a time...." (http://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/The-Home-Forum/2014/0507/Attack-of-the-semicolons)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 28, 2014, 07:01:55 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 22, 2014, 08:07:15 AM
Not that we look to politicians as exemplars of good English . . . As a Roman Catholic, the traditional teaching of my faith has not w​​avered. That's simply wrong, isn't?--the initial phrase can only refer to the first-person possessive pronoun my.  Sloppy, sloppy.  But of course: typical of our politicians these days.

Yes, the As-clause modifies the subject, which is "the traditional teaching" and that makes no sense.

"I think you know what I'm trying to say!"   ;)

Quote from: karlhenning on May 28, 2014, 06:36:46 AM
"Trying to win the war of correct English usage is the labor of Sisyphus and would drive me over the edge. So I choose one battle at a time...." (http://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/The-Home-Forum/2014/0507/Attack-of-the-semicolons)

The field of Punctuation is full of landmines!

Praises to the professor!  The struggle does seem quixotic at times, and probably is quixotic. Nevertheless, we keep hoping things will at least stabilize in our aliterate* era.

* Referring to people who have rudimentary reading and writing skills, but who rarely read or write anything.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 28, 2014, 12:31:50 PM
Courtesy of my daughter: some of these seem just too good to be real, but...

Some very nasty words are used here and there:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/19-people-who-took-on-the-english-language-and-lost (http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/19-people-who-took-on-the-english-language-and-lost)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 28, 2014, 03:19:27 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 28, 2014, 12:31:50 PM
Courtesy of my daughter: some of these seem just too good to be real, but...

Some very nasty words are used here and there:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/19-people-who-took-on-the-english-language-and-lost (http://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/19-people-who-took-on-the-english-language-and-lost)

I'd rather go to a house that smells like incest than one that smells like incense.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 29, 2014, 02:16:44 PM
Quote from: Jay F on May 28, 2014, 03:19:27 PM
I'd rather go to a house that smells like incest...

So, okay, tell us!   ;)   What does that smell like?  Teen Spirit?   :o

Back to grumbling!

More and more, I dread correcting anything where my students must translate the Latin word (miles) for "soldier."

Because this is what I get from far too many of them (in order of preference):

Soilders

Soliders

Solders

Soligers

Soiljers

Soljers

??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

I have had them copy the word ten times, whenever they misspell it.  I have told them that unless the word "die" is in their spelling of "soldier," they have misspelled it: "A soldier can die, so that should help you remember it!"

Not one of them has been diagnosed as dyslexic or disabled in reading.  This group - like too many of their peers, from what I am hearing from other teachers elsewhere - just does not care to concentrate on and remember correct spelling.  Possibly this is the terrible result of txtng and twting.

Speaking of which, today I came across a reference to the heartbreak of chexting.   :P

This apparently is "cheating emotionally" on a spouse by "texting" one's ideas and feelings to someone of the opposite sex known only via Twitter or FaceBook or whatever.

"Chexting" has nothing to with breakfast cereal!   0:)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 29, 2014, 02:18:42 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 29, 2014, 02:16:44 PM
So, okay, tell us!   ;)   What does that smell like?  Teen Spirit?   :o

I understand that's got a smell of its own, one I probably wouldn't like any more than I do incense.  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 29, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
Quote from: Jay F on May 29, 2014, 02:18:42 PM
I understand that's got a smell of its own, one I probably wouldn't like any more than I do incense.  :P

You should be among adolescent boys these days in a school hallway after gym class: Clouds of "Axxe" are everywhere!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 29, 2014, 06:01:06 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 29, 2014, 02:16:44 PM
So, okay, tell us!   ;)   What does that smell like?  Teen Spirit?   :o

Back to grumbling!

More and more, I dread correcting anything where my students must translate the Latin word (miles) for "soldier."

Because this is what I get from far too many of them (in order of preference):

Soilders

Soliders

Solders

Soligers

Soiljers

Soljers

??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

I have had them copy the word ten times, whenever they misspell it.  I have told them that unless the word "die" is in their spelling of "soldier," they have misspelled it: "A soldier can die, so that should help you remember it!"

Not one of them has been diagnosed as dyslexic or disabled in reading.  This group - like too many of their peers, from what I am hearing from other teachers elsewhere - just does not care to concentrate on and remember correct spelling.  Possibly this is the terrible result of txtng and twting.

Speaking of which, today I came across a reference to the heartbreak of chexting.   :P

This apparently is "cheating emotionally" on a spouse by "texting" one's ideas and feelings to someone of the opposite sex known only via Twitter or FaceBook or whatever.

"Chexting" has nothing to with breakfast cereal!   0:)
You should give a break to those who spell it as solders.  At least solders is a word.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 29, 2014, 06:06:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 29, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
You should be among adolescent boys these days in a school hallway after gym class: Clouds of "Axxe" are everywhere!

I don't actually get asthma, so I'm not absolutely certain of this, but I think I get Axthma when I breathe Axe in.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 29, 2014, 06:12:50 PM
Quote from: Jay F on May 29, 2014, 06:06:34 PM
I don't actually get asthma, so I'm not absolutely certain of this, but I think I get Axthma when I breathe Axe in.

You have discovered a new disease!  Now you can sue the company and retire!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on May 29, 2014, 06:19:03 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 29, 2014, 06:12:50 PM
You have discovered a new disease!  Now you can sue the company and retire!  ;)

I've never experienced anything like it. I hardly even smell it by the time it's taken over my lungs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2014, 06:52:31 PM
Quote from: Jay F on May 29, 2014, 06:19:03 PM
I've never experienced anything like it. I hardly even smell it by the time it's taken over my lungs.

"Proof, your honor, of how insidious this terrible product is!  Forget the $100,000 lawsuit: it's now $1,000,000!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 30, 2014, 07:00:54 PM
Cato, how does one say Read this and weep?http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/police-launch-manhunt-after-men-open-fire-on-troopers-1-person-in-custody-so-far

Although I am curious how one impales a guardrail.  Usually it is the opposite.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 01, 2014, 02:24:45 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 30, 2014, 07:00:54 PM
Cato, how does one say Read this and weep?http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/police-launch-manhunt-after-men-open-fire-on-troopers-1-person-in-custody-so-far

Although I am curious how one impales a guardrail.  Usually it is the opposite.
I thought it said that the rifle impaled the guardrail.
"Authorities said two ISP troopers were in an unmarked squad car in the area when they noticed a suspicious-looking vehicle: a white 2002 Cadillac DTS. The troopers began to follow it without its overhead lights rotating."
Nice to know that the Cadillac had rotating overhead lights, even if they weren't in use..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 05, 2014, 01:32:34 AM
When some disease becomes epidemic, there is an epidemia. Or at least there ought to be..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 05, 2014, 04:23:02 AM
Quote from: North Star on June 05, 2014, 01:32:34 AM
When some disease becomes epidemic, there is an epidemia. Or at least there ought to be..

Amen!   0:)

My principal, a well-meaning 30-something, reads from the "lives of the Saints" every day over the P.A.

Today he read about "Saint Boniface," the latter being pronounced "Bahna Face."   ??? ??? ???

He tells us also that Saint Bahna Face met martyrdom in an area of southern Germany known as "Barbaria." ??? ??? ??? 0:) 0:) 0:)  (i.e. Bavaria)

Which I suppose it could have been called and made sense, given the martyrdom story!

Certainly northern Germans would agree with the mistake!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on June 05, 2014, 07:16:53 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 05, 2014, 04:23:02 AM
Amen!   0:)

My principal, a well-meaning 30-something, reads from the "lives of the Saints" every day over the P.A.

Today he read about "Saint Boniface," the latter being pronounced "Bahna Face."   ??? ??? ???

He tells us also that Saint Bahna Face met martyrdom in an area of southern Germany known as "Barbaria." ??? ??? ??? 0:) 0:) 0:)  (i.e. Bavaria)

Which I suppose it could have been called and made sense, given the martyrdom story!

Certainly northern Germans would agree with the mistake!   0:)

Conan the Bavarian.  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on June 05, 2014, 07:20:12 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 05, 2014, 04:23:02 AM
He tells us also that Saint Bahna Face met martyrdom in an area of southern Germany known as "Barbaria." ??? ??? ??? 0:) 0:) 0:)  (i.e. Bavaria)

Mrs. Rock, she of northern German ancestry, thinks Bavarians are barbarians. She'd approve of renaming the region  ;D

Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 05, 2014, 07:21:13 AM
The fictional foreign potentate with 320 wives (and who offers, IIRC, 12 goats in exchange for "Emma, Star of the East," to make 321) in the Avengers episode "Honey for the Prince" rules over "Barabia."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 05, 2014, 09:42:49 AM
Has anyone else here on this forum for music lovers (I was about to type "musical board" but then rethought! :P) noticed how many folks, even good writers who really should know better, misuse the word "crescendo"?  To wit, they say/write/type "reach a crescendo" or some such, as if crescendo meant a climax, which it does not? >:D $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 05, 2014, 09:49:23 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on June 05, 2014, 09:42:49 AM
Has anyone else here on this forum for music lovers (I was about to type "musical board" but then rethought! :P) noticed how many folks, even good writers who really should know better, misuse the word "crescendo"?  To wit, they say/write/type "reach a crescendo" or some such, as if crescendo meant a climax, which it does not? >:D $:)
We should use that phrase whenever things start to get (more and more) interesting..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 05, 2014, 09:52:35 AM
Quote from: North Star on June 05, 2014, 09:49:23 AM
We should use that phrase whenever things start to get (more and more) interesting..
...only if you want me to type
ARRRRRGH!!!
every time you do! :o :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 05, 2014, 10:00:35 AM
Happily, I see it seldom.  But it's always appalling, when I do see it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 06, 2014, 08:57:28 AM
"... an alumni" and "in it's production," from a journalist (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,404.msg807563.html#msg807563), if you please.

Quite a few of King's remarks are wonderful.  Christine as "a malevolent Happy Days" is brilliant.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 06, 2014, 09:14:10 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 06, 2014, 08:57:28 AM
"... an alumni" and "in it's production," from a journalist (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,404.msg807563.html#msg807563), if you please.
ARRRRRRRRGH!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 06, 2014, 09:53:35 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on June 06, 2014, 09:14:10 AM
ARRRRRRRRGH!!!
A crescendo of outrage.

>:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 06, 2014, 02:58:07 PM
Quote from: Ken B on June 06, 2014, 09:53:35 AM
A crescendo of outrage.

>:D
That would look like this:

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGHHH!!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 06, 2014, 06:06:34 PM
Quote from: North Star on June 06, 2014, 02:58:07 PM
That would look like this:

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGHHH!!!!
Thank you, Mr. Star. :) Indeed, your version is a proper crescendo.  Mine was outrage, pure and simple and unidynamic. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 07, 2014, 05:27:21 AM
On the CBS news this morning, a supposed group of musical geniuses from (of course) California, a group named Ka Wakan, played two boring "songs."

The singer, a 20-something with a Veronica Lake hairdo, mumbled her (fairly flat) way through a "song" whose "chorus" seemed like a jumble of syllables:

"La kaye nee uh joooo"  ??? ??? ???

Which translates as:

"Like I need you."   :o :o :o

A better name for the group: California Space Cadets!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 07, 2014, 09:57:56 AM
Yeah, those Californians and their "songs."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 07, 2014, 02:42:21 PM
Quote from: The Six on June 07, 2014, 09:57:56 AM
Yeah, those Californians and their "songs."

"  :D  "

Now these Californians rawked:

https://www.youtube.com/v/yY4UrdZOfJY
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 07, 2014, 05:57:56 PM
Yesterday while in Fort Lauderdale,  I noticed a store specializing in body armor, with various brand names emblazoned on its front.  One in particular drew my notice, because until I looked it up on line I could not believe someone would actually use it.
http://pointblankenterprises.com/paraclete/

The fact that the item in question is body armor only increases the bizarre factor;  I'd have the same reaction if I saw that brand name for pajamas or pineapple juice.   Perhaps the armor is so good it gives infallible protection?   (Perhaps they were just going back to the underlying meaning in Greek, which is, very roughly, "by one's side".)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 07, 2014, 09:33:56 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 07, 2014, 05:57:56 PM
Yesterday while in Fort Lauderdale,  I noticed a store specializing in body armor, with various brand names emblazoned on its front.  One in particular drew my notice, because until I looked it up on line I could not believe someone would actually use it.
http://pointblankenterprises.com/paraclete/

The fact that the item in question is body armor only increases the bizarre factor;  I'd have the same reaction if I saw that brand name for pajamas or pineapple juice.   Perhaps the armor is so good it gives infallible protection?   (Perhaps they were just going back to the underlying meaning in Greek, which is, very roughly, "by one's side".)

We live in interesting times.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 08, 2014, 04:54:13 AM
Quote from: Ken B on June 07, 2014, 09:33:56 PM
We live in interesting times.  ::)

I have written many times: Modern life cannot be satirized, because we live inside of a satire!  Life is now a Kafka story:

"I was walking by the body-armor store, when I noticed my 400-lb. neighbor coming out of the tattoo parlor."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 08, 2014, 09:09:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 08, 2014, 04:54:13 AM
I have written many times: Modern life cannot be satirized, because we live inside of a satire!  Life is now a Kafka story:

"I was walking by the body-armor store, when I noticed my 400-lb. neighbor coming out of the tattoo parlor."

One morning, as Gregor Samsa was waking up from anxious dreams, he discovered that he was covered in Paraclete body armor.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 08, 2014, 11:27:24 AM
Quote from: Ken B on June 08, 2014, 09:09:07 AM
One morning, as Gregor Samsa was waking up from anxious dreams, he discovered that he was covered in Paraclete body armor.

Becoming a cockroach might actually be a step up from that!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 09, 2014, 07:08:35 AM
(* Jeevesian cough (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,6347.msg808202.html#msg808202) *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 12, 2014, 05:35:16 AM
http://linguistics-research-digest.blogspot.nl/2014/03/the-truth-about-grammar-books-do-they.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 30, 2014, 10:24:01 AM
QuoteOscar Pistorius trial: Prosecutors worried that Pistorius would plead not guilty because "anxiety disorder."

I grieve to see the use of because downgraded in the byline of a newspaper article.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 30, 2014, 10:26:34 AM
Quote from: North Star on June 12, 2014, 05:35:16 AM
http://linguistics-research-digest.blogspot.nl/2014/03/the-truth-about-grammar-books-do-they.html

Most interesting, thank you!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 08, 2014, 05:54:01 AM
American television network CBS has a show it is hyping immensely, often a sign that it will be dreadful.

The title is Extant.

And you would think that Cato would endorse such a Latin-based word for the title!

The problem is that I find the pronunciation of the word "extant" used on the commercials completely false.  Never in my educational career here in Ohio have I heard a teacher say "ek-STANT" (second syllable rhymes with the insect "ant.").  Any time I have heard it - especially from classicists in the universities - it was pronounced "EX-tənt."

I know that the dictionaries hold both as correct - the latter (supposedly) being a British pronunciation.  Still, my ear will not release its bias.

Anyway, onward to something not debatable.

CBS (again!) reported about a recent roller coaster accident: "A roller coaster in California hits a tree   :o  and strands over 20 passengers!"

This sentence gives the impression that somehow the roller coaster flew off its track and into a tree!  Another station correctly reported the incident: "A nearby tree limb fell across a roller coaster and caused it to jam, stranding 20 passengers."

And at a Pepperidge Farm Bakery (a national chain) we saw this monstrosity:

"Sign Up for E-Mail Alerts:Please Print Legible!"   :o :o :o ::) ::) ::)

Two impulses seized me: first, to pull out my pen and correct the monstrosity, and then to follow the request and print "LEGIBLE" on the paper!   ;)

My wife pushed me out before I could cause an incident!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on July 08, 2014, 06:35:04 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 08, 2014, 05:54:01 AM
American television network CBS has a show it is hyping immensely, often a sign that it will be dreadful.

The title is Extant.

And you would think that Cato would endorse such a Latin-based word for the title!

The problem is that I find the pronunciation of the word "extant" used on the commercials completely false.  Never in my educational career here in Ohio have I heard a teacher say "ek-STANT" (second syllable rhymes with the insect "ant.").  Any time I have heard it - especially from classicists in the universities - it was pronounced "EX-tənt."

I know that the dictionaries hold both as correct - the latter (supposedly) being a British pronunciation.  Still, my ear will not release its bias.

Let them know. http://audienceservices.cbs.com/feedback/feedback.htm
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 08, 2014, 06:37:44 AM
Please adverb.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on July 08, 2014, 06:39:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 08, 2014, 05:54:01 AM
And at a Pepperidge Farm Bakery (a national chain) we saw this monstrosity:

"Sign Up for E-Mail Alerts:Please Print Legible!"   :o :o :o ::) ::) ::)

Two impulses seized me: first, to pull out my pen and correct the monstrosity, and then to follow the request and print "LEGIBLE" on the paper!   ;)

My wife pushed me out before I could cause an incident!   0:)

I edited a "less" that should have been a "fewer" on a sign in the elevator at my local supermarket. In response, the store replaced it with another copy of the sign. And yes, it still said "less," not "fewer."

I hate willful stupidity, though probably not as much as I hate "less" when it should be "fewer."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 08, 2014, 06:41:43 AM
Because stupidity.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on July 08, 2014, 06:56:18 AM
It.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 08, 2014, 08:03:03 AM
Quote from: Jay F on July 08, 2014, 06:39:03 AM
I edited a "less" that should have been a "fewer" on a sign in the elevator at my local supermarket. In response, the store replaced it with another copy of the sign. And yes, it still said "less," not "fewer."

I hate willful stupidity, though probably not as much as I hate "less" when it should be "fewer."

Also something that chews on the old ears!

Quote from: karlhenning on July 08, 2014, 06:41:43 AM
Because stupidity.

Sometimes the answer is "just because"...but not this time!  ;)  That headline writer needs to be horsewhipped!

But we are seeing the misuse or omission of prepositions ever more in our increasingly illiterate era, e.g. "I graduated high school," which mistake I find to be a reason for revoking the diploma!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on July 08, 2014, 01:22:27 PM
Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses? :(
Income
More Expenses
Loss
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 08, 2014, 01:43:42 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on July 08, 2014, 01:22:27 PM
Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses? :(
Income
More Expenses
Loss

Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on July 08, 2014, 01:54:20 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 08, 2014, 01:43:42 PM
Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   :P

I received an e-mail today that promised a look at "the most well-designed locales."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on July 08, 2014, 03:37:22 PM
Quote from: Jay F on July 08, 2014, 06:39:03 AM
I edited a "less" that should have been a "fewer" on a sign in the elevator at my local supermarket. In response, the store replaced it with another copy of the sign. And yes, it still said "less," not "fewer."

An arbitrary and useless distinction.


Quote from: Cato on July 08, 2014, 01:43:42 PM
Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   :P

Just shows what a mess English is. "More" can be easily added in front of any adjective.  If it were used all the time it would fit in nicely when using the opposite form (more high vs. less high).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 08, 2014, 06:04:54 PM
Quote from: The Six on July 08, 2014, 03:37:22 PM

Just shows what a mess English is. "More" can be easily added in front of any adjective.  If it were used all the time it would fit in nicely when using the opposite form (more high vs. less high).

Well, all languages are messes, more or less!   ;)

The music of "more" in front of a monosyllable tends to be clumsier than the "-er" suffix.

e.g. This strawberry is more big than this one.  vs.  This strawberry is bigger than this one.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 09, 2014, 04:44:49 AM
Quote from: Jay F on July 08, 2014, 01:54:20 PM
I received an e-mail today that promised a look at "the most well-designed locales."

. . . the most well laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
Gang aft agley . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on July 09, 2014, 10:47:45 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on July 08, 2014, 01:22:27 PM
Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses? :(
Income
More Expenses
Loss
The problem with 'deduct' is that it can have different meanings/shadings/usages and I think that could lead to (even more) misunderstandings.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on July 09, 2014, 10:52:21 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 09, 2014, 04:44:49 AM
. . . the most well laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
Gang aft agley . . . .

:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on July 09, 2014, 01:15:32 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on July 09, 2014, 10:47:45 AM
The problem with 'deduct' is that it can have different meanings/shadings/usages and I think that could lead to (even more) misunderstandings.

Maybe but it is better (more good?) than using less as a verb.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on July 10, 2014, 11:16:25 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on July 08, 2014, 01:22:27 PM
Sometimes usage is too general and cannot be changed. I've always been puzzled as to why accounts show:
Income
Less Expenses
Profit

rather than:
Income
Deduct Expenses
Profit

What if there were more expenses? :(
Income
More Expenses
Loss

expenses and profit can be negative numbers
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 10, 2014, 11:23:33 AM
I suppose, although normally negative profit is labeled loss  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on July 10, 2014, 11:33:06 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 10, 2014, 11:23:33 AM
I suppose, although normally negative profit is labeled loss  8)

yes but to be pedantic doesn't labeling a negative number as a loss mean that it is a profit?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on July 10, 2014, 11:36:21 AM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on July 10, 2014, 11:33:06 AM
yes but to be pedantic doesn't labeling a negative number as a loss mean that it is a profit?

I think you'd cause a furore in the board room!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 10, 2014, 11:39:34 AM
Interesting question!  I suppose in most contexts which I visualize that negative number represents the loss, rather than being an arithmetic negative operand upon a negative word.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on July 11, 2014, 08:53:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 08, 2014, 01:43:42 PM
Very good points!

Speaking of "more," I heard a local politician say "more high" today on the news, rather than "higher."   :P
If he was from Colorado, "more high" might be an appropriate descriptor for him. :o ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on July 11, 2014, 10:47:01 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on July 10, 2014, 11:36:21 AM
I think you'd cause a furore in the board room!

But not as much of a furor*  as would result from the use of imaginary numbers!


*NB.  Don't ever remember seeing the spelling used by Ten thumbs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 14, 2014, 10:05:31 AM
On those lines . . . headline at the on-line Christian Science Monitor:

QuoteGOP lambasts Obama's border funds request

I'm not imagining the e that is missing from lambastes, am I?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 14, 2014, 10:06:59 AM
Well, they must just be having a bad day. I also read:

QuoteUkrainina officials blamed rebels for the attack . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on July 14, 2014, 10:30:18 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 14, 2014, 10:05:31 AM
On those lines . . . headline at the on-line Christian Science Monitor:

I'm not imagining the e that is missing from lambastes, am I?

Lambast is given as an alternative spelling in some dictionaries. Gross.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on July 14, 2014, 10:43:16 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on July 14, 2014, 10:30:18 AM
Lambast is given as an alternative spelling in some dictionaries. Gross.

I've heard it pronounced with the second syllable sounding like the first in "bastard." I wanted to lambaste the speaker.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on July 14, 2014, 10:43:58 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on July 14, 2014, 10:30:18 AM
Lambast is given as an alternative spelling in some dictionaries. Gross.
Don't you mean grosse?  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on July 14, 2014, 08:28:12 PM
Große!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on July 15, 2014, 08:34:32 AM
Nothing beats announcing your ignorance to the world!

http://guff.com/amazing-tattoo-grammar-fails
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 15, 2014, 08:41:02 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on July 14, 2014, 10:30:18 AM
Lambast is given as an alternative spelling in some dictionaries. Gross.

Gross is right!  A gross error!  Time to find a new dictionary!

Tattoos, grammatical or otherwise, are an "epic failure" all by themselves.  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on July 15, 2014, 09:32:29 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 15, 2014, 08:41:02 AM
Gross is right!  A gross error!  Time to find a new dictionary!

Some dictionaries that list lambast as an alternative spelling are Oxford, Collins, Random House, and Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate. Not all of them indicate a preference for one spelling over the other. Funny—the generally more permissive American Heritage (5th) doesn't list lambast at all.

As is often the case, Bryan Garner's take is worth a read: http://books.google.com/books?id=mVcJqKs1isUC&pg=PA498
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 15, 2014, 11:18:49 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on July 15, 2014, 09:32:29 AM
Some dictionaries that list lambast as an alternative spelling are Oxford, Collins, Random House, and Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate. Not all of them indicate a preference for one spelling over the other. Funny—the generally more permissive American Heritage (5th) doesn't list lambast at all.

As is often the case, Bryan Garner's take is worth a read: http://books.google.com/books?id=mVcJqKs1isUC&pg=PA498

Well worth it, because he is correct!  Without the "e," you are catalyzing mispronunciations!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on July 15, 2014, 01:21:01 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 15, 2014, 11:18:49 AM
Well worth it, because he is correct!  Without the "e," you are catalyzing mispronunciations!
Or developement..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on July 15, 2014, 06:19:15 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 15, 2014, 11:18:49 AM
Well worth it, because he is correct!  Without the "e," you are catalyzing mispronunciations!
Lambaist.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on July 15, 2014, 06:31:00 PM
As long as you do not lambada.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on July 15, 2014, 06:58:11 PM
Quote from: Jay F on July 14, 2014, 10:43:16 AM
I've heard it pronounced with the second syllable sounding like the first in "bastard." I wanted to lambaste the speaker.
When I hear "lambaste," I tend to think of a Passover meal. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on July 16, 2014, 05:46:55 AM
Conversational Implicature!  No grumble here, but praise for a passage that may interest habitués of the Grammar Grumble.  It's from a widely used college text titled From Language to Communication by Donald G. Ellis. 

"When a communicator violates one of the maxims [for effective communication] and is not cooperative, he or she invites conversational implicature.  Generally speaking, a conversational implicature is an interpretive procedure that operates to figure out what is going on.  For example, the following conversation violates the relevancy submaxim.  Assume a husband and wife are getting ready to go out for the evening:

8.  Husband:  "How much longer will you be?"
9.  Wife:  "Mix yourself a drink."

To interpret the utterance in Sentence 9, the husband must go through a series of inferences based on principles that he knows the other speaker is using.  The husband assumes that the wife is being cooperative, even though she has violated the relevance principle.  Remaining topical is a key function of the relevancy maxim, and the wife has violated the expectation that conversationalists extend the topic...What is implicated in discourse is not logically entailed by the utterance, so implicatures are an important solution to problems that cannot be solved by a semantic theory principally concerned with truth conditions and entailment." (p. 78)  One of the great things about this book, besides its droll humor and brevity (at 169 pages, slim by college text standards) is that it fosters renewed appreciation for the complexity, variety and creativity of human discourse.  I think I'm going to read the whole thing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 16, 2014, 06:15:53 AM
Quote from: Ken B on July 15, 2014, 06:19:15 PM
Lambaist.

That would be one solution!   ;)

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on July 15, 2014, 06:31:00 PM
As long as you do not lambada.

Never!   8)

Quote from: jochanaan on July 15, 2014, 06:58:11 PM
When I hear "lambaste," I tend to think of a Passover meal. ;)

Well, somebody needed to tell that joke!   :laugh:

Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on July 16, 2014, 05:46:55 AM
Conversational Implicature!  No grumble here, but praise for a passage that may interest habitués of the Grammar Grumble.  It's from a widely used college text titled From Language to Communication by Donald G. Ellis. 

"When a communicator violates one of the maxims [for effective communication] and is not cooperative, he or she invites conversational implicature.  Generally speaking, a conversational implicature is an interpretive procedure that operates to figure out what is going on.  For example, the following conversation violates the relevancy submaxim.  Assume a husband and wife are getting ready to go out for the evening:

8.  Husband:  "How much longer will you be?"
9.  Wife:  "Mix yourself a drink."

To interpret the utterance in Sentence 9, the husband must go through a series of inferences based on principles that he knows the other speaker is using.... One of the great things about this book, besides its droll humor and brevity (at 169 pages, slim by college text standards) is that it fosters renewed appreciation for the complexity, variety and creativity of human discourse.  I think I'm going to read the whole thing.

Many thanks for the comment!

For the computer mavens out there, I wonder whether a computer would or could ever respond with something similar to the wife's comment.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Todd on July 17, 2014, 10:12:56 AM
https://www.youtube.com/v/8Gv0H-vPoDc
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 17, 2014, 10:35:25 AM
Great fun!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on July 17, 2014, 02:02:24 PM
This is a grammar thread, right?

Cato appréciera Karl.


>:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 17, 2014, 02:46:26 PM
Quote from: Todd on July 17, 2014, 10:12:56 AM
https://www.youtube.com/v/8Gv0H-vPoDc

Weird Al Yankovic remains one of America's great musicians!  :D

Nothing to do with grammar, but wait for Jack Black to appear, doing his Jack-Black thing!   :laugh:

https://www.youtube.com/v/XsWo8apgLys
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 14, 2014, 11:19:43 AM
First thing to know: the speaker was a Californian!   ??? ??? ???

So...the school-year started today with a "webinar," a word that makes me want to "reach for my revolver."*

During the presentation, the speaker shows us a sample page listing a fake family's name.

Then she says: "This sample shows a traditional family, where it lists mother and father.  But if you have more dynamic families in your school, then those can be tagged as well."   :o :o :o ::) ::) ::) :P :P :P

So a "dynamic" family can be one that is broken apart by divorce, or death, or prison time, or whatever?  "Non-traditional" is perhaps clumsier than "dynamic," but certainly it would be the correct term here.

Talk about a euphemism!   ;)

* Apparently Joseph Goebbels or Hermann Goering or other Nazi officials never said: "Whenever I hear the word 'culture,' I reach for my revolver!"  The line was found in a radical play from the 1930's by one Hanns Johst (q.v.).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 14, 2014, 11:21:52 AM
Take my euphemism. Please.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 14, 2014, 06:12:50 PM
QuoteHe's scoring at a ridiculous clip of 30 points per game

Since when did clip come to mean rate?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 14, 2014, 06:54:14 PM
Quote from: The Six on August 14, 2014, 06:12:50 PM
Since when did clip come to mean rate?
Quick Yahooing reveals no dates and of online dictionaries only Merriam Webster includes  a definition meaning rate or time,  but Oxford Dictionary describes "at a  clip" as US informal.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/at-a-clip
Perhaps someone subscribes to the OED or has access to a hard copy and can check the dates.
I confess that I have heard this usage for so many years I do not ever remember it as a novelty.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 15, 2014, 01:49:36 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 14, 2014, 06:54:14 PM
I confess that I have heard this usage for so many years I do not ever remember it as a novelty.

Indeed!  Though I nearly always hear it as "at a good clip."  So clip here implies some dispatch . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on August 15, 2014, 10:32:50 AM
Wu-Tang > Shakespeare

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/05/06/article-2621331-1D9C59BB00000578-804_964x565.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 15, 2014, 10:40:39 AM
When trbluf ha ya mikkoo ertph think?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Phrygian on August 15, 2014, 06:55:25 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2009, 05:00:18 PM
I have suffered far too long the slings and narrow-mindedness of outrageous morons mangling the English language!   $:)

Now Cato says: "Hold, enough!"  And undammed shall be the comments: let them flood in!

Cato is no doctrinaire scold: he will at times be inconsistent and contradictory in his grammar grumbles, since it is in the nature of languages to be so.  Yet ex cathedra will be his pronouncements!   0:)

My complaints shall arrive in no particular order, so let me just start, and you can see if you agree!

People trying to sound smart by using "I" all the time, even when it means it makes them wrong: the ubiquitous "just between you and I" is moronic.  "Between" is a preposition and therefore needs an object form, not a subject form.  Would you say "That package is for I" or "He stood in front of I" ? 

Then stop using "I" with the word "between" or any other preposition!!!    :P     8)    The script for the movie "Becoming Jane" contained the monstrosity "...by your father and I" at whose author the real Jane would have flung her inkpot, and maybe even that other pot in her chamber!   $:)

East Coasters and people on PBS using "Absolutely" instead of "Yes" drive me to the brink of pantocide!   >:D 
But I'll keep my shirt on!   :o 

People pronouncing the indefinite article "a" as if they were Canadians saying "eh?" make me want to throw bricks at nuns!   0:)  "That is eh very good book."  "This is eh book you must read."  Completely impossible pronunciation!   $:) 

It is the counterpart to "the = thee" being used in front of everything: "thee" for "the" is permissible only before vowels. 

Why are such things happening?  One can blame schools with hemidemisemiliterate teachers leading the ignorant into a perpetual wilderness of pseudo-educated ignorance.  One can blame a relativist society, where everyone is correct, especially in language, since aren't all grammar rules just "opinions" anyway?  Don't grammar rules stand in the way of personal expression and personal creativity?  Aren't grammar rules even perhaps ways to oppress people in the lower classes?   :o

The result of course is the growth of incoherence in private and public discourse, recent examples being past and present occupants of the White House in the last 20 years, Caroline Schlossberg and her infamous 99 "you knows" within 2 minutes of speaking, practically every "movie star" or "personality" jabbering on TV, etc.

Worse is the lack of music in their words: the most recent and risible public example was heard on January 20th in Washington D.C., a "poem" which was merely a concatenation of the most trite and unmusical syllables ever heard in decades. 

The lady's poetic license needs to be revoked!   :o

Another thing that drives Cato nutzoid are people referring to themselves in the 3rd person!    :o

So I will not really be doing that!   0:)

Feel free to list your own pet punctuation or pronunciation peeves: I will probably agree with you!

Clearly, Cato, you're a man after my own heart.  It's been enough to temporarily bring me out of my self-imposed message-boarding exile/hidey hole!!

I've just read this and the hilarious riposts to my husband and we've had a great laugh!!  You speak sense, sir, but language is in a constant state of flux.  Today we can use sentences without verbs and, because of this, sentences can and do start with "And" or even its horrific counterpart "But".  Conjunctions starting words?  Sheesh.

I watch old episodes of "Cops" when I want a good laugh and I notice all the cops ask, "Where do you live at?".  Who is this ubiquitous "At" when he's at home?  There's a strong element of group-think in these language behaviours, and its parturition is a an unholy alliance between ignorance and laziness, only a second cousin of'Lack of Enquiry and his formidable but ancient progenator, "I don't read".  Sounds like a line-up for the next Kentucky Derby, doesn't it?  Sired by 'I Don't Give a Damn' out of "Where's The Full Stop"!!

Your comments about relativism in society are apposite indeed.  I always used to say when I was teaching that we taught in the "Reader's Digest Education System - where every child wins a prize".  Trouble is, they're mostly worthless 'prizes'.

And, while I'm at it, please seek out and kill the person or persons who invented "Spellcheck".  The fate of civilization depends upon it!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 17, 2014, 07:09:07 PM
I actually learned some words from this.  (Score was 28 of 30).
But see if you spot the definition with a misspelled word.
http://www.playbuzz.com/jonb10/how-many-english-words-do-you-actually-know
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on August 17, 2014, 07:43:13 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 17, 2014, 07:09:07 PM
I actually learned some words from this.  (Score was 28 of 30).
But see if you spot the definition with a misspelled word.
http://www.playbuzz.com/jonb10/how-many-english-words-do-you-actually-know

I missed three. But I can't say what they are, as the page:

A. deliquesces or

B. evanesces

the original words.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 18, 2014, 10:58:34 AM
Saw this (O perdurable shame!) at the online Christian Science Monitor:

Quote[...] bent on proving that the Warren Commission was incorrect in its assessment of Oswald as the lone conspirator.

One man alone cannot be a conspirator, right?  A conspiracy implies more than a solitary individual, yes?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 18, 2014, 11:13:53 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 18, 2014, 10:58:34 AM
Saw this (O perdurable shame!) at the online Christian Science Monitor:

One man alone cannot be a conspirator, right?  A conspiracy implies more than a solitary individual, yes?

Copy editors were the first to go in the Great Purge following online publishing's takeover.

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on August 18, 2014, 12:27:15 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 17, 2014, 07:09:07 PM
I actually learned some words from this.  (Score was 28 of 30).
But see if you spot the definition with a misspelled word.
http://www.playbuzz.com/jonb10/how-many-english-words-do-you-actually-know

What fun!  And what's this "course, base, instinctive state of being"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Phrygian on August 18, 2014, 12:29:05 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 18, 2014, 10:58:34 AM
Saw this (O perdurable shame!) at the online Christian Science Monitor:

One man alone cannot be a conspirator, right?  A conspiracy implies more than a solitary individual, yes?

Yes, "lone conspirator" is actually an oxymoron (whereas Oswald was a moron!).  But it's possible to be a lone conspiracy theorist.

One of my 'favourite' solecisms is "if you feel ill go and lay down over there". 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on August 18, 2014, 09:09:59 PM
Speaking of solecisms... http://books.google.com/books?id=mVcJqKs1isUC&pg=PR51
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: listener on August 19, 2014, 04:41:28 AM
from a local suburban newspaper
The night will include pieces like Walton's "Façade Suite No. 2", Butterworth's "The Banks of Green Willow" and of course, Elgar's "cello concerto in E minor".

I'm sure those will be the actual pieces, not something 'like' them.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 19, 2014, 04:50:48 AM
Courtesy of our man in Lisbon: The vitriol that the single-space camp has toward the double-spacers these days is quite amazing, and typographers have made up an entire fake history to justify their position. (http://www.heracliteanriver.com/?p=324)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 19, 2014, 06:48:55 AM
Just checked my copy of Blackstone's Commentaries, a facsimile of the first edition from the 1760s, and can confirm the use of double spacing there. My facsimile of Shakespeare's First Folio uses mostly single spaces, but some double spaces, in the prose sections,  and sometimes no space at all; And in some places it uses a colon or semicolon followed by an upper case letter where modern practice would prescribe a period and no conjunctive word (see my example in this sentence.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 19, 2014, 07:27:17 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 19, 2014, 04:50:48 AM
Courtesy of our man in Lisbon: The vitriol that the single-space camp has toward the double-spacers these days is quite amazing, and typographers have made up an entire fake history to justify their position. (http://www.heracliteanriver.com/?p=324)
I was taught the old-fashioned way, to use two spaces after a period or a colon.  But I don't know how many Web sites automatically subtract that second space when I use it! ::) :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 19, 2014, 07:47:12 AM
This is the environment which treats "catalogue" as a spelling error :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on August 19, 2014, 07:53:21 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 19, 2014, 07:47:12 AM
This is the environment which treats "catalogue" as a spelling error :o

it damn sure is - this is 'Merica
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Gurn Blanston on August 19, 2014, 08:25:55 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on August 19, 2014, 07:27:17 AM
I was taught the old-fashioned way, to use two spaces after a period or a colon.  But I don't know how many Web sites automatically subtract that second space when I use it! ::) :P

I used 2 spaces back when I wrote with a typewriter. Somewhere early on in my computing days, I was informed it was unnecessary. I am pretty sure it had to do with proportional typefaces, although the exact reason eludes me. It was a long time ago...  :-\

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 20, 2014, 10:27:24 AM
There's a "he and me" in there (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,10511.msg823991.html#msg823991)Just saying . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 20, 2014, 10:29:57 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on August 19, 2014, 08:25:55 AM
I used 2 spaces back when I wrote with a typewriter. Somewhere early on in my computing days, I was informed it was unnecessary. I am pretty sure it had to do with proportional typefaces, although the exact reason eludes me. It was a long time ago...  :-\

8)

I'm damaged goods, typographically (or I feel a bit like it).  My habit (there, I did it again) when typing is double-space after periods/colons/semi-colons.  I rarely trouble to when "swyping" on either my Droid or Kindle.

Even at a keyboard, if I am composing a "tweet" (which is limited to 140 characters), I regretfully let go of that second space . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on August 20, 2014, 05:32:32 PM
I didn't learn touch typing until the computer era, so I've never double-spaced.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mookalafalas on August 21, 2014, 12:14:33 AM
Quote from: Jay F on August 20, 2014, 05:32:32 PM
I didn't learn touch typing until the computer era, so I've never double-spaced.

  I didn't know it had changed to single.  I always use double when typing formally.  I published an article in a book once where they wanted single space after periods. I think that is the only time I've ever done it that way.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 21, 2014, 07:35:23 AM
Quote from: Baklavaboy on August 21, 2014, 12:14:33 AM
  I didn't know it had changed to single.  I always use double when typing formally.  I published an article in a book once where they wanted single space after periods. I think that is the only time I've ever done it that way.
Nice.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 21, 2014, 02:26:18 PM
This is a new one.

QuoteWe provide Credit Tracker for our select consumer credit card members' at no additional charge.

Quote...the climate physics and recent observations tell me we will probably trigger the release of these vast carbon stores, dooming our kids' to a hothouse Earth.

Apostrophes can't really be this difficult to use properly, can they?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 21, 2014, 09:15:04 PM
Quote from: The Six on August 21, 2014, 02:26:18 PM


Apostrophes can't really be this difficult to use properly, can they?
Yes'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 22, 2014, 02:10:02 AM
I ca'nt believe this.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on September 01, 2014, 04:59:41 AM
Apostrophes can't really be this difficult to use properly, can they?
[/quote]

They are perhaps too easy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 06, 2014, 06:05:41 PM
Do people go gluten-free, or glu'n-free?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on September 07, 2014, 01:07:31 PM
Quote from: The Six on September 06, 2014, 06:05:41 PM
Do people go gluten-free, or glu'n-free?

They go gluon-free. Rather quarky if you ask me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 08, 2014, 06:06:48 AM
Quote from: The Christian Science MonitorRecent videos of Americans being beheaded and stolen images of nude celebrities call for Internet user to have better discernment on the easy choices in viewing such visuals.

At first, I found myself wishing simply that they had added the -s (call for Internet users to have).  Then I reached the end of the sentence, and the clunkiest use of visuals I've yet seen in a reputable periodical.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 08, 2014, 06:07:54 AM
It is an easy choice, though:  I don't look.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on September 08, 2014, 09:18:15 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 08, 2014, 06:07:54 AM
It is an easy choice, though:  I don't look.

Yup.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 08, 2014, 06:19:31 PM
QuoteWhat are your guys' friend codes?

This is another unfortunate quirk in the English language. The person meant "you guys' friend codes," asking for the codes of a bunch of people. The tendency to use the possessive "your' is incorrect here, but it somehow sounds more natural.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 09, 2014, 06:17:39 AM
Even sexier with a bad past participle:

Quote from: imdb.comChoosen by Empire Magazine as one of the 100 Sexiest Movie Stars in the world (#70) 2007.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 09, 2014, 06:25:41 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 08, 2014, 06:19:31 PM
This is another unfortunate quirk in the English language. The person meant "you guys' friend codes," asking for the codes of a bunch of people. The tendency to use the possessive "your' is incorrect here, but it somehow sounds more natural.
Pedantic perhaps but...
" You guys" is itself a colloquial expression, so how can one be ungrammatical in changing it?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 09, 2014, 06:26:34 AM
Y'all's got a point.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on September 09, 2014, 06:53:21 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 09, 2014, 06:25:41 AM
Pedantic perhaps but...
" You guys" is itself a colloquial expression, so how can one be ungrammatical in changing it?

You guyses'?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 09, 2014, 08:19:34 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 09, 2014, 06:26:34 AM
Y'all's got a point.
Apostrophe meltdown!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 09, 2014, 08:20:52 AM
An embarrassment of riches!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 09, 2014, 08:46:30 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 09, 2014, 06:25:41 AM
Pedantic perhaps but...
" You guys" is itself a colloquial expression, so how can one be ungrammatical in changing it?

Because "your guys" makes no sense. It changes the meaning of the question. "You guys" does make sense, and is not ungrammatical. It just sounds bad. People tend to think of "your" as being singular, so this brings to light the lack of a good plural possessive pronoun on English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 12, 2014, 05:47:21 PM
"On accident" is becoming more popular than "by accident," if it's not already. That fall of Western civilization is upon is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 12, 2014, 05:50:58 PM
Quote from: The Six on September 12, 2014, 05:47:21 PM
"On accident" is becoming more popular than "by accident," if it's not already. That fall of Western civilization is upon is.
As long as it does not happen by purpose.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on September 12, 2014, 06:06:30 PM
Quote from: The Six on September 12, 2014, 05:47:21 PM
"On accident" is becoming more popular than "by accident," if it's not already. That fall of Western civilization is upon is.

I said "on accident" when I was a child, thinking it was the opposite of "on purpose." My parents thought it was hysterical, and started saying it ironically. I wasn't a particularly ironic child, and eventually, I must have decided "on accident" was correct.

Nice to see the world has caught up.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on September 13, 2014, 06:43:03 PM
And why do so many people say "standing on line"?  I've always stood in lines if I had to... ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on September 13, 2014, 07:04:54 PM
Quote from: jochanaan on September 13, 2014, 06:43:03 PM
And why do so many people say "standing on line"?  I've always stood in lines if I had to... ???
It's a New York thing. I've always stood on line at the bank or the grocery store, since long before computers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on September 14, 2014, 04:59:06 AM
Quote from: The Six on September 12, 2014, 05:47:21 PM
"On accident" is becoming more popular than "by accident," if it's not already. That fall of Western civilization is upon is.

Hmmm.  I don't think I've ever heard "on accident", or seen it before this thread.  Just luck, I suppose.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 14, 2014, 06:16:48 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on September 14, 2014, 04:59:06 AM
Hmmm.  I don't think I've ever heard "on accident", or seen it before this thread.  Just luck, I suppose.

Very good luck!  I hear too many of my Catholic grade-school students using "on accident," undoubtedly viewed as the opposite of "on purpose" (as mentioned above).

Recent monstrosities (heard on the radio): "Stop on in at Charlie's today for blah blah blah!"

Three prepositions in a row?  Why not just say: "Stop by Charlie's today..."  ?   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 14, 2014, 06:25:29 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 14, 2014, 06:16:48 AM
Very good luck!  I hear too many of my Catholic grade-school students using "on accident," undoubtedly viewed as the opposite of "on purpose" (as mentioned above).

Recent monstrosities (heard on the radio): "Stop on in at Charlie's today for blah blah blah!"

Three prepositions in a row?  Why not just say: "Stop by Charlie's today..."  ?   :D
I think that there is Southernism, y'all.  Leastways, I reckon I have heard it used going on the last thirty years or so,  and it has a certain euphony when used with the proper drawl.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 14, 2014, 09:38:47 AM
"Come on in to Pete's Backyard BBQ" has a nice ring to it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 14, 2014, 10:06:09 AM
Come on in to at least get out of the rain.

Four.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 14, 2014, 10:14:54 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 14, 2014, 10:06:09 AM
Come on in to at least get out of the rain.

Four.
You could at least come out of the rain.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 14, 2014, 12:02:15 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 14, 2014, 10:06:09 AM
Come on in to at least get out of the rain.

Four.

We should have a contest!   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 25, 2014, 12:45:31 PM
"This is a suburb collection of the the full range of the 20th century [poetry]"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 26, 2014, 04:05:48 AM
Gah, I read a corker yesterday, but didn't make note . . . maybe I'll chance upon it again . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 29, 2014, 11:22:15 AM
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/ (http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/)

Yoohoo, Baklavaboy  ;) 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 29, 2014, 11:34:05 AM
The Apotheosis of the Turgid
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 29, 2014, 11:52:51 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 29, 2014, 11:22:15 AM
Yoohoo, Baklavaboy 
Quote from: karlhenning on September 29, 2014, 11:34:05 AM
The Apotheosis of the Turgid

:o :o :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? ??? :o ??? ???
:o :o :o :o :o ??? ??? ??? ??? :o ??? ???

:P :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NorthNYMark on September 29, 2014, 04:39:20 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 29, 2014, 11:22:15 AM
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/ (http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/)

Yoohoo, Baklavaboy  ;) 8)
This was a thought-provoking read. Thanks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 29, 2014, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 29, 2014, 11:22:15 AM
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/ (http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/)

Yoohoo, Baklavaboy  ;) 8)

The Zombie noun apocalypse.
I've encountered it outside academia, unfortunately.
At any rate, I've posted it to my FB page.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 29, 2014, 06:21:15 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 29, 2014, 11:22:15 AM
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/ (http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/)

Yoohoo, Baklavaboy  ;) 8)
A great article, thanks for posting, Ken.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on September 30, 2014, 09:28:49 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 29, 2014, 11:22:15 AM
http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/ (http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Academics-Writing-Stinks/148989/)
Well, not every academic is a Tolkien. :-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 30, 2014, 09:50:41 AM
Very true.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NorthNYMark on September 30, 2014, 10:06:34 AM
Of course, I don't entirely agree with the author: first, not all academic writing is aimed at a general audience, so the kind of explanations of terms he recommends would seem condescending in contexts where the audience is likely to understand the terminology; second (and more importantly, from my own perspective), he doesn't distinguish between bad writing and challenging, even difficult, writing.  Some of my most treasured reading experiences have involved writing that breaks almost all of his rules, including that of Judith Butler, his main negative example, not to mention other poststructuralist authors who specifically try to challenge the "classic" model of writing he takes for granted.  Sometimes, abstract, complex writing can convey things that concrete, straightforward writing cannot (much as in music or art, I believe).

That being said, his analysis was pretty thought-provoking, and could be helpful to keep in mind, especially when trying to write for non-specialized audiences.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 30, 2014, 10:20:51 AM
Einstein got it right, as usual.
Quote from: Albert Einsteineverything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 30, 2014, 10:40:27 AM
Many thanks for the Pinker article!

By chance, I have been wanting to link to a Wall Street Journal book review of one of Pinker's books, plus a book called Gwynne's Grammar and now have the opportunity to do so!

http://online.wsj.com/articles/book-review-gwynnes-grammar-by-n-m-gwynne-the-sense-of-style-by-steven-pinker-1411765107 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/book-review-gwynnes-grammar-by-n-m-gwynne-the-sense-of-style-by-steven-pinker-1411765107)

Some excerpts from the reviews by Joseph Epstein:

QuoteGrammar is not everybody's idea of a good time. Thanks to the remarkable inefficiencies of the Chicago public school system, I was able to steer happily clear of the subject until going off to college. Until then the entirety of my grammatical knowledge included beginning a sentence with a capital letter and ending it with a period and never using the word "ain't."... first learned grammar through instruction in French by a modest man named Philip Kolb, who I subsequently learned was the editor, in French, of the letters of Marcel Proust. Only later, gradually, did I pick up the rudiments of English grammar.

A sad comment: I do not know how old Mr. Epstein is, but education in America began to suffer to a great degree because of the idiocies rising up in the 1960's and later.

QuoteNot the least notable thing about "Gwynne's Grammar," the work of Neville Martin Gwynne, an English businessman and earlier an Etonian who went on to Oxford, is that it spent some time on best-seller lists in Britain. What makes this all the more extraordinary is that the book is a textbook, one with no pictures—"pictures in textbooks," Mr. Gwynne writes, "actually interfere with the learning process"—and with not the least wisp of dumbing-down in its composition...

If any criticism might be made of "Gwynne's Grammar," it might be about the extravagance of its author's promises. Mr. Gwynne holds that grammar is crucial to clear thinking, which may well be right. He also claims that "the rules [of grammar] always have a logic underpinning them," which, alas, isn't always the case. In a five-step syllogism, he contends that "grammar is the science of using words rightly, leading to thinking rightly, leading to deciding rightly, without which—as both common sense and experience show—happiness is impossible." Improvement in grammar, he also argues, unfailingly affects "both mind and character." All of which, as the English say, sounds like overegging the pudding.

QuoteMr. Pinker makes a useful distinction between formal and informal writing and speech and claims—who could dispute him?—that ours is an age of informality. He seeks to have academics write less woodenly, and especially less obscurely. Not inflexible in his rebellion, he often sensibly suggests staying with conventional usage lest one offend the easily enraged "gotcha" crowd by departing from it. He does not argue that anything goes but instead fills his readers in on the fact that they are already freer in their use of language than they might have thought. He wants them unfettered by hollow dicta. All this should be liberating.

Why, I wonder, isn't it, at least not for me? I would find making use of Mr. Pinker's loosening of the rules, as Robert Frost said of the writing of free verse, like playing tennis without a net. I feel a certain elegance in what I have been taught and still take to be correct English, and so, except when doing so results in a barbarous construction, I choose never to split an infinitive. I prefer not to end my sentences with prepositions because I have learned that the best-made sentences tend to close on strong words. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 30, 2014, 10:51:48 AM
A gross over-generalization, surely, of pictures, subjects, writers and readers. Unless Mr. Gwynne thinks interference can also be positive.  0:)
Quote from: Cato
Quote from: Epstein"pictures in textbooks," Mr. Gwynne writes, "actually interfere with the learning process"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 30, 2014, 11:47:44 AM
Just found on a website I sometimes read. A defender of the bible writes
QuoteJesus forever changed humanity. HE can make the blind man, see.
I think they were making blind men even earlier.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 30, 2014, 01:08:06 PM
Quote from: North Star on September 30, 2014, 10:51:48 AM
A gross over-generalization, surely, of pictures, subjects, writers and readers. Unless Mr. Gwynne thinks interference can also be positive.  0:)

Yes, I caught that!  I hope to see if he offers any research from brain scientists on that! 

I think it would depend on the number of pictures and other things.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 30, 2014, 01:11:55 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 30, 2014, 01:08:06 PM
Yes, I caught that!  I hope to see if he offers any research from brain scientists on that! 

I think it would depend on the number of pictures and other things.
Not to mention the fact that illustrations are vital in textbooks in some fields - e.g. geometry or anatomy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NorthNYMark on September 30, 2014, 02:07:23 PM
Quote from: North Star on September 30, 2014, 01:11:55 PM
Not to mention the fact that illustrations are vital in textbooks in some fields - e.g. geometry or anatomy.

Not to mention art history.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 30, 2014, 02:20:56 PM
Quote from: NorthNYMark on September 30, 2014, 02:07:23 PM
Not to mention art history.
Or chemistry, physics, biology, geography, statistics, architecture, engineering, etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 30, 2014, 06:20:41 PM
Quote from: North Star on September 30, 2014, 02:20:56 PM
Or chemistry, physics, biology, geography, statistics, architecture, engineering, etc.
Calligraphy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 30, 2014, 07:17:25 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 30, 2014, 06:20:41 PM
Calligraphy.
Nah, those books do just fine with only letters.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 30, 2014, 07:55:19 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 30, 2014, 10:40:27 AM
Many thanks for the Pinker article!

By chance, I have been wanting to link to a Wall Street Journal book review of one of Pinker's books, plus a book called Gwynne's Grammar and now have the opportunity to do so!

http://online.wsj.com/articles/book-review-gwynnes-grammar-by-n-m-gwynne-the-sense-of-style-by-steven-pinker-1411765107 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/book-review-gwynnes-grammar-by-n-m-gwynne-the-sense-of-style-by-steven-pinker-1411765107)

Some excerpts from the reviews by Joseph Epstein:

A sad comment: I do not know how old Mr. Epstein is, but education in America began to suffer to a great degree because of the idiocies rising up in the 1960's and later.

I learned grammar as a result of taking German in high school.  I was taught grammar as a normal part of "language arts" before then,  and used it in correct fashion, but the concepts never took root.
I would agree with Mr. Gwynne on the relationship of grammar and clear thinking, although perhaps grammar is not the parent, but rather the Siamese twin, of clear thinking.  The two go hand in hand.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 01, 2014, 03:36:56 AM
Likewise, my understanding of grammar improved by several orders of magnitude when I began to study French . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on October 01, 2014, 05:21:02 AM
Excellent article, Ken, thanks for posting.

All in all, Mr. Pinker owes me a keyboard, I spilled my beer over it more than once.  ;D

Quote from: Steven PinkerWhy should a profession that trades in words and dedicates itself to the transmission of knowledge so often turn out prose that is turgid, soggy, wooden, bloated, clumsy, obscure, unpleasant to read, and impossible to understand?

IIRC, it all originated with Hegel.  ;D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 01, 2014, 07:42:45 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 30, 2014, 07:55:19 PM
I learned grammar as a result of taking German in high school.  I was taught grammar as a normal part of "language arts" before then,  and used it in correct fashion, but the concepts never took root.
I would agree with Mr. Gwynne on the relationship of grammar and clear thinking, although perhaps grammar is not the parent, but rather the Siamese twin, of clear thinking.  The two go hand in hand.

As a foreign language teacher (German, Latin, Ancient Greek), I have often heard my students tell me: "I learn more about English here than in English class!"     0:)

Which also told me something about my colleagues in the English department!   ;)

And yes, I like the "Siamese twin" idea!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 01, 2014, 08:02:05 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 01, 2014, 07:42:45 AM
As a foreign language teacher (German, Latin, Ancient Greek), I have often heard my students tell me: "I learn more about English here than in English class!"     0:)

Which also told me something about my colleagues in the English department!   ;)

And yes, I like the "Siamese twin" idea!

I think it may actually be related to student's age.

Psychologists say there are actually important developments in how children and teenagers process information, and that it is only when they reach 13 or 14 that they obtain the ability to conceptualize the same way adults do: before that age learning is much more a process of accumulating discrete facts which a teacher or other adult can help bring together.   (I don't remember details, but consult educational psychology books if the topic interests you--of course being a teacher you may know this already!)

And 14 was the age at which I started learning German, while 12/13 was the age at which I last had formal instruction in "English grammar".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 01, 2014, 08:20:15 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 30, 2014, 07:55:19 PM
...I would agree with Mr. Gwynne on the relationship of grammar and clear thinking, although perhaps grammar is not the parent, but rather the Siamese twin, of clear thinking.  The two go hand in hand.
Neither parent nor twin, say I, but daughter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 03, 2014, 07:49:02 AM
Apostrophe catastrophe
QuotePolice say the student, who was 16 at the time, went to one of the teacher's apartments after a football game on September 12th
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 03, 2014, 09:18:49 AM
Quote from: North Star on October 03, 2014, 07:49:02 AM
Apostrophe catastrophe
QuotePolice say the student, who was 16 at the time, went to one of the teacher's apartments after a football game on September 12th
Why? A certain teacher has seven apartments. He uses a different one each day. The report says the student went to one of this teacher's apartments. My guess is it's the Friday apartment since 12 Sept was a Friday this year. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 03, 2014, 10:20:50 AM
Unintended hilarity from my rabbi in the form of a text message reminding everyone of tge time for Kol Nidre services tonight.
QuoteIf you aren't coming to Shul tonight, please be there at 6:30.

A corrected version went out about five minutes later.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 03, 2014, 12:53:01 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on October 03, 2014, 10:20:50 AM
Unintended hilarity from my rabbi in the form of a text message reminding everyone of tge time for Kol Nidre services tonight.
A corrected version went out about five minutes later.
As I was coming down the stair
I met a man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish that man would go away
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 03, 2014, 12:55:02 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 03, 2014, 09:18:49 AM

Why? A certain teacher has seven apartments. He uses a different one each day. The report says the student went to one of this teacher's apartments. My guess is it's the Friday apartment since 12 Sept was a Friday this year.
Or, it could be about two teachers having a threesome with the student (http://abc13.com/news/two-teachers-arrested-over-threesome-with-student/333435/).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 03, 2014, 05:55:38 PM
Quote from: North Star on October 03, 2014, 12:55:02 PM
Or, it could be about two teachers having a threesome with the student (http://abc13.com/news/two-teachers-arrested-over-threesome-with-student/333435/).
That still doesn't excuse the misplaced apostrophe.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 05, 2014, 09:25:58 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on October 03, 2014, 05:55:38 PM
That still doesn't excuse the misplaced apostrophe.
We have a winner! http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/more-grocers-apostrophes/ (http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/10/05/more-grocers-apostrophes/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 05, 2014, 12:37:11 PM
Quote from: jochanaan on October 03, 2014, 05:55:38 PM
That still doesn't excuse the misplaced apostrophe.
I posted it here in the first place, so obviously I agree.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 07, 2014, 09:04:04 AM
I just read this morning something about someone spending an "intricate amount of time" on something. :P ::) :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 07, 2014, 09:43:22 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on October 07, 2014, 09:04:04 AM
I just read this morning something about someone spending an "intricate amount of time" on something. :P ::) :P

Well, if you are a Time Traveler, I suppose things can become complicated and "intricate."   :D

At least they did not write that they "literally spent an infinite amount of time" on the project!   ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Adverb Love
Post by: Cato on October 08, 2014, 03:51:48 AM
From today's (October 8th) Wall Street Journal:

QuoteNo part of speech has had to put up with so much adversity as the adverb. The grammatical equivalent of cheap cologne or trans fat, the adverb is supposed to be used sparingly, if at all, to modify verbs, adjectives or other adverbs. As Stephen King succinctly put it: "The adverb is not your friend."

Not everybody, however, looks askance at the part of speech. Indeed, there is at least one place where the adverb not only flourishes but wields power—the American legal system...

Words such as "knowingly," "intentionally" and "recklessly," which deal with criminal intent, pop up most frequently, but plenty of other adverbs have enjoyed the spotlight. When the U.S. Supreme Court in June recognized religious protections of closely held companies, justices pondered the significance of an adverb in a 1993 federal statute that guards against laws that "substantially burden" the exercise of religion....

"Contrary to the ordinary view that adverbs are superfluous, law generally, and criminal law especially, emerges through its adverbs," James M. Donovan, a legal anthropology professor at the University of Kentucky College of Law, recently wrote in a paper on the subject.

Mr. Donovan, who runs the school's law library, said that he was immediately drawn to the subject after encountering Mr. King's "On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft" in a faculty reading group. "His blanket dismissal of the importance of adverbs got me uncomfortable," said Mr. Donovan, "but it took a while to articulate why."...

Unlike his peers, Justice Antonin Scalia is unapologetic. One legal linguist marveled at his "caustic exploitation" of adverbs in his opinions, which crackle with phrases like "blatantly misdescribes," "most tragically" and "judicially brainstormed."

According to a 2008 study by two scholars at the University of Oregon School of Law and Brigham Young University, lawyers who stuff so-call intensifier adverbs in their legal briefs—words such as "very," "obviously," "clearly," "absolutely" and "really"—are more likely to lose an appeal in court than attorneys who avoid those "weasel words," as Mr. Garner described them. But notably, the study found that the habit can actually work in a lawyer's favor if the presiding judge really likes to use those adverbs, too.


See:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/why-adverbs-maligned-by-many-flourish-in-the-american-legal-system-1412735402 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/why-adverbs-maligned-by-many-flourish-in-the-american-legal-system-1412735402)

And despite Cato's tepid bank account and lack of movie deals (in a sad contrast to Mr. King), he has no problem with adverbs: just use them correctly!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 08, 2014, 07:44:02 AM
In legal terminology, an adverb is less verbose than any equivalent phrasing, and expresses something necessary.

Consider: 
Cato intentionally dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.   (....with prior intention)
Cato recklessly dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.       (....with complete disregard of the consequences)
Cato negligently dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.   (.....without taking due care)
Cato accidentally dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.     (....by accident and no suggestion of not taking due care)

In all four cases Cato drops the laptop into the sewer.  But in two cases he ends up in jail for different periods of time, and in one case he may not even have to pay for the laptop.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 08, 2014, 07:52:46 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on October 08, 2014, 07:44:02 AM
In legal terminology, an adverb is less verbose than any equivalent phrasing, and expresses something necessary.

Consider: 
Cato intentionally dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.   (....with prior intention)
Cato recklessly dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.       (....with complete disregard of the consequences)
Cato negligently dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.   (.....without taking due care)
Cato accidentally dropped Mr. King's laptop into the sewer.     (....by accident and no suggestion of not taking due care)

In all four cases Cato drops the laptop into the sewer.  But in two cases he ends up in jail for different periods of time, and in one case he may not even have to pay for the laptop.
As I recall Cato voted FOR Jochum in the Bruckner 6 thread. It's Sarge who was reckless!
:laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 08, 2014, 10:01:15 AM
Quote from: Ken B on October 08, 2014, 07:52:46 AM
As I recall Cato voted FOR Jochum in the Bruckner 6 thread. It's Sarge who was reckless!
:laugh:

:D  Heh-heh!  Amen!

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on October 08, 2014, 07:44:02 AM
In legal terminology, an adverb is less verbose than any equivalent phrasing, and expresses something necessary.

Many thanks for that comment and the examples!  You are quite right, and through those examples we see why the anti-adverb crowd is so wrong-headed.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on October 08, 2014, 11:30:48 AM
If you enjoy crafting of any kind or playing with clip-art and such, The Graphics Fairy website is a great resource.  Membership is free, or I thought it was until her posting today : "This is a fabulous Free White Reindeer Image! Or at least I think that's what it is!"  So, is it free for sure or am I going to get a bill?  What if it's not fabulous?  Is she unsure about Santa's having released it from servitude?  Or, of course, she's questioning whether it's a white reindeer or not...  Guess we're gearing-up for Christmas already in any case.   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 09, 2014, 01:21:54 PM
Great typo I just saw on Facebook: "... his impeccable bass loins ...."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 09, 2014, 04:34:59 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 09, 2014, 01:21:54 PM
Great typo I just saw on Facebook: "... his impeccable bass loins ...."
You "loin" something new every day! :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NorthNYMark on October 09, 2014, 05:55:44 PM
This just reminds me that I have to get back to grading papers.  If I were to post hilarious grammatical, spelling, and syntactic errors every time I came across one, I would be filling up the thread. Some particularly memorable ones from years past include the "pedal stool of power" and "Napoleon Dynapart."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 09, 2014, 06:20:01 PM
Quote from: NorthNYMark on October 09, 2014, 05:55:44 PM
This just reminds me that I have to get back to grading papers.  If I were to post hilarious grammatical, spelling, and syntactic errors every time I came across one, I would be filling up the thread. Some particularly memorable ones from years past include the "pedal stool of power" and "Napoleon Dynapart."
It took me a moment to get the pedal one. D'oh!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NorthNYMark on October 09, 2014, 09:29:25 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 09, 2014, 06:20:01 PM
It took me a moment to get the pedal one. D'oh!

It took me a while to figure it out at first, as well.  The weirdest thing is that I have seen it at least twice, in two different universities.  I wonder if it's some kind of autocorrect thing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 27, 2014, 03:56:00 PM
Quote from: NorthNYMark on October 09, 2014, 05:55:44 PM
This just reminds me that I have to get back to grading papers.  If I were to post hilarious grammatical, spelling, and syntactic errors every time I came across one, I would be filling up the thread. Some particularly memorable ones from years past include the "pedal stool of power" and "Napoleon Dynapart."

A stool with pedals!  Sure!  Which reminded me of something recently seen called Top Gear: Ambitious but Rubbish, a show where everyone speaks with British accents of one sort or another.  ??? ??? ???

But then again, the show is found on BBC America!   ::)

My son discovered this curious broadcast, which features 3 odd mechanics who fancy themselves 21st century Henry Fords, but end up being closer to Canada's Red Green in competence and ingenuity!

So, the 3 are planning a cross-country race in motorized wheelchairs against British soldiers who were disabled in various ways.  They shake hands with the soldiers and agree on a bet:  the losers must pay the winners with...

"...a case of Biz."

(http://www.addictedtosaving.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/free26.jpg)

The bet struck my son and me as very funny, very eccentrically British!  A case of detergent booster!

Until it struck me that, because of those British accents, we were not really understanding things correctly!

They were actually betting a case of...

(http://www.taverntrove.com/beerpics/Schoenling-Old-Time--Bock-Beer-Labels-Schoenling-Brewing-Company_60108-1.jpg)

Well, maybe not this brand, but...

And yes, the soldiers won!   ;)

For an example of the fun, and to check out the "Messala hubcaps" :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtTnfFH2Hjc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtTnfFH2Hjc)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 27, 2014, 04:02:38 PM
Quote from: Cato on October 27, 2014, 03:56:00 PM
A stool with pedals!  Sure!  Which reminded me of something recently seen called Top Gear: Ambitious but Rubbish, a show where everyone speaks with British accents of one sort or another.  ??? ??? ???

But then again, the show is found on BBC America!   ::)
Brits with British accents?! Bizarre!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 27, 2014, 04:05:39 PM
    English is full of traps for the unwary. Not the least in pronunciation.

1) The bandage was wound around the wound.


                    2) The farm was used to produce produce.


                    3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.


                    4) We must polish the Polish furniture..


                    5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.


                    6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert..


                    7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.


                    8) A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.


                    9) When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.


                    10) I did not object to the object.


                    11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.


                    12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.


                    13) They were too close to the door to close it.


                    14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.


                    15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.


                    16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.


                    17) The wind was too strong for me to wind the sail.


                    18) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear..


                    19) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.


                    20) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 27, 2014, 04:09:07 PM
Quote from: North Star on October 27, 2014, 04:02:38 PM
Brits with British accents?! Bizarre!  0:)
I saw a show on BBC America where two Brit actresses played sisters. One had a Manchester sounding accent, middle or north England anyway, and her sister an Irish brogue.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 27, 2014, 04:12:55 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 27, 2014, 04:05:39 PM
    English is full of traps for the unwary. Not the least in pronunciation.

Great stuff, and what about the best sentence in the English language:

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 27, 2014, 04:24:39 PM
Quote from: North Star on October 27, 2014, 04:12:55 PM
Great stuff, and what about the best sentence in the English language:

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Great hot sauce!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 28, 2014, 03:22:59 AM
Quote from: Ken B on October 27, 2014, 04:05:39 PM
    English is full of traps for the unwary. Not the least in pronunciation.

1) The bandage was wound around the wound.

Many thanks for the list!  I will show this to my Latin students when they complain about anything being  "too confusing!"   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 28, 2014, 06:58:13 AM
Quote from: North Star on October 27, 2014, 04:12:55 PM
Great stuff, and what about the best sentence in the English language:

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
"With wings which I have won me..." --Gustav Mahler ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 03, 2014, 08:03:03 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/LfBBx1X.png)

That's good, cuz I've been looking for a girl who likes the joy!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on November 03, 2014, 09:31:16 AM
Perhaps we'd better give her a pass, since English is likely not her native tongue.  Otherwise, we would have to, uh-- Maybe I'd better stop here; too many puns about to slip past my fingers... :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Phrygian on November 03, 2014, 02:00:45 PM
The eponymous Grammarian of this thread has become a correspondent of mine.  A writer of rare perception and wit, Cato finds humour in the quotidian, the quirky, the idiosyncratic.  He mines a rich vein of irony and comedy in his regular missives and is never coarse or vulgar - he just doesn't have to be.  A gifted wordsmith, Cato's observations about "the increasingly Kafka-esque nature of American life" reveal him as a man who is very interested in his fellow human beings and these characters provide the colour in his daily life.  And he's a teacher.  Lucky students!!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 03, 2014, 03:04:36 PM
Quote from: Phrygian on November 03, 2014, 02:00:45 PM
The eponymous Grammarian of this thread has become a correspondent of mine.  A writer of rare perception and wit, Cato finds humour in the quotidian, the quirky, the idiosyncratic.  He mines a rich vein of irony and comedy in his regular missives and is never coarse or vulgar - he just doesn't have to be.  A gifted wordsmith, Cato's observations about "the increasingly Kafka-esque nature of American life" reveal him as a man who is very interested in his fellow human beings and these characters provide the colour in his daily life.  And he's a teacher.  Lucky students!!

Wow!  I am reminded that the Romans hired servants, who whispered into the ears of triumphant Roman generals marching in parades through the city: "Remember that you are only a man!"  $:)

Many thanks!

Quote from: jochanaan on November 03, 2014, 09:31:16 AM
Perhaps we'd better give her a pass, since English is likely not her native tongue.  Otherwise, we would have to, uh-- Maybe I'd better stop here; too many puns about to slip past my fingers... :laugh:

Or past your tongue, native or otherwise!   ???    0:)

My brother - who visits China semi-regularly - often tells of seeing bizarre translations on signs posted to help English-speaking tourists.  Instead, the tourists end up being puzzled or greatly amused, but not necessarily helped!

I recall seeing a pamphlet in Chinese-spiced English for a tea that was "varified to stop falling of hairs and boiling on skin!"   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on November 04, 2014, 08:37:13 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 03, 2014, 03:04:36 PM
...Or past your tongue, native or otherwise!   ???    0:) [...]
Tongues, indeed, were what I had in mind--especially cunning ones... :o :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 04, 2014, 11:55:10 AM
QuoteWhen the answer was still no, she tantrumed and screamed, and I had to drag her out of the store.

This may be the first I have seen tantrum verbed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 04, 2014, 12:08:43 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 04, 2014, 11:55:10 AM
This may be the first I have seen tantrum verbed.
Tantric works better as a verb.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 04, 2014, 12:36:37 PM
Tantric or tan treat?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 06, 2014, 09:03:27 AM
From "Inside Hollywood" in a story about the new Star Wars movie having a (sub)title:

QuoteThe reveal comes as the movie finishes its final day of shooting (with many more months of post-production to come.)

And what is wrong with "revelation" ?    $:)    Too many syllables for Inside Hollywood? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 06, 2014, 09:22:55 AM
Or "leak"   0:)   8)   :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 06, 2014, 10:11:06 AM
That would sound too apocalyptic.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 06, 2014, 11:15:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 06, 2014, 09:03:27 AM
From "Inside Hollywood" in a story about the new Star Wars movie having a (sub)title:

And what is wrong with "revelation" ?    $:)    Too many syllables for Inside Hollywood?

And what is wrong with reveal?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 06, 2014, 11:39:00 AM
Quote from: The Six on November 06, 2014, 11:15:07 AM
And what is wrong with reveal?
Verb it is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on November 06, 2014, 12:24:20 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 06, 2014, 09:03:27 AM
From "Inside Hollywood" in a story about the new Star Wars movie having a (sub)title:

And what is wrong with "revelation" ?    $:)    Too many syllables for Inside Hollywood?

So many, it gives them a disconnect.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 06, 2014, 04:30:03 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 06, 2014, 11:39:00 AM
Verb it is.

Verbs become nouns all the time. No problem here.

Now this...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1KZ7oaCIAAo6Jp.jpg)

5 is just a random collection of words.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 06, 2014, 04:44:33 PM
Quote from: The Six on November 06, 2014, 04:30:03 PM


Now this...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1KZ7oaCIAAo6Jp.jpg)

5 is just a random collection of words.

That's an agree.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on November 06, 2014, 05:51:14 PM
I think the nominal reveal carries implications that revelation doesn't about the nature of the revealing—first, that it was hyped or anticipated beforehand, and second, that its execution was spectacular, shocking, or particularly dramatic. That's because the word is associated with climactic moments in magic tricks and cinematic narratives, as in "the [big] reveal." There's a formula: the viewer is ready for something extraordinary to happen but still hopes to have a "mind=blown" moment. Half the joy is in the guessing.

Anyway, it's pretty common usage now. Benign and useful, I'd say, though certainly it can be misused.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reveal_%28narrative%29

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000941.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 06, 2014, 07:31:00 PM
Yes, "reveal" certainly has connotations that "revelation" does not. It's a useful distinction.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 07, 2014, 03:48:08 AM
Many thanks for the comments, and I understand the defense of the word: nevertheless, it grates my tympana.   8)

QuoteWe will dominate effort plays.
??? ??? ???

Random collection of words is a slam-dunk description!   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 07, 2014, 05:08:40 AM
10-4, Eleanor!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 07, 2014, 05:14:49 AM
Quote from: The Six on November 06, 2014, 04:30:03 PM
Now this...

5 is just a random collection of words.
The whole thing looks like someone has used Google Translate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 07, 2014, 08:09:20 AM
Quote from: North Star on November 07, 2014, 05:14:49 AM
The whole thing looks like someone has used Google Translate.

;D ;D ;D


Actually, after looking more carefully at them, I find #3 to be highly disturbing!!!   ???   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 07, 2014, 08:45:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 07, 2014, 08:09:20 AM
;D ;D ;D


Actually, after looking more carefully at them, I find #3 to be highly disturbing!!!   ???   0:)
You think it's a poor translate?

I am listening to a Haydn symphony right now. I think it's a good perform of a good compose. It's live and at the end you can hear loud applaud. A standing ovate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 07, 2014, 09:35:50 AM
No good do goes unpunished.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 07, 2014, 10:38:30 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 07, 2014, 08:45:03 AM
You think it's a poor translate?

I am listening to a Haydn symphony right now. I think it's a good perform of a good compose. It's live and at the end you can hear loud applaud. A standing ovate.

:D :D :D

Quote from: karlhenning on November 07, 2014, 09:35:50 AM
No good do goes unpunished.

;)  And what about the opposite of using a verb as a noun:Imagination that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 07, 2014, 12:44:37 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 07, 2014, 09:35:50 AM
No good do goes unpunished.
No good-doer goes unpunished.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 08, 2014, 01:44:10 AM
Do-gooder!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 08, 2014, 02:15:07 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 08, 2014, 01:44:10 AM
Do-gooder!  ;)
I thought I used a smiley there, Karl. 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 08, 2014, 04:20:31 AM
Bien sûr!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 08, 2014, 06:32:11 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 08, 2014, 04:20:31 AM
Bien sûr!
That's in California, right?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 08, 2014, 02:47:20 PM
The biggest, yes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 08, 2014, 03:04:43 PM
QuoteGroceries are getting so expensive anymore.
QuoteThis show is terrible anymore

I don't understand how people use "anymore" anymore.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on November 08, 2014, 11:32:38 PM
Annie Moore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Moore_%28immigrant%29)?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on November 09, 2014, 07:21:44 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 07, 2014, 08:09:20 AM
;D ;D ;D


Actually, after looking more carefully at them, I find #3 to be highly disturbing!!!   ???   0:)
Yes, and so is #2, with its placement of the word execute! :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on November 09, 2014, 07:23:46 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on November 08, 2014, 11:32:38 PM
Annie Moore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Moore_%28immigrant%29)?
"Here lies Lester Moore.
Five shots from a .44;
no Les, no Moore." :o :blank:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 09, 2014, 11:26:59 PM
Quote from: jochanaan on November 09, 2014, 07:23:46 PM
"Here lies Lester Moore.
Five shots from a .44;
no Les, no Moore." :o :blank:
Sounds like the work of some Renaissance poet.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 11, 2014, 09:36:28 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 07, 2014, 08:45:03 AM
You think it's a poor translate?

I am listening to a Haydn symphony right now. I think it's a good perform of a good compose. It's live and at the end you can hear loud applaud. A standing ovate.

answer
stain
cook
echo
plow
rant

Yes, there are words that function as both nouns and verbs! I hope this helps.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 11, 2014, 10:36:18 AM
Quote from: The Six on November 11, 2014, 09:36:28 AM
answer
stain
cook
echo
plow
rant

Yes, there are words that function as both nouns and verbs! I hope this helps.

The original problem was the "slangy" Hollywood use of the word "reveal" as a noun, and whether that was warranted.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 11, 2014, 11:07:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 11, 2014, 10:36:18 AM
The original problem was the "slangy" Hollywood use of the word "reveal" as a noun, and whether that was warranted.
I hope this clarify is enough.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on November 11, 2014, 11:29:42 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 11, 2014, 10:36:18 AM
The original problem was the "slangy" Hollywood use of the word "reveal" as a noun, and whether that was warranted.

I'm so old, I remember when "impact" was exclusive a noun.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 11, 2014, 11:41:12 AM
Quote from: Jay F on November 11, 2014, 11:29:42 AM
I'm so old, I remember when "impact" was exclusive a noun.

So you're from the 17th century, then?   :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on November 11, 2014, 11:55:53 AM
Quote from: The Six on November 11, 2014, 11:41:12 AM
So you're from the 17th century, then?   :o

I never heard "impact" used as a verb until 1976. I remember it very well. Some MBA type kept saying it one day at lunch in NYC at a restaurant where I was a waiter. Something or other was going to "impact the Southern territory."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 11, 2014, 12:08:05 PM
Quote from: Jay F on November 11, 2014, 11:55:53 AM
I never heard "impact" used as a verb until 1976. I remember it very well. Some MBA type kept saying it one day at lunch in NYC at a restaurant where I was a waiter. Something or other was going to "impact the Southern territory."
It has been a verb even before you were a waiter.  8)
Quote from: OED1601   P. Holland tr. Pliny Hist. World II. xx. xxi. 73   The seed of this hearbe remooveth the tough humours bedded in the stomacke, how hard impacted soever they be.
1712   P. Blair in Philos. Trans. 1710–12 (Royal Soc.) 27 75   These Pyramids, which receive the Hairs, are impacted in the Cutis.
a1791   J. Wesley Serm. lxxxii. i. 5, in Wks. (1811) IX. 417   Impact fire into iron, by hammering it when red hot.
1897   T. C. Allbutt et al. Syst. Med. III. 835   A stone-like mass..which had become impacted in the lower ilium.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on November 11, 2014, 12:10:00 PM
That MBA type seems to have been using it as a synonym for "affect,"though, which is a newer thing. It's a favorite of annoying sports talk show hosts .("How will Lebron's return impact the city of Cleveland?"  >:()
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 11, 2014, 12:14:23 PM
Quote from: North Star on November 11, 2014, 12:08:05 PM
It has been a verb even before you were a waiter.  8)
Hmmm. These are doubtful as it is a different meaning. Your impacted means forced or compressed (packed :)) into, not affected by or feeling the effect of. The modern businessese horror is different.

Some of your examples are adjectives too, but not the one about fire certainly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on November 11, 2014, 12:23:59 PM
Thank you, Six and Ken B. That's what I was talking about, using "impact" instead of "affect."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 11, 2014, 12:37:38 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 11, 2014, 12:14:23 PM
Hmmm. These are doubtful as it is a different meaning. Your impacted means forced or compressed (packed :)) into, not affected by or feeling the effect of. The modern businessese horror is different.

Some of your examples are adjectives too, but not the one about fire certainly.
They are not my examples, they are all lifted from the OED entry of impact, verb.


It's a small leap from these to the way it's used nowadays.
Quoteb. fig. To have a (pronounced) effect on.
1935   W. G. Hardy Father Abraham 370   For there was about them an air of eagerness and of shuddering expectation which impacted on his consciousness and fascinated even while it repelled him.
1956   Oxf. Mag. 8 Nov. 81/1   The Magazine.. is not the place for consideration of national and international events except in so far as they impact on Oxford.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 11, 2014, 12:53:03 PM
Quote from: North Star on November 11, 2014, 12:37:38 PM
They are not my examples, they are all lifted from the OED entry of impact, verb.


It's a small leap from these to the way it's used nowadays.
Quoteb. fig. To have a (pronounced) effect on.
1935   W. G. Hardy Father Abraham 370   For there was about them an air of eagerness and of shuddering expectation which impacted on his consciousness and fascinated even while it repelled him.
1956   Oxf. Mag. 8 Nov. 81/1   The Magazine.. is not the place for consideration of national and international events except in so far as they impact on Oxford./quote]

Examples of impact, verb with what meaning though? My point is it is a different meaning.
Some of those examples are adjectives, no matter the OED.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on November 12, 2014, 12:24:06 PM
In any case, there's no doubting the impactfulness of the OED!

:blank:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 12, 2014, 12:45:43 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on November 12, 2014, 12:24:06 PM
In any case, there's no doubting the impactfulness of the OED!

:blank:

The fullness of the impact is...well, full!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 12, 2014, 03:42:05 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 12, 2014, 12:45:43 PM
The fullness of the impact is...well, full!   0:)

A new phrase enters the argot: you are full of impact.
Title: "Freshman": A Dangerous Word Which MUST BE BANNED!!!
Post by: Cato on November 20, 2014, 06:54:08 AM
More proof that society has fallen down the rabbit hole into Cloud KafkaLand:

The word "freshman" apparently is a cause of...rape!!!  ??? ??? ???

QuoteElon University in North Carolina banned the word "freshman" from its website and student orientation, claiming it's sexist and suggests that the young women might make good rape victims.

It's replacing the term with "first-year."

"The term has often been felt to refer to the vulnerableness of young women in college for the first time," Leigh-Anne Royster, the school's "Inclusive Community Wellbeing Director" told the College Fix....

In fact, the word is apparently so dangerous that any orientation leader who dared to use it was immediately corrected.

"They engrained over and over in our brains that it was supposed to be 'first-year,' not 'freshman,'" sophomore orientation leader Alaina Schukraft told The Fix. "They were very adamant . . . and stressed the importance of using language that would make the new students feel comfortable."

Ironically, Schukraft said that multiple students approached her and said they were actually more comfortable with the word "freshman."

...Greg Zaiser, vice president of admissions and financial planning, insists that it will make the school a better place for women — telling the Fix that people consider "freshman" to be a "sexist" word.

(My emphases above)

"I'm a first year at Elon U."  ???

How about banning the word "vulnerableness" instead?   $:)

How much does an Inclusive Community Wellbeing Director get paid to sit around all day and find words to ban?   8)

And which people - and how many - consider "freshman" a dangerous word that must never be spoken?! :o

I will say it again: Life in America cannot be satirized, because every day we live in a satire!

See:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392994/university-bans-word-freshman-because-its-sexist-and-promotes-rape-katherine-timpf (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392994/university-bans-word-freshman-because-its-sexist-and-promotes-rape-katherine-timpf)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on November 20, 2014, 06:59:30 AM
I kept reading the name as Eloi U. in that post.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 20, 2014, 07:03:49 AM
Vulnerableness? What's wrong with good ol' vulnerability? Too much amiableness and capableness? (I [thought I] made those two up, and am shocked to see that the spell-checker doesn't find fault in them.)

It's always nice to know people care for you so much that they ban 'dangerous' words...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 20, 2014, 07:08:46 AM
Quote from: North Star on November 20, 2014, 07:03:49 AM
Vulnerableness? What's wrong with good ol' vulnerability? Too much amiableness and capableness? (I [thought I] made those two up, and am shocked to see that the spell-checker doesn't find fault in them.)

It's always nice to know people care for you so much that they ban 'dangerous' words...

The more they care for you, the less freedom you seem to have!  Amazing how that works out!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 20, 2014, 07:15:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 20, 2014, 07:08:46 AM
The more they care for you, the less freedom you seem to have!  Amazing how that works out!  $:)
Works for parenting, too..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 20, 2014, 07:56:20 AM
Quote from: North Star on November 20, 2014, 07:15:18 AM
Works for parenting, too..

In schools we have been noticing a rise in "nervous disorders" i.e. students who show behavioral problems because of irrational fears, or who are just fearful in general.  We (i.e. teachers) suspect that the "helicopter parent" of the last 15-20 years is to blame.

"Nothing bad should ever happen to my child in this school!"  I heard that some years ago, and it may be the epitaph for an entire generation with a large percentage of risk-averse, excuse-making, mollycoddled losers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on November 20, 2014, 09:32:00 AM
Banning "freshman" is just sophomoric.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 20, 2014, 10:21:01 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on November 20, 2014, 09:32:00 AM
Banning "freshman" is just sophomoric.

Wocka Wocka!   ;)

I still marvel at the Orwellian/Lewis-Carrollian nature of the phrase "Inclusive Community Wellbeing Director."

I really would like to find out how much that position pays: maybe I can apply!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on November 20, 2014, 10:25:54 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 20, 2014, 07:56:20 AM
In schools we have been noticing a rise in "nervous disorders" i.e. students who show behavioral problems because of irrational fears, or who are just fearful in general.  We (i.e. teachers) suspect that the "helicopter parent" of the last 15-20 years is to blame.

Today's "helicopter parents" were the 1980s' Babies on Board, who became the 1990s' Stranger Danger generation.
Title: Re: "Freshman": A Dangerous Word Which MUST BE BANNED!!!
Post by: Ken B on November 20, 2014, 11:06:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 20, 2014, 06:54:08 AM
More proof that society has fallen down the rabbit hole into Cloud KafkaLand:


I'll just leave this here. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392837/grandma-faces-police-interrogation-over-racially-offensive-knitted-gorilla-katherine (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392837/grandma-faces-police-interrogation-over-racially-offensive-knitted-gorilla-katherine)
Title: Re: "Freshman": A Dangerous Word Which MUST BE BANNED!!!
Post by: Phrygian on November 20, 2014, 11:27:52 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 20, 2014, 11:06:16 AM
I'll just leave this here. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392837/grandma-faces-police-interrogation-over-racially-offensive-knitted-gorilla-katherine (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392837/grandma-faces-police-interrogation-over-racially-offensive-knitted-gorilla-katherine)

Oh God, PLEASE, PLEASE...let there be a "South Park" episode about the racially offensive knitted gorilla!! 

(On the question of "Freshman" being a dangerous word which needs to be banned, see my entry in "What are you currently reading?"!!!!!)
Title: Re: "Freshman": A Dangerous Word Which MUST BE BANNED!!!
Post by: Ken B on November 20, 2014, 11:56:36 AM
Quote from: Phrygian on November 20, 2014, 11:27:52 AM
Oh God, PLEASE, PLEASE...let there be a "South Park" episode about the racially offensive knitted gorilla!! 

(On the question of "Freshman" being a dangerous word which needs to be banned, see my entry in "What are you currently reading?"!!!!!)

Have you seen Monkey Greg's knitted gorilla avatar? Shocking!!  >:D :laugh:
Title: Re: "Freshman": A Dangerous Word Which MUST BE BANNED!!!
Post by: Cato on November 20, 2014, 02:10:50 PM
Quote from: Phrygian on November 20, 2014, 11:27:52 AM
Oh God, PLEASE, PLEASE...let there be a "South Park" episode about the racially offensive knitted gorilla!! 

(On the question of "Freshman" being a dangerous word which needs to be banned, see my entry in "What are you currently reading?"!!!!!)

YES!!!  Bring it on!

Quote from: Ken B on November 20, 2014, 11:56:36 AM
Have you seen Monkey Greg's knitted gorilla avatar? Shocking!!  >:D :laugh:

I have always wondered about the degree of sensitivity in that picture!  Disrespecting monkeys by using a sock to make a mock monkey sounds like a mockery, maybe even a monckery, to me!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 21, 2014, 04:45:00 AM
You hosiery-huggers!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 21, 2014, 05:41:09 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 21, 2014, 04:45:00 AM
You hosiery-huggers!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpXP8abAv_w (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpXP8abAv_w)
Title: Re: "Freshman": A Dangerous Word Which MUST BE BANNED!!!
Post by: DaveF on November 21, 2014, 02:01:32 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 20, 2014, 11:06:16 AM
I'll just leave this here. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392837/grandma-faces-police-interrogation-over-racially-offensive-knitted-gorilla-katherine (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/392837/grandma-faces-police-interrogation-over-racially-offensive-knitted-gorilla-katherine)

Now if you want a really offensive knitted primate, you need this cute little fellow:
http://www.laughinghens.com/knitting-pattern.asp?patternid=1552 (http://www.laughinghens.com/knitting-pattern.asp?patternid=1552)

Didn't any editor look at it and say "Er, small problem here, chaps..."?

Sadly, he's been changed in later editions so that his hands are less busy - and he has less to keep them busy with.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 22, 2014, 05:02:26 AM
Quote from: DaveF on November 21, 2014, 02:01:32 PM
Now if you want a really offensive knitted primate, you need this cute little fellow:
http://www.laughinghens.com/knitting-pattern.asp?patternid=1552 (http://www.laughinghens.com/knitting-pattern.asp?patternid=1552)

Didn't any editor look at it and say "Er, small problem here, chaps..."?

More evidence that, notwithstanding the best of intentions, even a little filtration serves us well . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 24, 2014, 10:21:43 AM
Ouch!  On a hotel invoice, no less!

QuoteDeposit Recieved
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2014, 08:33:15 AM
Winter Storm Cato Has Been Named! (http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/video/winter-storm-cato-will-impact-many-in-new-york-boston)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 25, 2014, 08:35:02 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 25, 2014, 08:33:15 AM
Winter Storm Cato Has Been Named! (http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/video/winter-storm-cato-will-impact-many-in-new-york-boston)
And note the use of 'impact' there.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2014, 08:35:59 AM
Aye!   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2014, 08:38:28 AM
Epic!  I win Buzzword Bingo!

Epic Lake Effect Snow Timelapse (http://www.weather.com/news/weather/video/epic-lake-effect-snow-timelapse)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2014, 08:39:29 AM
"One of the coolest (hah, hah!) videos I've ever seen."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 25, 2014, 08:51:43 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 25, 2014, 08:33:15 AM
Winter Storm Cato Has Been Named! (http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/video/winter-storm-cato-will-impact-many-in-new-york-boston)

WOW!

And I love snow and cold!  How appropriate!   8)

Quote from: karlhenning on November 25, 2014, 08:38:28 AM
Epic!  I win Buzzword Bingo!

Epic Lake Effect Snow Timelapse (http://www.weather.com/news/weather/video/epic-lake-effect-snow-timelapse)

"Epic" has become a slang term: "absolutely tragic."  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 25, 2014, 09:12:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 25, 2014, 08:51:43 AM
"Epic" has become a slang term: "absolutely tragic."  ;)
Tragic? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2014, 09:31:19 AM
Everything has tragedy in it, but not everyone sees it.  8)    0:)    :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 25, 2014, 09:32:49 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 25, 2014, 09:31:19 AM
Everything has tragedy in it, but not everyone sees it.  8)    0:)    :)
Quote from: Mel BrooksTragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer  and die.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 25, 2014, 09:42:05 AM
That was Mel Brooks and not Abe Lincoln?  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 25, 2014, 09:47:03 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on November 25, 2014, 09:42:05 AM
That was Mel Brooks and not Abe Lincoln?  8)
I think Brooks stole it from the Gettysburg Address.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 25, 2014, 10:36:08 AM
Quote from: North Star on November 25, 2014, 09:47:03 AM
I think Brooks stole it from the Gettysburg Address.  ;D

More likely stolen from the Spagettysburg Address!  With Parmesan cheese!  And a knish on the side!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 25, 2014, 10:58:09 AM
<Insert blowhard joke here>

:laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 27, 2014, 07:47:18 AM
Another ridiculous name for a drug:

Myrbetriq (Sic!)  A drug for the bladder, so to speak!

And how the they pronounce it?  "MEER-Buh-trik" !   ??? ??? ???

So why not spell it Meerbutrik?

Or why not something sensible, like "Bob" or "Uri" ?   0:)

Soon the next drug for diabetes or whatever will be named Mxysptlk!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on November 27, 2014, 12:41:28 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 03, 2014, 03:04:36 PM
Wow!  I am reminded that the Romans hired servants, who whispered into the ears of triumphant Roman generals marching in parades through the city: "Remember that you are only a man!"  $:)

Many thanks!

Or past your tongue, native or otherwise!   ???    0:)

My brother - who visits China semi-regularly - often tells of seeing bizarre translations on signs posted to help English-speaking tourists.  Instead, the tourists end up being puzzled or greatly amused, but not necessarily helped!

I recall seeing a pamphlet in Chinese-spiced English for a tea that was "varified to stop falling of hairs and boiling on skin!"   0:)
Have you seen this site?
http://engrish.com/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 29, 2014, 03:57:56 AM
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941318
QuoteMany children, adolescents and young adults, now use cell phones as their only phone line and they begin using wireless phones at much younger ages.
Adolescents and young adults are part of a group called 'children'? Of course all people are somebody's children, but that's probably not what they meant.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mookalafalas on December 06, 2014, 07:03:45 AM
stumbled on a book purported to be all "bloopers" taken from students' writing. It is hard to know if such things are real or not, but this one really has stuff that makes me laugh so hard my chest hurts. A few samples from the history section:.

The Greeks were a highly sculptured people, and without them we wouldn't have history. The Greeks invented three kinds of columns - corinthian, ironic, and dorc - and built the Apocalypse. They also had myths. A myth is a female moth. One myth says that the mother of Achilles dipped him in the River Stynx until he became intollerable. Achilles appears in The Iliad, by Homer. Homer also wrote The Oddity, in which Penelope was the last hardship that Ulysses endured on his journey. Actually, Homer was not written by Homer but by another man of that name.

Socrates was a famous Greek teacher who wentaround giving people advice. They killed him. Socrates died from an overdose of wedlock. After his death, his career suffered a dramatic decline. In the Olympic Games, Greeks ran races, jumped, hurled the biscuits, and threw the Java. The reward to the victor was a coral wreath.

The government of Athens was democratic because people took the law into their own hands. There were no wars in Greece, as the mountains were so high that they couldn't climb over to see what their neighbors were doing. When they fought with the Persians, the Greeks were outnumbered because the Persians had more men.

Julius Caesar extinguished himself on the battlefields of Gaul. The Ides of March murdered him because they thought he was going to be made king. Dying, he gasped out the words "Tee hee, Brutus." Nero was a cruel tyranny who would torture his poor subjects by playing the fiddle to them. Rome came to have too many luxuries and baths. At Roman banquets, the guests wore garlics in their hair. They took two baths in two days, and that's the cause of the fall of Rome. Today Rome is full of fallen arches.

Then came the Middle Ages, when everyone was middle aged. King Alfred conquered the Dames. King Arthur lived in the Age of Shivery with brave knights on prancing horses and beautiful women. King Harold mustarded his troops before the Battle of Hastings. Joan of Arc was cannonized by Bernard Shaw. And victims of the blue-bonnet plague grew boobs on their necks. Finally, Magna Carta provided that no free man should be hanged twice for the same offense.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on December 18, 2014, 09:17:55 AM
The greatest animated show has truly impacted our embiggening. http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2014/12/simpsons-doh-meh-english-language/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on December 29, 2014, 06:33:05 PM
It finally happened. Something I knew I'd eventually see.

A fb exchange:

Person 1: "There just going over big stories unlike the page of you don't like it"

Person 2: "The word you meant to use was Their * ."


:-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 01, 2015, 07:49:53 AM
Quote from: Greg on December 29, 2014, 06:33:05 PM
It finally happened. Something I knew I'd eventually see.

A fb exchange:

Person 1: "There just going over big stories unlike the page of you don't like it"

Person 2: "The word you meant to use was Their * ."


:-X

"I weep for the future."

Quote from: North Star on November 29, 2014, 03:57:56 AM
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941318Adolescents and young adults are part of a group called 'children'? Of course all people are somebody's children, but that's probably not what they meant.  ::)

Given the  growth of paternalistic government, it could be exactly what the authors at ".gov"meant!   $:)

Quote from: The Six on December 18, 2014, 09:17:55 AM
The greatest animated show has truly impacted our embiggening. http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2014/12/simpsons-doh-meh-english-language/

"What's up, Doc?" was somewhat more articulate.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 02, 2015, 06:45:23 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 01, 2015, 07:49:53 AM
"What's up, Doc?" was somewhat more articulate.  8)

Ain't I a stinker?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on January 02, 2015, 09:12:16 AM
I found a facebook page called "Pit Bull's."

The first two sentences from the description:

QuoteWelcome to Pit Bull's .
They are mans best friend!

:'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 02, 2015, 09:53:32 AM
Quote from: Greg on January 02, 2015, 09:12:16 AM
I found a facebook page called "Pit Bull's."

:'(

Aye!  Yesterday I saw a TV blurb for a movie whose title had an unnecessary comma.  I believe it was "Angel's Sing" (Sic!)   :o



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ibanezmonster on January 02, 2015, 10:13:00 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 02, 2015, 09:53:32 AM
Aye!  Yesterday I saw a TV blurb for a movie whose title had an unnecessary comma.  I believe it was "Angel's Sing" (Sic!)   :o
???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 02, 2015, 10:29:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 02, 2015, 09:53:32 AM
Aye!  Yesterday I saw a TV blurb for a movie whose title had an unnecessary apostrophe.  I believe it was "Angel's Sing" (Sic!)   :o




Quote from: Greg on January 02, 2015, 10:13:00 AM
???

Not comma, apostrophe!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 03, 2015, 05:02:55 AM
An essay worried more about the long-term effects of too much talk and print, rather than the "anagramizing" of our speech:


QuoteIn case you missed it, the initials ICYMI stand for the first five words of this sentence. In the event you have, indeed, missed it (ITEYH, I, MI has not taken off yet for some reason), it's most likely because you're not on the Internet much, particularly Twitter, where individuals and outlets deploy it every few seconds to bring links to the attention of others who may not have seen them. The New York Times now even has a section at the bottom of its app called "In Case You Missed It" with articles from previous days.

While the extended phrase has been used in conversation for a long time, the shorthand betrays an anxiety central to the Internet epoch. There is simply too much readable, viewable and listenable data for anyone to stay abreast of, as a humor piece, "I'm All Caught Up!" by Nick Mickowski in McSweeney's, playfully suggested
.



Favorite quote from the article:

Quote"In the arena of the Internet, you have to be loud and keep trying and raising your hand."


See:   http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/style/the-unending-anxiety-of-an-icymi-world.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/style/the-unending-anxiety-of-an-icymi-world.html)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 03, 2015, 05:45:34 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 03, 2015, 05:02:55 AM
An essay worried more about the long-term effects of too much talk and print, rather than the "anagramizing" of our speech

See:   http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/style/the-unending-anxiety-of-an-icymi-world.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/style/the-unending-anxiety-of-an-icymi-world.html)

And this one.  8)

QuoteIf an article about deforestation is published but no one clicks on it, did it actually exist?

But I'm confused - was the writer complaining of the impermanence of Internet, or the permanence of e.g. TV shows?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on January 06, 2015, 06:45:49 PM
On a sports forum

QuoteWe don't have to verse all of them in the playoffs, just 3.

I guess "verse" is the verb form of "versus" now?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 06, 2015, 07:11:36 PM
Quote from: The Six on January 06, 2015, 06:45:49 PM
On a sports forum

I guess "verse" is the verb form of "versus" now?
I'd check the math too.  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 07, 2015, 08:03:05 AM
Quote from: The Six on January 06, 2015, 06:45:49 PM
On a sports forum

I guess "verse" is the verb form of "versus" now?

Quote from: Ken B on January 06, 2015, 07:11:36 PM
I'd check the math too.  >:D

It baffles science!  And grammarians!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Fagotterdämmerung on January 08, 2015, 10:06:15 AM
Quote from: The Six on January 06, 2015, 06:45:49 PM
I guess "verse" is the verb form of "versus" now?

Poetry readings: a new requirement in professional sport.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 08, 2015, 10:51:59 AM
Quote from: Fagotterdämmerung on January 08, 2015, 10:06:15 AM
Poetry readings: a new requirement in professional sport.

Sports should be harder.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 12, 2015, 07:33:59 AM
Hold on to your hat Cato!

Thinking about impact I have found a new verb to unleash upon the world.


....



Repercuss. "This will repercuss on the bottom line; we can repercuss the decision by ...;that will repercuss me."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 12, 2015, 07:41:29 AM
good gawd!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 12, 2015, 07:51:11 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 12, 2015, 07:33:59 AM
Hold on to your hat Cato!

Thinking about impact I have found a new verb to unleash upon the world.

Repercuss. "This will repercuss on the bottom line; we can repercuss the decision by ...;that will repercuss me."

Quote from: karlhenning on January 12, 2015, 07:41:29 AM
good gawd!

Well, hearing or reading "repercuss" should make one "cuss and hate your grandmother," in the words of a friend from long ago!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 12, 2015, 07:58:08 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 12, 2015, 07:33:59 AM
Hold on to your hat Cato!

Thinking about impact I have found a new verb to unleash upon the world.
....
Repercuss. "This will repercuss on the bottom line; we can repercuss the decision by ...;that will repercuss me."
The natives got there before you, Cristoforo Colombo.

Quote from: OED.com
repercuss, v.
Pronunciation:
  Brit.  /ˌriːpəˈkʌs/ , U.S.  /ˌripərˈkəs/ ,  /ˌrɛpərˈkəs/
Forms:  lME reprecusse, lME–16 repercusse, 15–16 repercust (past participle), 16 ... (Show More)
Etymology:  < classical Latin repercuss-, past participial stem of repercutere... (Show More)
 
4. intr. To cause or admit of implications or repercussions (repercussion n. 5b); to have an unwanted or unintended effect; to reflect or rebound on something.
In early use trans. (pass.).
1884   Cycl. Polit. Sci. III. 886/2   The tax imposed on one or many categories of individuals is repercussed on other classes.
1899   Science 16 June 851/2   There exists no fundamental element whose influence is not repercussed on the entire theory of these bodies.
1923   Glasgow Herald 16 Nov. 4/2   There is obviously considerable change from generation to generation, but most of this is extra-organismal and only repercusses indirectly, if at all, on the flesh and blood constitution.
1969   F. Halliday in A. Cockburn & R. Blackburn Student Power 323   There are also examples where an initially political campaign by students repercusses back into the campus and detonates an internal revolt within higher education.
1972   Guardian 18 Feb. 13/1   The public crucifixion of a mandarin looks likely to repercuss for years.
1975   J. De Bres tr. E. Mandel Late Capitalism vii. 243   The tendency towards thorough planning and organization within the companies or enterprises of late capitalism necessarily repercusses on the structure of the bourgeois class.
1976   Daily Tel. 1 Dec. 3/3   It is a script which the plaintiffs feel cannot do anything but repercuss poorly on their reputation if it is thought that ‘King Kong’ is associated with that.
2004   Record (Kitchener-Waterloo, Ont.)  (Nexis) 8 May j1   I'm as interested in Kitchener issues as I am in the issues in Waterloo, because one issue repercusses on the other..
†1. trans. Chiefly Med. = repel, also to drive back (air, dust, etc.).     dates from 1425, and must have been reasonably commonly used in 1850s [1853   N.Y. Med. Times Dec. 90:   We throw back, we repercuss the virus by drying up the virulent source!]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 12, 2015, 08:00:50 AM
Quote from: North Star on January 12, 2015, 07:58:08 AM
The natives got there before you, Cristoforo Colombo.

That's okay: I don't like the word.  It strikes my ear as unmusical.  Not every Latinism possible should be used.

But feel free to (reper)cuss, just not in public!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 12, 2015, 08:02:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 12, 2015, 08:00:50 AM
That's okay: I don't like the word.  Not every Latinism possible should be used.

And, curiously, that dictionary gives a Middle English form (which by now is a foreign language) and . . . the earliest citation there is late 19th c.;  already feels like a barbarous back-formation . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 12, 2015, 08:08:41 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 12, 2015, 08:00:50 AM
That's okay: I don't like the word.  It strikes my ear as unmusical.  Not every Latinism possible should be used.
Agreed.

Quote from: karlhenning on January 12, 2015, 08:02:35 AM
And, curiously, that dictionary gives a Middle English form (which by now is a foreign language) and . . . the earliest citation there is late 19th c.;  already feels like a barbarous back-formation . . . .
There are several quotes from each century between Middle English  & 19th c. in the full entry. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 12, 2015, 08:10:03 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 12, 2015, 08:02:35 AM
And, curiously, that dictionary gives a Middle English form (which by now is a foreign language) and . . . the earliest citation there is late 19th c.;  already feels like a barbarous back-formation . . . .

I had a professor many moons ago, who impishly told me that for every scholarly article he wrote, he made it a point to find an obsolete or obsolescent word in the OED and to insert it in his writing.   :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 12, 2015, 08:23:36 AM
Quote from: North Star on January 12, 2015, 08:08:41 AM
Agreed.
There are several quotes from each century between Middle English  & 19th c. in the full entry. :)

Thanks; I did wonder if that were not an accident  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on January 12, 2015, 05:01:51 PM
Quote from: Ken B on January 12, 2015, 07:33:59 AM
Hold on to your hat Cato!

Thinking about impact I have found a new verb to unleash upon the world.


....



Repercuss. "This will repercuss on the bottom line; we can repercuss the decision by ...;that will repercuss me."
When the Reaper cusses...!!! :o ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jay F on January 12, 2015, 06:10:38 PM
I like "repercuss," I find. My inner Lisa Simpson likes it, anyway. And no one has hated the nounicization of verbs and the verbicization of nouns more than I.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on January 15, 2015, 07:50:40 AM
Quote from: Jay F on January 12, 2015, 06:10:38 PM
I like "repercuss," I find. My inner Lisa Simpson likes it, anyway. And no one has hated the nounicization of verbs and the verbicization of nouns more than I.
Actually, "repercuss" is a mere restoration of a probable verb by removing a suffix--minor surgery compared to what else has happened to our mother tongue.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 15, 2015, 07:52:14 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on January 15, 2015, 07:50:40 AM
Actually, "repercuss" is a mere restoration of a probable verb by removing a suffix--minor surgery compared to what else has happened to our mother tongue.

It has been surgeried.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on January 15, 2015, 08:08:52 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 15, 2015, 07:52:14 AM
It has been surgeried.
Amazing, the difference between "surgically removed" and "cut off." :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 07:20:39 AM
On the lines of invite VS. invitation:

Quote from: softwareThe submit was successful.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 23, 2015, 08:41:33 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2015, 07:20:39 AM
On the lines of invite VS. invitation:
The submit impacted success in a positive fashion.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 09:18:11 AM
Nice succeed there, dude.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 10:28:26 AM
Quote from: CD liner notesToday innumerable of his 431 compositions have been recorded [...]

We can number his compositions;  we just cannot number the subset which have been recorded.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 23, 2015, 10:38:06 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2015, 10:28:26 AM
We can number his compositions;  we just cannot number the subset which have been recorded.
It would be a bit of a chore to count them, sure..

Of course, that isn't what they mean:
QuoteToday innumerable of his 431 compositions have been recorded, his output and life have been recorded in book form, and his works, most of which are still unprinted, are being published.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 10:40:50 AM
Maybe it's just some clunkiness in the translation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 23, 2015, 10:57:43 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2015, 10:40:50 AM
Maybe it's just some clunkiness in the translation.
Most likely, there's probably some expression which means both innumerable and several.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 23, 2015, 10:58:19 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2015, 10:40:50 AM
Maybe it's just some clunkiness in the translation.

A CPO CD?  They have some of the worst!  (Although to be fair, the original German in many of their notes is often full of high-falutin' babble by some phlyarologist.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 23, 2015, 11:20:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 23, 2015, 10:58:19 AM
A CPO CD?  They have some of the worst!  (Although to be fair, the original German in many of their notes is often full of high-falutin' babble by some phlyarologist.)

I like my babble low-falutin'. I'm a man of the people, me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: North Star on January 23, 2015, 10:57:43 AM
Most likely, there's probably some expression which means both innumerable and several.

Aye.  In inglese, if he wanted something more emphatic than (the admittedly rather neutral) several, I suppose he might have to go with a great many.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 11:23:42 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 23, 2015, 11:20:49 AM
I like my babble low-falutin'. I'm a man of the people, me.

Could be the Libra in me, but I do prefer mid-falutin'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 23, 2015, 11:24:08 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2015, 11:22:28 AM
Aye.  In inglese, if he wanted something more emphatic than (the admittedly rather neutral) several, I suppose he might have to go with a great many.
Or numerous.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 11:24:27 AM
Good.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 23, 2015, 11:28:11 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2015, 11:22:28 AM
Aye.  In inglese, if he wanted something more emphatic than (the admittedly rather neutral) several, I suppose he might have to go with a great many.
Untold. it is le mot juste. It means "not numbered or counted".
So: "451 masses, an untold number of which have been recorded."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 23, 2015, 11:35:50 AM
Nice.  I could tell I was being underverbal with a great many, but I was powerless . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on January 24, 2015, 02:58:22 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 23, 2015, 11:28:11 AM
Untold. it is le mot juste. It means "not numbered or counted".
So: "451 masses, an untold number of which have been recorded."

But the untold number could be just a few.  I'd go with "a whole bunch" or "a buttload".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 24, 2015, 05:53:44 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on January 24, 2015, 02:58:22 AM
But the untold number could be just a few.

Well, in a literal sense, yes.  But the dictionaries I consulted gave the definition as "vast" or "too many to be counted."  It was not defined as "unknown" in this sense.





Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 24, 2015, 09:30:02 AM
A set of Grumbleworthy mugs
http://www.theliterarygiftcompany.com/grammar-grumble-mugs---set-of-all-six-14140-p.asp (http://www.theliterarygiftcompany.com/grammar-grumble-mugs---set-of-all-six-14140-p.asp)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 24, 2015, 10:24:18 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on January 24, 2015, 02:58:22 AM
But the untold number could be just a few.  I'd go with "a whole bunch" or "a buttload".
No. The implication is a lot. That's the standard usage.

Quote from: Cato on January 24, 2015, 05:53:44 AM
Well, in a literal sense, yes.  But the dictionaries I consulted gave the definition as "vast" or "too many to be counted."  It was not defined as "unknown" in this sense.

As I said. ;D

However that is what we want here. He wrote a whole lot, 400 plus, of which many, no exact count, but not just a few have been recorded.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 24, 2015, 10:26:30 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 24, 2015, 09:30:02 AM
A set of Grumbleworthy mugs
http://www.theliterarygiftcompany.com/grammar-grumble-mugs---set-of-all-six-14140-p.asp (http://www.theliterarygiftcompany.com/grammar-grumble-mugs---set-of-all-six-14140-p.asp)

Must be imports. In 16 years Living here I have yet to meet an American who gets less/few. Or uses a fork correctly.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on January 24, 2015, 10:47:20 AM
Speaking of "a lot"...

http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 24, 2015, 10:48:14 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 24, 2015, 10:26:30 AM
Must be imports. In 16 years Living here I have yet to meet an American who gets less/few. Or uses a fork correctly.  :laugh:

Solution: Less forks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 24, 2015, 10:52:43 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 24, 2015, 10:48:14 AM
Solution: Less forks.

Happens naturally, with age and a long marriage.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on January 27, 2015, 09:02:25 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 23, 2015, 11:23:42 AM
Could be the Libra in me, but I do prefer mid-falutin'.
And I simply like fluting, and flouting, in any range. ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 27, 2015, 11:05:11 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on January 27, 2015, 09:02:25 AM
And I simply like fluting, and flouting, in any range. ;D

Off topic: have you ever tried playing The Flute´s Garden of Delights?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on January 28, 2015, 07:36:43 AM
Quote from: Florestan on January 27, 2015, 11:05:11 AM
Off topic: have you ever tried playing The Flute´s Garden of Delights?
That's one I hadn't heard of--apparently a criminal omission in one who loves early music.  I'll have to look into it!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 28, 2015, 09:19:27 AM
The manager of the fine jewelry department went to a corporate sponsored training yesterday.  On the store management schedule this was noted as
                                            FINE JEW TRAINING

There are things at which one can only laugh.....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 28, 2015, 03:58:37 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 28, 2015, 09:19:27 AM
The manager of the fine jewelry department went to a corporate sponsored training yesterday.  On the store management schedule this was noted as
                                            FINE JEW TRAINING

There are things at which one can only laugh.....

Oy! Some people are such mumsers!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on January 29, 2015, 01:06:54 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 28, 2015, 09:19:27 AM
The manager of the fine jewelry department went to a corporate sponsored training yesterday.  On the store management schedule this was noted as
                                            FINE JEW TRAINING

There are things at which one can only laugh.....

Teach Jews not to [insert stereotype].   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 29, 2015, 04:21:01 AM
This little Jew of mine,
I'm gonna train him fine . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 29, 2015, 05:32:22 AM
 :o

Some days I don't know who is more terrifying: the members here I usually disagree with, or the ones I usually agree with!

>:D :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on January 29, 2015, 07:48:18 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 29, 2015, 05:32:22 AM
:o

Some days I don't know who is more terrifying: the members here I usually disagree with, or the ones I usually agree with!

>:D :laugh:
Satire is such a terrifying art form. :o ;D :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 30, 2015, 10:58:06 AM
Well, at least the first bullet point makes sense with must be . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 30, 2015, 01:06:10 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 30, 2015, 10:58:06 AM
Well, at least the first bullet point makes sense with must be . . . .

I have seen too many such things!  Just sloppy and inattentive.

At a teacher meeting not long ago, some sort of "Mission Statement" was being asembled en masse on a screen, and as time went by, people just wanted to leave and were not paying attention.

The result was that some howlers were appearing.  My favorite appeared after two previous versions were rejected:

"Academic excellence will instill students of character and faith."   :o :o :o   $:)

The teacher typing it for the "SmartBoard" asked: "That sound okay?"  "Yeah, that's fine."  "Yeah, sure, let's do the next one."
??? :o ::) :o ::) ::) ::)

I raised my hand: "No, no, that makes no sense!  Excellence does not instill students!"

More awake then, they agreed that the sentence was...silly.   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 30, 2015, 01:13:46 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 30, 2015, 01:06:10 PM
I have seen too many such things!  Just sloppy and inattentive.

At a teacher meeting not long ago, some sort of "Mission Statement" was being asembled en masse on a screen, and as time went by, people just wanted to leave and were not paying attention.

The result was that some howlers were appearing.  My favorite appeared after two previous versions were rejected:

"Academic excellence will instill students of character and faith."   :o :o :o   $:)

The teacher typing it for the "SmartBoard" asked: "That sound okay?"  "Yeah, that's fine."  "Yeah, sure, let's do the next one."
??? :o ::) :o ::) ::) ::)

I raised my hand: "No, no, that makes no sense!  Excellence does not instill students!"

More awake then, they agreed that the sentence was...silly.   0:)

Thank you for instilling them.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 30, 2015, 01:36:12 PM
Quote from: Ken B on January 30, 2015, 01:13:46 PM
Thank you for instilling them.

After the meeting, I think they went to be distilled!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 31, 2015, 06:39:04 PM
I think we need something like a Bat-signal, I suppose it would be a Duck-signal per the avatar, to alert Cato to horrible cases of illiteracy blighting the nation. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/30/army-under-racial-fire-chink-armor-tweet-retreats-/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/30/army-under-racial-fire-chink-armor-tweet-retreats-/)

What impresses me most is not the illiteracy, because anyone can not know a word, but the complete failure to think they might be wrong, or that they should check, no matter how senseless their conclusion would seem to be. It's straight into self-righteous umbrage, at the top of their lungs. This, not the limited vocabulary, is the measure of how the education system has failed these fools.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on February 03, 2015, 04:08:24 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 30, 2015, 01:36:12 PM
After the meeting, I think they went to be distilled!   0:)
Well, still, and all... ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 07, 2015, 07:27:48 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 31, 2015, 06:39:04 PM
I think we need something like a Bat-signal, I suppose it would be a Duck-signal per the avatar, to alert Cato to horrible cases of illiteracy blighting the nation. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/30/army-under-racial-fire-chink-armor-tweet-retreats-/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/30/army-under-racial-fire-chink-armor-tweet-retreats-/)

What impresses me most is not the illiteracy, because anyone can not know a word, but the complete failure to think they might be wrong, or that they should check, no matter how senseless their conclusion would seem to be. It's straight into self-righteous umbrage, at the top of their lungs. This, not the limited vocabulary, is the measure of how the education system has failed these fools.

Amen!  The silliness just keeps on coming!  And the desire to look for insults when none were intended!

Our English teacher this week was in an outraged state: "Can you believe this?!" 

And she showed me some sort of "English standards" (possibly Common Core, possibly not) claiming that the "Subjunctive has been dead for around 300 years in English."   ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ???

Instead, we have only the "Conditional."  :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ???

Our English teacher asked me (being the oldest member on the faculty and proficient in 3 foreign languages): "Am I nuts to think that this is nuts?"

No, it is nuts!  A condition uses the word "if" and could (note the use of a subjunctive word!) use the subjunctive, but the subjunctive does not always involve "if-clauses."  Like the previous sentence.  So to say the subjunctive does not exist any longer, except in conditions, is just ignorant.

"The teacher suggested to the student that he study in the early evening."

"Study" is subjunctive: if the subjunctive is dead, and has been dead "for 300 years," how does one explain this form?  The regular form is of course "he studies."

"The teacher suggested to the student that he studies..." ??????????

One could also use another subjunctive:  "The teacher suggested to the student that he should study in the early evening."

Yes, it is just nuts.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 07, 2015, 03:11:13 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 07, 2015, 07:27:48 AM
Amen!  The silliness just keeps on coming!  And the desire to look for insults when none were intended!

Our English teacher this week was in an outraged state: "Can you believe this?!" 

And she showed me some sort of "English standards" (possibly Common Core, possibly not) claiming that the "Subjunctive has been dead for around 300 years in English."   ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ???

Instead, we have only the "Conditional."  :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ??? :o ???

Our English teacher asked me (being the oldest member on the faculty and proficient in 3 foreign languages): "Am I nuts to think that this is nuts?"

No, it is nuts!  A condition uses the word "if" and could (note the use of a subjunctive word!) use the subjunctive, but the subjunctive does not always involve "if-clauses."  Like the previous sentence.  So to say the subjunctive does not exist any longer, except in conditions, is just ignorant.

"The teacher suggested to the student that he study in the early evening."

"Study" is subjunctive: if the subjunctive is dead, and has been dead "for 300 years, how does one explain this form?  The regular form is of course "he studies."

"The teacher suggested to the student that he studies..." ??????????

One could also use another subjunctive:  "The teacher suggested to the student that he should study in the early evening."

Yes, it is just nuts.

In an algebra class I used the subjunctive. The prof, not an English native speaker, spun round and said "Don't do that!" I asked what. He said use the subjuntive. English he averred was mercifully free of it, but it blighted German and most languages.
I think French has more logic in this area, and wish the English subjunctive were more observed than it is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 08, 2015, 05:36:43 AM
A couple of photos recently from India-

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/DSCN1837_zpse6bf51a4.jpg)

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/DSCN1963_zpsb141d3b6.jpg)

More here https://app.box.com/s/mhi4kruhayox3ob1ww2uuh9nhjukncaz
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 08, 2015, 05:59:58 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 08, 2015, 05:36:43 AM
(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/DSCN1963_zpsb141d3b6.jpg)

Except improper use of capital letters I see nothing wrong with that.

Sean, you missed the point entirely: Cato grumbles about native English speakers making blatant mistakes, not about non-native English speakers making mistakes.  ;D ;D ;D

You know, English is neither the only language worth learning, reading, speaking and writing, nor the universal yardstick by which all other languages should be judged.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 08, 2015, 06:07:27 AM
Needless to say, Do not tease or feed the animals.

English is the global language...

But it has certain features that give it meaning, and which can't be ignored even if they're alien to the non-Western learner's conceptions of language and society.

So there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2015, 06:23:56 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 08, 2015, 05:36:43 AM
A couple of photos recently from India-

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/DSCN1963_zpsb141d3b6.jpg)


That broken fence says it all about teasing AND feeding the animals!!!   :o :o :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 08, 2015, 06:41:01 AM
<pedant mode>

Cato: I think your "could" and "should" examples aren't actually subjunctive.

</pedant mode>
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 08, 2015, 06:47:39 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 08, 2015, 06:07:27 AM
English is the global language...

Meaning that one should be able to understand it and made himself understood in it. And guess what? one doesn't need to speak or write it at native level in order to achieve the aforementioned goals.

Quote
But it has certain features that give it meaning, and which can't be ignored even if they're alien to the non-Western learner's conceptions of language and society.

True, but English linguistics and philology are topics for linguists, writers and philosophers, not for Indian or Chinese people trying to communicate basic instructions or feelings.

Now that you've got me started, are you trying to tell me that you, an Englishman, can understand all Shakespeare at first sight, without any need for some explanation in some cases?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 08, 2015, 06:48:41 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 08, 2015, 06:07:27 AM
Needless to say, Do not tease or feed the animals.

Oh, my! Pedantry at its worst.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 08, 2015, 06:58:36 AM
I think you're starting to prove my points about foreign learners.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 08, 2015, 07:25:56 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 08, 2015, 06:58:36 AM
I think you're starting to prove my points about foreign learners.

The very moment you'll write, read and speak Romanian at least as bad as I write, read or speak English I'll stand corrected.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2015, 03:21:30 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 08, 2015, 06:41:01 AM
<pedant mode>

Cato: I think your "could" and "should" examples aren't actually subjunctive.

</pedant mode>

They are. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 08, 2015, 04:17:33 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2015, 06:23:56 AM
That broken fence says it all about teasing AND feeding the animals!!!   :o :o :o

Offering them rubber steaks would count.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 08, 2015, 04:20:11 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 08, 2015, 03:21:30 PM
They are. ;)

I should think so.

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 08, 2015, 05:58:32 PM
Hm.

I'm sure it's a matter of definition, but no source I've found considers the "modal auxiliary + infinitive" construction to be subjunctive. In fact, the former is often explicitly presented as an alternative to the latter:

https://books.google.com/books?id=0P5O5rHzKdYC&pg=PA107
https://books.google.com/books?id=pqEgAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA51
https://books.google.com/books?id=ryasAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA118
https://books.google.com/books?id=77a-RZUsgHkC&pg=PA14-IA20

But your confidence has me curious, Cato—were you taught otherwise?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 08, 2015, 06:21:30 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 08, 2015, 05:58:32 PM
Hm.

I'm sure it's a matter of definition, but no source I've found considers the "modal auxiliary + infinitive" construction to be subjunctive. In fact, the former is often explicitly presented as an alternative to the latter:

https://books.google.com/books?id=0P5O5rHzKdYC&pg=PA107
https://books.google.com/books?id=pqEgAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA51
https://books.google.com/books?id=ryasAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA118
https://books.google.com/books?id=77a-RZUsgHkC&pg=PA14-IA20

But your confidence has me curious, Cato—were you taught otherwise?

Hmm. 

I looked only at the p51 link, but it is exactly on point, and supports Cato's postion. Suggest that he study, demand that she sing.

Also, the infinitive in English is a squirmy beast, not really the same as in Latin or German, but is usually considered to include "to". Otherwise split infinitives are not possible after all. Cato did not present a modal plus infinitive construction. That would be "suggest that he should to study. "

Formal grammar is little taught in English class in school (for native speakers), and I wish we had had more,  but Cato's understanding matches what I was taught many moons ago.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 08, 2015, 06:30:59 PM
No, Ken. All four of those links explicitly differentiate modal+infinitive from subjunctive. As did Fowler, by the way: http://www.ceafinney.com/subjunctive/excerpts.html#Fowler1926

The infinitive need not include "to," as its use after auxiliaries proves.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 08, 2015, 06:32:47 PM
Oh, I see the confusion here, Ken. Look back at Cato's post on the subjunctive. I was questioning the "would" and "should" examples he gave.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 08, 2015, 06:40:52 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 08, 2015, 06:30:59 PM
No, Ken. All four of those links explicitly differentiate modal+infinitive from subjunctive. As did Fowler, by the way: http://www.ceafinney.com/subjunctive/excerpts.html#Fowler1926

The infinitive need not include "to," as its use after auxiliaries proves.

So where is the modal in "suggest that he study"?

Fowler's stipulation. In fact his wording, "the subjunctives here to be considered 1) exclude those" means that those ARE subjunctives. He is not saying "those" are not subjunctives. He is saying he is excluding "those" from the following remarks. If I wanted to insult all Americans except those from Ohio or with red hair I might begin "The Americans here to be considered 1) exclude those from Ohio". I have not denied Ohioans are Americans.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 08, 2015, 06:43:17 PM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 08, 2015, 06:32:47 PM
Oh, I see the confusion here, Ken. Look back at Cato's post on the subjunctive. I was questioning the "would" and "should" examples he gave.

Well, I think, as does Fowler imply  ;) that those are subjunctive too. See previous comment.  But if you mean simply that the modal-less subjunctive is fading, then yes it is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 08, 2015, 06:49:24 PM
There's no auxiliary in "suggest that he study"—that's subjunctive. We agree on that.

But, according to every grammar I can find, there's no subjunctive in "suggest that he should study"—that's modal auxiliary + infinitive.

And I think you're mistaken about what Fowler is saying there. From The King's English (https://books.google.com/books?id=uBkFAQAAIAAJ&dq=fowler%20english&pg=PA154):

Quote
We have purposely refrained until now from invoking the subjunctive, because the word is almost meaningless to Englishmen, the thing having so nearly perished. But on this instance it must be remarked that when conjunctions like lest, which could once or still can take a subjunctive (as lest he die), use a compound form instead, they use the Sh. forms [should or shall] for all persons.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2015, 08:14:24 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 08, 2015, 06:49:24 PM
There's no auxiliary in "suggest that he study"—that's subjunctive. We agree on that.

But, according to every grammar I can find, there's no subjunctive in "suggest that he should study"—that's modal auxiliary + infinitive.

And I think you're mistaken about what Fowler is saying there. From The King's English (https://books.google.com/books?id=uBkFAQAAIAAJ&dq=fowler%20english&pg=PA154):

Modals are part of the Subjunctive: the mood deals with things that are not real, that are possibilities, or never happened.  e.g. "It should rain today" is not a guarantee or description of any reality.

My Random House Dictionary says "should" is indeed Subjunctive.

What we have are people redefining things that should (note the Subjunctive) be left alone (Fact: they are NOT being left alone).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 09, 2015, 08:26:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2015, 08:14:24 AM
Modals are part of the Subjunctive: the mood deals with things that are not real, that are possibilities, or never happened.  e.g. "It should rain today" is not a guarantee or description of any reality.

My Random House Dictionary says "should" is indeed Subjunctive.

What we have are people redefining things that should (note the Subjunctive) be left alone (Fact: they are NOT being left alone).

Thanks for the Random House info. They do seem to be in the minority, though, as every source I've checked (including old ones like Fowler) indicates otherwise. In any case, the subjunctive certainly isn't dead!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 09, 2015, 08:30:33 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 09, 2015, 08:26:38 AMIn any case, the subjunctive certainly isn't dead!
Indeed not - and it doesn't even smell funny.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2015, 08:35:54 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 09, 2015, 08:26:38 AM
Thanks for the Random House info. They do seem to be in the minority, though, as every source I've checked (including old ones like Fowler) indicates otherwise. In any case, the subjunctive certainly isn't dead!

Quote from: North Star on February 09, 2015, 08:30:33 AM
Indeed not - and it doesn't even smell funny.

Amen, Brothers!   0:)   ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 09, 2015, 08:40:03 AM
But out of curiosity, Cato: is your Random House information the same as the usage note that appears in Dictionary.com's entry for should (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/should)? It reads, in part:

Quote
Because the main function of should in modern American English is to express duty, necessity, etc. (You should get your flu shot before winter comes), its use for other purposes, as to form a subjunctive, can produce ambiguity, at least initially: "I should get my flu shot if I were you."

I ask because I think the subjunctive they refer to in that last sample sentence isn't get, but rather were—and so the situation isn't parallel to the modal-auxiliary examples you originally gave.

And just to complicate things: there's a preference in recent scholarship to define that kind of were as "irrealis" (i.e., not subjunctive at all). See https://books.google.com/books?id=qlxDqB4ldx4C&pg=PA58
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 09, 2015, 08:45:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2015, 08:14:24 AM
Modals are part of the Subjunctive: the mood deals with things that are not real, that are possibilities, or never happened.  e.g. "It should rain today" is not a guarantee or description of any reality.

My Random House Dictionary says "should" is indeed Subjunctive.

What we have are people redefining things that should (note the Subjunctive) be left alone (Fact: they are NOT being left alone).

I should think so. Older readers will recognize that sentence as subjunctive. It is clearer in counterfactuals: I should not have thought it of Cato to misspell "theatre" but I would have thought it of Joe Biden, as less careful writer. Note the would/should difference.  English commonly uses modals as part of the subjunctive declension; the mood is still subjunctive and indicated by the declension. 

Modals in English are a squishy mess overall. They cannot be consistently declined through all tenses but are incomplete; they are irregular; they are pressed into service for many purposes. Their redeeming charm lies in the perplexity they cause the French. "Confusion to the French" as Hornblower would say.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 09, 2015, 09:20:52 AM
Lest the subjunctive smell funny . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 09, 2015, 09:41:42 AM
Well, the important thing is that we're all competent users of modals and subjunctives in practice, right? So some of you subscribe to, er, idiosyncratic definitions. No biggie. Certainly doesn't bother me...

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 09, 2015, 10:13:26 AM
Quote from: aquariuswb on February 09, 2015, 09:41:42 AM
Well, the important thing is that we're all competent users of modals and subjunctives in practice, right? So some of you subscribe to, er, idiosyncratic definitions. No biggie. Certainly doesn't bother me...

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)

I should think be surprised if we could not.  >:D

Note that I am not suggesting I have a moral obligation to think not, indicating the modal is being used as part of a larger construction, in this case the subjunctive form ...
8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 09, 2015, 11:15:24 AM
So be it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 11, 2015, 09:30:55 AM
Sent by my better half. (I made a couple modest changes)

.. When fish are in schools, they sometimes take debate.

.. A thief who stole a calendar got twelve months.

.. When the smog lifts in Los Angeles U.C.L.A.

.. The batteries were given out free of charge.

.. A dentist and a manicurist married. They fought tooth and nail.

.. A will is a dead giveaway.

.. With her marriage, she got a new name and a dress.

.. A boiled egg is hard to beat.

.. When you've seen one shopping center you've seen a mall.

.. Police were summoned to a daycare center where a three-year-old was resisting a rest.

.. Did you hear about the fellow whose entire left side was cut off? He's all right now.

.. A bicycle can't stand alone; it's just two tired.

.. When a clock is hungry it goes back four seconds.

.. The guy who fell onto an upholstery machine is now fully recovered.

.. He had a photographic memory which was never developed.

.. When she saw her first strands of grey hair she thought she'd dye.

.. Acupuncture is a jab well done. That's the point of it.

.. Those who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2015, 09:59:53 AM
Wocka Wocka!

Worthy of Fozzie Bear at least !   8)

I do believe some of those were told by the troops at Valley Forge!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 13, 2015, 10:37:46 AM
Our school has been collecting "good deeds" for Saint Valentine's Day.  If a homeroom has 100 good deeds, which the students have written down on paper hearts, then they can wear regular clothes, rather than the school uniform.

Some interesting good deeds grammatically and in other ways:

"I helped a friend who fell up."   ??? ??? ???

Apparently our school is subject to occasional waves of anti-gravity!

I helped farther Christians food so he could go.  ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o

I believe this is supposed to be: "I helped (with) Father Christian's food, so he could go."  (Still rather obscure!)

Not to be forgotten:

I brought Sundays to the elderly!

And here I thought Father Time did that!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 13, 2015, 10:47:58 AM
Cato
Quoteregular clothes, rather than the school uniform

I thought uniforms were regular clothes.


>:D :laugh:
reg·u·lar
ˈreɡyələr/
adjective
1.
arranged in or constituting a constant or definite pattern, especially with the same space between individual instances.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 13, 2015, 10:53:35 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 13, 2015, 10:47:58 AM
Cato
I thought uniforms were regular clothes.

:D :laugh: 

Wocka Wocka!   :D

I would have the boys in 3-piece suits and ties, and the girls dressed as postulants, but that would probably not "fly" these days!

(http://www.sistersoflife.org/wp-content/gallery/postulants-2012/dsc_0090.jpg)

(http://www.poshtotz.co.uk/ekmps/shops/poshtotz/images/boys-5-piece-black-cream-suit-0-3-months-to-14-15-years-%5B4%5D-3559-p.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: oyasumi on February 19, 2015, 10:17:58 AM
Quote from: REDACTED on February 19, 2015, 02:37:12 AM
When in Boston, don't take someone else's shoveled-out parking spot (especially if you're a Yankee's fan).   :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 20, 2015, 04:14:57 AM
I found this curiosity on the Internet today:

It's with great sadness that I want to let my family and friends know that our beloved mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother transitioned at home this evening. She is with her soulmate and love of her life...

Besides that, there is the added curiosity that three people seem to have "transitioned."  ???   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2015, 05:45:15 AM
Okay, so I was driving through small-town Ohio yesterday, and "Steve's" general store had a sign, which obviously needed to be changed, but these things take time!

So the sign offered the following:

"Dont Forget Valentines Day: Free Flour!"

Obviously a genius, Steve gets our attention in all sorts of ways with this brilliant piece of marketing!   :D

My wife did not think she could properly appreciate a 5-pound bag of flour - free or  not - for Saint Valentine's Day!  0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 21, 2015, 06:13:57 AM
Suite!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 07:58:46 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 21, 2015, 05:45:15 AM
Okay, so I was driving through small-town Ohio yesterday, and "Steve's" general store had a sign, which obviously needed to be changed, but these things take time!

So the sign offered the following:

"Dont Forget Valentines Day: Free Flour!"

Obviously a genius, Steve gets our attention in all sorts of ways with this brilliant piece of marketing!   :D

My wife did not think she could properly appreciate a 5-pound bag of flour - free or  not - for Saint Valentine's Day!  0:)

Reminds me of a a sign I saw

Free Beer
Pay the bartender the ransom
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2015, 10:05:58 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 21, 2015, 06:13:57 AM
Suite!

Sew it is!    ???

Quote from: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 07:58:46 AM
Reminds me of a a sign I saw

Free Beer
Pay the bartender the ransom

Or those signs in the 1960's with "Wild Girls Want Sex Tonight" :o ??? :o ???

And then:  "Now that I have your attention..."   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 21, 2015, 10:29:24 AM
Hi Cato et al, can I run this past you, possibly not for the first time- why is it that non-westerners take substandard English to be fine and don't understand at all when the English speaking world shakes heads in mirth at them?

My basic argument is that many non-Western societies and languages don't prioritize articulation, differentiation and discrete expression as do Western languages and their modern societies. India is a great example- it's a fantastic culture but one for holistic thinking not straight thinking.

It's not that other languages are less than English, indeed they could easily be superior, and I'm most interested in Sanskrit for example. But English has to be learnt as English- it can be used in other ways that it's not designed for, but not as well. It fulfils specific functions of discrimination and precision and to ignore this becomes laughable- because these characteristics are part of its basic structure.

I don't know how to explain the ridiculously cavalier attitudes to English that non-Western learners show, other than that they're bringing in presuppositions from their own experience of what a language is. Western learners of English as a second language do not take a low level of understanding, or any garbage they write, to be just fine or a dialect as good as Australian or American English.

In each of my three jobs in S.Korea and China the local staff could not believe that their second-rate English was second-rate, and justified crazy mistakes as a legitimate local dialect of English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2015, 11:55:01 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 21, 2015, 10:29:24 AM
Hi Cato et al, can I run this past you, possibly not for the first time- why is it that non-westerners take substandard English to be fine and don't understand at all when the English speaking world shakes heads in mirth at them?

My basic argument is that many non-Western societies and languages don't prioritize articulation, differentiation and discrete expression as do Western languages and their modern societies. India is a great example- it's a fantastic culture but one for holistic thinking not straight thinking.

A handful of my students, whose parents were immigrants from India, used to say that America was a relief from the ways of Bombay and New Delhi.  8)

Concerning the attitude on language: I have seen a few teachers of English in Germany, who were occasionally teaching things incorrectly.  Most of the teachers of English I met there were most meticulous, but a few were just sloppy.

One can imagine that their errors were passed along to their students, who would remain under the impression that their English is therefore correct.

I know very few Oriental immigrants, but my brother, who has made many trips to China, has come across the same thing you have mentioned.  My wife and sons, who had Asian immigrants as professors, will tell you that it was well-nigh impossible at times to understand them!  The delusion that their English is just fine my brother ascribes to cultural arrogance, i.e. I must speak English well because it is just a barbarian language.  How hard could  it be?

I suspect incompetent teachers who accept sloppy pronunciation and sloppy grammar and sloppy vocabulary are more likely the cause. 

We have a good number of those types teaching English in our schools too!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 12:05:08 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 21, 2015, 11:55:01 AM
A handful of my students, whose parents were immigrants from India, used to say that America was a relief from the ways of Bombay and New Delhi.  8)

Concerning the attitude on language: I have seen a few teachers of English in Germany, who were occasionally teaching things incorrectly.  Most of the teachers of English I met there were most meticulous, but a few were just sloppy.

One can imagine that their errors were passed along to their students, who would remain under the impression that their English is therefore correct.

I know very few Oriental immigrants, but my brother, who has made many trips to China, has come across the same thing you have mentioned.  My wife and sons, who had Asian immigrants as professors, will tell you that it was well-nigh impossible at times to understand them!  The delusion that their English is just fine my brother ascribes to cultural arrogance, i.e. I must speak English well because it is just a barbarian language.  How hard could  it be?

I suspect incompetent teachers who accept sloppy pronunciation and sloppy grammar and sloppy vocabulary are more likely the cause. 

We have a good number of those types teaching English in our schools too!

So you've been to Detroit then.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2015, 12:27:17 PM
Quote from: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 12:05:08 PM
So you've been to Detroit then.

Oh yes!   ;)

But I have encountered a good number of incompetent teachers of English and other subjects even in the richest suburban schools.  Union contracts and tenure seem to catalyze a "dial-it-in" attitude among some people.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 21, 2015, 12:42:54 PM
It's what you get when your native language is a second or third language throughout the world.

Some "orientals" or Africans may not speak English (or in Western Africa French) very well, they may even be illiterate. But many people in such societies are rather fluent in 3 languages or more: one tribal/local, one national/offical like Kisuaheli, one "colonial" (like English).
Now imagine your barely literal redneck being conversant not only in English but also in Spanish and Hindi...!?!? Not a big surprise if the third language sometimes mutates to an odd pidgin style.
How many (otherwise reasonably) well educated Brits and Americans are fluent in ONE language besides their mother tongue?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 21, 2015, 01:01:55 PM
Sean, everyone should get the hint and only use their first language when communicating with you. See you after you've spent some time learning Finnish or Swedish. I promise I'll point out each and every mistake you make to others with the same wonder and amusement you have when writing of non-native English speakers trying to find a common means of communication with someone traveling in their country.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 02:19:52 PM
Quote from: North Star on February 21, 2015, 01:01:55 PM
Sean, everyone should get the hint and only use their first language when communicating with you. See you after you've spent some time learning Finnish or Swedish. I promise I'll point out each and every mistake you make to others with the same wonder and amusement you have when writing of non-native English speakers trying to find a common means of communication with someone traveling in their country.

I think Sean, perhaps understandably if not coherently, is reacting to something particular. It is often considered subtly unacceptable to insist upon, or even to request, careful and correct English. This is due in large part to its use as the lingua franca: correction can be seen as excluding non-native speakers. There is no such disapproval of French or Finnish punctilio. It can seem that English is being treated rather like a communal bicycle that no-one treats well. The resulting loss of precision and elegance can be felt by those of us old enough to remember when English was less widespread as a second language, or by those who are widely read in writings from before our birth. Few here know the difference between "I shall" and "I will" for example, or understand the joke about Samuel Johnson's surprised wife, to mention but two distinctions washed away in the past few decades.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 02:23:18 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 21, 2015, 12:27:17 PM
Union contracts and tenure seem to catalyze a "dial-it-in" attitude among some people.
Yes. They are called "members".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 21, 2015, 03:08:51 PM
Quote from: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 02:19:52 PM
I think Sean, perhaps understandably if not coherently, is reacting to something particular. It is often considered subtly unacceptable to insist upon, or even to request, careful and correct English. This is due in large part to its use as the lingua franca...

I always found Germans were just thrilled that foreigners (e.g. my students) were trying to learn German, and how they butchered the language did not counterbalance the delight that the students were trying to speak German.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 21, 2015, 03:39:54 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 21, 2015, 03:08:51 PM
I always found Germans were just thrilled that foreigners (e.g. my students) were trying to learn German, and how they butchered the language did not counterbalance the delight that the students were trying to speak German.

Yes. Stunned surprise is a common reaction from Germans who learn I taught myself some German.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 21, 2015, 11:48:14 PM
Cato, so some immigrants begin to sense how English actually works when they're in the speaking environment, sounds right.

However teachers being either accurate or lazy is really not the issue here. There's a distinct cultural phenomenon going on in non-Western countries where English and also other Western languages learnt are not respected as they should be, and indeed while Western learners of them as second languages do respect them.

Certainly errors are then passed on and fossilized in the host environment however.

Interesting point about Chinese arrogantly seeing foreign languages as surely simple and unsophisticated, but again this can't explain the inveteracy of this thing, and it's not just in China. The element of snootiness I think comes after, occupying a space that their own language leaves open- while we can look for greater distinctions, they don't have the linguistic means for that and instead look to social hierarchy and bonkers ideas about respect.

At my last job in China the managers would not correct ludicrous mistakes on the English exam, causing some questions to be unintelligible to the students, and the whole thing badly written and extremely professionally unethical, because the Chinese staff member preparing it would have been offended.

Ken B, plenty of native speakers use bad English, sure. But even those characters don't have the foolish indifference to it that non-westerners show, and indeed usually have a grasp somewhere of those underlying features that seek articulation of meaning.

Also although most international English use is just as a basic lingua franca there is no respect for its richness, expressive flexibility and articulating power, because they're not aware of it because it's not in their own language

They hence also dodge the proper awareness that almost all the literature in the entire modern arts and sciences is in English or other European languages.

Jo498, it's well beyond an issue of learning the basics of another language so you that can hold down a simple conversation. I was at a university where the Chinese staff had no respect for the language and defended it by quoting idiot philosophical deconstructionists, and then still not making proper arguments. Meanwhile the university dean's speeches, the website, the notice board, and the exams all remained pathetic jokes.

North Star, I'm trying not to criticize learners and their hard work unnecessarily, and the number of languages I speak is to one side of things here- I think you're missing the point.

I've got more theorizing plus photos of errors on signs using English for lingua franca purposes on a downloadable file here-

https://app.box.com/s/maramdcq1qe5hvh0gw37lm26t2g5b9cs
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 21, 2015, 11:54:29 PM
Moreover here's a ppt presentation I put together for Chinese English-teaching staff on common mistakes. It was a well-attended event but with some strained and indignant faces and nothing further encouraged, and some of the subsequent responses unfortunately being

'Frankly I don't think the mistakes you outlined were mistakes.'

In fact I got very angry and was called to a disciplinary meeting...

https://app.box.com/s/hp4vj2jd7ixt229x7gs75byu9yx81uzz
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 22, 2015, 12:34:54 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 21, 2015, 11:54:29 PM
https://app.box.com/s/hp4vj2jd7ixt229x7gs75byu9yx81uzz
Quote from: SeanI've interested in how education systems work and what they achieve
Are you sure you don't mean that you are interested in that. . .
And when you say 'propaganda and fakery that passes for news', should the verb be in plural form? And you say that you can be reached by email 'on' your address, should that be 'at'? And shouldn't there be a comma after 'However' here: 'However I don't use a phone or QQ...[sic]"

'Also note that very is only for adverbs... (?) [sic]' is a very interesting thing to write.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 22, 2015, 12:52:19 AM
Will correct these as nec, thanks, Polaris.

Are you sure you don't mean that you are interested in that. . .

And when you say 'propaganda and fakery that passes for news',


But However doesn't need a comma- it's a pause but only a short pause. And on is as good as at for me.

As for very and adverbs I remain unsure.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 22, 2015, 08:34:23 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 22, 2015, 12:52:19 AM
Will correct these as nec, thanks, Polaris.

Are you sure you don't mean that you are interested in that. . .

And when you say 'propaganda and fakery that passes for news',


But However doesn't need a comma- it's a pause but only a short pause. And on is as good as at for me.

As for very and adverbs I remain unsure.

Why unsure? As an adverb, it modifies verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.

"She is very beautiful."  (modifying an adjective)

"He ran very quickly."  (modifying another adverb)

"Very" can also be an adjective: "I am the very model of a modern major general."  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 22, 2015, 08:39:43 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 22, 2015, 08:34:23 AM
Why unsure? As an adverb, it modifies verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs.
Very true.  8)
But, we must allow Sean his complaints of the lack of command of the English language those orientals have. . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 22, 2015, 09:11:56 AM
I agree that the examples from Sean in the pdf are often hilarious or frustrating. But as I said this is what you get if a language that is very different from the local ones (apparently Chinese in most cases?) as lingua franca. To make hypotheses about the reasons I think one would have to know the local languages quite well (this would very probably also explain most of the common mistakes). But speculations about English being objectively "more expressive" or more subtle or about the apollinian or dionysian national character seems rather far-fetched.

Comparing English with the languages I have some knowledge of (unfortunately no Asian language) it allows very fine distinctions because of its huge vocabulary. It is also more expressive than German (but probably somewhat less than e.g. Spanish and Latin) with respect to tempus and verbal aspect. OTOH because there is almost no flexion of verbs and nouns word order is somewhat strict and inflexible (or prone to misunderstandings if handled more freely in poetry).
The curse of English as a second or third language is that it is fairly easy to know enough to get more or less along but very difficult to know it well because of its huge vocabulary and the dreaded "idioms". Also the spelling and the failing correspondence between spelling and pronounciation are probably the worst of all languages.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 22, 2015, 01:12:00 PM
Cato, we don't say I very like it. Can you elaborate why?

Jo

QuoteBut speculations about English being objectively "more expressive" or more subtle or about the apollinian or dionysian national character seems rather far-fetched.

Well I take a different view, English is a fantastic language, even if not perfect and I can even feel it sometimes constraining my thinking. It's not just the large vocabulary but subtle word order and other sophisticated features I can't claim to understand that give it enormous expressive reach and articulation that can no way exist if for instance you're using crude pictographs, which is what Far Eastern languages of course do.

Spelling and pronunciation issues are interesting- though inconsistent they hugely add richness, and corresponding latitude and critique of thought...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on February 22, 2015, 04:15:06 PM
Quote from: Sean on February 21, 2015, 11:48:14 PM
...Ken B, plenty of native speakers use bad English, sure. But even those characters don't have the foolish indifference to it that non-westerners show, and indeed usually have a grasp somewhere of those underlying features that seek articulation of meaning.... there is no respect for its richness, expressive flexibility and articulating power, because they're not aware of it ... They hence also dodge the proper awareness that almost all the literature in the entire modern arts and sciences is in English or other European languages.... it's well beyond an issue of learning the basics of [a] language so you that can hold down a simple conversation....
Sean, you're talking about some of my U.S.-born neighbors here in downtown Denver! :o :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 22, 2015, 05:33:14 PM
Quote from: jochanaan on February 22, 2015, 04:15:06 PM
Sean, you're talking about some of my U.S.-born neighbors here in downtown Denver! :o :laugh:

I think that's part of his complaint. It is now frowned upon to insist on good English even from monolingual native speakers born here. like Rodney Dangerfield, English don't get no respect.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 22, 2015, 08:58:10 PM
jochanaan, I still think there's a difference- even in the moronic masses' crudest English there's more grasp of its ability to articulate the world than the average Chinese learner.

There's some good examples of Chinglish on Youtube, and characters making similar points as me.

By the way I don't live in much of a Standard English zone here in central England- the place has its qualities but people have long since deliberately distorted the language, and knowing what they're doing-

How am you?

He's borrowed me his car

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 22, 2015, 10:57:55 PM
Quote from: Ken B on February 22, 2015, 05:33:14 PM
I think that's part of his complaint. It is now frowned upon to insist on good English even from monolingual native speakers born here. like Rodney Dangerfield, English don't get no respect.
But whoever may be to blame for this, clearly not the Asians, but probably the speakers italicized above...
(My sister studied English at a German university. One of her professors (apparently a British person) corrected students who used American phrases or pronunciation: "That's how they speak on the other side of the ocean" (But they had also  a few Aussie and American professors (and of course many Germans but I think the more practical exercises were usually taught by native speakers.)

As I said, I think one common problem of mangling English by both natives and foreigners is the huge difficulty differential between basic communication and advanced literate use of language. I still remember that I was puzzled when an older friend of mine (who was a teacher of English and French) claimed that English was considerably harder than French. Hardly any German High school student would agree with this because they struggle with French verbs or whatever. But apparently, once you are beyond the basics, it is not so hard to get really good at French because it is more regular (and maybe more logical). English seems to get harder the "deeper" you go.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 22, 2015, 11:07:45 PM
English is indeed more sophisticated the deeper you go. But what trips up the Chinese and Koreans, who're already looking for their idea of language as s simple pidgin, is the deceptively simple base to English.

It's not really simple because although you can communicate with a limited amount of study unlike some languages, the more advanced richness is implicit in the basics. In English you can write even a very simple sentence well or crudely. And the correct formations then give rise to immense potential for expression and articulation- once you understand the fuller meaning structured in the simple sentence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 23, 2015, 05:36:35 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 22, 2015, 10:57:55 PM
But whoever may be to blame for this, clearly not the Asians, but probably the speakers italicized above...


Oh I don't disagree, far from it. I'm just trying to explicate the legitimate core at the heart of Sean's maundering.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on February 23, 2015, 01:30:01 PM
Quote from: Sean on February 22, 2015, 01:12:00 PM
Cato, we don't say I very like it. Can you elaborate why?

Because very is an adjective, not an adverb. I've just encountered an interesting illustration of this, in the use of the superlative form, namely 'veriest'.

Sorry, I wrote this hurriedly. What I mean is that 'very' does not directly modify a verb. It can of course modify an adverb providing indirect modification, as in 'very quietly' or 'very much so'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 23, 2015, 02:15:30 PM

Quote from: Sean on February 22, 2015, 01:12:00 PM
Cato, we don't say I very like it. Can you elaborate why?

Yes, because there are various kinds of adverbs.  What you have there is "Borat English" !   :laugh:

"Very" is an adverb of degree, and is therefore wrong in your example.  "I very much like it" is of course correct.

Quote from: Ten thumbs on February 23, 2015, 01:30:01 PM
Because very is an adjective, not an adverb. I've just encountered an interesting illustration of this, in the use of the superlative form, namely 'veriest'

Again, "very" is both adjective and adverb: the superlative form is for the adjective.  "The veriest foolishness was on display in the cafeteria."  Meaning the best example of foolishness could be found (most probably) among the male students at the tables.   $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 23, 2015, 03:16:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 23, 2015, 02:15:30 PM
Yes, because there are various kinds of adverbs.  What you have there is "Borat English" !   :laugh:

"Very" is an adverb of degree, and is therefore wrong in your example.  "I very much like it" is of course correct.

Again, "very" is both adjective and adverb: the superlative form is for the adjective.  "The veriest foolishness was on display in the cafeteria."  Meaning the best example of foolishness could be found (most probably) among the male students at the tables.   $:)

Your explanation is the very thing.  And denying very is an adverb? The very idea!

It's a day for archaic words today. It's been a while since I saw titer, captious, or veriest, but I ran across them all today.  I send someone to the dictionary with parturition recently too, but that's not archaic, just esoteric.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 23, 2015, 11:11:28 PM
Thanks Cato.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 24, 2015, 03:02:05 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 23, 2015, 11:11:28 PM
Thanks Cato.

Spreading contentment wherever I can!   8)

Quote from: Ken B on February 23, 2015, 03:16:21 PM
Your explanation is the very thing.  And denying very is an adverb? The very idea!

It's a day for archaic words today. It's been a while since I saw titer, captious, or veriest, but I ran across them all today.  I send someone to the dictionary with parturition recently too, but that's not archaic, just esoteric.

Don't forget "twee" and "axolotl." 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 24, 2015, 03:05:22 AM
I was listening to some Peter Gabriel the other day, so I am in no danger of forgetting twee  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 24, 2015, 02:15:49 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 24, 2015, 03:05:22 AM
I was listening to some Peter Gabriel the other day, so I am in no danger of forgetting twee  8)

And then there is: louche!  0:)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/louche (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/louche)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 25, 2015, 12:54:00 AM
Found today here on GMG:

I know a few French phrases and them a few English.

I think it should read either

I know a few French phrases and they a few English ones.

or

I know a few French phrases and they a little English.

Anyway, them strikes me as wrong.


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on February 25, 2015, 01:26:38 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 24, 2015, 03:05:22 AMI was listening to some Peter Gabriel the other day, so I am in no danger of forgetting twee  8)

It's safer if you play him in German, then. (I liked him best in those years).  ;D
https://www.youtube.com/v/wv4_g5pmFPQ
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2015, 03:20:40 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 25, 2015, 12:54:00 AM

Anyway, them strikes me as wrong.

You are right, and your correction is accurate!

Found in an article on the French government's response to Islamic terrorists: not a mistake, but a sentence showing the importance of prepositions:

This fierce protection of public life from religion—which includes a law banning the hijab, the Islamic head scarf for women—is foreign to most Americans who view the state as promoting freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

(My emphasis)

See:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/kenneth-r-weinstein-a-french-lesson-for-american-liberals-1424821664 (http://www.wsj.com/articles/kenneth-r-weinstein-a-french-lesson-for-american-liberals-1424821664)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:10:07 AM
Hi Florestan, thanks, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

QuoteFound today here on GMG:

I know a few French phrases and them a few English.

I think it should read either...

In a way you're right, my sentence has a fault. But actually it doesn't have one because you're missing an important feature of English- the guiding criterion is not principles of construction, but instead only what is judged to be best in terms of articulate expression. It's a pragmatic language.

And thence formations give way to idioms.

Both your suggested alternatives are in fact then more long-winded and clumsy than my idiom, and thus I'm correct.

A related example might be I'll try and get it done, instead of I'll try to get it done. The former is idiomatic and hence with meaning to justify it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 07:16:02 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 25, 2015, 12:54:00 AM
Found today here on GMG:

I know a few French phrases and them a few English.

I think it should read either

I know a few French phrases and they a few English ones.

or

I know a few French phrases and they a little English.

Anyway, them strikes me as wrong.

Simply explained. Sean is part Chinese.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 25, 2015, 07:16:46 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 07:16:02 AM
Simply explained. Sean is part Chinese.

:D :D :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 25, 2015, 07:26:11 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:10:07 AM
Hi Florestan, thanks, there's no such thing as bad publicity.

In a way you're right, my sentence has a fault. But actually it doesn't have one because you're missing an important feature of English- the guiding criterion is not principles of construction, but instead only what is judged to be best in terms of articulate expression. It's a pragmatic language.

And thence formations give way to idioms.

Both your suggested alternatives are in fact then more long-winded and clumsy than my idiom, and thus I'm correct.

A related example might be I'll try and get it done, instead of I'll try to get it done. The former is idiomatic and hence with meaning to justify it.
Them must indeed be wrong in seeing a fault in your sentence, free of clumsiness.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:33:18 AM
Indeed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2015, 07:43:21 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:10:07 AM


And thence formations give way to idioms.



Or to incomprehensibility, depending on the mistake.


Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:10:07 AM

Both your suggested alternatives are in fact then more long-winded and clumsy than my idiom, and thus I'm correct.

????????????????  How on earth is changing "them" to "they" and adding one word or two "long-winded and clumsy"!!!???!!!   You could drop the "and" in Florestan's example, and his version flows nicely and without the clumsy jarring of an object as subject.

Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:10:07 AM

A related example might be I'll try and get it done, instead of I'll try to get it done. The former is idiomatic and hence with meaning to justify it.


I would not view the former as an "idiom" at all: "I'll" is simply understood before "get it done."  Comprehensibility is not impeded.  "Them know" is not an idiom: it is a mistake for "they know."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 07:51:46 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 25, 2015, 07:43:21 AM

Or to incomprehensibility, depending on the mistake.


????????????????  How on earth is changing "them" to "they" and adding one word or two "long-winded and clumsy"!!!???!!!   You could drop the "and" in Florestan's example, and his version flows nicely and without the clumsy jarring of an object as subject.

I would not view the former as an "idiom" at all: "I'll" is simply understood before "get it done."  Comprehensibility is not impeded.  "Them know" is not an idiom: it is a mistake for "they know."

You need to try for understand Cato.

Puncuation!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:52:08 AM
No.

I know a few French phrases and they a few English is more clumsy than I know a few French phrases and them a few English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on February 25, 2015, 07:54:00 AM
No, it isn't.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2015, 08:01:32 AM
Quote from: Christo on February 25, 2015, 07:54:00 AM
No, it isn't.  :)

Amen!  0:)

"Them (know) a few English (ones)" is as wrong as "Them see they dog."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 25, 2015, 08:04:37 AM
Some enallages is just wrong.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2015, 08:06:43 AM
Quote from: North Star on February 25, 2015, 08:04:37 AM
Some enallages is just wrong.

Throwing more French at us, eh?  8)   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 25, 2015, 08:13:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 25, 2015, 08:06:43 AM
Throwing more French at us, eh?  8)   ;)
:laugh:

It gets less and less baffling that some of Sean's students should make the odd grammatical error - or even a normal one - and insist that they didn't make one. Chances are, they didn't.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:13:46 AM
I'm right on this, guys.

Sometimes you have to bend the overall principle for greater clarity and immediacy; sometimes the structures available in the rules of English in fact are not good enough, as Florestan's necessarily clumsy attempts at correction show.

Structures are subject to a higher principle of judgement of coherency.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:18:10 AM
As if I haven't got better things to do this afternoon... one for North-

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/x%20Sean/026_zps68aa280b.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2015, 08:22:17 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:13:46 AM
I'm right on this, guys.

No, you are wrong.

Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:13:46 AM

Sometimes you have to bend the overall principle for greater clarity and immediacy; sometimes the structures available in the rules of English in fact are not good enough, as Florestan's necessarily clumsy attempts at correction show.

Structures are subject to a higher principle of judgement of coherency.

Again, how is changing the incorrect "them" to "they" somehow clumsy?

How exactly is "them know" a product of a higher principle of coherence?  That would mean that "they know" is wrong, and that objects are subjects! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:38:07 AM
Cato

QuoteAgain, how is changing the incorrect "them" to "they" somehow clumsy?

You're making the mistake of getting too far from idiomatic English- following rules in the present case causes you to cogitate over what the heck the sentence means. They in fact means them in the wider sense I was trying to communicate, but the language in terms of its rules here isn't sophisticated enough to cope with this. Seeing the sentence in the original context might also have helped.

I'm not in the least a relativist with this stuff and am quite clear that any dialect is not necessarily as good as Standard English, but English is practical in its nature, not officious and peremptory.

Indeed this is a key feature of English culture and why the dastardly Brits tended to win so many battles and spread their influence- they just deal with things empirically and as they stand, and overarching theories come later.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 08:46:08 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 07:52:08 AM
No.

I know a few French phrases and they a few English is more clumsy than I know a few French phrases and them a few English.

You mean more clumsiest.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 08:55:11 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:13:46 AM

Structures are subject to a higher principle of judgement of coherency.

Am I the only one who finds
1. coherency is clumsier than coherence
2. the whole dame thing is clumsy

Let's try that again. "English sometime bends the rules about pronouns for simplicity, comfort, or clarity." (I infer that is Sean's argument. I'm a good guesser.) Indeed. But in this case there is no gain only loss. It's especially egregious to teach Sean's way to a foreigner, because it will only confuse him. It is easy to see that the verb "know" has been elided in the correct formulation, and so it is easy for a learner to tease out the meaning, and see the logic. Not so in Sean's mistaken phrasing.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 09:15:00 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:13:46 AM
I'm right on this, guys.

You're saying that peer review is not your friend, eh?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 09:16:40 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 25, 2015, 08:22:17 AM
Again, how is changing the incorrect "them" to "they" somehow clumsy?

Gorblimey.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 09:32:01 AM
Quote from: A Law ProfessorHowever, we have a long history as humans of disliking the insanity defense ....

Is there any purpose served by the phrase as humans?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 25, 2015, 09:35:59 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:38:07 AM
Cato

You're making the mistake of getting too far from idiomatic English- following rules in the present case causes you to cogitate over what the heck the sentence means.

No, I am "cogitating" over what your sentence means!

Quote from: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 08:55:11 AM
Am I the only one who finds
1. coherency is clumsier than coherence
2. the whole dame thing is clumsy


No, you are not the only one!  $:)

Quote from: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 08:55:11 AM

Let's try that again. "English sometime bends the rules about pronouns for simplicity, comfort, or clarity." (I infer that is Sean's argument. I'm a good guesser.) Indeed. But in this case there is no gain only loss. It's especially egregious to teach Sean's way to a foreigner, because it will only confuse him. It is easy to see that the verb "know" has been elided in the correct formulation, and so it is easy for a learner to tease out the meaning, and see the logic. Not so in Sean's mistaken phrasing.

Amen!  I will repeat: how is "They know" somehow CLUMSY - either musically or grammatically - and "them know" somehow superior?

Quote from: karlhenning on February 25, 2015, 09:32:01 AM
Is there any purpose served by the phrase as humans?

No, unless the lawyer is addressing extraterrestrials or chimpanzees!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 09:37:10 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 25, 2015, 09:35:59 AM
No, unless the lawyer is addressing extraterrestrials or chimpanzees!

(* bites tongue *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 09:39:53 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 25, 2015, 09:37:10 AM
(* bites tongue *)
Go on! You KNOW you want to make a James joke!

>:D :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 25, 2015, 09:40:21 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 25, 2015, 09:32:01 AM
Is there any purpose served by the phrase as humans?
This feels like an appropriate entry after the previous discussion. . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 09:41:23 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 09:39:53 AM
Go on! You KNOW you want to make a James joke!

>:D :laugh:

Well, maybe the line was excerpted from a Stockhausen libretto . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 09:41:39 AM
Quote from: North Star on February 25, 2015, 09:40:21 AM
This feels like an appropriate entry after the previous discussion. . .

(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 09:44:40 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 25, 2015, 09:32:01 AM
Is there any purpose served by the phrase as humans?

There is in fact. It is the same purpose served by wearing tie-died shirts or shopping at Whole Foods.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on February 25, 2015, 09:44:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 25, 2015, 08:06:43 AMThrowing more French at us, eh?  8)   ;)

Chimpanzees aside, what little else is there found in English - but a vocabulary that was mostly derived from French and Latin?  :D
(http://www.ghs-mh.de/migration/projects/language/lw_en_1.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on February 25, 2015, 09:51:36 AM
Quote from: Christo on February 25, 2015, 09:44:51 AM
Chimpanzees aside, what little else is there found in English - but a vocabulary that was mostly derived from French and Latin?  :D
(http://www.ghs-mh.de/migration/projects/language/lw_en_1.jpg)
Oh, there are a few articles from Old English that carry into today's language--mostly tetragrammata. :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 25, 2015, 10:01:11 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on February 25, 2015, 09:51:36 AM
Oh, there are a few articles from Old English that carry into today's language--mostly tetragrammata. :laugh:
And Norse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Old_Norse_origin
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 10:03:46 AM
For better or Norse . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 25, 2015, 10:05:30 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 25, 2015, 10:03:46 AM
For better or Norse . . . .
You're talking about Gamalost again, aren't you?  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on February 25, 2015, 10:08:08 AM
Some might be interested in Chinese influences on English vocabulary: http://www.zompist.com/chinawords.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 25, 2015, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Christo on February 25, 2015, 10:08:08 AM
Some might be interested in Chinese influences on English vocabulary: http://www.zompist.com/chinawords.html
I wonder what Brits did to vegetables before they knew of chopping ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on February 25, 2015, 10:15:11 AM
Quote from: North Star on February 25, 2015, 10:12:45 AM
I wonder what Brits did to vegetables before they knew of chopping ;)
An easy one. What they still do with it:
https://www.youtube.com/v/piWCBOsJr-w
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 11:29:06 AM
(http://i405.photobucket.com/albums/pp140/DESTINY898/Food%20Fight/pie_in_face_1.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 25, 2015, 12:29:08 PM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:13:46 AM
I'm right on this, guys.

No, you aren´t.

Quote
Sometimes you have to bend the overall principle for greater clarity and immediacy; sometimes the structures available in the rules of English in fact are not good enough

They seem good enough for everybody, except you.

Quote
Structures are subject to a higher principle of judgement of coherency.

Now, that´s really clumsy. Structures are subject to a higher judgement principle: coherence sounds much better.

Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 08:38:07 AM
the language in terms of its rules here isn't sophisticated enough to cope with this.

Oh, I see. Your thoughts are so sophisticated that English grammar and its rules can´t cope with them (or is it they?). Then I suggest you try silence instead.

Quote
English is practical in its nature, not officious and peremptory.

Does "Entrance strickly forbidden" achieve the practical purpose of keeping people out? It does.

Does "Do not feed and tease the animals" achieve the practical purpose of not having the animals fed or teased? It does.

Why do you object to them then?

And officious is not used properly here.

officious

adjective

1. objectionably aggressive in offering one's unrequested and unwanted services, help, or advice; meddlesome:
an officious person.
2. marked by or proceeding from such forwardness:
officious interference.
3.Obsolete. ready to serve; obliging.


Quote
Indeed this is a key feature of English culture and why the dastardly Brits tended to win so many battles and spread their influence- they just deal with things empirically and as they stand, and overarching theories come later.

Balderdash.

And talking about clumsiness, here´s a real gem.

I also walk the streets further from the port road, being likewise pleasant, sleepy and safe.

Who or what is pleasant, sleepy and safe? The one who walks or the streets?

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 12:33:17 PM
On the plus side, snyprrr has found his long lost brother.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 25, 2015, 02:46:33 PM
Oh, gracious.  What if . . . ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 25, 2015, 09:44:31 PM
Florestan, good morning.

QuoteStructures are subject to a higher judgement principle: coherence

In recent years I've moved away from the colon and such formations as this. They're like an excessive use of italics or cute point making and there are always better ways of stating things more straightforwardly. I reserve colons for introducing major sections of information, otherwise I it's the dash and semicolon.

Quote...thoughts are so sophisticated that English grammar and its rules can´t cope with them

Well language certainly shapes thought, and its worth trying to go beyond that sometimes.

Yes I object to incorrect English, but as I've tried to say, that does not mean following rules. Good English is based on judgement of words and syntax and even if all possible rules could be written down they wouldn't displace this criterioin.

QuoteI also walk the streets further from the port road, being likewise pleasant, sleepy and safe.

Again you're taking that out of context, and if a sentence's meaning is immediately clear then you don't need further linguistic dogmatism.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 26, 2015, 12:30:22 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 25, 2015, 09:44:31 PM
Florestan, good morning.

´Morning to you.

Quote
Yes I object to incorrect English, but as I've tried to say, that does not mean following rules.
Me am sorry, but this is nonsensic. Incorrectical English is thus with a reason, being exackly that had been broken the rules.

Does the above phrase make any sense to you? Of course not, because I broke about as many rules as I could, starting off with the one you broke yourself claiming that it was actually right to do so. Let´s restate it correctly (ie, following the rules).

I am sorry, but this is nonsense. Incorrect English is incorrect for a reason, namely it breaks the rules.

Quote
Good English is based on judgement of words and syntax and even if all possible rules could be written down they wouldn't displace this criterioin.

Good English, just like good Romanian or good Quechua or good whatnot, is based on three things: vocabulary, grammar and syntax. Whether you like it or not, whether it suits you or not, all three have rules. Breaking them wil result in bad English. "Them know" is just as bad English as "strickly".


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 26, 2015, 12:38:27 AM
I'd say it's worse. Grammatical errors are more serious than spelling mistakes, IMO. And putting the subject of a sentence in the accusative case is among the most fundamental grammatical errors one can commit...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 26, 2015, 12:49:15 AM
You two, I didn't say them know.

It might have followed from the sentence but I didn't say it. They and them had their functions in the sentence and are both fine.

I don't think you're going to see this so I'll agree to disagree. Another topic perhaps.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 26, 2015, 12:58:35 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 26, 2015, 12:49:15 AM
You two, I didn't say them know.

It might have followed from the sentence but I didn't say it. They and them had their functions in the sentence and are both fine.


You´re right, you didn´t say it. You wrote it.

Quote from: Sean on February 22, 2015, 12:22:03 PMI know a few French phrases and them a few English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 05:05:04 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 26, 2015, 12:38:27 AM
I'd say it's worse. Grammatical errors are more serious than spelling mistakes, IMO. And putting the subject of a sentence in the accusative case is among the most fundamental grammatical errors one can commit...
What was that famous headline? J'accusative?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 05:26:51 AM
QuoteI know a few French phrases and them a few English.

I can make this work! With a little punctuation.

Cato asked me if I knew some phrases in German. And I said to Cato, "Those prases?  I know them.  I also know phrases in French, and just a few in English. I know a few french phrases, and them, a few English. Lots of phrases."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on February 26, 2015, 05:30:01 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 05:26:51 AM
I can make this work! With a little punctuation.

Cato asked me if I knew some phrases in German. And I said to Cato, "Those prases?  I know them.  I also know phrases in French, and just a few in English. I know a few french phrases, and them, a few English. Lots of phrases."

Your grammar is fine indeed. But now your French capital is wrong.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 26, 2015, 05:51:11 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 25, 2015, 09:44:40 AM
There is in fact. It is the same purpose served by wearing tie-died shirts or shopping at Whole Foods.

By their tie-dyed apparel shall ye now them.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 26, 2015, 06:04:03 AM
Quote from: Sean on February 26, 2015, 12:49:15 AM
You two, I didn't say them know.

Yes, you did: it is understood from the opening "I know."  If not, then please tell us which verb is supposed to go with the incorrect "them."

Quote from: Sean on February 26, 2015, 12:49:15 AM

It might have followed from the sentence but I didn't say it. They and them had their functions in the sentence and are both fine.

I don't think you're going to see this so I'll agree to disagree. Another topic perhaps.

There is no idea of "might" involved: "know" MUST follow from the sentence.

You can agree with yourself.  The world will disagree with you.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 26, 2015, 06:56:24 AM
Because I didn't actually say it, I can get away with it just fine; it's clearer as it is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on February 26, 2015, 08:00:43 AM
Sean is right in general principle but wrong in the specific case.

Yes, it's sometimes perfectly idiomatic to use an objective pronoun where a subjective one is technically called for, or vice versa. For example, a colloquial it's me or who do you love? is usually preferable to the "correct" alternative, which would raise eyebrows. And frankly, if following a "rule" of Standard English would cause a majority of educated speakers to think that you're an obnoxious pedant, then the rule isn't a rule at all.

But the present they/them question is an opposite situation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 26, 2015, 08:19:43 AM
(http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i82/Fotodoosje/Applaus.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 08:23:52 AM


Quote from: aquariuswb on February 26, 2015, 08:00:43 AM
Sean is right in general principle but wrong in the specific case.
... the present they/them question [he is wrong].


"Prefer the specific to the general, the definite to the vague, the concrete to the abstract."

(I am quoting scripture here  :blank:)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 26, 2015, 08:28:11 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 08:23:52 AM

"Prefer the specific to the general, the definite to the vague, the concrete to the abstract."

(I am quoting scripture here  :blank:)
Of course. Any Orthodox Christian monk worth of his name would urge you to do the same.  :blank:

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on February 26, 2015, 10:20:27 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 08:23:52 AM

"Prefer the specific to the general...
If I'm fighting a war, I don't think I want a specific to lead my armies! ;D
Quote from: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 08:23:52 AMthe definite to the vague
Or to Vogue? ;)
Quote from: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 08:23:52 AMthe concrete to the abstract."
That last is true, when you're building buildings; I can't stand on "abstract." :laugh: Although I'd want an abstract in hand before I bought the land...
Quote from: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 08:23:52 AM
(I am quoting scripture here  :blank:)
Whose scripture? :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 26, 2015, 10:37:13 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on February 26, 2015, 10:20:27 AM
If I'm fighting a war, I don't think I want a specific to lead my armies! ;D
So you don't want a specific general to lead the army?

QuoteOr to Vogue? ;)
That last is true, when you're building buildings; I can't stand on "abstract." :laugh: Although I'd want an abstract in hand before I bought the land...Whose scripture? :)
The Elements of Style (http://www.stat.ufl.edu/~presnell/Various/Strunk-and-White/etes_htm.htm), by Oliver Strunk
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 10:49:36 AM
Quote from: North Star on February 26, 2015, 10:37:13 AM
So you don't want a specific general to lead the army?
The Elements of Style (http://www.stat.ufl.edu/~presnell/Various/Strunk-and-White/etes_htm.htm), by Oliver Strunk

I knew you would recognize it!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on February 26, 2015, 10:59:33 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 26, 2015, 12:30:22 AM
Me am sorry, but this is nonsensic. Incorrectical English is thus with a reason, being exackly that had been broken the rules.

And yet William Faulkner wrote: "The crest, the trees, the roof of the house stand against the sky.  The cow nuzzles at me, moaning.  Then the dead, hot, pale air breathes on my face again.  He could fix it all right, if he just would.  And he dont even know it.  He could do everything for me if he just knowed it.  The cow breathes upon my hips and back, her breath warm, sweet, stertorous, moaning.  The sky lies flat down the slope, upon the secret clumps.  Beyond the hill sheet-lightning stains upward and fades.  The dead air shapes the dead earth in the dead darkness, further away than seeing shapes the dead earth."

or this: "From a little after two oclock until almost sundown of the long still hot weary dead September afternoon they sat in what Miss Coldfield still called the office because her father had called it that -- a dim hot airless room with the blinds all closed and fastened for forty-three summers because when she was a girl someone had believed that light and moving air carried heat and that dark was always cooler, and which (as the sun shone fuller and fuller on that side of the house) became latticed with yellow slashes filled with dust motes which Quentin thought of as being of the dead old dried paint itself blown inward from the scaling blinds as wind might have blown them. "

Faulkner broked the rules with style! :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 26, 2015, 11:13:34 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 26, 2015, 10:59:33 AM
And yet William Faulkner wrote:

Faulkner broked the rules with style! :)
Faulkner & other similar literary artists don't really have anything to do with the discussion, though. It all started with Sean ridiculing those who speak English as their nth language (Sean not being fluent in any second language, to put it kindly) for not caring 'enough' about punctuation, and when we politely pointed out some of his own errors in the material he uses to teach English as a second language, he's been defending himself by claiming that the rules are just wrong.

Quote from: Sean on February 21, 2015, 10:29:24 AM
Hi Cato et al, can I run this past you, possibly not for the first time- why is it that non-westerners take substandard English to be fine and don't understand at all when the English speaking world shakes heads in mirth at them?

My basic argument is that many non-Western societies and languages don't prioritize articulation, differentiation and discrete expression as do Western languages and their modern societies. India is a great example- it's a fantastic culture but one for holistic thinking not straight thinking.

It's not that other languages are less than English, indeed they could easily be superior, and I'm most interested in Sanskrit for example. But English has to be learnt as English- it can be used in other ways that it's not designed for, but not as well. It fulfils specific functions of discrimination and precision and to ignore this becomes laughable- because these characteristics are part of its basic structure.

I don't know how to explain the ridiculously cavalier attitudes to English that non-Western learners show, other than that they're bringing in presuppositions from their own experience of what a language is. Western learners of English as a second language do not take a low level of understanding, or any garbage they write, to be just fine or a dialect as good as Australian or American English.

In each of my three jobs in S.Korea and China the local staff could not believe that their second-rate English was second-rate, and justified crazy mistakes as a legitimate local dialect of English.

Quote from: Sean on February 21, 2015, 11:54:29 PM
Moreover here's a ppt presentation I put together for Chinese English-teaching staff on common mistakes. It was a well-attended event but with some strained and indignant faces and nothing further encouraged, and some of the subsequent responses unfortunately being

'Frankly I don't think the mistakes you outlined were mistakes.'

In fact I got very angry and was called to a disciplinary meeting...

https://app.box.com/s/hp4vj2jd7ixt229x7gs75byu9yx81uzz
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 26, 2015, 11:47:52 AM
This is not a problem, as indicated below several times...

Good English is not mere rule-following English, it's gaining an understanding of what works, what has balance and sense, and with these things occasionally transgressing whatever rulebook.

English has no academy that approves its formations and words, unlike some languages.

Whatever the criteria instead are for good English, and they're very distinct and non-relative, they're not the equivalent of tilting your compass to the north star and following it blindly.

This tremendous subtlety catches foreign learners out royally however, and they usually don't suspect it exists at all.

Having Koreans and Chinese with a sheet of their English and laughing at you with eye-popping incredulity when you tell them that it's covered in mistakes is a test of patience far beyond anything on GMG, I can assure you.

Got it?

Oh no, maybe that wasn't a sentence though, so I shouldn't say it....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 12:15:52 PM
So let me summarize. English is not treated with the respect it deserves, and egregious misuse abounds. So let's teach foreigners to use "them" as a subject, because William Faulkner's semi-literate first person narrator did.

QuoteIt all started with Sean ridiculing those who speak English as their nth language ... for not caring 'enough' about punctuation, and when we politely pointed out some of his own errors in the material he uses to teach English as a second language, he's been defending himself by claiming that the rules are just wrong.

Bingo.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 26, 2015, 12:19:37 PM
I need to set more time aside for my American literature.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 26, 2015, 01:27:35 PM
Quote from: North Star on February 26, 2015, 11:13:34 AM
Faulkner & other similar literary artists don't really have anything to do with the discussion, though. It all started with Sean ridiculing those who speak English as their nth language (Sean not being fluent in any second language, to put it kindly) for not caring 'enough' about punctuation, and when we politely pointed out some of his own errors in the material he uses to teach English as a second language, he's been defending himself by claiming that the rules are just wrong.

Exackly.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 26, 2015, 01:53:07 PM
Quote from: Sean on February 26, 2015, 12:19:37 PM
IMe need to set more time aside for my American literature.

FTFY.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on February 26, 2015, 03:44:11 PM
Quote from: Florestan on February 26, 2015, 01:27:35 PM
Exackly.  ;D
Quote from: North Star on February 26, 2015, 11:13:34 AM
Faulkner & other similar literary artists don't really have anything to do with the discussion, though. It all started with Sean ridiculing those who speak English as their nth language (Sean not being fluent in any second language, to put it kindly) for not caring 'enough' about punctuation, and when we politely pointed out some of his own errors in the material he uses to teach English as a second language, he's been defending himself by claiming that the rules are just wrong.

I was teasing with the Faulkner thing. I guess it fell flat...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 26, 2015, 04:19:27 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 26, 2015, 03:44:11 PM
I was teasing with the Faulkner thing. I guess it fell flat...

:D  By no means!  :D

The ontology of Faulkner's fawlty grammer is the phylogeny of his grampa!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on February 26, 2015, 11:46:04 PM
Quote from: North Star on February 26, 2015, 11:13:34 AMand when we politely pointed out some of his own errors in the material he uses to teach English as a second language, he's been defending himself by claiming that the rules are just wrong.

But they are! Sean is just trying to help ours!  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 27, 2015, 04:53:12 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 26, 2015, 10:59:33 AM
And yet William Faulkner wrote: "The crest, the trees, the roof of the house stand against the sky.  The cow nuzzles at me, moaning.  Then the dead, hot, pale air breathes on my face again.  He could fix it all right, if he just would.  And he dont even know it.  He could do everything for me if he just knowed it.  The cow breathes upon my hips and back, her breath warm, sweet, stertorous, moaning.  The sky lies flat down the slope, upon the secret clumps.  Beyond the hill sheet-lightning stains upward and fades.  The dead air shapes the dead earth in the dead darkness, further away than seeing shapes the dead earth."

or this: "From a little after two oclock until almost sundown of the long still hot weary dead September afternoon they sat in what Miss Coldfield still called the office because her father had called it that -- a dim hot airless room with the blinds all closed and fastened for forty-three summers because when she was a girl someone had believed that light and moving air carried heat and that dark was always cooler, and which (as the sun shone fuller and fuller on that side of the house) became latticed with yellow slashes filled with dust motes which Quentin thought of as being of the dead old dried paint itself blown inward from the scaling blinds as wind might have blown them. "

Faulkner broked the rules with style! :)

Dialect.

Wish we might excuse Sean on that account!  But, no, he's just being lazy  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 27, 2015, 04:53:45 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 26, 2015, 04:19:27 PM
The ontology of Faulkner's fawlty grammer is the phylogeny of his grampa!  $:)

In a nutshell!  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 28, 2015, 12:53:11 AM
I've mentioned these files of mine before, but I've since enlarged them.

Expressions, though could do with a good proofread-

https://app.box.com/s/b1jli8pvw8zf3mzjylv0ijb18ms4xn7t

Vocabulary-

https://app.box.com/s/pqs7dpf0h9zmanlg9njti8bcywqqsold
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on March 03, 2015, 12:37:57 AM
This should read something like Coconut breaking stand (don't think I've posted this before.)

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/x%20Various/DSCN1891_zps78qsanzq.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on March 04, 2015, 09:06:10 AM
Quote from: sanantonio on March 04, 2015, 07:39:51 AM
So, I've been noticing as I listen to NPR that often (usually for younger reporters) when a reporter is being interviewed, they begin their answers with "So, ..." 

Is this the educated man's "like"?

Is it correct?
As far as I can determine, it's a common speech tic.  And, like many speech tics, it is not "right" or "wrong" until it gets annoyingly repetitive. >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2015, 04:36:36 AM
Not a true Grumble, just enjoying a typo . . . Breaking the land-speed record for returning to the office:

QuoteI am currently out of the office without access to email and will return on Monday, Mach 23.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on March 20, 2015, 07:12:59 AM
This too is not a true grumble, but certainly it is Cato territory.
http://wonkette.com/575109/vermont-proposes-official-latin-motto-wingnuts-tell-vermont-to-go-back-to-mexico#
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 20, 2015, 07:31:14 AM
Yes!  I saw that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 20, 2015, 07:41:53 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on March 20, 2015, 07:12:59 AM
This too is not a true grumble, but certainly it is Cato territory.
http://wonkette.com/575109/vermont-proposes-official-latin-motto-wingnuts-tell-vermont-to-go-back-to-mexico#
Hilarious. The irony is I think she -- Wonkette has a history of obtuseness -- missed the irony in "Hell No! This is America, not Latin America. When in Rome do as the Romans do!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 20, 2015, 07:42:47 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 20, 2015, 07:31:14 AM
Yes!  I saw that!
+1
Quote from: Ken B on March 20, 2015, 07:41:53 AM
Hilarious. The irony is I think she -- Wonkette has a history of obtuseness -- missed the irony in “Hell No! This is America, not Latin America. When in Rome do as the Romans do!”
Hah! Of course, that might have been unintentional. . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2015, 05:34:31 PM
Wow! 

Satire or seriousness?  Since our society has become a satire, it is ever more difficult to say!  $:)

Anyway, the poster with Bob Newhart and company has a partially incorrect caption in Latin: "And this is my other brother Darryl" should be "...et hic est meus alius frater Darryl."

Across the Ohio border at Toledo in the highly questionable state of Michigan is a fruit and vegetable store run by a family of Italian descent: as far as I know the place actually is a "legitimate business."  :laugh:  Anyway, the store  is notorious for hand-made and badly spelled signs.

Recently during a visit there, we were met with a vegetable called Brockli  ??? and a large display of "Ornges," both of which are understandable because the two brothers pronounce the produce with precisely those spellings.

Also on sale: "Asean Pears."  :o

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on March 21, 2015, 01:13:34 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2015, 05:34:31 PM
Also on sale: "Asean Pears."  :o
Straight from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, I suppose.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on March 21, 2015, 02:00:42 AM
Probably someone should adopt "Sancta simplicitas" as motto. Or "ite domus, Romanos" or  "difficile, satyram non scribere"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 24, 2015, 11:05:06 AM
Stop the presses! Typo of the Year!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 24, 2015, 11:11:14 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 24, 2015, 11:05:06 AM
Stop the presses! Typo of the Year!

Can you post improvements in a "grumble" thread?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on March 25, 2015, 09:11:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2015, 05:34:31 PM
...Also on sale: "Asean Pears."  :o
Once in the Seoul airport (that's in Korea :laugh:), I ate for lunch an "American Dog Sausage." ??? :laugh:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
That's a hot dog, in case anyone wondered. $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 25, 2015, 09:12:31 AM
Oh, dear . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on March 25, 2015, 09:13:20 AM
*urrrrrrrrrrrrrp* Indeed. :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 25, 2015, 09:57:39 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on March 25, 2015, 09:11:39 AM
Once in the Seoul airport ...  I ate for lunch an "American Dog Sausage."
.
That's a hot dog, in case anyone wondered. $:)

For non-Americans let me explain. Dogs taste terrible cold, so we only eat them hot.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Phrygian on March 25, 2015, 10:22:53 AM
Cato, I do miss your hugely funny missives demonstrating the tortured vernacular of the colourful characters in 'Kafkaesque' America!!  I'm still in Europe and in the last 24 hours have had some success with consistent internet reception at a hotel!  My husband has fallen ill so I've been reading GMG today and have just noticed your latest foray into the fruit and vegetable business ;D  Many of your emails have been hilarious and I do wish you'd post some of these on the "Grammar Grumble" page for all the world to see.

I met a German artist on the train last week - a man of 60, with an absolutely superb sense of humour and he regaled me for the over-4 hour rail journey with all sorts of anecdotes/observations about Germany and his world travels.  This fellow is an abstract artist and also has a PhD in Pre-History;  he showed me pictures of some of his work which is regularly exhibited all over the world.  When we arrived at our destination his friends were there to greet him and we parted company by warmly shaking hands and he gave me his card.  I said to one of his friends, "we've been talking the whole way" and one said with a huge, knowing smile, "of course"!!!  A warm and wonderfully engaging man who had a total appreciation for the ridiculous in life as well as an acutely developed sense of how language can be abused.  He would be a great participant for the "Grammar Grumble"!!  When I suggested things to him - in response to some of his comments - he crinkled up his face and eyes and enthusiastically said, "Oh, I love it"!!

Some of the things my artist friend had to say about Germans and their bureaucracy ("you know, in Germany it's illegal to be dead for more than 25 years"!!) told me that they are capable of great self-parody and have an excellent sense of humour.  The same thing happened on the ship in Norway when a huge German man from Nuremburg made friends with us and his wife had to tell him to "shoosh" when he frequently roared with laughter.  We had trouble because the ship broke a propeller and we were stranded in Harstadt - deeply northern Norway - for 2 days and all we had to amuse us was a heavy snow-storm and each other.

Cato;  the man who did the much-too-frequent announcements on the ship and my attempts to stop them encroaching into our cabin by throwing around the phone and pulling out the plugs (to no avail) would be worthy of a spot on the "Grammar Grumble", but I'm afraid they would be profane!! 








Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 25, 2015, 10:24:54 AM
Zis iz KAOS: ve don't shoosh hier!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 25, 2015, 12:16:34 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 25, 2015, 10:24:54 AM
Zis iz KAOS: ve don't shoosh hier!

Sad to say, I recognized that instantly and with no effort.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 26, 2015, 05:12:14 AM
I've embraced my fondness for Agent 86.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Brian on April 01, 2015, 10:35:59 AM
Just read the line "This club has impacted me to eat more healthily"

This sentence has impacted me to rage!!!  >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 01, 2015, 10:38:43 AM
Grammar Rage!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 01, 2015, 11:36:56 AM
Quote from: Brian on April 01, 2015, 10:35:59 AM
Just read the line "This club has impacted me to eat more healthily"

This sentence has impacted me to rage!!!  >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

Calm down Brian. "Healthily" is an adverb, and it modifies the verb "to eat".  This is correct.  I am sorry the sentence has been so impactful upon you, but I hope this mild correction will eventuate in such a manner as to have impacted you to note adverbs more carefully. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 13, 2015, 11:15:59 AM
Rogue comma:

QuoteCharles Dickens walked about 10 miles a day. Scientists I looked at turned out to be avid, sailors, hikers, skiers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on April 14, 2015, 08:19:32 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 13, 2015, 11:15:59 AM
Rogue comma:
I have found that even the greatest writers get tripped up by rogue commas.  But in many cases, I blame the copy-editors. :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 14, 2015, 08:21:05 AM
This article was rife with poor punctuation . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 15, 2015, 03:26:26 AM
Quote from: Phrygian on March 25, 2015, 10:22:53 AM

Some of the things my artist friend had to say about Germans and their bureaucracy ("you know, in Germany it's illegal to be dead for more than 25 years"!!) told me that they are capable of great self-parody and have an excellent sense of humour. 

Some of the funniest stories I have read are by Patrick Sueskind in his short novel Die Geschichte von Herrn Sommer (The Story of Mr. Summer) and Hans Fallada Damals Bei Uns Daheim (Back Then With Us At Home.

Quote from: karlhenning on April 14, 2015, 08:21:05 AM
This article was rife with poor punctuation . . . .

That could be the epitaph for our era!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Phrygian on April 16, 2015, 05:41:05 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 15, 2015, 03:26:26 AM
Some of the funniest stories I have read are by Patrick Sueskind in his short novel Die Geschichte von Herrn Sommer (The Story of Mr. Summer) and Hans Fallada Damals Bei Uns Daheim (Back Then With Us At Home.

That could be the epitaph for our era!   0:)

I wish I had your German, but I certainly dig your sense of humour.

I'm not sure about punctuation problems being "the epitaph for our era"!!  Youth unemployment, perhaps?

My German friend from the ICE train, who knows the German bureaucracy so well, can hardly have understood anything about the Greek.  It's appalling, as in this damning article:

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2015/04/peoples-money-runs/

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on April 17, 2015, 03:22:54 AM
Here's the amazon.com "Editorial review" of an upcoming DVD release, surely the result of google translate, or something similar, though that doesn't account for "in witch":

QuoteA modern opera inspired by Victor Hugos Claude Gueux, on a libretto by Robert Badinter and music by Thierry Escaich. The synopsis of Claude is based on a true story. Claude is a silk worker who will be sentenced to 7 years of hard-Labor. From this, follows a chain of injustice and violence in witch Claude finish to kill the prison warden. He will himself be ""guillotined"" (decapitated). Claude is a plea against prison and for human dignity worn by magnificent performers: Jean-Sébastien Bou, in the title role, Jean-Philippe Lafont and Rodrigo Ferreira. The Orchestre de l'Opéra de Lyon is conducted by Jérémie Rhorer. This thrilling opera is staged by Olivier Py.

http://www.amazon.com/Claude-Jeremie-Rhorer/dp/B00TOTNZM8/ref=pd_ys_cs_all_12

At least now I know what ""guillotined"" means.   :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 17, 2015, 03:33:26 AM
It's all good, but this is the best: "... in witch Claude finish to kill the prison warden."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 17, 2015, 06:27:39 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 17, 2015, 03:33:26 AM
It's all good, but this is the best: "... in witch Claude finish to kill the prison warden."

Wow!  I am partial to this one:

QuoteClaude is a plea against prison and for human dignity worn by magnificent performers.

To wear a plea!  To cook a plea!  To fricassee a plea!  That is the question!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 17, 2015, 06:28:34 AM
:-)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on April 17, 2015, 09:32:08 AM
That quote definitely deserves a "prise" for the most "airs" in a single "revue"! :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 17, 2015, 09:34:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 17, 2015, 06:27:39 AM
To wear a plea!  To cook a plea!  To fricassee a plea!  That is the question!

I know you mash chick pleas.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 17, 2015, 01:48:41 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 17, 2015, 09:34:03 AM
I know you mash chick pleas.

Hummus a song while you mash the chick pleas, please!   0:) ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 22, 2015, 04:52:06 AM
Quote"If someone in your family or your office that happens to be gay and they invite you to their wedding, would you go?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 22, 2015, 04:56:37 AM
I wonder which is trickier, the grammar or the question? ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 22, 2015, 04:59:02 AM
;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 22, 2015, 07:14:07 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 22, 2015, 04:52:06 AM
...office that...

Well, I guess that is one happy office!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 22, 2015, 06:24:22 PM
Courtesy of a FB discussion, the realization that Charles Dickens could sometimes go grammatically off course.
Quote
"If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble,... "the law is a ass—a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience—by experience."

Twice in a row, yet.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 22, 2015, 11:56:18 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 22, 2015, 06:24:22 PM
Courtesy of a FB discussion, the realization that Charles Dickens could sometimes go grammatically off course.
Twice in a row, yet.

If one pronounces "a" like the letter, it doesn´t sound that bad.  :D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on April 23, 2015, 12:38:11 AM
It doesn't sound like it but could it be an accent or personal mannerism of the character Mr Bumble?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 23, 2015, 06:00:17 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on April 23, 2015, 12:38:11 AM
It doesn't sound like it but could it be an accent or personal mannerism of the character Mr Bumble?

That's how I should have took it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 23, 2015, 06:29:51 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on April 23, 2015, 12:38:11 AM
It doesn't sound like it but could it be an accent or personal mannerism of the character Mr Bumble?

Yes, it is the character's mistake, not that of Dickens.  But note how the awkwardness in fact emphasizes the insults!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 23, 2015, 06:59:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2015, 06:29:51 AM
Yes, it is the character's mistake, not that of Dickens.  But note how the awkwardness in fact emphasizes the insults!

[T]he law's delay, The insolence of office

Shakespeare, our contemporary...

;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 23, 2015, 07:16:16 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 23, 2015, 06:00:17 AM
That's how I should have took it.
0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 23, 2015, 02:45:23 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 23, 2015, 06:29:51 AM
Yes, it is the character's mistake, not that of Dickens.  But note how the awkwardness in fact emphasizes the insults!

No actually not. English has not always favoured "an" as the indefinite article before a vowel, and a long "a" has a long history.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 24, 2015, 03:56:08 AM
From Lawtalk: The law is a ass:

QuoteIt is not the law but the aptly named Mr. Bumble that is the primary subject of ridicule here, because of his dialect, his foolishness in entering into a bad marriage, his inability to control his wife, and his eagerness to blame others for his short-comings as a man.

See:

https://books.google.com/books?id=PFq1ir3_hosC&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=Mr.+Bumble+%2B+dialect&source=bl&ots=uYfLuuTnvQ&sig=daUVfLIg2uLpyynP-NMij291PBU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Viw6VaDyJ9HLsASXpoCoCg&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Mr.%20Bumble%20%2B%20dialect&f=false (https://books.google.com/books?id=PFq1ir3_hosC&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=Mr.+Bumble+%2B+dialect&source=bl&ots=uYfLuuTnvQ&sig=daUVfLIg2uLpyynP-NMij291PBU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Viw6VaDyJ9HLsASXpoCoCg&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Mr.%20Bumble%20%2B%20dialect&f=false)


Also see this from a linguistics professor now at Dartmouth:

Quote Indeed, linguists are misguided on their views on this issue (i.e. "a" vs. "an"), but the neo-neo-Bloomfieldian free variationists are no less so than their colleagues. Their mistake, the mistake of all who have considered this problem so far, lies in their belief that the variation is morphological in nature. It is an acknowledged fact that the neo-Bloomfieldians concentrated on syntax and semantics to the virtual exclusion of phonology. This sin has persisted in linguistics since the neo-Bloomfieldian days, although lately generativists have been less guilty of it than others. Because of this, no one ever considered the simple, obvious solution which I now present: an occurs before words beginning with vowels and a occurs before words beginning with consonants. This solution is simple, economical, and accounts for all of the data in English, barring performance errors. Note that when an occurs before words beginning with orthographic h, this h is not pronounced; e.g., an herb. This non-pronunciation of initial h is especially common among French and British people, who can't pronounce English very well.

In conclusion, I should like to urge that this article be taken to heart by those linguists who still ignore phonology in their analyses. As demonstrated here, many seemingly intractable problems can be solved with a little bit of effort in the right direction.

Quote from: Ken B on April 23, 2015, 02:45:23 PM
No actually not. English has not always favoured "an" as the indefinite article before a vowel, and a long "a" has a long history.

Tell us more, if you disagree with the above!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 25, 2015, 04:33:04 AM
Today my wife came across a curious phrase in the newspaper: "Wrongful entrustment."  ???

A local ne'er-do-well was fined $300. for "wrongful entrustment" and another $100. for a "seat-belt violation."

The latter crime was a clue: I guessed that if you "entrust" a car to somebody who should not be driving, you can be fined.

"Google" implied that the phrase is only to be found in the Ohio law code:

Quote4511.203 Wrongful entrustment of motor vehicle.
(A) No person shall permit a motor vehicle owned by the person or under the person's control to be driven by another if any of the following apply:

(1) The offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the other person does not have a valid driver's or commercial driver's license or permit or valid nonresident driving privileges.

(2) The offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the other person's driver's or commercial driver's license or permit or nonresident operating privileges have been suspended or canceled under Chapter 4510. or any other provision of the Revised Code.

It goes on!  ;)    http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511.203 (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511.203)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 25, 2015, 09:58:59 AM
Quote
This non-pronunciation of initial h is especially common among French and British people, who can't pronounce English very well.

Pity the poor Brits who can't pronounce English very well.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 25, 2015, 10:05:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 25, 2015, 04:33:04 AMA local ne'er-do-well was fined $300. for "wrongful entrustment" and another $100. for a "seat-belt violation."
I assume they did inappropriate things to the seatbelt.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 25, 2015, 11:15:15 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 24, 2015, 03:56:08 AM
From Lawtalk: The law is a ass:

See:

https://books.google.com/books?id=PFq1ir3_hosC&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=Mr.+Bumble+%2B+dialect&source=bl&ots=uYfLuuTnvQ&sig=daUVfLIg2uLpyynP-NMij291PBU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Viw6VaDyJ9HLsASXpoCoCg&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Mr.%20Bumble%20%2B%20dialect&f=false (https://books.google.com/books?id=PFq1ir3_hosC&pg=PA156&lpg=PA156&dq=Mr.+Bumble+%2B+dialect&source=bl&ots=uYfLuuTnvQ&sig=daUVfLIg2uLpyynP-NMij291PBU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Viw6VaDyJ9HLsASXpoCoCg&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Mr.%20Bumble%20%2B%20dialect&f=false)


Also see this from a linguistics professor now at Dartmouth:

Tell us more, if you disagree with the above!

I believe giving that linguist a teaching job was wrongful entrustment.
Title: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2015, 08:07:12 AM
"The word "socialist" is generally considered an epithet in the US..."

Does the writer generally consider an epithet something negative?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on April 30, 2015, 09:03:01 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 30, 2015, 08:07:12 AM
"The word "socialist" is generally considered an epithet in the US..."

Does the writer generally consider an epithet something negative?

That word has adopted a purely negative connotation, so yes, I guess the writer does. I never hear "epithet" used for something positive or neutral. 'Darling' is an epithet for someone dear to you.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on April 30, 2015, 09:09:59 AM
This is interesting; in German "Epithet" is completely neutral and rather academic language, not common at all. Whoever uses it at all is probably as likely to say/write "epitheton".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2015, 09:40:57 AM
I take epithet as neutral, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 30, 2015, 10:21:33 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on April 30, 2015, 09:09:59 AM
This is interesting; in German "Epithet" is completely neutral and rather academic language, not common at all. Whoever uses it at all is probably as likely to say/write "epitheton".

My Random House Dictionary of the English Language has an alternate meaning of "epithet:" "insult" or something negative.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 30, 2015, 10:48:17 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on April 30, 2015, 09:40:57 AM
I take epithet as neutral, too.

That's because you're a neutralist.

I bet in fact you are a radical neutralist! You probably see comment, remark, observation as neutral too!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2015, 10:49:45 AM
Observation, never!  Perfidy!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 30, 2015, 10:53:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 30, 2015, 10:21:33 AM
My Random House Dictionary of the English Language has an alternate meaning of "epithet:" "insult" or something negative.

Which means, as always with alternate secondary meanings, that it depends on context. I have heard used in a purely neutral fashion but I have also heard it used otherwise, as an insult. I think in the quotation under discussion it was meant to mean insult, and I read it that way. Let's try a variant. "In Europe "Ulta-liberal" is often used as an epithet."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on April 30, 2015, 11:25:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 30, 2015, 10:21:33 AM
My Random House Dictionary of the English Language has an alternate meaning of "epithet:" "insult" or something negative.
Well, but so many usages once enshrined by custom have taken on negative connotations.  In other words, our tongues have turned sour. :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2015, 03:35:36 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on April 30, 2015, 11:25:02 AM
Well, but so many usages once enshrined by custom have taken on negative connotations.  In other words, our tongues have turned sour. :(

In more than one way!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 01, 2015, 03:40:22 AM
Wash those mouths out with soap!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2015, 06:54:57 AM
Two delicious typos seen this morning:

QuoteIncident Short Description: suspicioius email

QuoteConsumer Discreationary Update
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 11, 2015, 07:56:58 PM
Useful new words. Megalothymia, and prepone.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 12, 2015, 03:33:40 AM
I saw "prepone" somewhere;  barbarous.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 12, 2015, 03:51:18 AM
QuoteHi,

In this instrutable I am going to show you a few methods of cleaning a laptop screen with household products you probably already have. It is cheep and safe way to make your monitor shine like its brand new!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 12, 2015, 04:13:04 AM
"Consumer Discreationary Update"

Well, some updates should be discreated!   0:)

Quote
In this instrutable I am going to show you a few methods of cleaning a laptop screen with household products you probably already have. It is cheep and safe way to make your monitor shine like its brand new!!

I find "instrutable" inscrutable: does the writer mean "instruction" ?

And "prepone" ?   I am skeptical of needing that word! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 12, 2015, 04:16:10 AM
You cannot strut it, it is instrutable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on May 12, 2015, 04:51:59 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 12, 2015, 04:13:04 AM
And "prepone" ?   I am skeptical of needing that word!

As a Latin teacher you should have nothing against the word, shouldn't you? But I certainly prefer postponing...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 12, 2015, 04:57:17 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on May 12, 2015, 04:51:59 AM
As a Latin teacher you should have nothing against the word, shouldn't you? But I certainly prefer postponing...
;)
I don't know about prepone, I suppose it's a handy way to say that something has been rescheduled to an earlier time, so there's a theoretical reason for its existence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 12, 2015, 06:22:24 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 12, 2015, 03:33:40 AM
I saw "prepone" somewhere;  barbarous.

Yeah. Really it has a lot going for it. It is useful. It derives from the same process oas postpone. It really should be OK. But it just feels awful, just awful. Business speak at its worst.

Megalothymia is a needed and useful one though. Too bad it's not shorter and catchier.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on May 12, 2015, 06:46:25 AM
Isn't megalothymia the same as magnanimity, only Greek?

My favorites when studying Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics were pleonexia (to want to have more than one's share) and megaloprepeia (spending big for parties for friends or sth. like that). The latter is a virtue!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on May 12, 2015, 09:37:29 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 12, 2015, 03:33:40 AM
I saw "prepone" somewhere;  barbarous.
"...and though it is a barbarous country, there are no barbers there." --L. Frank Baum, The Patchwork Girl of Oz :laugh:

(Not an example of "grammar grumble," BTW; whatever one may think of the Oz books and the pun-ishment therein, Mr. Baum's grammar was excellent. 8))
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 12, 2015, 10:27:44 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on May 12, 2015, 09:37:29 AM
"...and though it is a barbarous country, there are no barbers there." --L. Frank Baum, The Patchwork Girl of Oz :laugh:

(Not an example of "grammar grumble," BTW; whatever one may think of the Oz books and the pun-ishment therein, Mr. Baum's grammar was excellent. 8))

Quite true!
Quote from: Jo498 on May 12, 2015, 06:46:25 AM
Isn't megalothymia the same as magnanimity, only Greek?


No, I suppose it means "desiring great respect."  The latter means "extremely generous."

Quote from: Jo498 on May 12, 2015, 06:46:25 AM

My favorites when studying Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics were pleonexia (to want to have more than one's share) and megaloprepeia (spending big for parties for friends or sth. like that). The latter is a virtue!

Also used in Herodotus for a politician buying votes by spending big on public works. 

Nothing has changed, except today it is called "pork-barrel spending."   $:)

One of my favorite words from Ancient Greek is "Cathadypathy" (from kathadupatheo) which means to "squander your life in riches and luxurious living."

Ancient Greek had all kinds of very specific words!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 12, 2015, 10:56:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 12, 2015, 10:27:44 AM
Quite true!
No, I suppose it means "desiring great respect."  The latter means "extremely generous."
Well, extreme generousness.  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 12, 2015, 11:02:32 AM
Megalothymia is defined as "a need to feel superior. "  It's usefulness in the modern world of PC mau-mauing, shame storms, and politics as identity is clear enough.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 12, 2015, 11:20:57 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 12, 2015, 11:02:32 AM
Megalothymia is defined as "a need to feel superior."

You're welcome. (http://www.soundsandfury.com/)

QuoteIt then struck us we had not so much as a single Beatles song in our library and that in order to download MP3s of our favorites recorded by the Beatles themselves we'd have to buy them and, to our dismay, would have to buy them through iTunes even though we'd long ago sworn to never again install a piece of Apple software on our Windows machine.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 12, 2015, 02:11:38 PM
Mr. Douglas certainly qualifies for the Fury portion of his blog's title.  Hurwitz has nothing on him.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wanderer on May 12, 2015, 11:48:10 PM
Quote from: Ken B on May 12, 2015, 11:02:32 AM
Megalothymia is defined as "a need to feel superior. "

That's a definition that Fukuyama coins to the word in one of his books. The actual meaning of the word in Greek, still in use, is magnanimity.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wanderer on May 12, 2015, 11:58:18 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on May 12, 2015, 06:46:25 AM
Isn't megalothymia the same as magnanimity, only Greek?

Yes.

Quote from: Jo498 on May 12, 2015, 06:46:25 AM
My favorites when studying Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics were pleonexia (to want to have more than one's share) and megaloprepeia (spending big for parties for friends or sth. like that). The latter is a virtue!

Both are widely used to this day; πλεονεξία meaning greed or rapacity and μεγαλοπρέπεια meaning splendour, magnificence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on May 13, 2015, 12:22:59 AM
Very interesting! As my ancient Greek is very rusty and my modern Greek virtually non-existent, except for a few simple words, it's nice to see that such words are still used with pretty much the same meaning.

I looked it up again in my (modest) German/Ancient Greek dictionary (I cannot get the online Liddell&Scott to work properly, to stupid to enter the Greek text). This did not have the negatively connoted megalothymos. It gives only the old-fashioned to obsolete "grossherzig" which means literally having a big heart which implies generosity but more in a charitable, forgiving way, not mainly spending generously.
There is also megalopsychia (even more literally magnanimity) with roughly the same meaning.

The fun thing with German and Greek is that they are similar in the way words can be compounded to sometimes long concatenations. (batrachomyomachia is "Froschmäusekrieg", please don't ask why it is not "Froschmauskrieg" or "Fröschemäusekrieg")
Another similarity, ruthlessly (ab)used by philosophers since Aristotle is coining nouns by simply sticking a definite article in front of something which isn't a noun (and German is not quite as powerful here but it still works).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 13, 2015, 01:41:37 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 12, 2015, 02:11:38 PM
Mr. Douglas certainly qualifies for the Fury portion of his blog's title.

I hadn't spared a thought for him in a decade or more.  But Ken's provision of that definition brought him right to mind, somehow . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 14, 2015, 08:13:49 AM
Of course, having been gulled at times myself, I am not saying I am certain that this was not the fault of voice-to-text software, but I did enjoy just reading:

Quote. . . 7 year old full bread German shepherd.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 14, 2015, 08:19:25 AM
I don't think bread is the usual material used in stuffing animals. . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 14, 2015, 08:20:01 AM
For table rather than the diorama, yes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 14, 2015, 08:21:28 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 14, 2015, 08:20:01 AM
For table rather than the diorama, yes.
Well, that is certainly true. I don't know how common it is to eat a dog of so advanced years. A puppy would be delicious, I'm sure. . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: More On "Megalothumos"
Post by: Cato on May 15, 2015, 04:05:04 AM
Quote from: Wanderer on May 12, 2015, 11:48:10 PM
That's a definition that Fukuyama coins to the word in one of his books. The actual meaning of the word in Greek, still in use, is magnanimity.

Quote from: Wanderer on May 12, 2015, 11:58:18 PM
Yes.

Earlier, I had disagreed with "magnanimity" as a possible meaning.  At the time I was separated from my reference books.

So I have dug through the finally shrinking - yet still vast - Cato Archives and excavated my Ancient Greek Dictionary (Liddell and Scott) purchased over 50 years ago.

It seems that we are all correct, or at least not incorrect   :laugh:   , about megalothymia: the word is given as a variation on "megathumos" (found in Plato) which the authors say means "high-minded."   8)   At least for Plato!

Because...

"Thumos" the root has all kinds of meanings: the basic one is "soul" and is said to be parallel with Latin's "anima."

However, depending on the author and the century, many other possibilities are given: desire (of various kinds from desire to shoot, desire for meat, etc.), "heart," "the seat of sorrow or joy," spirit, courage, anger, wrath, mind, temper, willpower, thinking power.

So "magnanimity" and "desire for recognition" are not stretches of the word by any means!



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: More On "Megalothumos"
Post by: Ken B on May 15, 2015, 11:22:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 15, 2015, 04:05:04 AM
Earlier, I had disagreed with "magnanimity" as a possible meaning.  At the time I was separated from my reference books.

So I have dug through the finally shrinking - yet still vast - Cato Archives and excavated my Ancient Greek Dictionary (Liddell and Scott) purchased over 50 years ago.

It seems that we are all correct, or at least not incorrect   :laugh:   , about megalothymia: the word is given as a variation on "megathumos" (found in Plato) which the authors say means "high-minded."   8)   At least for Plato!

Because...

"Thumos" the root has all kinds of meanings: the basic one is "soul" and is said to be parallel with Latin's "anima."

However, depending on the author and the century, many other possibilities are given: desire (of various kinds from desire to shoot, desire for meat, etc.), "heart," "the seat of sorrow or joy," spirit, courage, anger, wrath, mind, temper, willpower, thinking power.

So "magnanimity" and "desire for recognition" are not stretches of the word by any means!

But the neologism is an English word. Even from French etymology is not always an accurate guide. Command, demand, cent, actual, etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: More On "Megalothumos"
Post by: North Star on May 15, 2015, 11:42:39 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 15, 2015, 11:22:25 AM
But the neologism is an English word. Even from French etymology is not always an accurate guide. Command, demand, cent, actual, etc.
Encore!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: More On "Megalothumos"
Post by: Ken B on May 15, 2015, 12:48:23 PM
Quote from: North Star on May 15, 2015, 11:42:39 AM
Encore!
Drole.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: More On "Megalothumos"
Post by: North Star on May 15, 2015, 12:57:24 PM
Quote from: Ken B on May 15, 2015, 12:48:23 PM
Drole.
Downright grotesque!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: WHO IS KITTEN MILK?!
Post by: Cato on May 18, 2015, 05:44:09 AM
I am not making this up!   8)

On a country road in Ohio lurks a large sign outside a veterinarian clinic with this plea:

Kitten Milk Is Needed  ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

Hmmm!

Possible meanings:

1. Famous Las Vegas stripper Kitten Milk should be reporting to this clinic to help entertain the pet owners, while their pets undergo delicate operations.  $:)

2. You should try to milk your kittens with itsy bitsy eye-droppers and bring it to this clinic.   :o

3. Milk for kittens is needed.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 18, 2015, 06:14:19 AM
I guess that's less alarmist than Mars Needs Kitten Milk!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: WHO IS KITTEN MILK?
Post by: Cato on May 18, 2015, 06:25:05 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 18, 2015, 06:14:19 AM
I guess that's less alarmist than Mars Needs Kitten Milk!

Could be the sequel!  But I think Tommy Kirk and Yvonne Craig are too old these days to reprise their roles.  :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 18, 2015, 01:19:10 PM
As seen on Sefer Panim

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: More On "Megalothumos"
Post by: Wanderer on May 19, 2015, 01:20:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 15, 2015, 04:05:04 AM
It seems that we are all correct, or at least not incorrect   :laugh:   , about megalothymia: the word is given as a variation on "megathumos" (found in Plato) which the authors say means "high-minded."   8)   At least for Plato!

Μεγάθυμος (adj.)  is indeed only encountered in Plato with this meaning – μεγάθυμος (adj.) meaning magnanimous is encountered much earlier in Homer and Hesiod and as far as I know that is what's considered the standard definition, its derivative(s) being used and encountered with this meaning ever since.

Note that it's the adjective, not the noun that is encountered in Plato with the "high-minded" meaning and that's important; in ancient Greek one never assumes a derivative word has the same meaning as the word it supposedly derives from unless it is encountered in sources, contemporary or later, and/or there are signs of its use with this meaning elsewhere. As far as I can tell, the use of the derivative noun with the "high-minded" meaning is a 20th century neologism coined very recently for commentary on this particular Platonic text.

Quote from: Cato on May 15, 2015, 04:05:04 AM
"Thumos" the root has all kinds of meanings: the basic one is "soul" and is said to be parallel with Latin's "anima."

However, depending on the author and the century, many other possibilities are given: desire (of various kinds from desire to shoot, desire for meat, etc.), "heart," "the seat of sorrow or joy," spirit, courage, anger, wrath, mind, temper, willpower, thinking power.

Indeed, and it gets stranger.  ;D  "Thumos" or "thymos" actually corresponds to two different words, θύμος and θυμός (note the difference in acccent, which can't be replicated in Latin transliteration) each with a variety of meanings.

Quote from: Cato on May 15, 2015, 04:05:04 AM
So "magnanimity" and "desire for recognition" are not stretches of the word by any means!

Indeed! The first being the let's say standard definition, the other a neologism used in Platonic studies (or a definition pertaining specifically to Plato). I understand your predilection for it.  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 19, 2015, 01:23:06 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 18, 2015, 01:19:10 PM
As seen on Sefer Panim

Wonderful;  I'm sharing this . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on May 20, 2015, 05:32:44 AM
Funnily enough, I've recently met a rescue cat who, when tiny, had no mother and needed kitten milk, which is not that readily available. Ever tried milking a cat? I'm not sure though why it isn't called cat milk.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 31, 2015, 05:21:47 PM
Today a substitute priest with something of a New Joisey accent says:

"Sane Paww eluded to da Trinnady..."

Ignoring the problems with proper pronunciation, I wondered if "eluded" was a simple one-time lapse.

But he later talked about "Sane Paww" "eluding" to other things two more times, with a definite long "E" at the beginning. 

This distraction meant that at times his points alluded me.  0:)   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 31, 2015, 05:29:31 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 31, 2015, 05:21:47 PM
Today a substitute priest with something of a New Joisey accent says:

"Sane Paww eluded to da Trinnady..."

Ignoring the problems with proper pronunciation, I wondered if "eluded" was a simple one-time lapse.

But he later talked about "Sane Paww" "eluding" to other things two more times, with a definite long "E" at the beginning. 

This distraction meant that at times his points alluded me.  0:)   ;)

Ya know wut dey sez about the Saint Valentine's massacree. It was an alley, gory.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 01, 2015, 08:43:05 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 31, 2015, 05:29:31 PM
Ya know wut dey sez about the Saint Valentine's massacree. It was an alley, gory.
Owwwww!! :P :laugh:

Lots of folks seem never to have learned the distinction between illusion and allusion. ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 01, 2015, 08:49:23 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on June 01, 2015, 08:43:05 AM
Owwwww!! :P :laugh:

Lots of folks seem never to have learned the distinction between illusion and allusion. ::)

One vowel  makes all the difference!  0:)

Speaking of mispronunciations, I am hearing too often "eemediately" rather than the short "i" for "immediately."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 01, 2015, 08:53:13 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 01, 2015, 08:49:23 AM
One vowel  makes all the difference!  0:)
QuoteThe bustard's an exquisite fowl
With minimal reason to growl:
He escapes what would be
Illegitimacy
By the grace of a fortunate vowel. --George Vaill
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 01, 2015, 08:55:39 AM
Not the Vaill of tears?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 01, 2015, 09:01:43 AM
Obviously not, given the evidence of that limerick. :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 01, 2015, 02:26:32 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 01, 2015, 08:49:23 AM
One vowel  makes all the difference!  0:)

Speaking of mispronunciations, I am hearing too often "eemediately" rather than the short "i" for "immediately."

I asked my friend Fack about that and he nodded.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 02, 2015, 07:59:19 AM
Quote from: Ken B on June 01, 2015, 02:26:32 PM
I asked my friend Fack about that and he nodded.
:o I wonder if he was any relation to my college classmate, whose last name was Fuchs...? :laugh: Any more of these and they could resurrect the famous Colorado singing group the Mother Folkers! ;D http://mother-folkers.com/ (http://mother-folkers.com/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wanderer on June 02, 2015, 11:20:31 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on June 02, 2015, 07:59:19 AM
...whose last name was Fuchs...?

That's another family name with huge band potential, e.g. *The Fuchsias*.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 02, 2015, 06:44:41 PM
I have learned from experience with my customers that Spanish speakers not totally fluent in English will pronounce fuchsia with the u as in up,
the chs as ks..a bit startling as they tend to be women of about 70 years old.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on June 03, 2015, 08:28:36 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 02, 2015, 06:44:41 PM
I have learned from experience with my customers that Spanish speakers not totally fluent in English will pronounce fuchsia with the u as in up,
the chs as ks..a bit startling as they tend to be women of about 70 years old.
:o >:D :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 18, 2015, 07:51:00 PM
Not grammar, but will interest Cato.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-esquith-investigation-20150617-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-esquith-investigation-20150617-story.html)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on June 19, 2015, 12:23:41 AM
I do not understand. Is "Huckleberry Finn" completely banned (because n word and other slang?) and this includes even passages not containing racial slurs? Or is the episode with the conmen "Duke" and "King" deemed to bawdy or violent (one of them does receive some physical punishment in one town) for children?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 19, 2015, 03:59:10 PM
Another, not grammar but will interest Cato.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/oregon-white-privilege-100K (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/oregon-white-privilege-100K)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 19, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Not grammar, but will interest Cato:

(https://welltempered.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/yuja-wang-dress-times-3.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 20, 2015, 06:06:44 PM
Quote from: Ken B on June 18, 2015, 07:51:00 PM
Not grammar, but will interest Cato.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-esquith-investigation-20150617-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-esquith-investigation-20150617-story.html)

Quote from: The Six on June 19, 2015, 07:13:22 PM
Not grammar, but will interest Cato:

(https://welltempered.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/yuja-wang-dress-times-3.jpg)

Quote from: Ken B on June 19, 2015, 03:59:10 PM
Another, not grammar but will interest Cato.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/oregon-white-privilege-100K (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/oregon-white-privilege-100K)

Many thanks to The Six and Ken B. !  ;)

Concerning the LA Times article on the suspended teacher daring to read Mark Twain aloud: nothing in LaLaLand can surprise me, and nothing - no matter how idiotic or bizarre - is currently impossible in our modern world.  Bizarre things impossible 40 or 50 years ago are  now yawns of boredom.

Concerning "micro-aggressions" and needing to be counseled about them: my teaching style has always been about macro-aggressions.  Micro-aggressions are tossed out a dime a baker's dozen!   0:)

And now to some language items: I overheard this conversation in a motel lobby in Virginia:

"Whe' ya gah ea bre'fa'?"
"Ahno. Wha' th' gah?"
"Ba' 'n' aze 'n' wahz 'n' u'er stuh."

I have never heard English spoken with so many consonants completely missing: no, the speakers were not physically handicapped, except for weighing between 350-450 pounds, nor were they mentally handicapped.

Translation (aided by the context of the dialogue):

"When are you going to eat breakfast?"
"I don't know. What (do) they got?"
"Bacon and eggs and waffles and other stuff."

At a farmer's market, which had signs along a major freeway in South Carolina, more fun without consonants, vowels, and decimals!  Assorted signs:

"Canlopes: $100"    "Broclli: $100"  "Callyflowrs $100"  "Taters $500 20#"

The latter - "Taters" - could be seen as a cute Southernism.  The others...  ??? ??? ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 21, 2015, 02:25:10 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 20, 2015, 06:06:44 PM
Many thanks to The Six and Ken B. !  ;)

Concerning the LA Times article on the suspended teacher daring to read Mark Twain aloud: nothing in LaLaLand can surprise me, and nothing - no matter how idiotic or bizarre - is currently impossible in our modern world.  Bizarre things impossible 40 or 50 years ago are  now yawns of boredom.

Concerning "micro-aggressions" and needing to be counseled about them: my teaching style has always been about macro-aggressions.  Micro-aggressions are tossed out a dime a baker's dozen!   0:)

And now to some language items: I overheard this conversation in a motel lobby in Virginia:

"Whe' ya gah ea bre'fa'?"
"Ahno. Wha' th' gah?"
"Ba' 'n' aze 'n' wahz 'n' u'er stuh."

I have never heard English spoken with so many consonants completely missing: no, the speakers were not physically handicapped, except for weighing between 350-450 pounds, nor were they mentally handicapped.

Translation (aided by the context of the dialogue):

"When are you going to eat breakfast?"
"I don't know. What (do) they got?"
"Bacon and eggs and waffles and other stuff."

At a farmer's market, which had signs along a major freeway in South Carolina, more fun without consonants, vowels, and decimals!  Assorted signs:

"Canlopes: $100"    "Broclli: $100"  "Callyflowrs $100"  "Taters $500 20#"

The latter - "Taters" - could be seen as a cute Southernism.  The others...  ??? ??? ???

Similar to Ken B.'s "not grammar" links, this vignette is technically not grammar, but a use of language impossible 20 years ago and before, but now...

A female teenager - very obese and unhappy looking - at the motel in Virginia was wearing a T-Shirt which used the font of the now ubiquitous "Keep Calm and Carry On" slogan from England.

What it proclaimed, however, was quite different, and gave me an image of the Apocalypse:

"Fu... You

    and

Su.. My  Di.."

The last line made me wonder if the creature might be a hermaphrodite.  What made this especially depressing was that the idiot girl's idiot mother was with her.  One wonders about the company which manufactured such a shirt, and the angry mentality behind the decision to buy and wear such a shirt.

I made my displeasure known with a sneering glower and a sarcastic clearing of the throat aimed at both of them, and left the area.  Freedom of speech to be sure, but...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 21, 2015, 07:41:27 PM
Seen on the Book of Face
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on June 24, 2015, 07:27:48 PM
This is a real sign.

(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--5KUXJLZQ--/1311707178354066498.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 24, 2015, 07:36:02 PM
Quote from: The Six on June 24, 2015, 07:27:48 PM
This is a real sign.

(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--5KUXJLZQ--/1311707178354066498.jpg)

Good thing they didn't include a call in number.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on July 02, 2015, 08:15:34 AM
Not grammar but will interest Cato

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/209868/ (http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/209868/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 02, 2015, 09:14:11 AM
Quote from: Ken B on July 02, 2015, 08:15:34 AM
Not grammar but will interest Cato

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/209868/ (http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/209868/)

The original article: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/why-college-kids-are-avoiding-the-study-of-literature/#gf_18 (https://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/why-college-kids-are-avoiding-the-study-of-literature/#gf_18)

QuoteThere is an obvious proof that the great novelists knew more about human psychology than any social scientist who ever lived. If psychologists, sociologists, or economists understood people as well as George Eliot or Tolstoy did, they could create portraits of people as believable as Middlemarch's Dorothea Brooke or Anna Karenina. But no social scientist has ever come close.

Amen!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on July 03, 2015, 08:33:43 AM
QuoteThere is an obvious proof that the great novelists knew more about human psychology than any social scientist who ever lived. If psychologists, sociologists, or economists understood people as well as George Eliot or Tolstoy did, they could create portraits of people as believable as Middlemarch's Dorothea Brooke or Anna Karenina. But no social scientist has ever come close.

It's almost as if scientists study actual, living people, instead of creating characters in works of fiction!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 03, 2015, 12:22:57 PM
Quote from: The Six on July 03, 2015, 08:33:43 AM
It's almost as if scientists study actual, living people, instead of creating characters in works of fiction!

That is exactly the idea: for all their studying actual, living people, social scientists know less about them than writers creating fictional characters do.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on July 03, 2015, 12:48:19 PM
That's asserted, but I didn't see anything to back it up. The writer's "obvious proof" is nonsense.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 03, 2015, 02:48:17 PM
Quote from: Ken B on July 02, 2015, 08:15:34 AM
Not grammar but will interest Cato

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/209868/ (http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/209868/)

Thank you!  A salient quote:

QuoteLiterary texts, like other artworks, are neither more nor less important than any other cultural artifact or practice. Keeping the emphasis on how cultural meanings are produced, circulated, and consumed, the investigator will focus on art or literature insofar as such works connect with broader social factors, not because they possess some intrinsic interest or special aesthetic values.

This is the war-cry for killing off the love of reading in the schools, at least on the higher levels.  Why would the professor talk about the psychology of a  character like e.g. Pierre in War and Peace or of the personal tortures in Lord Jim ?

"The private life is dead in Russia." - The Communist terrorist Strelnikov in the movie version of Dr. Zhivago.

Anyway...

At my doctor's office a poster from an international drug company which was pushing a drug for asthma and other breathing problems:

"Help us, help you have control over your COPD symptoms."   ??? ??? ???

I did not have my red pen with me, otherwise...!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on July 03, 2015, 11:34:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 20, 2015, 06:06:44 PM
At a farmer's market, which had signs along a major freeway in South Carolina, more fun without consonants, vowels, and decimals!  Assorted signs:

"Canlopes: $100"    "Broclli: $100"  "Callyflowrs $100"  "Taters $500 20#"

The latter - "Taters" - could be seen as a cute Southernism.  The others...  ??? ??? ???

You think that's bad!  In the UK, it would also be sprinkled with the, in this case, accurately named "Greengrocers' Apostrophe", so: "Canlope's, Callyflower's, Tater's".  (For good measure, they would probably add "Its all fresh today".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on July 04, 2015, 12:11:16 AM
The really scary thing is that this apostrophe has crept into German. As in German the apostrophe is almost always wrong in that place and there is no proper use (like in the genitive in English), it has been dubbed "Deppenapostroph" (idiot's apostrophe).

The exceptions where it is right in German are the genitive of words ending in s, z or x to avoid a double s (or awkward combination of consonants, we Germans are only sometimes fond of those, not generally): "Brahms' zweite Sinfonie", "Fritz' Fahrrad". There is an alternative but this is rather old-fashioned or obsolete, "Fritzens Fahrrad". There is a song by Pfitzner (after a poem by C.F. Meyer) called "Hussens Kerker" (about Jan Hus in his prison cell, literally "Hus' prison". But if the word does not end in those, it is simply wrong to put an apostrophe. So it would be "Catos Grammatik-Meckerei" in German, not Cato's. Except that you will now find this wrong apostrophe on many small shops...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 04, 2015, 05:09:09 AM
Oop's!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 04, 2015, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 04, 2015, 05:09:09 AM
Oop's!

Out-of-print´s? Doesn´t make any sense to me.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on July 04, 2015, 07:10:42 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 20, 2015, 06:06:44 PM
At a farmer's market,

So there was only one farmer?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 04, 2015, 07:55:05 AM
Quote from: The Six on July 04, 2015, 07:10:42 AM
So there was only one farmer?

Yes: an individual  farmer had opened a store by the highway, operated by his children.

Quote from: Florestan on July 04, 2015, 05:18:58 AM
Out-of-print´s? Doesn´t make any sense to me.  ;D

Nor to me!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 06, 2015, 08:48:58 AM
Much swashbuckling and derring-do ensues.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 06, 2015, 11:38:28 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 06, 2015, 08:48:58 AM
Much swashbuckling and derring-do ensues.

Hmmm!  0:)  They does, does they?   ;)

Seen around town: "Mortgage Behind? Call xxx-xxxx!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on July 06, 2015, 11:47:56 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 06, 2015, 11:38:28 AM
Hmmm!  0:)  They does, does they?   ;)

Seen around town: "Mortgage Behind? Call xxx-xxxx!"

'Now that the mortgage is behind you, maybe you would like a new one. Call xxx-xxxx!'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 06, 2015, 11:54:53 AM
Quote from: North Star on July 06, 2015, 11:47:56 AM
'Now that the mortgage is behind you, maybe you would like a new one. Call xxx-xxxx!'

Is that what it means?!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 08, 2015, 10:55:47 AM
Chicago, unlike 34 American states, has laws that enforce background checks at gun shows, according to Governing magazine.

I suppose this does technically work.

To my eye, it seems almost to suggest that Chicago is a state, though.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 08, 2015, 11:09:06 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 08, 2015, 10:55:47 AM
Chicago, unlike 34 American states, has laws that enforce background checks at gun shows, according to Governing magazine.

I suppose this does technically work.

To my eye, it seems almost to suggest that Chicago is a state, though.

Yes: at least it did not state "...34 other American states..."

I know that there are a good number of non-Cook County Illinois residents who wish Chicago could be booted out of the state!   ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 10, 2015, 09:30:30 AM
Say the Opposite of What You (Probably) Mean Dept.

Quote"It's hard to downplay (sic) the significance of this really monumental event, that a state so wedded to history and its symbols voted pretty overwhelmingly to take this flag down and put it in a museum."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on July 13, 2015, 09:07:49 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 10, 2015, 09:30:30 AM
Say the Opposite of What You (Probably) Mean Dept.
Multiple problems with the grammar in that quote, including what for many used to be an antipathy toward the word downplay.  Who was it who said, "The next time I hear the word 'downplay' I will upget and outwalk!"? :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 13, 2015, 09:49:34 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on July 13, 2015, 09:07:49 AM
Multiple problems with the grammar in that quote, including what for many used to be an antipathy toward the word downplay.  Who was it who said, "The next time I hear the word 'downplay' I will upget and outwalk!"? :o

Heh-heh- I liked "pretty overwhelming."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on July 13, 2015, 11:38:29 AM
I've always had a soft spot for the overwhelmingly pretty. . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 16, 2015, 04:24:22 AM
From a promotional e-mail message:

QuoteEmjoy 30% Off Your Stay
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on July 16, 2015, 07:28:46 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 16, 2015, 04:24:22 AM
From a promotional e-mail message:

So what time would we have to get up in the morning?  :laugh:

Twice in the last 24 hours I've seen online articles in which the writer speaks of feeling "self-conscience." ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 16, 2015, 07:48:50 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on July 16, 2015, 07:28:46 AM
So what time would we have to get up in the morning?  :laugh:

Twice in the last 24 hours I've seen online articles in which the writer speaks of feeling "self-conscience." ::)

Oof.

Good morning, friend!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 16, 2015, 10:08:18 AM
From a book review of a new book by a speechwriter for a former (disgraced) South Carolina governor:

After writing an excellent and highly praised speech, the speechwriter was asked to write an editorial in the governor's name (adulterer and probable lunatic Mark Sanford)...

Quote...The governor told him that it "just doesn't sound like me" and rewrote the op-ed in its entirety. The opening sentence now read: "Legislative sessions represent a way of bringing change to our state—and given that our last one ended a few weeks ago, I write to give you my take on what happened and what it means going forward." A co-worker explained to Mr. Swaim that his job wasn't to write well but to write like the governor. "And this is how he writes?" Mr. Swain asked. "Um, yeah," his co-worker replied. "Welcome to hell."

Mr. Swaim's wife advised him to write badly, like Mr. Sanford, "with clumsy, meandering sentences and openings that seem calculated to make you stop reading." But he resisted. Then the governor made it clear that he was thinking about bringing in a new writer. Still, Mr. Swaim was concerned that if he wrote the way the governor did, he would be fired. Mr. Sanford "knew bad writing when he saw it, except when he was the author."

To an extent, Mr. Swaim gave in. He grew familiar with the governor's syntax and compiled a list of his favorite phrases—e.g., "goes well beyond," "this larger notion" and "speaks volumes." He made sure to include a few of the phrases in his compositions and gradually found that the governor was leaving his copy alone....

...In fact, he was in Argentina with his mistress. Once the facts were out, the governor could not bring himself to apologize to his staff. "I just wanted to say the obvious," he told aides, "which is the obvious."

Mr. Swaim recounts how Mr. Sanford searched in vain for some "larger notion" that "would show the world that his infantile obsession with a foreign divorcée was somehow nobler or more pardonable than the sordid entanglement of an average politician." The result was a series of puzzling statements and wandering disquisitions....

See:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/learning-to-lie-like-a-politician-1437000199 (http://www.wsj.com/articles/learning-to-lie-like-a-politician-1437000199)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 28, 2015, 05:53:24 AM
Viz. this headline:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/07/filmmakers-fighting-happy-birthday-copyright-find-their-smoking-gun/

I might have wished that they had said simply "conclusive evidence" rather than "smoking gun."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on July 28, 2015, 08:15:42 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 28, 2015, 05:53:24 AM
Viz. this headline:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/07/filmmakers-fighting-happy-birthday-copyright-find-their-smoking-gun/

I might have wished that they had said simply "conclusive evidence" rather than "smoking gun."
Yes, that metaphor is moribund. ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 28, 2015, 08:38:54 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 28, 2015, 05:53:24 AM
Viz. this headline:

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/07/filmmakers-fighting-happy-birthday-copyright-find-their-smoking-gun/

I might have wished that they had said simply "conclusive evidence" rather than "smoking gun."

"Worn-out phrases and longing gazes won't get you where you want to go."   ;)

And a "smoking gun" does not necessarily prove anything, except that the gun was fired.   0:) 

On the radio this morning I heard a 20-something use "sweeped" rather than "swept."   I find no acceptance of that form in dictionaries, even though the speaker has obviously been attracted by rhyming words like "leap," which does allow "leaped" and "leapt."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on July 28, 2015, 08:46:20 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on July 28, 2015, 08:15:42 AM
Yes, that metaphor is moribund. ::)

Don't you mean "shot dead!"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 28, 2015, 08:57:11 AM
Not merely a flesh wound.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on July 28, 2015, 09:19:02 AM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on July 28, 2015, 08:46:20 AM
Don't you mean "shot dead!"?
Wasn't that what I said? ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on July 28, 2015, 09:35:45 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on July 28, 2015, 09:19:02 AM
Wasn't that what I said? ;D

:)moribund meaning "well on the way toward death." In this case, one could wish for the "smoking gun" to shoot itself deader than a doornail.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 29, 2015, 06:02:29 AM
"Every child is uniquely brilliant!"

The slogan of an on-line K-12 school.  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 29, 2015, 06:05:00 AM
Zowie!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 29, 2015, 06:31:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 29, 2015, 06:02:29 AM
"Every child is uniquely brilliant!"


or brilliantly unique.  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 29, 2015, 09:06:52 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 29, 2015, 06:31:03 AM
or brilliantly unique.  :D

That one will most probably be used by a competing school!   0:)

I was reminded of the line from the wonderful cartoon movie The Incredibles:

https://www.youtube.com/v/A8I9pYCl9AQ
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on July 29, 2015, 11:42:34 AM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on July 28, 2015, 09:35:45 AM
:)moribund meaning "well on the way toward death." In this case, one could wish for the "smoking gun" to shoot itself deader than a doornail.

I'm glad you used deader rather than more dead. In these days when we are all to be wrapped in cotton wool, everything must be made 'more safe'.
One could though argue that dead in an absolute.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 29, 2015, 05:22:15 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on July 29, 2015, 11:42:34 AM
I'm glad you used deader rather than more dead. In these days when we are all to be wrapped in cotton wool, everything must be made 'more safe'.
One could though argue that dead is an absolute.

An old debate for such words: I suppose one could say that somebody dead for 10 days is "deader" than somebody dead for 5 days.  Of course, both are still dead. 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on July 31, 2015, 07:33:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 29, 2015, 05:22:15 PM
An old debate for such words: I suppose one could say that somebody dead for 10 days is "deader" than somebody dead for 5 days.  Of course, both are still dead. 0:)
Reminds me of "a little bit pregnant"! ??? :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 04, 2015, 03:37:47 AM
Perhaps it is our egalitarianism that has led to bad grammar being heard and written more prominently than in the past. Once it was confined to the 'lower classes', for example servants. Here are some examples from Charlotte Smith's novel 'The Old Manor House', 1793.

"I'm not myself no judge of them there things"
"He gived me a letter, which I carried in"
"he look'd to me as if he had rather of stay'd"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 04, 2015, 04:02:48 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on July 31, 2015, 07:33:18 AM
Reminds me of "a little bit pregnant"! ??? :laugh:

Heh-heh!  I once saw the phrase "final death" which, I suppose, could work for vampires... 8)

Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 04, 2015, 03:37:47 AM
Perhaps it is our egalitarianism that has led to bad grammar being heard and written more prominently than in the past. ...

A distinct possibility, along with simple laziness, or the desire to be "cool" like the morons lionized in the media: you should see and hear my suburban students trying to sound like "gangstas."   :P 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Abuelo Igor on August 04, 2015, 05:29:26 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 04, 2015, 04:02:48 AM
Heh-heh!  I once saw the phrase "final death" which, I suppose, could work for vampires... 8)

Death is really just the beginning...

(Ominous chord)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 04, 2015, 06:06:30 PM
Quote from: Abuelo Igor on August 04, 2015, 05:29:26 AM
Death is really just the beginning...

(Ominous chord)

:D   F-A-D-F-A-F-G# ?


Speaking of Music and Grammar, it is time to revisit this:

https://www.youtube.com/v/8Gv0H-vPoDc
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 05, 2015, 05:23:35 AM
From the Gesualdo Hex : Music, Myth and Memory by Glenn Watkins, a work of remarkable scholarship and insight, but which needed a more alert editor:

"How, in a word, could death be taken at face value when it was destined to be quickly and dramatically overturned by resurrection?  In this Gesualdo no doubt sensed special properties that helps (sic) us to understand the magical appeal of such a large undertaking..."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 05, 2015, 05:40:33 AM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 05, 2015, 05:23:35 AM
From the Gesualdo Hex : Music, Myth and Memory by Glenn Watkins, a work of remarkable scholarship and insight, but which needed a more alert editor:

"How, in a word, could death be taken at face value when it was destined to be quickly and dramatically overturned by resurrection?  In this Gesualdo no doubt sensed special properties that helps (sic) us to understand the magical appeal of such a large undertaking..."


That is a book which I need to re-read.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 05, 2015, 08:32:20 AM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 05, 2015, 05:23:35 AM
From the Gesualdo Hex : Music, Myth and Memory by Glenn Watkins, a work of remarkable scholarship and insight, but which needed a more alert editor:

"How, in a word, could death be taken at face value when it was destined to be quickly and dramatically overturned by resurrection?  In this Gesualdo no doubt sensed special properties that helps (sic) us to understand the magical appeal of such a large undertaking..."

Well, in Ancient Greek, neuter plurals are treated as singulars...but this is English!  $:)

And now...this!  ;)

America is already suffering what is termed a "debate" involving candidates for president.

10 - TEN! - people will be on a stage, but they will not be debating anything.  What one will see - if one wants to (I do not) - is a ten-sided press conference, and NOT a "debate."

To discover what used to be called a debate, check out the Lincoln-Douglas Debates.  You will note two things immediately: only TWO people were on stage, and they had more than 120 to 180 seconds to make their statements.

The Short-Attention Span Society (SASS) strikes again!  0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 05, 2015, 08:44:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 04, 2015, 04:02:48 AM
Heh-heh!  I once saw the phrase "final death" which, I suppose, could work for vampires... 8)
Or cats.  Or gaming characters. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 05, 2015, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 05, 2015, 05:40:33 AM
That is a book which I need to re-read.

Gesualdo fan?  I re-read it while I'm reading it (most paragraphs twice as he phrases even the simplest concepts complexly).  Would have put it down except that 1.) author has done his homework; 2.) has valuable things to say; and 3.) was on the ground floor of the Gesualdo revival.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 05, 2015, 09:20:29 AM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 05, 2015, 09:04:56 AM
Gesualdo fan?  I re-read it while I'm reading it (most paragraphs twice as he phrases even the simplest concepts complexly).  Would have put it down except that 1.) author has done his homework; 2.) has valuable things to say; and 3.) was on the ground floor of the Gesualdo revival.

Much more a Stravinsky fan, and via that path, an admirer of Gesualdo.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 05, 2015, 10:59:46 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 05, 2015, 09:20:29 AM
Much more a Stravinsky fan, and via that path, an admirer of Gesualdo.
The musician who literally got away with murder?!  Heavens!  What will the morality police say?  They've already banned Tchaikovsky and Britten, I hear. :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 05, 2015, 11:04:21 AM
How did they have ingenuity for that sort of thing before there were automatic rifles?   ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 05, 2015, 11:50:22 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 05, 2015, 09:20:29 AM
Much more a Stravinsky fan, and via that path, an admirer of Gesualdo.

Ach, the Stravinsky Connex to the Gesualdo Hex! I shoulda guessed!  8) 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 07, 2015, 12:00:09 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on August 05, 2015, 10:59:46 AM
The musician who literally got away with murder?! 

Having a company of men-at-arms and owning a well-guarded castle certainly helped.  :D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 07, 2015, 09:18:01 AM
If I told you that I had a "vitrified ceramic entertainment center,"  ??? ??? ???  what do you think would be in my possession?   ;)

Yesterday we were in a large store full of trinkets and decorations from other countries, and we saw a box which had this very odd phrase on it to describe the contents.

Vitrified Ceramic Entertainment Center: the first two words were more accurate than the last two.

Because...





...this is what the box contained:










(...it did not look quite like this, but close enough...)



























(http://thumbs2.ebaystatic.com/d/l225/m/mqn6eVVRBSv1iHuX21wKz-g.jpg)

"Are you not entertained?" :laugh:    That's right: a salt and pepper set with creamers or oil pitchers. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 07, 2015, 11:44:58 AM
Verbatim:

QuoteNerdgasm

Derives from the word orgasm.

When someone has experienced just too much nerdiness at one time, they are saidto have a nerdgasm. The person usually goes into a state of shock and can't speak for up to 1 hour. Never distured a someone who as recently nerdgasmed because the person is prone to just spurt out random nerdy things that regular people could never comprehend.

Person one: Dude, the PS3 is going to use blu-ray discs, imagine the texture file quality!!!

Person two:*nergasm*!!!

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerdgasm
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 07, 2015, 12:01:10 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 07, 2015, 09:18:01 AM
If I told you that I had a "vitrified ceramic entertainment center,"  ??? ??? ???  what do you think would be in my possession?   ;)


:) :D ;D Hey, you vilified the vitrified!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 07, 2015, 12:20:37 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 07, 2015, 11:44:58 AM
Verbatim:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerdgasm

Wow!  I wonder if this word will catch on!  I suppose our society has generated personalities which this word describes: "comic book conventions" for adults did not exist in the good old days.  There were 10-year old boys who might have debated the merits of The Phantom against those of The Lone Ranger, but...

Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 07, 2015, 12:01:10 PM
:) :D ;D Hey, you vilified the vitrified!

My apologies!  I suspect the phrase came from a Chinese to English Google Translator.  0:)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 08, 2015, 06:07:17 AM
Don't go changing . . . found on FB:

QuoteI'd worship at that alter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 08, 2015, 07:33:57 PM
Quote from: ZauberdrachenNr.7 on August 07, 2015, 12:01:10 PM
:) :D ;D Hey, you vilified the vitrified!

He stained the glassed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 11, 2015, 08:09:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 07, 2015, 09:18:01 AM
If I told you that I had a "vitrified ceramic entertainment center,"  ??? ??? ???  what do you think would be in my possession?   ;)
My first thought was: A mirror? :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 11, 2015, 08:11:53 AM
Hah!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 11, 2015, 08:14:20 AM
Now, Karl, is that a grammatically correct "Hah"? :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 11, 2015, 09:11:27 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on August 11, 2015, 08:09:03 AM
My first thought was: A mirror? :laugh:

Excellent guess!   :D

Speaking of odd phrases: a friend of mine saw a sign in Kentucky that almost made him wreck the car.

"Used Cows for Sale."

Exactly how had they been used?  Inquire at the house!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 11, 2015, 09:54:25 AM
Gently Used Cows?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 11, 2015, 10:02:41 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 11, 2015, 09:11:27 AM
Excellent guess!   :D

Speaking of odd phrases: a friend of mine saw a sign in Kentucky that almost made him wreck the car.

"Used Cows for Sale."

Exactly how had they been used?  Inquire at the house!

My guess is that Cato has misidentified a drollery.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 11, 2015, 11:41:39 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 11, 2015, 10:02:41 AM
My guess is that Cato has misidentified a drollery.

Instead of a dairy?   8)  Well, my friend was in Kentucky at the time: as any Buckeye will tell you, they think "diffrunt" in "Kaintucky."  ;)

Some websites are a trollery: does that count as a drollery?  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 12, 2015, 08:09:13 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 11, 2015, 11:41:39 AM
...Some websites are a trollery: does that count as a drollery?  0:)
No.  I have yet to encounter a droll troll. :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 14, 2015, 05:05:19 AM
This is the last line of the article; so not only is it rather unfortunate in its poor (and unclear) expression, but it casts rather a pall on the entire article one has just read . . .

Quote from: Sara AridiWhile her use of a personal e-mail account and server did not break the rules at the time, no other secretary of State has exclusively done so.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 14, 2015, 05:08:57 AM
If this be nitpicking, let us pick more such nits:

Quote from: Matthew DickinsonAt the risk of nitpicking, however, I would argue that a "statistical tie" is not the equivalent of a "dead heat," the Times's headline notwithstanding.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Politics-Voices/2015/0811/Bernie-Sanders-and-Hillary-Clinton-It-s-not-a-dead-heat-in-New-Hampshire
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 14, 2015, 05:50:41 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 14, 2015, 05:08:57 AM
If this be nitpicking, let us pick more such nits:


"I think you know what I'm trying to say" : the guiding philosophy of today's journalism...and a good number of people in general! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 14, 2015, 06:12:00 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 14, 2015, 05:50:41 AM
"I think you know what I'm trying to say" : the guiding philosophy of today's journalism...and a good number of people in general! 

Makes me think of one of Twain's righteous outrages in "Fenimore Cooper's Literary Offenses":

Quote from: Samuel L. ClemensIn addition to these large rules, there are some little ones. These require that the author shall:

12. Say what he is proposing to say, not merely come near it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 14, 2015, 08:52:54 AM
From C.S. Lewis: "Child, to say exactly what you mean, neither more nor less nor other: that's the art and joy of words." (Till We Have Faces)

I too tend to think that it's sheer laziness not to make your meaning clear, especially in newswriting.  But the old objectives of "who, what, where, when, why" seem to have been swallowed up in the need to spin everything, and in general sloppiness. ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 18, 2015, 03:41:14 AM
Not a grammar grumble, but a study of regional patterns of swearing preferences in the United States: Mapping the United Swears of America (https://stronglang.wordpress.com/2015/07/28/mapping-the-united-swears-of-america/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 18, 2015, 03:44:50 AM
Dadgummit!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 18, 2015, 08:40:05 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 18, 2015, 03:44:50 AM
Dadgummit!
:laugh: Here in downtown Denver that wouldn't even qualify as swearing.  You have to mention bodily discharges or fornication to draw any attention. :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 18, 2015, 08:46:14 AM
I'd never meet the bar out West!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on August 19, 2015, 01:45:35 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 18, 2015, 08:46:14 AM
I'd never meet the bar out West!
Oh, you'd do fine outside the big cities.  I have to be very careful of my language when I visit my folks in rural Nebraska! :o :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 21, 2015, 05:27:37 AM
Quote from: email msg from NaxosIn this second volume, The President's Own US Marine Band, records another way of fantastic and rare marches, all from the pen of "The March King" himself.

Way or wave, whatever.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 02, 2015, 11:15:13 AM
QuoteVoters of America: Get ahold of yourselves, please.

"ahold"? Really?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 02, 2015, 12:09:37 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 02, 2015, 11:15:13 AM
"ahold"? Really?

Umm, Karl, that means get a grip on yourself. Which is what is meant. If you were trying to reserve yourself at the library, stop payment on yourself, put yourself in a half-Nelson, then you would be putting a hold on yourself.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on September 02, 2015, 12:52:27 PM
QuoteOrigin of AHOLD

probably from the phrase a hold
First Known Use: 1854

Those wacky 1800ers!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 02, 2015, 01:38:41 PM
Quote from: The Six on September 02, 2015, 12:52:27 PM
Those wacky 1800ers!

Interesting. I found this site, which says 1610. I will google a bit to see if I can get ahold of an early citation.
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/a-hold-or-ahold?page=1 (http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/a-hold-or-ahold?page=1)

Update. Aseek and ye shall afind! Before 1600
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/ahold (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/ahold)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 02, 2015, 02:19:56 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 02, 2015, 12:09:37 PM
Umm, Karl, that means get a grip on yourself. Which is what is meant.

Sure.  I've heard the expression uncountable times, and I suppose I have visualized the spelling as "get a hold of yourself."  Was I wrong, then?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 02, 2015, 02:38:41 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 02, 2015, 02:19:56 PM
Sure.  I've heard the expression uncountable times, and I suppose I have visualized the spelling as "get a hold of yourself."  Was I wrong, then?

No, I expect they are both in use. And logic is a dubious guide to such things. Flammable/inflammable anyone? But I don't think you register an official grumble here.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 02, 2015, 04:36:08 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 02, 2015, 02:38:41 PM
No, I expect they are both in use.

Aye, and here I've learnt an interesting archaism.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 06, 2015, 05:08:41 AM
Greetings Grammar Grumblers!

School has started, and of course our computer system did not work for over a week.  Plus, other projects, errands, duties, surprises, annoyances, and etc. etc. etc. have prevented from visiting for a few weeks.

Anyway...

Yesterday on the TV news during a report about an attack on a small college's campus:

"Students are telling a story that is terrifying, and even...scary!"   ??? ??? ???

Well, I suppose that made sense to ace and very blonde reporter Barbie Bubblebrain, but my wife and I both burped "What?!" when we heard it.

During a trip along Ohio's back roads to Lake Erie, we went past a farm that had a sign by the road.  The sign said the same thing on both sides:

"Genes for sale."

I told Mrs. Cato we should stop and buy some DNA sequences!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 06, 2015, 05:12:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 06, 2015, 05:08:41 AM
During a trip along Ohio's back roads to Lake Erie, we went past a farm that had a sign by the road.  The sign said the same thing on both sides:

"Genes for sale."

I told Mrs. Cato we should stop and buy some DNA sequences!   0:)

That's one twisted sign  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Scion7 on September 06, 2015, 06:05:37 AM
"Genes For Sale"

Maybe some woman was selling her husband and didn't punctuate properly?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 06, 2015, 06:21:08 AM
Or, she was polyandrous, and insisted on marrying a man only if his name was Eugene.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 06, 2015, 02:07:37 PM
https://www.youtube.com/v/xf8zep5BADs   https://www.youtube.com/v/v0bds2vFg0M

https://www.youtube.com/v/2E7stjbXGgg
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 06, 2015, 04:44:11 PM


Quote from: Scion7 on September 06, 2015, 06:05:37 AM
"Genes For Sale"

Maybe some woman was selling her husband and didn't punctuate properly?

Quote from: karlhenning on September 06, 2015, 06:21:08 AM
Or, she was polyandrous, and insisted on marrying a man only if his name was Eugene.

:laugh:  Both good possibilities!  Of course, maybe the owner is a "Frankenfarmer" and has nothing against "Genetically Modified Food."

I was just jarred by some bad grammar in the British offering on PBS called Arthur and George: I believe it was the Conan Doyle character who was speaking.

"...with my wife and I..."    ??? ??? ???

I do not believe Sir Arthur would have made such a mistake!  8)    If people stopped and thought: "Does anyone say: 'He wants to talk with I' ?"  then this error would fade away.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 15, 2015, 08:43:59 AM
Quote from: Todd on September 15, 2015, 07:51:18 AM
But I like hanging chads. (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/15/2016-election-old-voting-machines-hanging-chad)

Damn sloppy journalism:

Quote from: Ed Pilkington. . . the notorious "hanging chad" affair that shook the country in 2000 and propelled George W Bush into the White House, experts on electoral procedures are warning.

I am not at all convinced that it was any matter of propulsion, but it was certainly not L'affaire tchad which propelled him there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on September 16, 2015, 06:08:29 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 15, 2015, 08:43:59 AM
Damn sloppy journalism:

I am not at all convinced that it was any matter of propulsion, but it was certainly not L'affaire tchad which propelled him there.
More like, a tame Supreme Court. :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 16, 2015, 07:38:03 PM
Quote from: jochanaan on September 16, 2015, 06:08:29 PM
More like, a tame Supreme Court. :P

Piffle. Aside from anything else, you know they did do post facto recounts, right? Which Bush won.

Here's a test for you. The USSC rejected the recount. What was the vote?

It was 7-2. The 5-4 was on another issue, about further recounts and timing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 17, 2015, 04:14:45 AM
Well, we are in effect demonstrating why it is understandable that a UK journo could garble the facts  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 17, 2015, 04:22:23 AM
Good God, Vanessa:

Quote from: Vanessa WilliamsShe also offered a strong explanation for one of the defining characteristics of
the race so far: why non-politicians, including she, Trump and retired
neurosurgeon Ben Carson, were drawing majority support from Republican voters.

... including she ? ? ? ! ! !
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 17, 2015, 06:54:19 AM
QuoteJeb Bush looked better than he did in the first debate, but likely didn't do
enough to bring his poll numbers back up or sooth his donors' growing fears.

In sooth!  Is that really an alternate spelling for soothe?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 17, 2015, 07:02:18 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 17, 2015, 04:22:23 AM
Good God, Vanessa:

... including she ? ? ? ! ! !

Appalling.
"including s/he"


>:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 17, 2015, 07:03:50 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 17, 2015, 06:54:19 AM
In sooth!  Is that really an alternate spelling for soothe?
Sooth is a noun and soothe a verb.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 21, 2015, 04:09:24 AM
Quote from: North Star on September 17, 2015, 07:03:50 AM
Sooth is a noun and soothe a verb.

And that's the sooth!   0:)

From USA Today online version, in a story about preserving brain power in old age:

Quote"The committee did say the evidence "provides some justification for individual choices to eat less meat and more nuts and legumes, whole grains, and monounsaturated fats, such as olive oil, to perverse cognitive health."
:o :o :o

Well, the word is spelled correctly!   $:)

See:  http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2015/09/20/brain-diets-supplements/72248670/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2015/09/20/brain-diets-supplements/72248670/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 21, 2015, 04:16:45 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 21, 2015, 04:09:24 AM
From USA Today online version, in a story about preserving brain power in old age:
   :o :o :o

Well, the word is spelled correctly!   $:)

See:  http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2015/09/20/brain-diets-supplements/72248670/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/2015/09/20/brain-diets-supplements/72248670/)
Shouldn't it actually be pervert, though?  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 21, 2015, 05:37:00 AM
Quote from: North Star on September 21, 2015, 04:16:45 AM
Shouldn't it actually be pervert, though?  ::)

Heh-heh!  I suspect somebody had the letters really scrambled and saw the red line underneath it, hit "spell check" to unscramble it without checking carefully, saw the red line disappear, and hit "send." 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 25, 2015, 05:27:52 AM
A case of suspicious quotation marks in the title of a Youtube video. Perhaps the photographs are of forgeries. How much would you pay for a "genuine painting" by "Claude Monet"?  ::)
QuoteGabriel FAURE': Pavane, Op. 50 - Paintings By "CLAUDE MONET"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 01, 2015, 11:03:47 AM
Not a full-on grumble . . . I had to see a headline phrased differently, to understand that Woman Burned as Baby Finally Reunites With Nurse Who Cared for Her was meant as Woman [ Burned as Baby ] Finally Reunites With Nurse Who Cared for Her rather than Woman Burned . . . as Baby Finally Reunites With Nurse Who Cared for Her.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 01, 2015, 11:04:49 AM
Probably a downstream effect of burned having served as slang in my high school . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 01, 2015, 03:06:07 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 01, 2015, 11:04:49 AM
Probably a downstream effect of burned having served as slang in my high school . . . .

If I saw a baby reunited withnurse I'd be burned too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 02, 2015, 03:23:15 AM
Love is a burnin' thing . . . an' it leaves a fiery ring . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 02, 2015, 08:54:58 AM
Or, as a contemporary campaign slogan puts it, "Feel The Bern!" 8) ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 21, 2015, 05:03:50 AM
There was, was there?

Quote from: CNNIn the fictional setting of Hill Valley, California, there was flying cars, self-tying Nikes, and hoverboards.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 21, 2015, 05:11:09 AM
Headline on the Innernitz:

Is 'Star Wars' hype overrated?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 21, 2015, 05:22:59 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on October 21, 2015, 05:03:50 AM
There was, was there?

QuoteIn the fictional setting of Hill Valley, California, there was flying cars, self-tying Nikes, and hoverboards.

Apparently major networks fail at basic grammar in the future.  $:)

And we were just complaining this morning here at school that hoverboards are still not available: and yes, we saw the magnetic levitation trick a few weeks ago.  But that obviously is not the same as an anti-gravity hoverboard!

Quote from: karlhenning on October 21, 2015, 05:11:09 AM
Headline on the Innernitz:

Is 'Star Wars' hype overrated?

Why, yes, ipso facto, yes it is!   :laugh:

From a local radio ad touting a major hospital's prowess:

"A program treating brain trauma with spinal injuries and lower-extremity nerve conditions..."  ??? :o ??? :o

Now if you suffer from "brain trauma," how on earth does treating it by injuring your spine and causing lower-extremity nerve conditions make it better?

Perhaps the word "involving" rather than "with" would be more accurate?  Treating brain trauma with aspirin sounds a whole lot better!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Brahmsian on October 25, 2015, 11:33:14 AM
Interesting.  There is the word 'uncouth', but no word 'couth'.  :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 25, 2015, 12:48:08 PM
Quote from: ChamberNut on October 25, 2015, 11:33:14 AM
Interesting.  There is the word 'uncouth', but no word 'couth'.  :-\
The word exists of course, but, not uncannily, it is obscure.

OED:


Quote† couth, n.2
View as: Outline |Full entryKeywords: On |OffQuotations: Show all |Hide all
Etymology:  apparently < couth adj.
Obs.

1. ? Known quality, renown.
c1460   Launfal 624 in J. Ritson Anc. Eng. Metrical Romanceës I. 197   Syr Launfal schud be stward of halle, For to agye hys gestes alle, For cowthe of largesse.


2. ? Friendliness, kindness; = couthiness n. at couthie adj. Derivatives.
a1806   in Jamieson Pop. Ball I. 125   O, blessins on thy couth, lord John; Weel's me to see this day.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Brahmsian on October 25, 2015, 04:42:36 PM
Quote from: North Star on October 25, 2015, 12:48:08 PM
The word exists of course, but, not uncannily, it is obscure.

OED:

I saw that afterwards!  It wasn't in the Oxford Dictionary I have at home, but it is in the online Dictionary.  I thought it interesting, as I've heard the term 'uncouth' used regularly, but never have I heard anyone use the term 'couth'.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on October 26, 2015, 12:41:19 AM
Isn't "obs." closer to "obsolete" in that case? I vaguely remember that almost 20 years ago someone showed me humorous text or poem that relied mainly on using such words were the "positive" or basic form did not exist (or was at least very uncommon). E.g "kempt" does exist but "unkempt" is much more common. I did not really get the humour at that time because my English was not good enough.
The phenomenon of surviving negative of compound forms where the positive or basic form has become obsolete long ago does exist in German as well but I am not sure if there would be enough words to make a funny text.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 26, 2015, 06:59:52 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 26, 2015, 12:41:19 AM
Isn't "obs." closer to "obsolete" in that case?
In the dictionary entry? Yes, that's what it means there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2015, 08:23:33 AM
Only an amusing misspelling, to be sure start with:

Quote
Brett's hobbies were building model clipper ships; some can be scene behind him in his bridge station and also in the engineering bays where he works.

Edit :: Emended on Karlo's excellent suggestion
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2015, 08:24:24 AM
"hobby was" rather than "hobbies were" (genuine Grumble)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 10, 2015, 08:28:56 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on December 10, 2015, 08:24:24 AM
"hobby was" rather than "hobbies were" (genuine Grumble)
Right, and it was only with great difficulty that I got over grumbling over it, and could move on to the somewhat amusing misspelling. So, to be sure, there is not only an amusing misspelling...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2015, 08:51:25 AM
Quote from: North Star on December 10, 2015, 08:28:56 AM
Right, and it was only with great difficulty that I got over grumbling over it, and could move on to the somewhat amusing misspelling. So, to be sure, there is not only an amusing misspelling...

You're right!  Grumble noted, and addressed  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2015, 09:01:32 AM
Quote from: imdb.com
The film was originally banned when released in Finland.

Phrased like that, it makes me ask, Which was it?—released in Finland, or banned in Finland?

I suppose what is meant is, When originally released, the film was banned in Finland.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 10, 2015, 09:39:21 AM

Quote
QuoteBrett's hobbies were building model clipper ships; some can be scene behind him in his bridge station and also in the engineering bays where he works.

Quote from: karlhenning on December 10, 2015, 08:24:24 AM
"hobby was" rather than "hobbies were" (genuine Grumble)


Quote from: North Star on December 10, 2015, 08:28:56 AM
Right, and it was only with great difficulty that I got over grumbling over it, and could move on to the somewhat amusing misspelling. So, to be sure, there is not only an amusing misspelling...

There is a similar error sometimes called attraction by linguists, e.g. "A small group of bad-smelling and appallingly ignorant yokels were disturbing the peace."   ???

The subject is "group," but it is not as close to the verb's position as "yokels," and so to some people "were" sounds correct.

Quote from: karlhenning on December 10, 2015, 09:01:32 AM
Phrased like that, it makes me ask, Which was it?—released in Finland, or banned in Finland?

I suppose what is meant is, When originally released, the film was banned in Finland.

First the release, then the kibosh!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2015, 09:45:59 AM
Containment!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 10, 2015, 09:47:09 AM
Or, like Monty Python's The Life of Brian:  it was released, and then sundry localities banned it?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 10, 2015, 10:12:45 AM
Of course, there are movies that escape, instead of being released!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on December 11, 2015, 06:51:41 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 10, 2015, 10:12:45 AM
Of course, there are movies that escape, instead of being released!   0:)
Can you name some of them?  Or would that be couth? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 22, 2015, 06:14:39 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on December 11, 2015, 06:51:41 PM
Can you name some of them?  Or would that be couth? ;)

Oh, just off the top of my head: anything with Hot Tub and Time Machine combined for a title!   ???    Or The Scouts' Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse   :o :o :o  Yes, people with millions of disposable dollars thought such a script worthy of their investment.

On topic:

Today I saw a TV ad for an exercise machine on which I could save " 40% LESS!"

I will be interested in the sales figures!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on December 22, 2015, 04:36:28 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 22, 2015, 06:14:39 AM
...On topic:

Today I saw a TV ad for an exercise machine on which I could save " 40% LESS!"

I will be interested in the sales figures!   $:)
:laugh: :blank: :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 11, 2016, 03:41:00 AM
Great typo:

QuoteFlynn Center for the Performing Art

Don't keep us on tenterhooks:  WHICH ONE???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Monsieur Croche on January 11, 2016, 03:57:27 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on January 11, 2016, 03:41:00 AM
Great typo:

Don't keep us on tenterhooks:  WHICH ONE???

But of course, a group of easels onstage, paint moving about on their surfaces as if by magic... you know, "performing art."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 14, 2016, 10:05:32 AM
Quote from: TV talking head... in a generic general sense ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 14, 2016, 11:00:16 AM
In a military discussion?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on January 14, 2016, 09:07:42 PM
More from over here in China

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/China%20Nanchang%203/067_zpswlblhkmv.jpg)

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/China%20Nanchang%201/007_zpse2msoldl.jpg)

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/China%20Nanchang%201/002_zpsbwrmv1cn.jpg)

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/China%20Nanchang%201/001_zpsyaghhcy7.jpg)

These I may have posted before...

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/x%20Various%204/Modern%20Tech%20Building%20sign%20ridiculous_zpsbukvww8r.jpg)

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/x%20Various%204/1_zpsuyxvulzg.jpg)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Stupid Drug Names
Post by: Cato on January 15, 2016, 04:18:38 AM
I happened to see a television commercial for a drug with another stupid name, spelled in a stupid way.

What is really odd, is that the company saw fit to place parentheses with a semi-phonetic spelling underneath the stupidly spelled name!

So the drug's name sounds like it should be spelled Zyfaxin.

Did they spell it that way?  No, of course not!  Why would they do that?!  ??? ??? ???

They spell it XIFAXAN.

Coming soon to a pharmacy near you: MXYZPTLK!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Stupid Drug Names
Post by: Gurn Blanston on January 15, 2016, 04:39:23 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 15, 2016, 04:18:38 AM
I happened to see a television commercial for a drug with another stupid name, spelled in a stupid way.

What is really odd, is that the company saw fit to place parentheses with a semi-phonetic spelling underneath the stupidly spelled name!

So the drug's name sounds like it should be spelled Zyfaxin.

Did they spell it that way?  No, of course not!  Why would they do that?!  ??? ??? ???

They spell it XIFAXAN.

Coming soon to a pharmacy near you: MXYZPTLK!

Another in the same vein is Farxiga  (Far-ZEE-ga). They have stopped it in their latest round of adverts, probably not because they came to their senses though.

On the same line, if they weren't allowed to advertise on television at all, this would not be a problem.  >:(

8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Stupid Drug Names
Post by: Cato on January 15, 2016, 06:27:31 AM
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on January 15, 2016, 04:39:23 AM
Another in the same vein is Farxiga  (Far-ZEE-ga). They have stopped it in their latest round of adverts, probably not because they came to their senses though.

On the same line, if they weren't allowed to advertise on television at all, this would not be a problem.  >:(

8)

Yes, also silly!   

And on to another grumble: local weather today on a certain station had a blurb running at the bottom of the screen:  "Warmer then yesterday!"

One might think this was perhaps a typing error, but the weatherman, a woolly worm with three names, distinctly said "warmer then.." twice, and then repeated the same error when he said next week would be "much colder then this week was."

This was never a problem in my experience until the last decade or so.  Has anyone else noticed it in the 70's or 80's?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on January 15, 2016, 07:59:59 AM
Don't capitalize the names of currencies

its the Chinese yuan, Australian dollar etc.  Even the Financial press goofs this frequently
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on January 15, 2016, 11:00:47 AM
A
Tht was last year: a newbie TV newsperson reporting on Kim Jung Un referred to him as 'Kim Jong Un(*), son of Kim Jung Il. Which (in French) went: Kim Jung One, son of Kim Jung Two.

In French, 'un' = one, and of course she misread Il for the roman two (II).

She was quickly replaced and has not been heard of since. A pity, since she probably attended Journalism School in university for the mandatory 3 years.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on January 18, 2016, 08:09:57 AM
Silly spellings are frequently given to commercial products merely so that they can be copyrighted. As for instance the Ford Ka.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Stupid Drug Names
Post by: jochanaan on January 28, 2016, 07:16:06 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 15, 2016, 04:18:38 AM
I happened to see a television commercial for a drug with another stupid name, spelled in a stupid way.

What is really odd, is that the company saw fit to place parentheses with a semi-phonetic spelling underneath the stupidly spelled name!

So the drug's name sounds like it should be spelled Zyfaxin.

Did they spell it that way?  No, of course not!  Why would they do that?!  ??? ??? ???

They spell it XIFAXAN.

Coming soon to a pharmacy near you: MXYZPTLK!
L. Frank Baum anticipated this with his P y r z q x g l [sic]. ;D (From The Magic of Oz)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2016, 03:24:41 PM
Quote from: jochanaan on January 28, 2016, 07:16:06 PM
L. Frank Baum anticipated this with his P y r z q x g l [sic]. ;D (From The Magic of Oz)

Wow!  Who knew?!

Quote from: Ten thumbs on January 18, 2016, 08:09:57 AM
Silly spellings are frequently given to commercial products merely so that they can be copyrighted. As for instance the Ford Ka.

You mean it has nothing  to do with the Ancient Egyptian trinity of the soul?!  0:)

Courtesy of the New York Times:

"Hieronymus Bosch Is Credited With Work in Kansas City Museum"  ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o

In the 1500's, I suspect the Kansas City Museum was a highly mobile teepee.

See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/02/arts/design/work-at-a-kansas-city-museum-may-be-by-hieronymus-bosch-researchers-say.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/02/arts/design/work-at-a-kansas-city-museum-may-be-by-hieronymus-bosch-researchers-say.html?_r=0)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 05, 2016, 09:22:19 AM
[ Cross-post ]

Yes: GAALLERY
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on February 05, 2016, 07:06:14 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2016, 03:24:41 PM
Wow!  Who knew?!...
I did.  0:) :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sean on February 05, 2016, 11:43:08 PM
I took this one yesterday on the new metro train line in Nanchang, east central China.

(http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m71/SeanMcHugh02/x%20Various%204/107_zpsxhfp7fj4.jpg)

This is about the dumbest I've ever seen; you might need to know your British English though.
Title: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 14, 2016, 09:43:06 AM
When I read the following ...

"In the wake of the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the six remaining Republican presidential candidates ...."

... I half-wondered if that implied that Scalia had been the seventh candidate ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on February 14, 2016, 12:03:37 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 14, 2016, 09:43:06 AM
When I read the following ...

"In the wake of the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, the six remaining Republican presidential candidates ...."

... I half-wondered if that implied that Scalia had been the seventh candidate ....

Truth to tell,  Mr. Justice Scalia would probably have been a better president than most of the lot actually running.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 15, 2016, 12:57:22 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on February 14, 2016, 12:03:37 PM
Truth to tell,  Mr. Justice Scalia would probably have been a better president than most of the lot actually running.

Amen!   0:)

Yesterday we heard this at church:

A reading from the Book of..Dude O'Romeny.  ??? ??? ??? 0:) 0:) 0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 15, 2016, 02:30:08 PM
Wish I had thought of that yesterday! ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 17, 2016, 07:08:37 AM
Great (and arguably Twilight Zone-ish) transposition:

Quote from: Alfred EakerRod Serling (who co-wrote the script for 1986's Planet of The Apes) was commissioned to compose a treatment for Beneath the Plant of the Apes, which was summarily (and foolishly) rejected.

RTWT here
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 17, 2016, 03:17:48 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on February 17, 2016, 07:08:37 AM
Great (and arguably Twilight Zone-ish) transposition:

Quote from: Alfred Eaker


QuoteRod Serling (who co-wrote the script for 1986's Planet of The Apes) was commissioned to compose a treatment for Beneath the Plant of the Apes, which was summarily (and foolishly) rejected.

1986?!  Somebody stepped on a butterfly!   0:)

I sat through the remake from Tim Burton, and found everything inferior to the original, especially the ending.

On topic:

I cannot verify this, but a blogger claimed that she had seen an analysis of the grammar and vocabulary of the political "debates" (they are nothing of the kind) among the candidates for president.  It used to be said that television was on the level of a 12-year old.

The grammar and vocabulary in the "side-by-side, sound-bite-bumper-sticker-slogan" contests worked out to be on a 4th to 5th Grade level, i.e. suitable for 9 and 10 year-old children.

In comparison to the Lincoln - Douglas Debates, these things today are beyond disgraceful.  But the situation was predicted over 30 years ago by technology critic Neil Postman: check his books Amusing Ourselves To Death and especially The Disappearance of Childhood.  That his predictions have turned out to be fairly precise is most dismaying.


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 01, 2016, 10:11:17 AM
This prequel lacks a little in it's concept of who and what the creator of the human race should be. It does have it's good points and I think you should watch this with an open mind especially if your an 'Alien' series enthusiast.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 03, 2016, 04:56:07 AM
Technically, more or less off-topic . . . but I weep for America that there may be any who choose Option #1 . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on March 08, 2016, 04:31:49 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 01, 2016, 10:11:17 AM
This prequel lacks a little in it's concept of who and what the creator of the human race should be. It does have it's good points and I think you should watch this with an open mind especially if your an 'Alien' series enthusiast.
And who was responsible for that ungrammatical drivel? ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 08, 2016, 04:54:52 PM
Seen along a state highway by a large farm:

FREE HAY FOR SALE   ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o

A paradox for the ages, like Donald and Daisy!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 08, 2016, 05:38:25 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 08, 2016, 04:54:52 PM
Seen along a state highway by a large farm:

FREE HAY FOR SALE   ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o

A paradox for the ages, like Donald and Daisy!   0:)

I was thinking on roughly similar lines when the lesson this Sunday previous was the much-familiar you who have no money, come, buy and eat!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 09, 2016, 04:37:44 AM
Quote from: Someone who, face it, makes a great deal more money than I doPlease make every effort to join your colleagues and I ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on March 09, 2016, 07:40:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 08, 2016, 04:54:52 PM
Seen along a state highway by a large farm:

FREE HAY FOR SALE   ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o

A paradox for the ages, like Donald and Daisy!   0:)
Maybe the farmer/rancher needs a "bale-out"! :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2016, 05:15:39 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on March 09, 2016, 04:37:44 AM
Please make every effort to join your colleagues and I ....

Come with I to the Casbah!   $:)

Could you help I, please? 

Quote from: jochanaan on March 09, 2016, 07:40:18 AM
Maybe the farmer/rancher needs a "bale-out"! :D

8) 8) 8)

Maybe, but that sounds like a "straw-man" argument!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on March 11, 2016, 06:22:27 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 10, 2016, 05:15:39 PM
...Maybe, but that sounds like a "straw-man" argument!   0:)
:laugh: 8) :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 31, 2016, 08:45:19 AM
Offhand, I think convention was meant.

QuoteRNC unveils contested contention website
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 04, 2016, 08:53:15 AM
From the May 4th, 2016 Wall Street Journal by Joseph Epstein:

Quote...Feel no embarrassment if you don't know his name. Robert Hartwell Fiske was an unknown soldier in that most glorious and hopeless of wars, that against the ignorant and abusive use of language. He published five or six books on the subject, with such titles as "The Dictionary of Disagreeable English," "The Dimwit's Dictionary" and "Robert Hartwell Fiske's Dictionary of Unendurable English." He also ran a website called Vocabula Review, which featured essays written by various hands, on occasion my own among them, discussing the vagaries and comedy of language...

...A brief Wikipedia entry about him is almost entirely negative. He is accused by a linguist of being "far too prescriptivist in orientation for a sophisticated linguistic audience." Two reviews of the "Dictionary of Unendurable English" are cited: In one the book is said to be—no fainter praise is imaginable—"enjoyable for word snobs and copy editors"; in the other he is called "so passionate in the prescriptivist cause of smiting the lax and the uncaring that the book at times resembles a parody of itself."

The "prescriptivist cause" means the assertion of correct and clear English, the insistence on a standard. One might have thought such an objective admirable, but in their sophistication contemporary linguists are keener on demotic than on elegant English. Besides, in the spirit of our day, when the chief function of authority is to serve as an object of attack, to set up as an authority is to risk—to expect, really—an onslaught of shaving-cream pies in the face.

No one among them ever thought himself a prescriptivist, but the prescriptivist honor roll is distinguished. On it are Jonathan Swift, H.L. Mencken, George Orwell, Evelyn Waugh and Edmund Wilson. My own favorite writer in this realm is H.W. Fowler, whose "Modern English Usage" was a best-seller in America when it was published in 1926. Immensely learned yet with nothing schoolmarmish about him, Fowler was able to lay down the law without seeming the least priggish. Although he knew all the rules, his general advice was to break any rule rather than be forced into writing something that sounds barbarous.

I'm not sure when, precisely, Robert Fiske signed on to fight the pollution of empty jargon, idiotic euphemism, self-serving imprecision, comic redundancy and nonsense generally. He had earlier worked as a copy editor for the Addison-Wesley publishing company and then as a freelance editor. A passion for correct English at some point must have turned into an obsession. Robert was apparently obsessive in other realms: He was a weightlifter and a man who went on 10-mile treks carrying 50 pounds of bricks in a backpack.

Perhaps it requires an obsessive to devote himself to linguistic delinquencies in any age, but especially in ours, the age of the emoticon. In his "Dimwit's Dictionary," Robert explains his reigning idea in the first paragraph of his first chapter, when he announces that "Dimwitticisms are worn-out words and phrases; they are expressions that dull our reason and dim our insight, formulas that we rely on when we are too lazy to express what we think or even to discover how we feel. The more we use them, the more we conform—in thought and feeling—to everyone else who uses them."

In his various writings, Robert insisted on distinctions: between forcefully and forcibly, fortunately and fortuitously, tortured and tortuous, and many more. He could be death on academic locution and on the ungainly "in terms of," the overused "scenario," the misused "transpire," the merely hideous "prioritize."

Robert believed that "our knowledge of the world expands as our familiarity with words increases," and that inattentiveness to the niceties of language "blunts our understanding and quashes our creativity." I could say that he was the H.W. Fowler de nos jours, but Robert would have been pained by my unnecessary, and thereby pretentious, use of French...

...Robert Hartwell Fiske was doing the Lord's work. I only hope that, when he gets to the gates of heaven, St. Peter, in interviewing him, doesn't split an infinitive or misuse the word "precipitous," and Robert, feeling the need to correct him, blows everything.

See:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/death-of-a-word-man-1462313666#:yGo2wYdWovoqwA (http://www.wsj.com/articles/death-of-a-word-man-1462313666#:yGo2wYdWovoqwA)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 04, 2016, 10:03:14 AM
Love it! . . . the merely hideous "prioritize."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on May 04, 2016, 04:45:28 PM
"Dimwitticisms" ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 05, 2016, 05:19:11 AM
Are you avoiding avocado because of it's high fat reputation?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 05, 2016, 07:46:22 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 05, 2016, 05:19:11 AM
Are you avoiding avocado because of it's high fat reputation?

'Tis a high fat reputation that plagues me, Claudius,
Hence I must hie me hither to it's calories which make me fat!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on May 05, 2016, 04:15:02 PM
What about unnecessary quotation marks, such as Fresh "Fish" $3.99 a pound. Would anyone buy it?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 05, 2016, 05:13:52 PM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on May 05, 2016, 04:15:02 PM
What about unnecessary quotation marks, such as Fresh "Fish" $3.99 a pound. Would anyone buy it?

Unpleasant in any version: "Fresh" Fish, "Fresh Fish," "$3.99" a pound (Would that mean do not be surprised when it costs you $5.00 a pound?), or $3.99 "a pound" (meaning to expect 3/4 of a pound to be considered a pound   ;)  ).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on May 05, 2016, 05:42:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 05, 2016, 05:13:52 PM
Unpleasant in any version: "Fresh" Fish, "Fresh Fish," "$3.99" a pound (Would that mean do not be surprised when it costs you $5.00 a pound?), or $3.99 "a pound" (meaning to expect 3/4 of a pound to be considered a pound   ;)  ).

This one is quite disturbing...

(http://cdn.detonate.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/31de87e310f1dd4cc827fd1505f643cc.jpg)

There's a book devoted to such signs (or is that "signs"?).  ;)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51tCuGhXv0L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 06, 2016, 03:30:40 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on May 05, 2016, 04:15:02 PM
What about unnecessary quotation marks, such as Fresh "Fish" $3.99 a pound. Would anyone buy it?

I "don't" know.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 06, 2016, 04:01:51 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on May 05, 2016, 05:42:21 PM
This one is quite disturbing...

(http://cdn.detonate.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/31de87e310f1dd4cc827fd1505f643cc.jpg)

There's a book devoted to such signs (or is that "signs"?).  ;)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51tCuGhXv0L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)

Quotation marks around "Santa" mean what?  Maybe he is really SATAN   >:D...?  Or the local child molester?  ???

An entire book devoted to unnecessary quotation marks!  "Who'da thunk it?"  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on May 06, 2016, 07:29:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 06, 2016, 04:01:51 AM
Quotation marks around "Santa" mean what?  Maybe he is really SATAN   >:D...?  Or the local child molester?  ???

An entire book devoted to unnecessary quotation marks!  "Who'da thunk it?"  :laugh:

I'm more concerned about the meaning of "free"!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 06, 2016, 10:57:27 AM
I found the coinage "thoughtlet" in an essay about a certain politician occasionally in the news these days:

QuoteThat's where thoughtlets like Muslim bans, mass deportations...and numerous other stray verbal hand grenades come from.

What say ye?  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on May 06, 2016, 03:28:48 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 06, 2016, 10:57:27 AM
I found the coinage "thoughtlet" in an essay about a certain politician occasionally in the news these days:

What say ye?  8)

Since said candidate recently embraced Mexicans, perhaps it should be a "thoughtito."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on May 07, 2016, 07:19:39 PM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on May 05, 2016, 04:15:02 PM
What about unnecessary quotation marks, such as Fresh "Fish" $3.99 a pound. Would anyone buy it?
Wellllll, maybe the fish in question actually is "fish" and not fish! :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on May 08, 2016, 09:58:45 AM
The whole question is fishy.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 09, 2016, 02:41:24 PM
Seen today in a prayer at my school:

"Grant us the ability to stay optimistic and the lastability to help others."

:o ??? :o ??? :o ???

Perhaps the author of this monstrosity meant "perseverance" or "diligence," but wanted something to parallel "ability" ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 10, 2016, 02:12:57 AM
Verbal Wessonality . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 15, 2016, 07:20:05 AM
The latest word of NewSpeak, courtesy of the Department of Education in a pamphlet for college administrators:

"Justice-Involved Individuals."   ??? ??? ???

No, our bureaucrats are not referring obliquely to the Supreme Court, or judges of any kind, or lawyers, but to those who are on the wrong side of the law.

Yes, a "justice-involved individual" is the way our Department of Education refers to criminals.

Quote...There is also growing recognition that successful
reintegration back into our society for justice-involved individuals benefits
those individuals, their families, and our communities. Research also shows
that education can be a powerful pathway for justice-involved individuals to
transition
out of prison back into the classroom or the workforce, and cuts
the likelihood of returning to prison within three years by over 40 percent.

With this context, it is critical to ensure that gateways to higher education,
such as admissions practices, do not disproportionately disadvantage justice-involved
individuals
who have already served their time. ...

Other curiosities of language are in red.   0:)

See:

http://www2.ed.gov/documents/beyond-the-box/guidance.pdf (http://www2.ed.gov/documents/beyond-the-box/guidance.pdf)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on May 15, 2016, 12:46:48 PM
Administrative lingo larded with convolutions. Beeerk.  >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 15, 2016, 01:21:56 PM
Quote from: André on May 15, 2016, 12:46:48 PM
Administrative lingo larded with convolutions. Beeerk.  &gt;:(
Nor is lard figurative there.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on May 15, 2016, 07:41:48 PM
We should require lawyers to use words of one syllable.  And diagram each sentence! ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 16, 2016, 06:56:43 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on May 15, 2016, 07:41:48 PM
We should require lawyers to use words of one syllable.  And diagram each sentence! ::)

Not to mention the legislators!  $:)

In America most of them openly admit to not reading the legislation they consider: probably because reading it would cause brain damage due to their synapses over-heating from the process of deciphering the proposal!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 16, 2016, 10:17:23 AM
I can't bare this!

QuoteA wolf in sheep's clothing allows the beast lurking within to bear its teeth.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 16, 2016, 10:27:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 15, 2016, 07:20:05 AM
The latest word of NewSpeak, courtesy of the Department of Education in a pamphlet for college administrators:

"Justice-Involved Individuals."   ??? ??? ???

No, our bureaucrats are not referring obliquely to the Supreme Court, or judges of any kind, or lawyers, but to those who are on the wrong side of the law.

Yes, a "justice-involved individual" is the way our Department of Education refers to criminals.

Other curiosities of language are in red.   0:)

See:

http://www2.ed.gov/documents/beyond-the-box/guidance.pdf (http://www2.ed.gov/documents/beyond-the-box/guidance.pdf)

Hmmm, let´s elaborate it a bit.

Non-consensual-sex-involved individuals = rapists.

Non-voluntarily-sharing-involved individuals = burglars





Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 16, 2016, 10:37:43 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on May 16, 2016, 10:17:23 AM
I can't bare this!

Wolf, sheep, bear, and don't forget "dear"  ??? !

Quote from: Florestan on May 16, 2016, 10:27:31 AM
Hmmm, let´s elaborate it a bit.

Non-consensual-sex-involved individuals = rapists.

Non-voluntarily-sharing-involved individuals = burglars


Florestan: You're in the club!  Come to America and become a government bureaucrat!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 16, 2016, 10:56:08 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 16, 2016, 10:37:43 AM
Florestan: You're in the club!  Come to America and become a government bureaucrat!  $:)

I´m sure it would be a big improvement in my financial status --- but I´d rather endanger my wallet than my soul...  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 16, 2016, 04:02:42 PM
Quote from: Florestan on May 16, 2016, 10:56:08 AM
I´m sure it would be a big improvement in my financial status --- but I´d rather endanger my wallet than my soul...  ;D ;D ;D

Where have I heard the phrase "soulless bureaucrats" ?  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 19, 2016, 11:04:49 AM
Seeing folks use the wrong word, unaware of the homonym, no longer much fazes me . . . .

QuoteMarnie is also famed for starring Sean Connery, and for the fact that he asked to see a script before committing to the role of Mark. This unprecedented request was allegedly due to Connery's unwillingness to be typecast as a spy (due to his famous role as James Bond), and didn't seem to phase Hitchcock, who reportedly got along well with Connery during filming.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 19, 2016, 11:23:44 AM
Aye, I've faced that, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on May 25, 2016, 11:50:14 AM
The misuse of "literally":

https://www.youtube.com/v/TZBn8-UUQeI
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 02, 2016, 02:15:01 PM
It's not grammar but https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2016/06/02/in-defense-of-reading-dead-rich-white-guys-like-shakespeare/ (https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2016/06/02/in-defense-of-reading-dead-rich-white-guys-like-shakespeare/)

Increasingly I think branding "I am an empty headed fool" on your forehead is cheaper than an Arts degree, and not fundamentally different.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 03, 2016, 02:37:51 AM
Oh, must give that a read later . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 06, 2016, 08:29:21 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 03, 2016, 02:37:51 AM
Oh, must give that a read later . . . .

Quote from: Tyler O'NeilWow. So reading dead white men without the saving grace of some minority transgender lesbians is a kind of abuse?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 06, 2016, 08:31:12 AM
Do you perhaps mean that you must give that a reading later, or that you must read it later? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 06, 2016, 08:51:37 AM
Well, whatever I meant, now I have read it  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 06, 2016, 01:50:27 PM
Quote from: karlhenning on June 06, 2016, 08:51:37 AM
Well, whatever I meant, now I have read it  8)

After I read it, I could only think of the old joke: "Must be a Yale man!"  8) ;)

However, I suspect some Hahvahd students would probably agree with them!   0:)

I will not bother grumbling about how many times I have heard the latest monstrosity plaguing us at this time of the year:

"He graduated high school last night!"   >:D

However, the quality of English in America (and the economy?) was perhaps symbolized by some hand-lettered signs nailed to telephone poles

"Toon-Ups and Break Jobs - Low Prices nnn-nnnn"  ??? ??? ???

Which sign could be offering a service wherein your not very funny cartoon would be punched up, for a low price, and an offer to teach that guy who owes you money a lesson known as a permanent limp.   $:)

In Cincinnati we saw a similar sign: "Plumming Jobs - Cheap Rates nnn-nnnn"   :'( :'( :'(

I have heard of a "plum job:" maybe this was one of those!  On the other hand, there is also the phrase: "plumb stupid."   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 06, 2016, 02:02:53 PM
Quote from: North Star on June 06, 2016, 08:31:12 AM
Do you perhaps mean that you must give that a reading later, or that you must read it later? ;)

I will save this comment for later: it will give me a good laughing.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 09, 2016, 03:22:21 AM
I came across a word which - at first - I thought simply had been the victim of a typographical error.

But then I typed it into the search engine, and of course was appalled to find a good number of things such as the following:

"A candidate's position on student debt will be a major influencer on how Millenials vote this year." 

Why the "r"?!  Is it the influence of too many Pirates of the Caribbean movies?   Maybe those movies have been a majorrr influencerrr on college stoonts?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 09, 2016, 04:15:57 AM
Yowzer!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 09, 2016, 05:38:05 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 09, 2016, 03:22:21 AM
I came across a word which - at first - I thought simply had been the victim of a typographical error.

But then I typed it into the search engine, and of course was appalled to find a good number of things such as the following:

"A candidate's position on student debt will be a major influencer on how Millenials vote this year." 

Why the "r"?!  Is it the influence of too many Pirates of the Caribbean movies?   Maybe those movies have been a majorrr influencerrr on college stoonts?
It's like a confluencer of errors.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 09, 2016, 06:48:18 AM
Quote from: Ken B on June 09, 2016, 05:38:05 AM
It's like a confluencer of errors.

Such a confluencer could make a major differencer in many things!  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 09, 2016, 08:20:54 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 09, 2016, 06:48:18 AM
Such a confluencer could make a major differencer in many things!  ???
No shitter.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on June 12, 2016, 12:21:22 PM
Too numerous to quote: examples of confusion between "plane" and "plain" (as in: a higher plain  ??? ) or "to reign" and "to rein in" as in reigning in one's impulses...  >:( :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on June 12, 2016, 01:51:29 PM
I see that the word 'food' has become obsolete and is to be replaced by 'eating products'.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 12, 2016, 02:31:52 PM
FB seems to have a new term
USIES

Meaning a selfie with two or more people featured.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 12, 2016, 02:59:53 PM
Quote from: André on June 12, 2016, 12:21:22 PM
Too numerous to quote: examples of confusion between "plane" and "plain" (as in: a higher plain  ??? ) or "to reign" and "to rein in" as in reigning in one's impulses...  >:( :(

The latter mistake I have been noticing more often these days!

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 12, 2016, 02:31:52 PM
FB seems to have a new term
USIES

Meaning a selfie with two or more people featured.

So it is pronounced "us-eez" ?   ??? $:)

Ugh-eez!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 18, 2016, 07:38:12 AM
I was reading a book review in the Wall Street Journal from the weekend and came across this curiosity:

...the Talmudists and the medieval commentators agreed that (in Gehenna) infernal punishments can be atoned for and are strictly limited to 12 months.

??? ??? ???

Am I missing something?  One does not "atone for" a punishment: I would think one atones for the things which caused the punishment.

It is nice to know that among these theologians the idea of eternal punishment  >:D  was not possible!  0:)

Perhaps there is an exception for grammar crimes!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 18, 2016, 07:42:20 AM
And to think the punishment atonement is mensurable in Earth-months, too!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 18, 2016, 08:11:07 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on July 18, 2016, 07:42:20 AM
And to think the punishment atonement is mensurable in Earth-months, too!

True!  A month out on Altair IV could be a little longer!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 19, 2016, 04:58:52 AM
A television commercial for a charter-school group here in Ohio says that they believe "every child is uniquely brilliant."  ??? ::) :o

Which phrase proves why you would never want to send your child to their schools!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on July 19, 2016, 06:27:35 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 18, 2016, 07:38:12 AM
I was reading a book review in the Wall Street Journal from the weekend and came across this curiosity:

...the Talmudists and the medieval commentators agreed that (in Gehenna) infernal punishments can be atoned for and are strictly limited to 12 months.

??? ??? ???

Am I missing something?  One does not "atone for" a punishment: I would think one atones for the things which caused the punishment.

It is nice to know that among these theologians the idea of eternal punishment  >:D  was not possible!  0:)

Perhaps there is an exception for grammar crimes!  8)

What was probably meant was a reference to the idea that saying the Kaddish prayer, giving charity,  and other religious acts done by the children are deemed merits of the deceased parent and mitigate otherworldly punishment. Like indulgences shorten Purgatory in Catholic teaching (or have they given it up?)...in fact, since Judaism downplays eternal punishment (the worst of the worst "lose their share of the World to Come", and there is no single agreed definition of what that actually means)  Purgatory is a good parallel.

Most souls get out of Gehenna before twelve months. Only the worst ones (presumably  not quite as bad as those who lose their share of the World to Come) stay twelve months. And since no child wants to imply their parent was as bad as that, Kaddish is said for eleven months. It is also recited on the anniversary of the death every year, but the theory is that the parent is already in Paradise, and prayers and charity in their honor are means to elevate them to a higher level.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 20, 2016, 01:55:23 AM
Thanks for the enlightenment, Jeffrey.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on July 20, 2016, 04:27:59 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 12, 2016, 02:31:52 PM
FB seems to have a new term
USIES

Meaning a selfie with two or more people featured.

I'm sure a usie must be anything that is put to use.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 20, 2016, 05:18:14 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on July 19, 2016, 06:27:35 PM
What was probably meant was a reference to the idea that saying the Kaddish prayer, giving charity,  and other religious acts done by the children are deemed merits of the deceased parent and mitigate otherworldly punishment. Like indulgences shorten Purgatory in Catholic teaching (or have they given it up?)...in fact, since Judaism downplays eternal punishment (the worst of the worst "lose their share of the World to Come", and there is no single agreed definition of what that actually means)  Purgatory is a good parallel.

Most souls get out of Gehenna before twelve months. Only the worst ones (presumably  not quite as bad as those who lose their share of the World to Come) stay twelve months. And since no child wants to imply their parent was as bad as that, Kaddish is said for eleven months. It is also recited on the anniversary of the death every year, but the theory is that the parent is already in Paradise, and prayers and charity in their honor are means to elevate them to a higher level.

Yes, thanks for the explanation!

As for indulgences, I must admit that, if they have not exactly been given up, they are hardly mentioned at all any more.   0:)

Quote from: Ten thumbs on July 20, 2016, 04:27:59 AM
I'm sure a usie must be anything that is put to use.

I await a cure for the rampant narcissism affecting the planet: perhaps an invasion of brain-eating aliens?   ???

Or is that what has caused this disease?  ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 18, 2016, 08:22:06 AM
Yesterday at a faculty meeting we were given an excerpt from one of the most gruesome inventions known in all of Human History...

...an "Education" Textbook!  ??? :o ;)

It has a chart with the following curiosity, where Level I is Incompetent and Level IV is Superior.

"Level I: Student frequently cannot work independently...

Level II: Student continuously fails to work independently"

Other charts had the same insistence that "frequently" somehow meant "continuously" and "continuously" meant something less than "continuously"!

This was on a page marked "Rubrics for Metacognition"  ??? ::) :D  with the last word being a professorial preciosity in Education Departments.  My comment was: Why use "metacognition" when you could have used "epistemology" or, even better, "introspection" ?   ;)   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 18, 2016, 09:25:33 AM
Metacognition: what happens when you continue to write after your conscious mental activities have stopped.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 18, 2016, 09:26:15 AM
I've seen it! On the Interwebs!

Thanks, Obama.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 19, 2016, 03:22:46 AM
Quote from: North Star on August 18, 2016, 09:25:33 AM
Metacognition: what happens when you continue to write after your conscious mental activities have stopped.

Quote from: karlhenning on August 18, 2016, 09:26:15 AM
I've seen it! On the Interwebs!

Thanks, Obama.

;) ;) ;)

Last night a local television reporter, giving us the latest on another unsolved shooting, said:

"At eleven we'll have the remains of the investigation for you."   ??? $:)

I am not sure what that could be, but it certainly sounds unpleasant!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 19, 2016, 03:55:12 AM
Eeeewww
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 19, 2016, 11:15:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 18, 2016, 08:22:06 AM
Yesterday at a faculty meeting we were given an excerpt from one of the most gruesome inventions known in all of Human History...

...an "Education" Textbook!  ??? :o ;)

It has a chart with the following curiosity, where Level I is Incompetent and Level IV is Superior.

"Level I: Student frequently cannot work independently...

Level II: Student continuously fails to work independently"

Other charts had the same insistence that "frequently" somehow meant "continuously" and "continuously" meant something less than "continuously"!

This was on a page marked "Rubrics for Metacognition"  ??? ::) :D  with the last word being a professorial preciosity in Education Departments.  My comment was: Why use "metacognition" when you could have used "epistemology" or, even better, "introspection" ?   ;)   8)

Perhaps Level I should be parsed to mean "Student does not have the ability...."
And Level II should be parsed to mean "Student has, but does not use, the ability"

I did audit some education courses at the local university a couple of decades back.  The School of Education there was a real world demonstration of a corollary of Bernard Shaw's "Those that can, do.  Those that can not, teach."  Those that can not teach, teach teaching.   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 19, 2016, 04:27:25 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 19, 2016, 11:15:49 AM
Perhaps Level I should be parsed to mean "Student does not have the ability...."
And Level II should be parsed to mean "Student has, but does not use, the ability"

I did audit some education courses at the local university a couple of decades back.  The School of Education there was a real world demonstration of a corollary of Bernard Shaw's "Those that can, do.  Those that can not, teach."  Those that can not teach, teach teaching.

And those who fail at everything connected to education, become Education Department bureaucrats for state and federal governments!   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on August 21, 2016, 04:44:17 AM
I was just taken aback when watching a TV program on suspension bridges and hearing the plural of vortex (swirling water around the bridges) as vortexes! Anyway, I looked it up now and vortexes stands beside vortices as plural, coming first as a matter of fact. I was just wondering when all this happened. Of course, regular English words like box get es for plural, the same with compound words such as prefix, complex, etc.
Vortex is like matrix so it shouldn't be too hard to remember vortices being similar to matrices.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 21, 2016, 04:51:12 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on August 21, 2016, 04:44:17 AM
I was just taken aback when watching a TV program on suspension bridges and hearing the plural of vortex (swirling water around the bridges) as vortexes! Anyway, I looked it up now and vortexes stands beside vortices as plural, coming first as a matter of fact. I was just wondering when all this happened. Of course, regular English words like box get es for plural, the same with compound words such as prefix, complex, etc.
Vortex is like matrix so it shouldn't be too hard to remember vortices being similar to matrices.

Yes, this is another sore point!  You are quite right, it should not be that hard, but this is the era of EEEZZZEEE everything, so apparently it is too hard for our latest group of humans known as GNRTN TXTNG.  The Wall Street Journal surrendered some years ago to "indexes" and no longer uses "indices."   $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on August 21, 2016, 05:13:06 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 21, 2016, 04:51:12 AM
Yes, this is another sore point!  You are quite right, it should not be that hard, but this is the era of EEEZZZEEE everything, so apparently it is too hard for our latest group of humans known as GNRTN TXTNG.  The Wall Street Journal surrendered some years ago to "indexes" and no longer uses "indices."   $:)

"Indices" and "matrices" are easier to say. "Vortex" is not as common, but "vortices" sounds swell if you have a chance to use it. No need for "supercalifragolicious..." to impress others.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on August 21, 2016, 05:17:36 AM
I need advice....

For some reason I keep switching between 'speciality' and 'specialty' in conversation. As I understand it, Australian English is probably much more relaxed with the 'rules' than other varieties of English....but is there a standard for this word which is technically more correct than the other? I would rather be consistent with my English but I don't know which pronunciation to use anyway. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 21, 2016, 05:31:08 AM
Quote from: jessop on August 21, 2016, 05:17:36 AM
I need advice....

For some reason I keep switching between 'speciality' and 'specialty' in conversation. As I understand it, Australian English is probably much more relaxed with the 'rules' than other varieties of English....but is there a standard for this word which is technically more correct than the other? I would rather be consistent with my English but I don't know which pronunciation to use anyway.

Both are considered correct, according to most dictionaries: "specialty" without the extra "i" is probably more common here in America: probably most people would agree that it is easier to say.   Possibly for fancy emphasis you might hear "My speciality is...ontology."  0:)

("Speciality" is underlined right now in red.)  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on August 21, 2016, 05:32:22 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 21, 2016, 05:31:08 AM
Both are considered correct, according to most dictionaries: "specialty" without the extra "i" is probably more common here in America: probably most people would agree that it is easier to say.   Possibly for fancy emphasis you might hear "My speciality is...ontology."  0:)

("Speciality" is underlined right now in red.)  ;)
For this reason I have chosen to use 'speciality' 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spineur on August 21, 2016, 09:05:52 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on August 21, 2016, 04:44:17 AM
.....Vortex is like matrix so it shouldn't be too hard to remember vortices being similar to matrices.
Dont you think this has more to do with science education than english knowledge ?  I was talking to somebody about hysterisis and metastable states in magnets and she thought I was talking about cancer....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 22, 2016, 01:32:57 AM
Indices are basically mathematical. Those things at the back of books are, and should always be, indexes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 22, 2016, 02:15:40 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 22, 2016, 01:32:57 AM
Indices are basically mathematical. Those things at the back of books are, and should always be, indexes.

Interesting distinction: I could not find a dictionary with that idea. Where did you find it?

Again, a major business newspaper (Wall Street Journal) calls its (mathematical) stock charts "indexes."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 22, 2016, 02:51:34 AM
I trust you also use all the appropriate Finnish noun cases and plurals when talking about saunasta... And speaking of charts, the plural of χάρτης is of course χάρτες - chartes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 22, 2016, 05:36:55 AM
I've become increadingly annoyed by a certain self-replicating typo.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on August 22, 2016, 06:32:07 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 22, 2016, 05:36:55 AM
I've become increadingly annoyed by a certain self-replicating typo.
Goodness me I feel I need to check my thread title from that CD thread I made......
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 22, 2016, 06:59:08 AM
;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 22, 2016, 07:44:05 AM
Quote from: North Star on August 22, 2016, 02:51:34 AM
I trust you also use all the appropriate Finnish noun cases and plurals when talking about saunasta... And speaking of charts, the plural of χάρτης is of course χάρτες - chartes.

Whenever I use Finnish or Greek, absolutely!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 23, 2016, 01:34:47 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 22, 2016, 02:15:40 AM
Interesting distinction: I could not find a dictionary with that idea. Where did you find it?

Again, a major business newspaper (Wall Street Journal) calls its (mathematical) stock charts "indexes."

Ah! Maybe this is a cross-Atlantic difference. Here in England it is absolutely the case.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 23, 2016, 02:35:34 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 23, 2016, 01:34:47 PM
Ah! Maybe this is a cross-Atlantic difference. Here in England it is absolutely the case.

That would explain it!   0:)

Today, at a McDonald's, I saw a framed award with the following highly disturbing sentence:

"The Henderson Road Store is awarded this Certificate of Excellence

For Its Execution of the Five Primary Drivers."
  ???  $:) $:) $:) $:) $:)

There MUST be a better way of stating this!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 23, 2016, 05:29:40 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 23, 2016, 02:35:34 PM
That would explain it!   0:)

Today, at a McDonald's, I saw a framed award with the following highly disturbing sentence:

"The Henderson Road Store is awarded this Certificate of Excellence

For Its Execution of the Five Primary Drivers."
  ???  $:) $:) $:) $:) $:)


Texas I assume.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Monsieur Croche on August 25, 2016, 02:14:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 09, 2009, 05:30:43 AM
I notice many things hopefully!

Tsk, tsk. That is, "it is to be hoped," ~ not 'hopefully.'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 25, 2016, 02:17:38 AM
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on August 25, 2016, 02:14:55 AM
Tsk, tsk. That is, "it is to be hoped," ~ not 'hopefully.'
Except if Cato means that the manner in which he notices those many things is hopeful.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 25, 2016, 02:54:30 AM
Quote from: North Star on August 25, 2016, 02:17:38 AM
Except if Cato means that the manner in which he notices those many things is hopeful.  :)

Talking of plurals - why do people insist on saying cacti and narcissi but baulk at consistency when it comes to dahliae and chrysanthema?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on August 25, 2016, 03:14:03 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on August 25, 2016, 02:54:30 AM
Talking of plurals - why do people insist on saying cacti and narcissi but baulk at consistency when it comes to dahliae and chrysanthema?

I think it's the English language that baulks at consistency.  It actually farts in consistency's general direction.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 25, 2016, 03:31:01 AM
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on August 25, 2016, 02:14:55 AM
Tsk, tsk. That is, "it is to be hoped," ~ not 'hopefully.'

Irony was intended in that case!  $:)  And you went back 7 years to read the topic?!  Very impressive!

Quote from: North Star on August 25, 2016, 02:17:38 AM
Except if Cato means that the manner in which he notices those many things is hopeful.  :)

:D  Also a constant!  ;)

Quote from: Ten thumbs on Today at 02:54:30 AM
QuoteTalking of plurals - why do people insist on saying cacti and narcissi but baulk at consistency when it comes to dahliae and chrysanthema?

Probably some people find cactuses and narcissuses too hard to thpit out!  0:)

Never expect consistency in languages: they are invented by inconsistent human beings!  0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 25, 2016, 03:36:07 AM
Adaptation of the indigenously-correct plural along with the word imported into English, is a sometime thing.  To wit: octopodes  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 25, 2016, 05:46:59 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 25, 2016, 03:36:07 AM
Adaptation of the indigenously-correct plural along with the word imported into English, is a sometime thing.  To wit: octopodes  8)

;)

My Random House Dictionary wants octopuses as the primary plural, and octopi as a (less standard) secondary form.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 25, 2016, 06:01:13 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 25, 2016, 05:46:59 AM
;)

My Random House Dictionary wants octopuses as the primary plural, and octopi as a (less standard) secondary form.
Octopi is idiotic, of course. Latin plural for a Greek loanword in English. . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 25, 2016, 06:06:39 AM
Quote from: North Star on August 25, 2016, 06:01:13 AM
Octopi is idiotic, of course. Latin plural for a Greek loanword in English. . .

I was going to post similarly, but when I reached for my American Heritage Dictionary, the etymology included an intermediary New Latin form . . . and octopi is arguably legitimate for the middle-man import  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 25, 2016, 06:27:48 AM
Confusion exists in music as well.

Concerti
Concertos

Most people seem to go for concertos, but not everyone.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 25, 2016, 06:36:40 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 25, 2016, 06:27:48 AM
Confusion exists in music as well.

Concerti
Concertos

Most people seem to go for concertos, but not everyone.

I think tolerance of both is eminently practical.

It can get a bit messy when writing of more than one Concerto grosso.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 25, 2016, 06:51:38 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on August 25, 2016, 06:06:39 AM
I was going to post similarly, but when I reached for my American Heritage Dictionary, the etymology included an intermediary New Latin form . . . and octopi is arguably legitimate for the middle-man import  8)
Fair enough - there must be many more similar cases.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on August 25, 2016, 07:07:04 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 25, 2016, 05:46:59 AM
;)

My Random House Dictionary wants octopuses as the primary plural, and octopi as a (less standard) secondary form.

And here I thought it was octopussys.

Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 25, 2016, 07:38:10 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on August 25, 2016, 07:07:04 AM
And here I thought it was octopussys.

Sarge

Must be the New New Latin.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 25, 2016, 08:51:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 25, 2016, 05:46:59 AM
;)

My Random House Dictionary wants octopuses as the primary plural, and octopi as a (less standard) secondary form.

The issue here is what is the source language. Octopus traces back to Greek so should not take a Latin plural. Octopi is a Latin plural. Its creeping acceptance is like the creeping acceptance of literally to mean figuratively: a concession to ignorance and folly.

Cactus also derives from Greek, so the correct plural should be cactuses.  I for one will eat cactuses but not octpuses.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 25, 2016, 10:30:36 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 25, 2016, 08:51:07 AM
  I for one will eat cactuses but not octopuses.

Wise advice!   ;)   "Include me out"* when the calamari is on the table!  ;)

(Such phrases of fractured English have been attributed to movie legend Samuel Goldwyn.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 25, 2016, 12:14:41 PM
I tend to follow Fowler's Modern English Usage, which advocates English plurals for foreign words brought into English when speaking in the vernacular. When the matter is technical a different approach may be appropriate. The usual stumbling block to those who like classical plurals is ignoramus, which is not a Latin noun.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 26, 2016, 06:26:17 PM
This is not a grammar grumble per se, but more of a "What Are You Thinking, Mr. Ad Man?"  0:)

A certain restaurant chain (Panera) has the following slogan in its new ad campaign:

"Our food will be 100% clean by the end of the year!"   ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

Now to be sure, the first half of the ad says that "clean food" is devoid of hormones, pesticides, artificial colors, etc.

So if you miss that part, the slogan will sound very odd!   :D   Even so, to our ears it still sounds like an odd thing to trumpet!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 26, 2016, 11:08:50 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 26, 2016, 06:26:17 PM
This is not a grammar grumble per se, but more of a "What Are You Thinking, Mr. Ad Man?"  0:)

A certain restaurant chain (Panera) has the following slogan in its new ad campaign:

"Our food will be 100% clean by the end of the year!"   ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

Now to be sure, the first half of the ad says that "clean food" is devoid of hormones, pesticides, artificial colors, etc.

So if you miss that part, the slogan will sound very odd!   :D   Even so, to our ears it still sounds like an odd thing to trumpet!

Not necessarily clean of trichinella, or E. coli, just of the nasty stuff.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on August 27, 2016, 12:10:49 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 25, 2016, 08:51:07 AM
The issue here is what is the source language. Octopus traces back to Greek so should not take a Latin plural. Octopi is a Latin plural. Its creeping acceptance is like the creeping acceptance of literally to mean figuratively: a concession to ignorance and folly.

Cactus also derives from Greek, so the correct plural should be cactuses.  I for one will eat cactuses but not octpuses.
I don't follow. Why should the plural be anglizised for Greek but not for Latin words? Especially as for "kaktos" the plural "kaktoi" would be pronounces very similar to the Latin "i" in modern Greek.

I'd say one should either anglizise almost everything except for technical language or other cases where a "classical" plural is suffiently well known. And here it will sometimes be a latinate plural of a Greek word because that's how tradition worked. ("It's all Greek to me" probably stems from a time when reading Latin was very common but Greek for specialists only.)
We pronounce and stress most Greek names also usually in anglizised versions of latinate versions (it once took me a long time to figure out what was meant when someone talked about "Theaetetus" in common English pronunciation because I was used to a German/Greek "Theaitetos" (more like Ta-Y-ta-tos). But many ancient names are also latinized (especially the stress) in German usage and sometimes endings dropped (one will find "Theätet" in older writings).

Or stick as closely as possible to the original plurals. Which sometimes gives the impression of pomposity and it is somewhat inconsistent because we usually do not put the words in the proper grammatical case anyway (unlike many German texts at the time of Bach who still put "Jesum" when it's accusative).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 27, 2016, 05:54:28 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on August 27, 2016, 12:10:49 AM
I don't follow. Why should the plural be anglizised for Greek but not for Latin words? Especially as for "kaktos" the plural "kaktoi" would be pronounces very similar to the Latin "i" in modern Greek.

I'd say one should either anglizise almost everything except for technical language or other cases where a "classical" plural is suffiently well known. And here it will sometimes be a latinate plural of a Greek word because that's how tradition worked. ("It's all Greek to me" probably stems from a time when reading Latin was very common but Greek for specialists only.)
We pronounce and stress most Greek names also usually in anglizised versions of latinate versions (it once took me a long time to figure out what was meant when someone talked about "Theaetetus" in common English pronunciation because I was used to a German/Greek "Theaitetos" (more like Ta-Y-ta-tos). But many ancient names are also latinized (especially the stress) in German usage and sometimes endings dropped (one will find "Theätet" in older writings).

Or stick as closely as possible to the original plurals. Which sometimes gives the impression of pomposity and it is somewhat inconsistent because we usually do not put the words in the proper grammatical case anyway (unlike many German texts at the time of Bach who still put "Jesum" when it's accusative).

I am not sure there is ever a cogent reason why languages should be the way they are. I am simply giving you you the rule.
The reason probably is that English is half French, and French derives from Latin. In French Latin nouns usually brought their plurals with them, and then brought them hence into English. That happened with the other major parent of English, the Germanic languages. Sheep is a Germanic word and brought its irregular plural with it, as did numerous others. Unless a word has such a genealogy it will have a regular plural.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on August 27, 2016, 06:04:36 AM
Quote from: North Star on August 25, 2016, 06:01:13 AM
Octopi is idiotic, of course. Latin plural for a Greek loanword in English. . .

Octo-pie, yum!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 27, 2016, 06:09:01 AM
With Cool-Whip!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on August 27, 2016, 06:34:45 AM
and a cherry on top...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 27, 2016, 10:57:09 AM
What can we bitch about on this thread? So, on a recommendation I tried reading one of the medieval mysteries by Paul Doherty. Lots of rave reviews. You can try samples through Amazon.

I defy anyone who cares about the use of English to get through three pages.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 29, 2016, 10:52:15 AM
GREAT (well, wrily amusing) typo!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 29, 2016, 05:05:23 PM
Quote from: Ken B on August 27, 2016, 10:57:09 AM
What can we bitch about on this thread? So, on a recommendation I tried reading one of the medieval mysteries by Paul Doherty. Lots of rave reviews. You can try samples through Amazon.

I defy anyone who cares about the use of English to get through three pages.


I am intrigued!   ;D

Never heard of the author, but that he has been published (apparently with success) and has "won awards," yet, as you say, can commit crimes against English with impunity, is par for the course these days! 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 29, 2016, 05:33:05 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 29, 2016, 05:05:23 PM
I am intrigued!   ;D

Never heard of the author, but that he has been published (apparently with success) and has "won awards," yet, as you say, can commit crimes against English with impunity, is par for the course these days! 0:)

Page 1 of his latest medieval mystery.

Athelstan, Dominican friar and parish priest of St Erconwald's in Southwark, moved restlessly. He breathed a prayer for help against the horrors he half-suspected lurked behind the door, now being forced, on the upper gallery of the guesthouse at Blackfriars. Athelstan swallowed hard and stared at the wall painting to the right side of the door. In the circumstances, the painting was most appropriate. The artist, whoever it was, had certainly caught the present times. The wall fresco depicted the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah, cities of the plain, which tumbled from God's grace into the deepest destruction. The painting presented a vivid scene of divine wrath: all the elements of nature running riot, the black-horizoned landscape glowing with flame. Strife held sway over raging hordes of warriors bristling with weapons. Fiery furnaces and hellish volcanoes burnt fiercely, the blackness beyond them constantly pricked with globes of light which illuminated fang-faced demons armed for war. 'Do you fear the worst, Brother Athelstan?'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 29, 2016, 05:54:12 PM
The checklist method of an opening paragraph!  ??? ::)

Quote from: Ken B on August 29, 2016, 05:33:05 PM
Page 1 of his latest medieval mystery.

Athelstan, Dominican friar and parish priest of St Erconwald's in Southwark, moved restlessly. He breathed a prayer for help against the horrors he half-suspected lurked behind the door, now being forced, on the upper gallery of the guesthouse at Blackfriars. Athelstan swallowed hard and stared at the wall painting to the right side of the door. In the circumstances, the painting was most appropriate. The artist, whoever it was, had certainly caught the present times. The wall fresco depicted the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah, cities of the plain, which tumbled from God's grace into the deepest destruction. The painting presented a vivid scene of divine wrath: all the elements of nature running riot, the black-horizoned landscape glowing with flame. Strife held sway over raging hordes of warriors bristling with weapons. Fiery furnaces and hellish volcanoes burnt fiercely, the blackness beyond them constantly pricked with globes of light which illuminated fang-faced demons armed for war. 'Do you fear the worst, Brother Athelstan?'

The artist is an "it" ?  ???   Was that an attempt to avoid assuming that the artist had to be a man?  (In the Middle Ages, that assumption would be quite fine!   0:)  )

How can there be all of this "blackness" when there is so much fiery glowing everywhere?  It would seem that everything would be illuminated! 0:)

To quote George Takei : "OH MY!!!"   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 29, 2016, 06:19:39 PM
How does one "half-suspect" a horror?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 29, 2016, 06:30:41 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 29, 2016, 06:19:39 PM
How does one "half-suspect" a horror?

:D

Should I quote some of the rejection slips I have received?  My favorite from c. 30 years ago told me that my book was "very well-written," with a wonderful style, and a highly original story, "which is why it will never be published."

The agent was very apologetic, and obviously disgusted with the publishing world!  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on August 30, 2016, 02:34:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 29, 2016, 05:54:12 PM
The checklist method of an opening paragraph!  ??? ::)

The artist is an "it" ?  ???   Was that an attempt to avoid assuming that the artist had to be a man?  (In the Middle Ages, that assumption would be quite fine!   0:)  )
Except that I'm sure they produced a great deal of art in the nunneries, too. There was plenty of art produced by women in Britain then, but they rarely signed their works. 'It' is still bizarre, of course.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 30, 2016, 03:33:43 AM
Quote from: North Star on August 30, 2016, 02:34:03 AM
Except that I'm sure they produced a great deal of art in the nunneries, too. There was plenty of art produced by women in Britain then, but they rarely signed their works. 'It' is still bizarre, of course.

Oh yes, and one thinks (or should think) of e.g. Hildegard of Bingen and her mandalas, as well as the music.

Not to mention the women who worked on tapestries! 

And who knows?  That ubiquitous medieval sculptor, poet, painter, and composer Anonymous may have have been a woman!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 31, 2016, 01:20:17 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 29, 2016, 05:33:05 PM
Page 1 of his latest medieval mystery.

Athelstan, Dominican friar and parish priest of St Erconwald's in Southwark, moved restlessly. He breathed a prayer for help against the horrors he half-suspected lurked behind the door, now being forced, on the upper gallery of the guesthouse at Blackfriars. Athelstan swallowed hard and stared at the wall painting to the right side of the door. In the circumstances, the painting was most appropriate. The artist, whoever it was, had certainly caught the present times. The wall fresco depicted the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah, cities of the plain, which tumbled from God's grace into the deepest destruction. The painting presented a vivid scene of divine wrath: all the elements of nature running riot, the black-horizoned landscape glowing with flame. Strife held sway over raging hordes of warriors bristling with weapons. Fiery furnaces and hellish volcanoes burnt fiercely, the blackness beyond them constantly pricked with globes of light which illuminated fang-faced demons armed for war. 'Do you fear the worst, Brother Athelstan?'

As Dan-Brown-ish as it gets. The structure of the first sentence is actually a DB trademark.

What trash...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 31, 2016, 01:35:50 AM
The literary application of paint-by-numbers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on August 31, 2016, 02:01:33 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 27, 2016, 05:54:28 AM
I am not sure there is ever a cogent reason why languages should be the way they are. I am simply giving you you the rule.

Interesting, if there really is such a rule in English. In German it is all over the place. Many Latin/Greek words have a germanized plural which will still be irregular e.g. Atlas - Atlanten, not Atlasse (here because it retains the stem). Others keep the original plural, sometimes in addition to a somewhat germanized alternative plural. E.g. "Kommata" (,) sounds somewhat old-fashioned and learned and one will find "Kommas" probably more frequently. But a less common term like "Lemma" will usually retain the Greek plural Lemmata.

Kaktus has "Kakteen" which seems again a strange hybrid. I guess it lost the us-ending as many germanized greco-latin words and then a somewhat regular plural ending was added. I dimly recall a unit in 4th grade when we did a lot of these irregular plurals (some of which seemed really odd then because nobody had started learning Latin or another foreign language).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 31, 2016, 03:34:22 PM
Quote from: Florestan on August 31, 2016, 01:20:17 AM
As Dan-Brown-ish as it gets. The structure of the first sentence is actually a DB trademark.

What trash...

What is the best selling French novel in the history of France? You know, France, cultural superpower, center of art and refinement?

The French translation of the Da Vinci Code.   :'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 31, 2016, 04:55:53 PM
Quote from: Florestan on August 31, 2016, 01:20:17 AM
As Dan-Brown-ish as it gets. The structure of the first sentence is actually a DB trademark.

What trash...

Fortunately, I have never been tempted to read anything by "D.B."   $:)

Quote from: Ken B on August 31, 2016, 03:34:22 PM
What is the best selling French novel in the history of France? You know, France, cultural superpower, center of art and refinement?

The French translation of the Da Vinci Code.   :'(

More evidence for Oswald Spengler to masticate, if he were still alive!   ;)

Quote from: karlhenning on August 31, 2016, 01:35:50 AM
The literary application of paint-by-numbers.

I have told this before, but earlier this year a supposed literary agent wanted the "names of 5 novels similar" to mine!

I responded: "Why would I try to imitate 5 other novels, which apparently all imitate each other?"

Hollywood - a creative desert right now except for animation - is pushing a remake of the comedy/fantasy Splash.  But they think it will be seen as "highly original" because this time the sea creature is a...

Mer-man ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o instead of a Mermaid!

"J.B. !  I got a great script!  It's about a mad hunter who travels the earth with a posse of men to capture a monstrous bird that bit off his leg! It's called Moby Duck!!!"

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 01, 2016, 01:02:07 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 31, 2016, 03:34:22 PM
You know, France, cultural superpower, center of art and refinement?

Il estoit une fois...  ;D

Quote from: Cato on August 31, 2016, 04:55:53 PM
More evidence for Oswald Spengler to masticate, if he were still alive!   ;)

Actually, he might have understated his case...  ;D

Quote
"J.B. !  I got a great script!  It's about a mad hunter who travels the earth with a posse of men to capture a monstrous bird that bit off his leg! It's called Moby Duck!!!"

ROTFL
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2016, 03:17:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 31, 2016, 04:55:53 PM
"J.B. !  I got a great script!  It's about a mad hunter who travels the earth with a posse of men to capture a monstrous bird that bit off his leg! It's called Moby Duck!!!"

Dude, I needed that duck this morning!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 01, 2016, 05:04:37 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 01, 2016, 03:17:03 AM
Dude, I needed that duck this morning!

Jokes about Hollywood write themselves: and speaking of amok ducks and Hollywood...take 7 minutes for...

The Scarlet Pumpernickel!!!

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2016, 05:37:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 01, 2016, 05:04:37 AM
Jokes about Hollywood write themselves: and speaking of amok ducks and Hollywood...take 7 minutes for...

The Scarlet Pumpernickel!!!

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh)

Aye . . . Lord save me for an heretic, but I do love those Warner Bros shorts.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2016, 06:42:13 AM
Great typo on Facebook (auto-correct strikes again), as someone posted about trucks and bridges on "Sorrow Drive."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 01, 2016, 07:45:40 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 01, 2016, 06:42:13 AM
Great typo on Facebook (auto-correct strikes again), as someone posted about trucks and bridges on "Sorrow Drive*."
Let me guess.  Another truck  ignored all the signs that say "No trucks! low bridge!" and tried to go under the bridge that's too low for trucks?

*For those who aren't familiar with the Hub, the correct name is Storrow Drive.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 01, 2016, 08:01:47 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 01, 2016, 05:04:37 AM
Jokes about Hollywood write themselves: and speaking of amok ducks and Hollywood...take 7 minutes for...
The Scarlet Pumpernickel!!!
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh)

Most of the jokes and allusions are above the heads of kids!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2016, 08:13:55 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on September 01, 2016, 08:01:47 AM
Most of the jokes and allusions are above the heads of kids!

And always were!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2016, 08:15:22 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 01, 2016, 07:45:40 AM
Let me guess.  Another truck  ignored all the signs that say "No trucks! low bridge!" and tried to go under the bridge that's too low for trucks?

*For those who aren't familiar with the Hub, the correct name is Storrow Drive.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 01, 2016, 08:37:24 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 01, 2016, 08:13:55 AM
And always were!

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on September 01, 2016, 08:01:47 AM
Most of the jokes and allusions are above the heads of kids!

And yet they were still funny somehow!  I remember Bugs Bunny saying: "What a maroon!" and did not realize it was supposed to be a mispronunciation of "moron."

"It ain't Wendell Willkie!"  Many adults had already forgotten this sacrificial Hoosier in the presidential campaign of 1940, but the line was hysterical!  My friends and I repeated it and "maroon" and many others at appropriate times with no awareness of the meanings involved.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2016, 08:45:11 AM
Ye Giant Size Wipex
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 01, 2016, 09:21:07 AM
A question about the use of quotation marks in English.

Aside from marking a quotation proper, can they be used to express doubt about the reality behind the words or expressions contained within them, or indicate that theyb are not taken at face value?

For instance, if I wrote

Dan Brown´s "literary artistry" has produced several best-sellers.

would a reader from the English-speaking world instantly and unequivocally understand that I actually express doubt about DB´s literary artistry, or that I do not actually take it at face value?

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on September 01, 2016, 09:44:31 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 01, 2016, 09:21:07 AM
A question about the use of quotation marks in English.

Aside from marking a quotation proper, can they be used to express doubt about the reality behind the words or expressions contained within them, or indicate that theyb are not taken at face value?

For instance, if I wrote

Dan Brown´s "literary artistry" has produced several best-sellers.

would a reader from the English-speaking world instantly and unequivocally understand that I actually express doubt about DB´s literary artistry, or that I do not actually take it at face value?

Yes on all counts. Generally, quotation marks can be used in that way to express irony, a kind of a nod and a wink to the reader.  (Best not to overuse it, however.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 01, 2016, 10:23:26 AM
Quote from: Ghost Sonata on September 01, 2016, 09:44:31 AM
Yes on all counts. Generally, quotation marks can be used in that way to express irony, a kind of a nod and a wink to the reader.  (Best not to overuse it, however.)

Yes, we even have the gesture of writing "ironic quotation marks" in the air with fingers.

https://www.youtube.com/v/bGp35rnGQog
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 01, 2016, 10:27:33 AM
Thank you for your answers, gentlemen. Pretty much what I expected.

There is a specific reason for my asklng that question, but I won´t disclose it.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 01, 2016, 10:34:26 AM
Oh, "won't" you!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 01, 2016, 11:49:06 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 01, 2016, 05:37:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 01, 2016, 05:04:37 AM
Jokes about Hollywood write themselves: and speaking of amok ducks and Hollywood...take 7 minutes for...

The Scarlet Pumpernickel!!!

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2zvfqh)
Aye . . . Lord save me for an heretic, but I do love those Warner Bros shorts.
What's not to like‽
Coincidentally, I just watched this video about Chuck Jones, who created a good many of the Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies shorts.
https://www.youtube.com/v/kHpXle4NqWI
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 01, 2016, 01:54:09 PM
Quote from: Florestan on September 01, 2016, 09:21:07 AM
A question about the use of quotation marks in English.

Aside from marking a quotation proper, can they be used to express doubt about the reality behind the words or expressions contained within them, or indicate that theyb are not taken at face value?

For instance, if I wrote

Dan Brown´s "literary artistry" has produced several best-sellers.

would a reader from the English-speaking world instantly and unequivocally understand that I actually express doubt about DB´s literary artistry, or that I do not actually take it at face value?

English is subjunctive challenged.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on September 01, 2016, 02:10:38 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 01, 2016, 01:54:09 PM
English is subjunctive challenged.

Yes, I wish we were better in that dept. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on September 01, 2016, 02:37:59 PM
Quote from: Ghost Sonata on September 01, 2016, 09:44:31 AM
Yes on all counts. Generally, quotation marks can be used in that way to express irony, a kind of a nod and a wink to the reader.  (Best not to overuse it, however.)

What about the single quotation marks ('single' vs "single" for example) ? What is the purpose and proper use of each ?

Thanks !
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 01, 2016, 02:51:20 PM
Quote from: André on September 01, 2016, 02:37:59 PM
What about the single quotation marks ('single' vs "single" for example) ? What is the purpose and proper use of each ?

Thanks !

The old rule I was taught in school was that single quotes were used inside full quotes. "Then I said 'pfffft' to him."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on September 01, 2016, 03:39:08 PM
Thanks ! A very simple explanation that makes perfect sense to me. Especially if it's based on "old rules" from school !  ;)


In French too, "old rules" prevail over time and fashions.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 01, 2016, 06:31:53 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 01, 2016, 02:51:20 PM
The old rule I was taught in school was that single quotes were used inside full quotes. "Then I said 'pfffft' to him."

Right!  I have seen a strange tendency to have only single quotation marks recently, a tendency possibly stemming from a desire for "simplification."   ;)

Incompetence is also a possibility! 0:)

Quote from: André on September 01, 2016, 03:39:08 PM
Thanks ! A very simple explanation that makes perfect sense to me. Especially if it's based on "old rules" from school !  ;)


In French too, "old rules" prevail over time and fashions.

0:) Amen!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Uhor on September 01, 2016, 08:05:17 PM
In school ":)" was a Pavlovian paratext to a grade.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 02, 2016, 03:09:44 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 01, 2016, 06:31:53 PM
Right!  I have seen a strange tendency to have only single quotation marks recently, a tendency possibly stemming from a desire for "simplification."   ;)

One thing which immediately struck my eye as typographically exotic when I first read The Lord of the Rings, was the default use of single-quotes.


You know, it feels so good to share that . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 02, 2016, 03:25:43 AM
And to comment on being part of the "old school"...

"I am not a 'snob.'  I am a 'Luddite'!"  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 02, 2016, 03:54:22 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 02, 2016, 03:25:43 AM
And to comment on being part of the "old school"...

"I am not a 'snob.'  I am a 'Luddite'!"  8)

One year at Wooster, my composition instructor Dr Jack Gallagher was taking a well-deserved sabbatical.  He left us in good hands with Paul Schwartz, an Austrian emigré on the facuty of Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio.  (The first day we met in the studio, and introduced ourselves one to another, I managed to impress him by knowing the word Anschluss.  For his part, he enjoyed the borderline "Dark Continent" puns on Kenyan and Gambia.)

Dr Schwartz and I got on just fine.  A classmate of mine, though, who was arguably a bolder experimenter than I, and who was working on rather a Minimalist-tinged piece for piano four hands (I remember enjoying the textures, but I could not now comment on its strengths as a composition) . . . well, he objected to a critique or other of Dr Schwartz's in the studio.  What I remember was this agreeable, avuncular composer stepping out into the hallway of the Music Department building, trying to keep collected, and muttering (not at all in anger), "I am not naïf — I have principles."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 02, 2016, 04:08:37 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 02, 2016, 03:54:22 AM
"I am not naïf — I have principles."

Carve that in stone!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spineur on September 02, 2016, 05:15:58 AM
Quote from: André on September 01, 2016, 03:39:08 PM
Thanks ! A very simple explanation that makes perfect sense to me. Especially if it's based on "old rules" from school !  ;)


In French too, "old rules" prevail over time and fashions.
In French too, « old rules » prevail over time and fashions, and typography matters...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What Does "Persian" Mean?
Post by: Cato on September 02, 2016, 06:54:51 AM
Artistic Correctness in Canada:

QuoteA 1999 work by glass artist Dale Chihuly is in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto.

Until recently, the wall text for Persian Ceiling offered the artist's explanation of the title:

"I just liked the name 'Persian.' It conjured up the Near East, Byzantine, Far East, Venice—all the history, trades, smells and senses. It was an exotic name to me, so I just called them Persians."

The museum has removed the label in question, according to the Toronto Star, which quotes a statement from the institution: "Once the exhibition installation was complete, and the text was seen in context, it became clear that it did not reflect the voice of the museum, nor did it reflect the experience of the work."

My emphasis.

How on earth can the management of a museum know precisely how everyone will "experience" the work???!!!

(https://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/persianceiling2-web.jpg)

See:

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/dale-chihuly-controversy-exotic-persians-614045 (https://news.artnet.com/art-world/dale-chihuly-controversy-exotic-persians-614045)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 02, 2016, 07:14:06 AM
Well, the MFA in Boston was perfectly fine with Persian.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What Does "Persian" Mean?
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 02, 2016, 07:30:57 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 02, 2016, 06:54:51 AM
Artistic Correctness in Canada:
How on earth can the management of a museum know precisely how everyone will "experience" the work???!!!
(https://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/persianceiling2-web.jpg)


I see fish. OK, "Persian" fish.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What Does "Persian" Mean?
Post by: North Star on September 02, 2016, 08:11:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 02, 2016, 06:54:51 AM
Artistic Correctness in Canada:

My emphasis.

This bit isn't any less worrisome.

"Once the exhibition installation was complete, and the text was seen in context, it became clear that it did not reflect the voice of the museum"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: What Does "Persian" Mean?
Post by: Cato on September 02, 2016, 08:24:33 AM
Quote from: North Star on September 02, 2016, 08:11:03 AM
This bit isn't any less worrisome.

"Once the exhibition installation was complete, and the text was seen in context, it became clear that it did not reflect the voice of the museum"

Amen!  Or at least the title did not reflect the obviously newly hired voice, since things were fine for 27 years!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 07, 2016, 09:28:27 AM
Another day, another great typo:

Moranis, who played the Darth Vader-like Dark Helmet and is also known for roles in movies such as Ghostbusters and Honey, I Strunk the Kids . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2016, 09:59:45 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 07, 2016, 09:28:27 AM
Another day, another great typo:

Moranis, who played the Darth Vader-like Dark Helmet and is also known for roles in movies such as Ghostbusters and Honey, I Strunk the Kids . . . .

I have some students who should be strunked!  ;)

This is an old itch: the original title should, of course, use "Shrank" (parallel with "drink, drank, has drunk"), but I see some dictionaries have surrendered and allow "Shrunk" as an alternate or secondary Past Tense, and not just a Past Participle.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 07, 2016, 10:07:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 07, 2016, 09:59:45 AM
I have some students who should be strunked!  ;)
Why stop halfway, when you can get them strunked and whited!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 07, 2016, 11:32:02 AM
Quote from: North Star on September 07, 2016, 10:07:19 AM
Why stop halfway, when you can get them strunked and whited!
I was shocked a few years ago to find there are people who hate that book. Because of course some of the rules are a bit outmoded or not actually about grammar. (Why considering the title one would assume it's all about grammar is beyond me.)  It's the book I have read most often, one of my true favourites. I can still recite the para on why a sentence should have no unnecessary words. Amongst computer types who care about clear writing the book is worshiped. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2016, 03:08:51 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 07, 2016, 11:32:02 AM
I was shocked a few years ago to find there are people who hate that book. Because of course some of the rules are a bit outmoded or not actually about grammar. (Why considering the title one would assume it's all about grammar is beyond me.)  It's the book I have read most often, one of my true favourites. I can still recite the para on why a sentence should have no unnecessary words. Amongst computer types who care about clear writing the book is worshiped.

Yes, The Elements of Style by definition would go beyond grammar: one can be grammatically correct and yet have stinky style.

School textbooks in History come to mind!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on September 07, 2016, 03:39:04 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 07, 2016, 11:32:02 AM
I was shocked a few years ago to find there are people who hate that book. Because of course some of the rules are a bit outmoded or not actually about grammar. (Why considering the title one would assume it's all about grammar is beyond me.)  It's the book I have read most often, one of my true favourites. I can still recite the para on why a sentence should have no unnecessary words. Amongst computer types who care about clear writing the book is worshiped.

I can verify that it is hated by some, which only made me treasure it the more.  Also, Fowler, when greater detail is needed.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NorthNYMark on September 08, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 07, 2016, 09:59:45 AM
I have some students who should be strunked!  ;)

This is an old itch: the original title should, of course, use "Shrank" (parallel with "drink, drank, has drunk"), but I see some dictionaries have surrendered and allow "Shrunk" as an alternate or secondary Past Tense, and not just a Past Participle.

Perhaps along similar lines, I always thought it should have been  "I've Shrunk the Kids." :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on September 08, 2016, 10:07:15 PM
my goodness me.......it always irks me whenever I hear 'If I was' instead of 'If I were' although I have no idea why the former bothers me so much.

https://www.youtube.com/v/L5Z9Bompq8s
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on September 08, 2016, 10:08:09 PM
Quote from: NorthNYMark on September 08, 2016, 09:42:37 PM
Perhaps along similar lines, I always thought it should have been  "I've Shrunk the Kids." :)


You mean to tell me it is simply 'I shrunk' and not 'I've shrunk' in the title? ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NorthNYMark on September 08, 2016, 10:19:06 PM
Quote from: jessop on September 08, 2016, 10:07:15 PM
my goodness me.......it always irks me whenever I hear 'If I was' instead of 'If I were' although I have no idea why the former bothers me so much.

https://www.youtube.com/v/L5Z9Bompq8s

That mistake always irks me as well. There's even a Midge Ure song titled "If I Was" that was a minor hit in the '80s.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 05:18:24 AM
Quote from: jessop on September 08, 2016, 10:08:09 PM
You mean to tell me it is simply 'I shrunk' and not 'I've shrunk' in the title? ???

Past tense and past perfect. The past perfect uses the past participle.

I sewed my wild oats; I have sewn wild oats.

I rode the horse. I have ridden the horse.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on September 09, 2016, 05:20:54 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 05:18:24 AM
Past tense and past perfect. The past perfect uses the past participle.

I sewed my wild oats; I have sewn wild oats.

I rode the horse. I have ridden the horse.
Yes, but whenever I imagine the title of the movie in my head, my memory tells me it's 'Honey, I've Shrunk the Kids' not 'Honey, I Shrunk the Kids.'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 05:45:57 AM
Quote from: jessop on September 09, 2016, 05:20:54 AM
Yes, but whenever I imagine the title of the movie in my head, my memory tells me it's 'Honey, I've Shrunk the Kids' not 'Honey, I Shrunk the Kids.'
You have a grammatical soul.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 09, 2016, 06:54:01 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 05:18:24 AM
Past tense and past perfect. The past perfect uses the past participle.
I sewed my wild oats; I have sewn wild oats.

Are you talking about embroidery? I thought it was "sow" and "sown" or "sowed" for seed.

BTW, I read that some folk are advocating a return of "healthful" for what produces health rather than "healthy" that has been used indiscriminately for a few decades. I still cringe when hearing about "healthy" food.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 08:14:17 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on September 09, 2016, 06:54:01 AM
Are you talking about embroidery? I thought it was "sow" and "sown" or "sowed" for seed.

BTW, I read that some folk are advocating a return of "healthful" for what produces health rather than "healthy" that has been used indiscriminately for a few decades. I still cringe when hearing about "healthy" food.
Hey! Take that to the Spelling Grumble!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 09, 2016, 08:21:52 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on September 09, 2016, 06:54:01 AM
Are you talking about embroidery? I thought it was "sow" and "sown
BTW, I read that some folk are advocating a return of "healthful" for what produces health rather than "healthy" that has been used indiscriminately for a few decades. I still cringe when hearing about "healthy" food.

You may just need some more SUPERFOOD in your diet.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 09, 2016, 08:37:02 AM
Quote from: jessop on September 08, 2016, 10:07:15 PM
my goodness me.......it always irks me whenever I hear 'If I was' instead of 'If I were' although I have no idea why the former bothers me so much.

https://www.youtube.com/v/L5Z9Bompq8s

I think there is another "Doors" song which has the monstrous "...for you and I..."  ??? ??? ???

It is a crappy song anyway, even without the ridiculous "For I."

I just saw a fellow grammar grumbler combine three often-heard mistakes to satirize them:

"Loosers always find escape goats irregardless!"  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 09:30:43 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 09, 2016, 08:37:02 AM

"Loosers always find escape goats irregardless!"  :D
You snicker but Pretty Boy Floyd always said a goat was the most reliable get-away.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on September 09, 2016, 04:33:14 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 05:45:57 AM
You have a grammatical soul.


Well there's no point speaking a language if one doesn't understand it!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 09, 2016, 04:36:59 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 09, 2016, 09:30:43 AM
You snicker but Pretty Boy Floyd always said a goat was the most reliable get-away.

"Not a bad stay-cation, either," he would customarily add.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 10, 2016, 01:48:00 AM
Quote from: karlhenning on September 09, 2016, 08:21:52 AM
You may just need some more SUPERFOOD in your diet.

Oh gosh, I came full circle from that mentality. Not any more.
The "best" is frequently the enemy of the "good".
I just want normal food, simple pleasures.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 26, 2016, 04:30:49 AM
QuoteNevada is a reliably red state in presidential elections, but that could change in 2016.

So . . . don't we mean: Nevada has been a reliably red state in presidential elections, but that could change in 2016 ...?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 26, 2016, 04:58:25 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 26, 2016, 04:30:49 AM
So . . . don't we mean: Nevada has been a reliably red state in presidential elections, but that could change in 2016 ...?
But, Nevada is a reliably red state in presidential elections, based on the current data.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 26, 2016, 05:13:07 AM
Quote from: North Star on September 26, 2016, 04:58:25 AM
But, Nevada is a reliably red state in presidential elections, based on the current data.
I'm with Karl. The whole point is that it perhaps no longer is reliably red, per current polling data. It has been, but whether it still is is precisely the point at issue, and saying it "is" obscures that.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 26, 2016, 05:22:24 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 26, 2016, 05:13:07 AM
I'm with Karl. The whole point is that it perhaps no longer is reliably red, per current polling data. It has been, but whether it still is is precisely the point at issue, and saying it "is" obscures that.
I agree completely, I was just saying that there is an argument (not necessarily a good one) for using the present tense, although it does obscure the point about recent polls.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 28, 2016, 03:31:59 AM
Just a typo, of course:

'If you're voting for the leeser of two evils you're still voting for evil.'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 28, 2016, 03:59:59 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 28, 2016, 03:31:59 AM
Just a typo, of course:

'If you're voting for the leeserof two evils you're still voting for evil.'

Would the leesee therefore also be evil?!  0:)

Concerning "is" vs. "has been"

In some languages, certain prepositions or grammatical ideas cause the use of a present tense ("is") where we would insist upon a present perfect ("has been").  From their point of view, if something "has been" a certain way, then it "is" that way right now.

However, the distinction pointed out above by Karl is quite valid in English.  The current state of affairs may be different at this moment, despite the past state of affairs.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 28, 2016, 04:04:42 AM
The leesee would be nuts! "Leesee? Nuts!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 28, 2016, 05:30:33 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 28, 2016, 04:04:42 AM
The leesee would be nuts! "Leesee? Nuts!"

Well, I have heard of leechee nuts!  8)

Reminds me of an old joke:

Jack: "I just bought a house, but it needs all kind of work."

Zack: "What kind of house is it?"

Jack: "A stucco house."

Zack: "I guess that makes you the stuckee!"   ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 28, 2016, 05:48:49 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 28, 2016, 03:31:59 AM
Just a typo, of course:

'If you're voting for the leeser of two evils you're still voting for evil.'
Off topic but: a spoilt ballot is a legitimate choice.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 03, 2016, 07:45:43 AM
I cringe at "third parties"!  If there are more than two, only one can be the third! $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 03, 2016, 08:37:46 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on October 03, 2016, 07:45:43 AM
I cringe at "third parties"!  If there are more than two, only one can be the third! $:)

I have excellent friends who are voting Johnson/Weld.  I think them profoundly mistaken, but, hey, it's their vote and their right.

If however El Tupé becomes POTUS by a narrow margin, and the Johnson/Weld vote is a sliver which makes the difference in some swing states, they will have a lot of 'splainin' to do  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 03, 2016, 10:36:10 AM
[ Sorry, I have allowed the thread to be derailed. ]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 03, 2016, 10:36:47 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 03, 2016, 10:36:10 AM
[ Sorry, I have allowed the thread to be derailed. ]
Incorrect use of the passive voice.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 03, 2016, 10:37:43 AM
Quote from: Ken B on October 03, 2016, 10:36:47 AM
Incorrect use of the passive voice.

8)

Thanks!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on October 03, 2016, 02:11:15 PM
I want this thread to help me understand how to identify and use subjunctive in English because I don't know what it is......could anyone enlighten me?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on October 03, 2016, 02:30:44 PM
Quote from: jessop on October 03, 2016, 02:11:15 PM
I want this thread to help me understand how to identify and use subjunctive in English because I don't know what it is......could anyone enlighten me?
This sentence is declarative. If I were to speak of hypotheticals--that is subjunctive. At least, so I declare. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 03, 2016, 02:45:02 PM
I suggest that the subjunctive be used for opinions and other such things not considered generally known facts, as well.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 03, 2016, 02:58:14 PM
Quote from: North Star on October 03, 2016, 02:45:02 PM
I suggest that the subjunctive be used for opinions and other such things not considered generally known facts, as well.
I should say so.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on October 03, 2016, 04:21:40 PM
Thank you, helps a lot.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 03, 2016, 04:28:33 PM
English is subjunctive challenged, but it can be found in odd corners and older literature. Steven Pinker has an interesting discussion in his (blasphemous and only cautiously recommendation) book on style.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 03, 2016, 05:23:32 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 03, 2016, 10:36:47 AM
Incorrect use of the passive voice.

Which means, of course, that things are back on track!  $:)

Quote from: jessop on October 03, 2016, 02:11:15 PM
I want this thread to help me understand how to identify and use subjunctive in English because I don't know what it is......could anyone enlighten me?

The Subjunctive Mood deals with possibility or probability: it creates possible pasts, presents, and futures.

To identify it, look for could, should, would, may, might, must, ought to.  Also, the Present Subjunctive for verbs uses the Past Tense + "if" with the curiosity that plurals are used for singulars, mainly seen in the verb "to be."

Examples:

It may rain later today.  (The odds are above 50%)

It might rain later today.  (The odds are below 50%)

If I were you, I would not go in there!

This is called a Present Contrary-to-Fact Condition, i.e. Fact: I am not You!  Assume the opposite (the contrary), that I am in fact you, and therefore I will not be going there!

Some books incorrectly call the use of the form "Were" a "Past Subjunctive," when it is actually a Present.  Other Subjunctive Forms use this form of the verb to be with an infinitive: "If I were to bring you some food right now, you would eat it all by yourself!  1

"Were to bring" can be replaced by "brought," which again would be a Present Subjunctive, not a "Past."

The Past Subjunctive for this sentence is: "If I had brought you some food yesterday, you would have eaten it all by yourself."

Technically, even though many people say it, "If I was you..." is incorrect.  It means that in the past, there was a 50/50 chance that I was you!  8)  Clearly that is impossible. 

Past Contrary-to-Fact Condition e.g. If it had rained yesterday, we would not have played baseball.   Fact: it did not rain.  Fact: we did play baseball.  Contrary-to-Fact shows a possible Past, which did not occur.

Future-Less-Vivid (should-would) Condition - If you should see my sister at the party (the odds are against it), would you give her a message for me?

The Subjunctive should be heard in wishes: If only I could throw a 95-mph fast ball!   or:  If only I threw a curve ball decently!  ("Threw" here is a Present Subjunctive, not a Past Tense, Subjunctive or otherwise.)  Past Subjunctive: If only I could have thrown a 95 mph fast ball, when the Babe stepped up to the plate!  If only I had thrown a curve ball decently...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on October 03, 2016, 05:31:37 PM
Understandable. It's a matter of certainty/uncertainty, right  ?

In French the subjonctive has four different tenses: présent, passé, imparfait, plus-que-parfait. I often get scr...ed at the Scrabble because my imparfait and plus-que-parfait tenses are, well, imperfect, whereas the computer knows every single variant !

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 03, 2016, 06:20:40 PM
Quote from: André on October 03, 2016, 05:31:37 PM
Understandable. It's a matter of certainty/uncertainty, right  ?

In French the subjunctive has four different tenses: présent, passé, imparfait, plus-que-parfait. I often get scr...ed at the Scrabble because my imparfait and plus-que-parfait tenses are, well, imperfect, whereas the computer knows every single variant !

Yes!  French is paralleling its ancestor Latin with those tenses: in Latin, the Imperfect and Pluperfect tend to be seen more often, followed by the Present and then the Perfect.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on October 04, 2016, 01:07:06 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 03, 2016, 05:23:32 PM
Which means, of course, that things are back on track!  $:)

The Subjunctive Mood deals with possibility or probability: it creates possible pasts, presents, and futures.

To identify it, look for could, should, would, may, might, must, ought to.  Also, the Present Subjunctive for verbs uses the Past Tense + "if" with the curiosity that plurals are used for singulars, mainly seen in the verb "to be."

Examples:

It may rain later today.  (The odds are above 50%)

It might rain later today.  (The odds are below 50%)

If I were you, I would not go in there!

This is called a Present Contrary-to-Fact Condition, i.e. Fact: I am not You!  Assume the opposite (the contrary), that I am in fact you, and therefore I will not be going there!

Some books incorrectly call the use of the form "Were" a "Past Subjunctive," when it is actually a Present.  Other Subjunctive Forms use this form of the verb to be with an infinitive: "If I were to bring you some food right now, you would eat it all by yourself!  1

"Were to bring" can be replaced by "brought," which again would be a Present Subjunctive, not a "Past."

The Past Subjunctive for this sentence is: "If I had brought you some food yesterday, you would have eaten it all by yourself."

Technically, even though many people say it, "If I was you..." is incorrect.  It means that in the past, there was a 50/50 chance that I was you!  8)  Clearly that is impossible. 

Past Contrary-to-Fact Condition e.g. If it had rained yesterday, we would not have played baseball.   Fact: it did not rain.  Fact: we did play baseball.  Contrary-to-Fact shows a possible Past, which did not occur.

Future-Less-Vivid (should-would) Condition - If you should see my sister at the party (the odds are against it), would you give her a message for me?

The Subjunctive should be heard in wishes: If only I could throw a 95-mph fast ball!   or:  If only I threw a curve ball decently!  ("Threw" here is a Present Subjunctive, not a Past Tense, Subjunctive or otherwise.)  Past Subjunctive: If only I could have thrown a 95 mph fast ball, when the Babe stepped up to the plate!  If only I had thrown a curve ball decently...
These things have all been instinctive for me without realising! It does help to know that I have been right without knowing it prior to reading this, but what do you think you could unpack North Star's sentence in a similar fashion?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 04, 2016, 01:13:59 AM
Quote from: North Star on October 03, 2016, 02:45:02 PM
I suggest that the subjunctive be used for opinions and other such things not considered generally known facts, as well.

Be that as it may . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 04, 2016, 03:33:23 AM
Quote from: jessop on October 04, 2016, 01:07:06 AM
These things have all been instinctive for me without realising! It does help to know that I have been right without knowing it prior to reading this, but what do you think you could unpack North Star's sentence in a similar fashion?

Yes, it can be considered an indirect command.  Direct commands are (usually) not Subjunctive, but are called Imperative.

e.g. Stay here!  Be all that you can be!

Indirect Command: He told me that I should/must/ought to stay here. 

She insisted that I be all that I can be
.  Or: She insisted that I should/must/ought to be all that I can be.

Also consider: May you always have sunny days! 

Closer to a wish than a command, but there are gray areas depending on tone of voice:

Teacher to student: You really might want to do your homework... NOW! ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 04, 2016, 04:58:03 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 04, 2016, 03:33:23 AM

Teacher to student: You really might want to do your homework... NOW! ;)
The subjunctive is for counterfactuals Cato, not fantasies.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 04, 2016, 05:05:56 AM
Quote from: Ken B on October 04, 2016, 04:58:03 AM
The subjunctive is for counterfactuals Cato, not fantasies.

:D :D

True!  However, I tend toward optimism!  0:)  You will be glad to know that Mrs. Cato also calls my optimism a land of fantasy! $:)

I have lived to see the day where - right now in my Catholic grade school in an area of some wealth - a group of parents is whining about the homework (5 - 7 sentences for a "reflection" about various Bible readings) in Religion, and are right now circulating a petition to have our Religion teacher fired because of it.

"My kid dreads going to Mass now all because of that assignment!"

To call them idiots and morons would insult idiots and morons!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 04, 2016, 05:57:42 AM
From a Catholic News Agency tweet, no less:

We fill a very unique roll that's very different.

As the baker said, I loaf it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on October 04, 2016, 07:15:11 AM
Again it shows that someone who knows only his native language often does not even know this one... ;)
The names for these modes are often confusing because they are usually taken from Latin where they have both similar and additional functions compared to e.g. English. In German it is called "Konjunktiv" but it is only used for indirect speech, wishes, counterfactual conditionals, never for the more general kind of "conjunctive" subclauses (like ut- or cum-clauses in Latin or after uncertain statements of opinion like in French or Italian). So the name is not very plausible at all.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 04, 2016, 08:27:24 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 04, 2016, 05:57:42 AM
From a Catholic News Agency tweet, no less:

We fill a very unique roll that's very different.

As the baker said, I loaf it.

8)

At least worth a penance of 10 Our Father's, 10 Hail Mary's, and 10 Glory Be's! 0:)

Quote from: Jo498 on October 04, 2016, 07:15:11 AM
Again it shows that someone who knows only his native language often does not even know this one... ;)
The names for these modes are often confusing because they are usually taken from Latin where they have both similar and additional functions compared to e.g. English. In German it is called "Konjunktiv" but it is only used for indirect speech, wishes, counterfactual conditionals, never for the more general kind of "conjunctive" subclauses (like ut- or cum-clauses in Latin or after uncertain statements of opinion like in French or Italian). So the name is not very plausible at all.

And in English a "conjunction" is not a clause, but the word uniting clauses or words, e.g. and, because, etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 04, 2016, 08:34:26 AM
And conjunctivitis is the inflammation of the conjunctiva. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 07, 2016, 10:06:54 AM
Just a typo, but, hey . . .

Trump focues on rebound at second debate but refuses to be controlled (headline at the online Washington Post)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on October 09, 2016, 05:16:23 AM
Quote from: Cato on October 03, 2016, 05:23:32 PM
Which means, of course, that things are back on track!  $:)

The Subjunctive Mood deals with possibility or probability: it creates possible pasts, presents, and futures.

To identify it, look for could, should, would, may, might, must, ought to.  Also, the Present Subjunctive for verbs uses the Past Tense + "if" with the curiosity that plurals are used for singulars, mainly seen in the verb "to be."

Examples:

It may rain later today.  (The odds are above 50%)

It might rain later today.  (The odds are below 50%)

If I were you, I would not go in there!

This is called a Present Contrary-to-Fact Condition, i.e. Fact: I am not You!  Assume the opposite (the contrary), that I am in fact you, and therefore I will not be going there!

Some books incorrectly call the use of the form "Were" a "Past Subjunctive," when it is actually a Present.  Other Subjunctive Forms use this form of the verb to be with an infinitive: "If I were to bring you some food right now, you would eat it all by yourself!  1

"Were to bring" can be replaced by "brought," which again would be a Present Subjunctive, not a "Past."

The Past Subjunctive for this sentence is: "If I had brought you some food yesterday, you would have eaten it all by yourself."

Technically, even though many people say it, "If I was you..." is incorrect.  It means that in the past, there was a 50/50 chance that I was you!  8)  Clearly that is impossible. 

Past Contrary-to-Fact Condition e.g. If it had rained yesterday, we would not have played baseball.   Fact: it did not rain.  Fact: we did play baseball.  Contrary-to-Fact shows a possible Past, which did not occur.

Future-Less-Vivid (should-would) Condition - If you should see my sister at the party (the odds are against it), would you give her a message for me?

The Subjunctive should be heard in wishes: If only I could throw a 95-mph fast ball!   or:  If only I threw a curve ball decently!  ("Threw" here is a Present Subjunctive, not a Past Tense, Subjunctive or otherwise.)  Past Subjunctive: If only I could have thrown a 95 mph fast ball, when the Babe stepped up to the plate!  If only I had thrown a curve ball decently...

PSA: this is almost entirely incorrect.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 09, 2016, 05:23:51 AM
Quote from: aquablob on October 09, 2016, 05:16:23 AM
PSA: this is almost entirely incorrect.
(http://i706.photobucket.com/albums/ww61/imbrial/xkcd_citation_needed_edit.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: aquablob on October 09, 2016, 05:38:39 AM
Quote from: North Star on October 09, 2016, 05:23:51 AM
(http://i706.photobucket.com/albums/ww61/imbrial/xkcd_citation_needed_edit.jpg)

:laugh:

No, I'm afraid citation is needed for the claim that "It may rain" is subjunctive.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 09, 2016, 11:31:41 AM
Quote from: aquablob on October 09, 2016, 05:38:39 AM
:laugh:

No, I'm afraid citation is needed for the claim that "It may rain" is subjunctive.

I should say so.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 12, 2016, 09:54:39 AM
Congratulations Karl Henning. New credentials has been created for you.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 12, 2016, 11:03:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 12, 2016, 09:54:39 AM
Congratulations Karl Henning. New credentials has been created for you.

In the 1980's the abbreviation G.I.G.O. became popular among computer programmers, when people blamed the computer for mistakes rather than the humans behind the mistake.

Garbage In, Garbage Out.

i.e. if "garbage" is programmed into the computer, the computer will spit the garbage back out!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on October 20, 2016, 11:25:41 AM
Found this image illustrating a Vox article.
(https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/gOkrbvwlsxIPlCz0-gPEM0YHd2M=/0x0:5502x3668/1220x813/filters:focal(2311x1394:3191x2274):format(webp)/cdn1.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/51427505/GettyImages-613809588.0.jpg)

???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 20, 2016, 11:31:06 AM
Those apostrophe's is trubble!   ???

From Karl Henning's composing topic:

Quote from: Cato on October 20, 2016, 09:39:01 AM


:D :D :D

Recently my 8th-Grade students were on a field trip to a university laboratory on Lake Erie, where graduate students gave them mini-courses in fish dissection, testing water for pollution, etc.

One of the graduate students had a horrible habit of "emphasizing" comparatives: "more greater," more easier," etc.

One of my best students raised her hand and corrected him: "Don't you mean 'easier'?"  ??? 8)

He responded with some embarrassment: "Yeah, but I'm a Science major, not language."  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 24, 2016, 10:48:37 AM
QuoteIt is hard to imagine any other actor but Nicholson being able to fit in this roll with such conviction and raw power.


(From a review of the Blu-Ray edition of The Shining.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 24, 2016, 10:49:31 AM
There goes my appetite..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on October 24, 2016, 12:28:38 PM
Quote from: North Star on October 24, 2016, 10:49:31 AM
There goes my appetite..

:D

From a story about a possible flying car...

QuoteCould this be the mysterious "flying car" rumored to be being developed by Google co-found Larry Page?
??? :o

Hmmm, how about this instead?

Could this be the mysterious "flying car" rumored to be in/under development by Google co-found Larry Page?   0:)

See:

http://www.montereyherald.com/article/NF/20161023/NEWS/161029863 (http://www.montereyherald.com/article/NF/20161023/NEWS/161029863)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 24, 2016, 02:23:52 PM
To be being . . . or not to be being . . . it ain't Shakespeare.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 07, 2016, 04:33:20 AM
I guess that, at this point, I do not greatly object to the neologism past tense for to forecast.  But—

Quote48.4 percent

That's the expected share of the popular vote that Hillary Clinton is forecasted to win, based on the latest from the FiveThirtyEight model. Donald Trump is projected to get 45.3 percent, but there are a solid range of possibilities, so it's worth checking out the model every minute of every day until you feel certain of your place in the world.

Emphasis mine.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 07, 2016, 06:35:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 07, 2016, 04:33:20 AM
I guess that, at this point, I do not greatly object to the neologism past tense for to forecast.  But—


I sometimes wonder if it's just me. Did I mislearn this when I was young? What other errors am I making? Should I say "I had my hair cutted" ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 07, 2016, 06:52:33 AM
I don't like forecasted.  But I only object in select company . . . .


0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on November 07, 2016, 09:01:53 AM
Saw this comment on a national network site:  "My sentiments exactly, but I want to add that Trump's lack of personal disclosure leaves open the possibility that he is a complete financial fraud. I am a registered republican in a Democratic state. I voted against any republican candidate that openly supported Donald Trump. Vote your conscious."  I always do, vote my conscious, that is.  Though I've often wondered about Trump supporters...   :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 07, 2016, 09:07:44 AM
(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2016, 02:38:25 AM
The outcome of the U.S. election is another example of the immense level of change . . . .

I may use language better, but this guy owns at least two very nice residences, and has no worries about affording health care.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2016, 04:52:57 AM
QuoteThe Democratic Party has shockingly little to show for itself after a cycle that was supposed to coronate a new demographic majority

Good grief: coronate? Coronate??!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 10, 2016, 05:06:01 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 10, 2016, 04:52:57 AM
Good grief: coronate? Coronate??!!

Who says Leo Gorcey and  The Bowery Boys are dead?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 10, 2016, 02:38:25 AM
The outcome of the U.S. election is another example of the immense level of change . . . .

These remind me of scholarly journals, where all sorts of grammatical errors, atrocities, monstrosities, and preciosities can be found.  A general rule from one of my professors decades ago: the more specious the topic, the more heinous will be the crimes against language in the article.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 10, 2016, 05:31:04 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 07, 2016, 06:52:33 AM
I don't like forecasted.  But I only object in select company . . . .

Would you prefer "predicted"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 10, 2016, 05:34:24 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 10, 2016, 05:31:04 AM
Would you prefer "predicted"?
Forecast would do.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2016, 06:03:12 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 10, 2016, 05:31:04 AM
Would you prefer "predicted"?

What is the past of "to cast"?

Not to be oblique, my preference is forecast for the past of to forecast.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 10, 2016, 06:16:13 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 10, 2016, 06:03:12 AM
What is the past of "to cast"?
Not to be oblique, my preference is forecast for the past of to forecast.

So how would you tell the difference between present and past?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 10, 2016, 06:25:48 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 10, 2016, 06:16:13 AM
So how would you tell the difference between present and past?
From the context. :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on November 10, 2016, 06:28:09 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 10, 2016, 06:16:13 AM
So how would you tell the difference between present and past?

Context.  Just as the context of this discussion makes it clear you were referencing grammatical tenses even though you did not use the word itself.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 10, 2016, 06:43:20 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 10, 2016, 06:03:12 AM
What is the past of "to cast"?

Not to be oblique, my preference is forecast for the past of to forecast.

Past of stand, stood.
Past of understand, understanded.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on November 10, 2016, 06:52:56 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 10, 2016, 06:43:20 AM
Past of stand, stood.
Past of understand, understanded.

Maybe in Canada but where I am from, understanded is not a word and understood can be past or present tense.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 10, 2016, 07:02:45 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 10, 2016, 06:43:20 AM
Past of understand, understanded.

You really know how to hurt a guy, don't you?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 10, 2016, 08:02:21 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 10, 2016, 06:52:56 AM
Maybe in Canada but where I am from, understanded is not a word and understood can be past or present tense.
Where I'm from sarcasm is subtle.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 10, 2016, 08:55:22 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on November 10, 2016, 06:52:56 AM
Maybe in Canada but where I am from, understanded is not a word and understood can be past or present tense.

Present Perfect Tense - e.g. I (have) understood

English is curious: one can say "landed," and "banded," and "sanded," and even "stranded," but not "standed."

Curiously, our cousin language German uses "stand" as a past tense!  :o ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 10, 2016, 12:19:24 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 10, 2016, 08:55:22 AM
Present Perfect Tense - e.g. I (have) understood

English is curious: one can say "landed," and "banded," and "sanded," and even "stranded," but not "standed."
English is not even-hood.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 11, 2016, 01:02:00 AM
"understood" can never be present tense, can it? it is either the simple past or the participle, so "is understood" is present passive because it uses the participle (which is technically a "perfect" participle, isn't it?)

Actually, modern German is exactly parallel with modern English in that "understand" and "verstehen" (or stand and stehen) have both strong flexion: understood and verstand(en). (The mostly false friend pairing is "stay" - "stehen")
I am not sufficiently versed in linguistics but for whatever reasons often the most important everday verbs (be, have, bring, see, give, put....) have strong flexion or are even highly irregular with different stems (this is really annoying in ancient greek, arguably the most difficult thing about that language).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on November 11, 2016, 04:23:34 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 11, 2016, 01:02:00 AMI am not sufficiently versed in linguistics but for whatever reasons often the most important everday verbs (be, have, bring, see, give, put....) have strong flexion or are even highly irregular with different stems (this is really annoying in ancient greek, arguably the most difficult thing about that language).

My vague recollection from that one linguistics class I took is that irregularities are more likely to survive if they're in words that are used commonly, while they're more likely to be ironed out of a language if they're in less commonly-used words.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 11, 2016, 05:04:03 AM
Quote from: Mahlerian on November 11, 2016, 04:23:34 AM
My vague recollection from that one linguistics class I took is that irregularities are more likely to survive if they're in words that are used commonly, while they're more likely to be ironed out of a language if they're in less commonly-used words.
That's true; people bother to learn (and remember) if the words are commonly used, and also if it's a commonly used word, more people are outraged when the irregularities are dispensed with.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2016, 06:30:35 AM
Brethren!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 11, 2016, 11:02:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 11, 2016, 06:30:35 AM
Brethren!
If all men are brothers would you let one marry your sister?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 11, 2016, 11:04:36 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 11, 2016, 11:02:37 AM
If all men are brothers would you let one marry your sister?
Or marry your own sister?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 11, 2016, 11:22:28 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 11, 2016, 11:02:37 AM
If all men are brothers would you let one marry your sister?

Is that where Schiller was going with that!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on November 13, 2016, 08:45:11 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 11, 2016, 11:02:37 AM
If all men are brothers would you let one marry your sister?
Loved that Theodore Sturgeon story! ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 13, 2016, 11:08:06 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on November 13, 2016, 08:45:11 AM
Loved that Theodore Sturgeon story! ;D
I was beginning to think no-one would spot the reference!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 14, 2016, 04:50:40 AM
I know, we can probably find several of these every day, but . . .

Quotea country that is not diminishing it's military
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on November 14, 2016, 08:58:57 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 13, 2016, 11:08:06 AM
I was beginning to think no-one would spot the reference!
A story far ahead of its time, as was Mr. Sturgeon himself. 8)

Karl, I blame the various autocorrect programs for some of these grammatical fiascos.  (Fiaschi? :) )  I've had to fight mine on my phone because it always first insists on changing its to "it's." ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 14, 2016, 09:04:33 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on November 14, 2016, 08:58:57 AM
Karl, I blame the various autocorrect programs for some of these grammatical fiascos.  (Fiaschi? :) )  I've had to fight mine on my phone because it always first insists on changing its to "it's." ::)

Aye, I feel you, old dear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2017, 11:15:54 AM
But . . . but . . . this was a pop-up at the Barnes & Noble website . . .

QuoteIf you don't recieve this email . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 06, 2017, 11:30:03 AM
And what does 'recieve' even mean
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 13, 2017, 11:10:22 AM
Finally checking out "the comma queen," recommended by the new guy in the office:

http://www.youtube.com/v/3nbJWS_cmI0

". . . err on the side of who — it's better to be casual and use who, than it is to be super wrong using whom when it ought to be who."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on January 13, 2017, 05:40:38 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 13, 2017, 11:10:22 AM
Finally checking out "the comma queen," recommended by the new guy in the office:

http://www.youtube.com/v/3nbJWS_cmI0

". . . err on the side of who — it's better to be casual and use who, than it is to be super wrong using whom when it ought to be who."

To who is she addressing this advice and whom is it for?

(I hope it's clear that that was intentional on my part...)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2017, 06:25:24 AM
The priest for our Children's Mass used the word "undermine" in his sermon, and asked the younger grades if they understood what the word meant.  After some not bad definitions, he used the word to emphasize the main point in the Gospel of that day.

"So instead of undermining people, what should we be doing?" he asked the younger students.  (They sit in the front.)

Various answers were: "Help them!"  "Encourage them!" along with other synonyms.

Until a Third-Grader, the wise-guy son of our Seventh and Eighth Grade History teacher, raises his hand and says:

"We should overmine them!"  8)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2017, 06:30:50 AM
;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 03, 2017, 07:16:09 AM
If she is "Comma Queen", then who is "Comma King"?
Title: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2017, 07:42:32 AM
In the court of the Semicolon King

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2017, 08:11:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 03, 2017, 07:42:32 AM
In the court of the Semicolon King.

A most egriegious pun! 0:)

Maybe it's time for a semicolonoscopy!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2017, 08:18:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2017, 08:11:21 AM
Maybe it's time for a semicolonoscopy!   0:)

That sounds half-arsed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2017, 08:44:57 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 03, 2017, 08:18:35 AM
That sounds half-arsed!

8)  Wocka Wocka!

Concerning a grumble highly annoying to me for some reason (but I think
I know the reason  ;) )  i.e.  "Transition" as a Verb!  ???

"He's transitioning to a new department."

"We'll transition after lunch to the 3rd floor."

This is one of those preciosities born undoubtedly in advertising offices and/or bureaucracies of governments.

"Transfer" or "change" or "go" would be highly preferable. 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 03, 2017, 08:52:10 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2017, 08:44:57 AM

Concerning a grumble highly annoying to me for some reason (but I think
I know the reason  ;) )  i.e.  "Transition" as a Verb!  ???
"He's transitioning to a new department."
"We'll transition after lunch to the 3rd floor."
This is one of those preciosities born undoubtedly in advertising offices and/or bureaucracies of governments.
"Transfer" or "change" or "go" would be highly preferable. 0:)

Indeed! I don't like that noun "transitioned" into a verb.
Somehow, "transitioning" to the other gender has a softer ring to it than "sex-change", probably the reason "transition" is used, instead of other verbs that could do just as well.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2017, 09:02:01 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 03, 2017, 08:52:10 AM
Indeed! I don't like that noun "transitioned" into a verb.
Somehow, "transitioning" to the other gender has a softer ring to it than "sex-change", probably the reason "transition" is used, instead of other verbs that could do just as well.

Or one can just say "change" or "transform."  Probably it is too late to stop the contagion!  But, being a quixotic type, I will keep trying! $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 03, 2017, 09:44:17 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2017, 09:02:01 AM
Or one can just say "change" or "transform."  Probably it is too late to stop the contagion!  But, being a quixotic type, I will keep trying! $:)
Our team instituted a pro-active policy modulation with the goal of delay minimization in the delivery process for functional operation alterations.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2017, 09:48:12 AM
Good question!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 03, 2017, 10:00:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2017, 09:02:01 AM
Or one can just say "change" or "transform."  Probably it is too late to stop the contagion!  But, being a quixotic type, I will keep trying! $:)
I disagree. I think there is a connotation with "transition" wherein the essence is unchanged. This is more specific than change. All transitions are changes but not all changes are transitions. We could call water freezing or ice melting transitions, but we* would only call wood burning a transition ironically. I think this is why the word won out.



*"we" = native speakers of English with enough taste to reject "grand-aunt".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2017, 10:02:39 AM
(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2017, 10:23:13 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 03, 2017, 10:00:16 AM
I disagree. I think there is a connotation with "transition" wherein the essence is unchanged. This is more specific than change. All transitions are changes but not all changes are transitions. We could call water freezing or ice melting transitions, but we* would only call wood burning a transition ironically. I think this is why the word won out.

As a noun, all of that may be quite fine!  The problem is this new desire to use the word as a verb.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 03, 2017, 10:28:27 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2017, 10:23:13 AM
As a noun, all of that may be quite fine!  The problem is this new desire to use the word as a verb.
*looks about furtively*
*smirks evilly*
The noun was verbed. We often verb nouns. Verbing nouns is common.

verb, v.t, to transition into a verb. Example: "Verb was verbed."

*slinks off, partly proud, partly ashamed*
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2017, 10:49:38 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 03, 2017, 10:28:27 AM
*looks about furtively*
*smirks evilly*
The noun was verbed. We often verb nouns. Verbing nouns is common.

verb, v.t, to transition into a verb. Example: "Verb was verbed."

*slinks off, partly proud, partly ashamed*

:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on February 03, 2017, 10:55:17 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 03, 2017, 10:28:27 AM
*looks about furtively*
*smirks evilly*
The noun was verbed. We often verb nouns. Verbing nouns is common.

verb, v.t, to transition into a verb. Example: "Verb was verbed."

*slinks off, partly proud, partly ashamed*

To quote the philosopher Calvin*: "Verbing weirds language."

*The one who's six years old, not the one who's five hundred years old...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 03, 2017, 11:11:07 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 03, 2017, 10:28:27 AM
Verbing nouns is common.

How 'bout nouning verbs?  ;D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2017, 04:45:52 PM
Quote from: Florestan on February 03, 2017, 11:11:07 AM
How 'bout nouning verbs?  ;D

Hmmm!  $:)

Well, we do have The Holy See ! 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 12:46:18 AM
Re: Who/whom.
I am always slightly confused when people use things like "objective case". Maybe it is because I grew up distinguishing more cases (native: German, first language at school: Latin) but even while in English might be no distinction in flexion between dative and accusative, they are still different cases, aren't they: "I give him [Dat] the book [Acc]." [and even with the marker "to" in a different order "I give the book to him", I'd still say that it is dative] "I see him [Acc]."
"him" is an object in both sentences but once it is dative, once accusative, so talking of "objective case" is neglecting that difference. Or am I projecting from German? "Ich gebe ihm das Buch" vs. "Ich sehe ihn"
But if one had to translate these examples into German or Latin one would have to know that "him" is in a different case.
And the genitive/possessive is still there as well "The guy whose pants were on fire reached for the water jug".

I realize that this is done not to confuse people with grammar and admit that I am inflexible but it is like converting things from binary code or so. If people talk about direct/indirect etc. objects I always translate this in my mind into accusative/dative etc. I realize they are not exactly parallel although in the languages with hardly any flexion it is close enough but it is confusing for me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 04, 2017, 01:58:24 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 12:46:18 AM
Re: Who/whom.
I am always slightly confused when people use things like "objective case". Maybe it is because I grew up distinguishing more cases (native: German, first language at school: Latin) but even while in English might be no distinction in flexion between dative and accusative, they are still different cases, aren't they: "I give him [Dat] the book [Acc]." [and even with the marker "to" in a different order "I give the book to him", I'd still say that it is dative] "I see him [Acc]."
"him" is an object in both sentences but once it is dative, once accusative, so talking of "objective case" is neglecting that difference. Or am I projecting from German? "Ich gebe ihm das Buch" vs. "Ich sehe ihn"
But if one had to translate these examples into German or Latin one would have to know that "him" is in a different case.

Arabic doesn't distinguish between dative and objective case. Verbs can have two objects (maflun-bihi) if they are transitive (X gave him that).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 03:06:30 AM
But is English really like Arabic or does it just happen to have the same form of the noun for dative and accusative? I did not claim that all languages have to have these cases.
But the indoeuropean ones started out with them and later fused some of them together or "lost" them and so I think it is a meaningful question if English does have accusative and dative or if they are fused into an "objective". The forms of the noun are fused but the syntactical functions are distinguishable.
(There does not seem to be a doubt that English retains some kind of genitive/possessive as well, so it has at least three cases left.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 04, 2017, 04:10:56 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 03:06:30 AM
(There does not seem to be a doubt that English retains some kind of genitive/possessive as well, so it has at least three cases left.)

I just cribbed this from Wikipedia.

"Middle English (ME) is collectively the varieties of the English language spoken after the Norman Conquest (1066) until the late 15th century; scholarly opinion varies but the Oxford English Dictionary specifies the period of 1150 to 1500. This stage of the development of the English language roughly followed the High to the Late Middle Ages...Early Middle English (1100–1300) has a largely Anglo-Saxon vocabulary (with many Norse borrowings in the northern parts of the country), but a greatly simplified inflectional system. The grammatical relations that were expressed in Old English by the dative and instrumental cases are replaced in Early Middle English with prepositional constructions. The Old English genitive -es survives in the -'s of the modern English possessive, but most of the other case endings disappeared in the Early Middle English period, including most of the roughly one dozen forms of the definite article ("the"). The dual personal pronouns (denoting exactly two) also disappeared from English during this period.".

I am a big fan of the Canterbury Tales, especially in books where the rendering to modern English is on the facing page. Nouns were inflected similar to German:
  singular
      strong   weak
nom   engel   name
acc   engel   name
gen   engles   namen
dat   engle   namen
     plural
      strong   weak
nom   engles   namen
acc   engles   namen
gen   engle   namene
dat   englen   namen
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:21:46 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2017, 04:45:52 PM
Hmmm!  $:)

Well, we do have The Holy See ! 0:)

Yes, this one is quite intriguing: why not The Holy Seat, or even literally The Holy Chair*? Why See?

* The Romanian term is Sfântul Scaun, which means exactly The Holy Chair.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 04, 2017, 04:26:17 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:21:46 AM
Yes, this one is quite intriguing: why not The Holy Seat, or even literally The Holy Chair*? Why See?
* The Romanian term is Sfântul Scaun, which means exactly The Holy Chair.

Good question. A lot of people must have been asking themselves where "See" came from.

Apparently, it is from "seat":
The term Holy See comes from the Latin Sancta Sedes, meaning "Holy Chair," and originates from the enthronement ceremony of the Bishop of Rome, the Pope.  Strictly speaking, the cathedra, i.e. the chair or throne, represents the position and authority of the Holy Father or a bishop, and the place where he resides in the territory of his jurisdiction.  Here the Holy See refers to the "seat of government" of the universal Church.  Geographically, this seat of government is located in the Diocese of Rome.
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-does-the-term-holy-see-mean/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:30:17 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 04, 2017, 04:26:17 AM
Good question. A lot of people must have been asking themselves where "See" came from.

Apparently, it is from "seat":
The term Holy See comes from the Latin Sancta Sedes, meaning "Holy Chair," and originates from the enthronement ceremony of the Bishop of Rome, the Pope.  Strictly speaking, the cathedra, i.e. the chair or throne, represents the position and authority of the Holy Father or a bishop, and the place where he resides in the territory of his jurisdiction.  Here the Holy See refers to the "seat of government" of the universal Church.  Geographically, this seat of government is located in the Diocese of Rome.
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-does-the-term-holy-see-mean/

Thanks. I suspected that See is actually a contraction of Seat and has got nothing to do with the verb.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 04:38:33 AM
Thanks; very interesting. Of course I didn't mean to dispute any of that. I guess my point is whether it makes sense to speak of "cases" as functions in the syntax if they work almost exactly as the would in a language that still has different endings.
So English has three forms: he, his, him. Someone like me who is native German and first really learned grammar when studying Latin tends to think of this as follows
Nom: he
Gen: his
Dat: (to) him
Acc: him

I also tend to think of verbs as "going with" a case. This might be wrong but somewhat automatic because I have to relate English to my mother tongue (as soon as I think about grammar). So in "I believe him" I think of "him" as dative because in German "glauben" has the direct object in the dative case. Whereas in "I see him" it would be accusative.
Of course I understand that one can equally well call both cases of a direct object "objective case" because there is no difference in grammatical form. (This would make no sense in a language like German where a verb can have direct objects in the genitive (rare), dative and accusative.)

It is still confusing because of verbs with more than one object, at least as long as one can leave out prepositions. In "I give him the book" ("Ich gebe ihm das Buch") "him" has a different place in the syntax as in "I see him" although the grammatical form is the same. So one has to learn anyway that "him" can have different places/functions, so there is a distinction not captured by only contrasting "him" as "objective" with "he" (subjective). I realise that this might be more confusing than helpful for natives or learners of English that have not learned a language with several cases and different direct objects first. But as German and (I think) the slavic languages (and probably others as well) do have such cases, I'd think it would still be helpful to think the way I tried to sketch.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:45:15 AM
It always strikes me as stridently wrong to reply to, for instance, "I love you!" with "Me too!" "I too!" is the logical and right way, methinks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 04, 2017, 04:54:12 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:45:15 AM
It always strikes me as stridently wrong to reply to, for instance, "I love you!" with "Me too!" "I too!" is the logical and right way, methinks.
"I love you too" is more accurate, though - unless you mean that you love yourself. ;)
And 'me too' is accurate if it's an exclamation of surprise - as in, "you love me too?" (the other person apparently loves several people).
'I' can sound very contrived in colloquial English - and it certainly sounds very wrong when used improperly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 04, 2017, 05:01:27 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 04, 2017, 04:26:17 AM
Good question. A lot of people must have been asking themselves where "See" came from.

Apparently, it is from "seat":
The term Holy See comes from the Latin Sancta Sedes, meaning "Holy Chair," and originates from the enthronement ceremony of the Bishop of Rome, the Pope.  Strictly speaking, the cathedra, i.e. the chair or throne, represents the position and authority of the Holy Father or a bishop, and the place where he resides in the territory of his jurisdiction.  Here the Holy See refers to the "seat of government" of the universal Church.  Geographically, this seat of government is located in the Diocese of Rome.
http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-does-the-term-holy-see-mean/


Thanks.

Quote from: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:30:17 AM
Thanks. I suspected that See is actually a contraction of Seat and has got nothing to do with the verb.

Aye. I rather suspect Cato knew that, and was funnin'. (And punnin'.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 04, 2017, 05:06:44 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 04:38:33 AM
Thanks; very interesting. Of course I didn't mean to dispute any of that. I guess my point is whether it makes sense to speak of "cases" as functions in the syntax if they work almost exactly as the would in a language that still has different endings.
So English has three forms: he, his, him. Someone like me who is native German and first really learned grammar when studying Latin tends to think of this as follows
Nom: he
Gen: his
Dat: (to) him
Acc: him

I also tend to think of verbs as "going with" a case. This might be wrong but somewhat automatic because I have to relate English to my mother tongue (as soon as I think about grammar). So in "I believe him" I think of "him" as dative because in German "glauben" has the direct object in the dative case. Whereas in "I see him" it would be accusative.
Of course I understand that one can equally well call both cases of a direct object "objective case" because there is no difference in grammatical form. (This would make no sense in a language like German where a verb can have direct objects in the genitive (rare), dative and accusative.)

It is still confusing because of verbs with more than one object, at least as long as one can leave out prepositions. In "I give him the book" ("Ich gebe ihm das Buch") "him" has a different place in the syntax as in "I see him" although the grammatical form is the same. So one has to learn anyway that "him" can have different places/functions, so there is a distinction not captured by only contrasting "him" as "objective" with "he" (subjective). I realise that this might be more confusing than helpful for natives or learners of English that have not learned a language with several cases and different direct objects first. But as German and (I think) the slavic languages (and probably others as well) do have such cases, I'd think it would still be helpful to think the way I tried to sketch.

Prepositions were a bugbear when I was learning German, because I was thinking in English (still do). One similarity that I held onto was when they appear at the end like "pick it up".
I was surprised to learn in Arabic that dative and accusative were considered direct objects for some verbs. I never expected to see that outside English. But they have plenty of prepositions and do inflect verbs, the subject of which would be too long for this thread and past the limits of my own knowledge.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 04, 2017, 05:33:59 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:30:17 AM
Thanks. I suspected that See is actually a contraction of Seat and has got nothing to do with the verb.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 04, 2017, 05:01:27 AM
Aye. I rather suspect Cato knew that, and was funnin'. (And punnin'.)

Right!  Ken B.'s joke on "verbing" vs. "nouning" brought up that pun on "see" as a noun, which word, however, has nothing to do with the verb "see." :D

On cases and forms in English:

Quote from: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 03:06:30 AM
But is English really like Arabic or does it just happen to have the same form of the noun for dative and accusative?
(There does not seem to be a doubt that English retains some kind of genitive/possessive as well, so it has at least three cases left.)

Here is the lamentable state of the teaching of English in America: it is quite possible to major in English in many colleges and not study one foreign language connected to it.  :o ???  There are even Ph.D. programs with either no specific requirement or a "2-year requirement" in "any" foreign language.  Knowing Anglo-Saxon, Gothic, Old English/Middle English, Latin, French, or German beyond the two-year level apparently is not considered important to become a professor of English at too many universities.

This is why I have heard from students throughout my 45-year career of teaching German, Latin, and Ancient Greek that "I learn more English in your class than I do in English."

Anyway, yes, I would agree that English has a Dative and an Accusative Case, although many English teachers will not know the terms "Dative Case" or "Accusative Case."  The "him" in "I gave him a dollar" vs. "I saw him yesterday" are not used in the same way, although the forms are the same.

I have known English teachers who have told me that the following sentence "I gave a dollar to him" uses "him" simply as an "object of a preposition," and that it is NOT an indirect object!  ???   That the prepositional phrase is used as an indirect object did not occur to them.  ??? ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 04, 2017, 06:07:41 AM
To be fair, even in Germany where we do have 4 distinct cases, grammar is often not taught very well. Because it is boring in one's mother tongue, that's why one should study a few foreign languages, preferably at least one like Latin (or Russian or Ancient Greek...) with declensions and conjugations and all the fun stuff.

In my case I had a rather energetic teacher in 4th grade who wanted those of us who were going to transfer to the track where we'd start Latin or English in 5th grade to be well prepared, so she made us learn some grammar already then, including the Latin technical terms for the cases etc. And once one starts Latin there is of course no way to avoid grammar and because it is so  systematic and clear there, one tends to think of other languages in similar ways. This has limits and that's why I am hesitant to claim that what I sketched above is simply "right". But when one wants to translate from English into German or Latin one has to realize that there is a real difference between the two occurences of "him" in "I give him the book" and in "I see him". There might be different ways to conceptualize the difference and the "classical" way with dative and accusative might be somewhat disingenious for English but I am glad that Cato agrees that it is not nonsense.

As for foreign language requirements: it is the mixed blessing of the anglophone world that they do not have to learn foreign languages, so it is understandable that these requirements slacked over time. (Recall that English as lingua franca is fairly recent, I think it passed French only around/after WW II.)

In Germany we still have formal requirements of several years of two foreign languages for most university subjects. In practice it is difficult to pass the high school diploma without taking two foreign languages for several years, so theoretically, most students fulfil that formal requirement before university (it is a different question how well students actually know the languages although most younger Germans are actually speaking English quite well because they had 8 or even 10 years of instruction at school - one needs about 5-6 years and about 3-5 in a second language to pass the requirements I guess). (In my school time in the late 1980s it was normal for the academic track students to start the first language at 5th (10 years old), the second at 7th and a third at 9th grade. One could avoid the third language with some extra classes in other subjects but many/most students took a few years of it. Most common then was English/French/Latin (or in another order) Then one could get rid typically of one of those three in 11th or 12th grade for the last two school years if one wanted. If one started Latin or Greek in 9th grade and passed an exam in the last (13th) grade this fulfilled the requirements for divinity school or other university subjects requiring ancient languages.)
Of course anyone going for a master's or PhD degree needs a working knowledge of English in most subjects (one exception is law... they do legalese instead...) because of international publications and many universities also have the formal requirement of Latin for some humanities PhDs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 07:22:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 04, 2017, 05:33:59 AM
The "him" in "I gave him a dollar" vs. "I saw him yesterday" are not used in the same way, although the forms are the same.

Romanian makes a clear distinction between accusative and dative without even needing the object to be mentioned as such.  :D

I-am dat un dolar means "I / we gave [him / her] a dollar". That I at the very beginning  indicates the dative, but if it's "to him" or "to her" is either deduced from the context or have to be explicited thus:

I-am dat lui un dolar --- "lui" means "to him"

I-am dat ei un dolar --- "ei" in this context means "to her" (in other contexts can mean "they" but only for males)

L-am văzut means "I / we saw him". That L at the very beginning indicates both the accusative and the fact that it's "him".

Am văzut-o means "I / we saw her". The o at the end indicates both the accusative and the fact that it's "her".

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 04, 2017, 07:48:07 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 04:30:17 AM
Thanks. I suspected that See is actually a contraction of Seat and has got nothing to do with the verb.
It comes from the Latin, sedes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 08:49:33 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 04, 2017, 07:48:07 AM
It comes from the Latin, sedes.

Scio.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 07, 2017, 04:42:22 AM
I suppose people just may ask that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 08, 2017, 01:06:05 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 07, 2017, 04:42:22 AM
I suppose people just may ask that.

Lemony Persnickety? 8)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 08, 2017, 09:29:29 PM
Has anyone seen this monstrosity: "healthyish"?

"Healthy" when meaning "healthful" is bad enough, but who has the nerve to make an adjective into an adverb and even worse, to use it as an adjective?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 09, 2017, 01:25:55 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 08, 2017, 09:29:29 PM
"Healthy" when meaning "healthful" is bad enough

What's so wrong about "healthy", I wonder?  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 09, 2017, 01:37:31 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 09, 2017, 01:25:55 AM
What's so wrong about "healthy", I wonder?  ???

When I was in school, there was a distinction made between something health giving (healthful) and a state of health (healthy). I don't know why the first term went out of common use.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 09, 2017, 01:58:07 AM
Maybe because it is strange to think of health as something residing in the fresh fruit and not in the body?
Multiple meanings for "healthy" are so common in many languages that it has been a standard example for a certain kind of multiple meaning/equivocation/homonymy since Plato and Aristotle!
(I fully agree that "healthyish" sounds and looks monstrous and seems also superfluous.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 09, 2017, 02:12:41 AM
By way of precision, I still prefer the distinction made between promoting a state of health and it being already achieved.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2017, 04:15:48 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 09, 2017, 02:12:41 AM
By way of precision, I still prefer the distinction made between promoting a state of health and it being already achieved.

Good for you! 0:)

The following is true (sad, but true).  Names have been eliminated to protect the innocent.

A supposed History teacher at a local high school gave a test with the following howlers.  Usually things like this come from the students. ;)

These came from the teacher!

"What was the name given to Hitler's blonde harried Germans?"

(True or False)

"Fascism is more concerned with ones individual rights then the groups concerns." :(

And for general incomprehensibility:

"A major reason for the failures of the League of Nations were no force consequences to disobey orders."  ??? ??? ???

My favorite:

"What was the German name for Hitler's lightening war?"  :o :o :o

And you thought World War II was one of the "heavy" wars!

Not one word about Stalin's pact with Hitler, or the invasion by Stalin of Poland and the Baltic states from the East.

Anyway, I am sure the man is a fine coach!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 11, 2017, 04:45:47 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2017, 04:15:48 AM
The following is true (sad, but true).  Names have been eliminated to protect the innocent.
A supposed History teacher at a local high school gave a test with the following howlers.  Usually things like this come from the students. ;)
These came from the teacher!
"What was the name given to Hitler's blonde harried Germans?"
(True or False)
"Fascism is more concerned with ones individual rights then the groups concerns." :(
And for general incomprehensibility:
"A major reason for the failures of the League of Nations were no force consequences to disobey orders."  ??? ??? ???
My favorite:
"What was the German name for Hitler's lightening war?"  :o :o :o
And you thought World War II was one of the "heavy" wars!
Not one word about Stalin's pact with Hitler, or the invasion by Stalin of Poland and the Baltic states from the East.
Anyway, I am sure the man is a fine coach!  ;)

Lighten up a cigarette, right?
Maybe the guy is not a native English speaker?  ::)
My high school English teacher was so devoted, she could not sleep if there were any uncorrected dangling participles in homework she may have missed.
Because of her, I still have a hard time with splitting infinitives.
Saying or writing them still makes me feel guilty, or at least uncomfortable...

ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2017, 05:14:20 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 11, 2017, 04:45:47 AM
Lighten up a cigarette, right?
Maybe the guy is not a native English speaker?  ::)
My high school English teacher was so devoted, she could not sleep if there were any uncorrected dangling participles in homework she may have missed.
Because of her, I still have a hard time with splitting infinitives.
Saying or writing them still makes me feel guilty, or at least uncomfortable...

ZB

:D

Concerning the teacher:   Unfortunately  ;)  no, he is an American and has no excuse for those errors, and I should mention that there were easily a dozen more in spelling and punctuation!

Teachers are supposed to make students uncomfortable, because they are young, ignorant, and these days are much too proud of themselves. They need to grow up and wise up! 8)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 11, 2017, 06:17:25 AM
"Did you misplace this modifier, sir?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 11, 2017, 06:22:45 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 04, 2017, 08:49:33 AM
Scio.  :)

Just curious, do you say "Skio" or "Shio"?
Maybe Cato can enlighten us as to the current Latin pronunciation.
So many arguments go back and forth in choirs.
I do prefer the Italian as per my family origin.

ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 11, 2017, 06:34:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 11, 2017, 06:17:25 AM
"Did you misplace this modifier, sir?"

"Who modified the modifier?"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 11, 2017, 08:54:14 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 11, 2017, 06:22:45 AM
Just curious, do you say "Skio" or "Shio"?
Maybe Cato can enlighten us as to the current Latin pronunciation.
So many arguments go back and forth in choirs.
I do prefer the Italian as per my family origin.

ZB

A classical pronunciation uses a "K" sound for any "c" in a word.  The "ch" pronunciation before certain vowels (as in "chin") is more medieval, as Latin changes into Italian.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 11, 2017, 09:19:27 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 11, 2017, 08:54:14 AM
A classical pronunciation uses a "K" sound for any "c" in a word.  The "ch" pronunciation before certain vowels (as in "chin") is more medieval, as Latin changes into Italian.

But you wouldn't say "s-ch-io" but "sh-io" in Italian pronunciation of Latin? Right, or wrong?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 12, 2017, 05:01:10 AM
There is also a "germanized" pronunciation (one will hear in quite a few recordings of Latin church music by German language choirs) that would have "s-tsio". Basically, the c's (that were all hard "k" in classical Latin) become "ts" before "i", "e" and "ae" and double cc becomes "k-ts"
E.g. "ak-tsendit" instead of "ashendit" where classically it would have been "akkendit" although I admit that I do not know how Latin would have been pronounced in the 4th century AD (when the Nicene Creed was formulated); very probably the classical pronunciation had already yielded to different "local" changes by then. (I recently read that by the 8th/9th century old French had departed sufficiently from late Latin/pre-French that people would not understand priests using the current version of ecclesiastical Latin)
Certainly no church choir would have pronounced Latin classically between the high middle ages and today. They would use local pronunciation (and the French one that can be heard on some recordings of Charpentier and other 17th century composers) sounds quite strange to my ears but I trust that it is the way they did it in French catholic churches). So, if one wants historically accuracy the italianate pronunciation is probably wrong for stuff like Bach's b minor, probably also for Beethoven and Haydn. With so many italian singers around in 18th century Germany and Austria, I am not sure although I very much doubt that German/Austrian church choirs would have used that pronunciation. Latin was the main subject for those choir boys in school and I see no indication why they would have used the italianate way in the choir and the germanized in class. However, as most seem to agree that the italianate way is easier to sing, I don't see a reason why international choirs should try to emulate the germanized way. But neither is there a good reason for germanophone choirs to use the italianate way.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 12, 2017, 06:55:44 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 12, 2017, 05:01:10 AM
There is also a "germanized" pronunciation (one will hear in quite a few recordings of Latin church music by German language choirs) that would have "s-tsio". Basically, the c's (that were all hard "k" in classical Latin) become "ts" before "i", "e" and "ae" and double cc becomes "k-ts". E.g. "ak-tsendit" instead of "ashendit" where classically it would have been "akkendit"...

"Ak-tsendit" (accendit) is really hard to sing, a tongue twister, as the consonants go from back to front, the top of the palate, then through the lips.
There one German choir conductor who tried to impose hard consonants on locals used to Italian pronunciation and were very loathe to change (an understatement).

ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 12, 2017, 07:41:01 AM
As I said, I also think it is nonsense to make a choir that is already used to some pronunciation change it. But I see no problem if germanophone choirs (or maybe also some Dutch or Scandinavian, I have no idea which consonants they's prefer) use the germanized pronunciation. (I admit that I personally dislike the French pronunciation.) Except for some cases, e.g. Verdi's Requiem (and this was also sung with germanized Latin in 1960s Germany/Austria) it is not really a right/wrong question. Why should e.g. an American choir singing for American audiences in 2017 try to mimick the germanized Latin pronunciation only because Bach would probably have been used to it?
I all for trying to pronounce, e.g. German in a Bach cantata as correctly as possible. But doing germanized Latin seems a waste of time.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on February 12, 2017, 05:20:30 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 12, 2017, 07:41:01 AM
As I said, I also think it is nonsense to make a choir that is already used to some pronunciation change it. But I see no problem if germanophone choirs (or maybe also some Dutch or Scandinavian, I have no idea which consonants they's prefer) use the germanized pronunciation. (I admit that I personally dislike the French pronunciation.) Except for some cases, e.g. Verdi's Requiem (and this was also sung with germanized Latin in 1960s Germany/Austria) it is not really a right/wrong question. Why should e.g. an American choir singing for American audiences in 2017 try to mimick the germanized Latin pronunciation only because Bach would probably have been used to it?
I all for trying to pronounce, e.g. German in a Bach cantata as correctly as possible. But doing germanized Latin seems a waste of time.

Your last paragraph raises another aspect of the question.

Did Bach ( or Mozart, Haydn, Telemann, Beethoven, etc.) use a pronounciation of German that was essentially the same as today's? Were there any dialectical or local variations among speakers from, say, Hamburg, Dresden, and Vienna.

That might matter more in theory than in practice: it does not usually matter if one sings with one or another form of British or American prounounciation. (It does matter if the texts are prior to 1500, because of the vowel shifts and related matters which occurred in medieval England). But other languages may be different (Hebrew, for instance, where the difference between Ashkenazi and Sephardic pronounciation extends to consonants as well as vowels, and which now offers as a third alternative modern Israeli, which is a sort of blending of the two).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 12, 2017, 11:45:53 PM
I have not looked up actual research but as 2017 there are very clear distinctions between speakers from Dresden, Hamburg and Vienna and often very slight nuances are often even recognizable with trained speakers/actors. (I recently watched one of mediocre TV crime mysteries that are produced by the 100s every year for German TV and in a Hamburg setting two police detectives and the eventual culprit were played by Austrian actors and had slight Austrian accents/colorations...)

I do not know about actors and singers in the 18th/19th century; I'd expect that as soon as German became an important opera language in the early 19th century they would train their pronunciation according to some standard, but I am not even sure whether such standards existed. Very probably not for Leipzig or Vienna choirboys 1720...

I mentioned this already in some other thread on the board: German was despite the Luther Bible from the 1520s quite late in developing a national literature, it was politically not unified, there was the 30 years war, etc. (While there was German literature in the 16th and 17th century, the first "great" writers were Lessing and Goethe in the mid/late 18th century. The greatest German intellectual around 1700, Leibniz, wrote mainly in French and Latin.) And I would assume that standards for pronunciation, even for professional actors and singers were even later to emerge, in fact they have changed between the 1920s and today).
However, as German is not comparable to English in that almost everything is "pronounced as spelled/written", unless we are talking about dialects the variance among people attempting to use some standard pronunciation would probably not be as large as in English.

I have not heard about anyone trying to sing in "historical pronunciation" (except for the really old stuff like the 13th century Minnesaenger, but middle high German really was a different language than modern German, so the issue is not pronunciation). I fear it would sound ridiculous to a modern speaker/listener if people would sing Bach with a Saxon accent.
There are a few recordings of Elizabethan music (like the "Cries of London") that try historical pronunciation for ca. 1600 English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 13, 2017, 04:16:08 PM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 11, 2017, 09:19:27 PM
But you wouldn't say "s-ch-io" but "sh-io" in Italian pronunciation of Latin? Right, or wrong?

Well, the priests I knew in the old days, including some Monsignors, did indeed pronounce it "S-ch-io," although I have heard on recordings both "Shio" and a kind of "tsio" as well.

What the priests did, however, could simply be the propagation of a mistake via their professors in the seminary: all of them had gone through the same system in the late 1800's and early 1900's.

Quote from: Jo498 on February 12, 2017, 11:45:53 PM
I have not looked up actual research but as 2017 there are very clear distinctions between speakers from Dresden, Hamburg and Vienna and often very slight nuances are often even recognizable with trained speakers/actors. (I recently watched one of mediocre TV crime mysteries that are produced by the 100s every year for German TV and in a Hamburg setting two police detectives and the eventual culprit were played by Austrian actors and had slight Austrian accents/colorations...

Oh yes!  And some (many?) try to claim their accent as the "official Hochdeutsch" pronunciation!   8)  I once knew a Bavarian who claimed that the Bavarian pronunciation was the only way to pronounce German correctly! :o 0:)

Rhinelanders scoffed and laughed at this claim, and told me that "Bayrisch" was basically a low-class briarhopper (i.e. farm boy) pronunciation! ??? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 13, 2017, 09:15:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 13, 2017, 04:16:08 PM
Well, the priests I knew in the old days, including some Monsignors, did indeed pronounce it "S-ch-io," although I have heard on recordings both "Shio" and a kind of "tsio" as well.
What the priests did, however, could simply be the propagation of a mistake via their professors in the seminary: all of them had gone through the same system in the late 1800's and early 1900's.

"Scio" in Italian is pronounced "shio". Saying "ch" as in "church" would be the propagation of a mistake. The point about using Italian pronunciation in Latin is it comes from a natural development in the very peninsula where Latin emerged. Saying "ts" where there is no historical justification for it, other than some people used it, is not a convincing argument. Also it is dang hard to sing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on February 13, 2017, 11:39:27 PM
There is a historical justification. As the italianate Latin pronunciation is the one that emerged in Italy, the germanized is the one that came to be common in Germany, Austria and the slavic countries for hundreds of years since the high middle ages and the frenchified one in France (and I guess there is also a hispanicized pronunciation with soft c's before i and e pronounced as in Spanish). After all the italianate one is as far from classical Latin as the others. "Shio, sio, stsio" are all equally far from "skio".
So it was sung that way when the music was composed and this is clearly a justification to do it that way. It is of course not a knock-down argument.
There is also the exactly analoguous argument from practice to the one you mention, namely that the choir does not have to change from what it is used to. Finally, I think that until a few decades ago a German audience would have found the italianate pronunciation strange or irritating.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 14, 2017, 12:16:22 AM
Wow, I had no idea I would provoke a historical / philological / dialectological tsunami.

I wouild pronounce it in the Italianate way, shio.

Anyway, the Latin scio turned into the Romanian ştiu, pronounced shteew (ee like in creed, w like in few).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 14, 2017, 01:25:39 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on February 13, 2017, 11:39:27 PM
So it was sung that way when the music was composed and this is clearly a justification to do it that way. It is of course not a knock-down argument. There is also the exactly analoguous argument from practice to the one you mention, namely that the choir does not have to change from what it is used to. Finally, I think that until a few decades ago a German audience would have found the italianate pronunciation strange or irritating.

Being more concerned about the music, I wouldn't get irritated by pronunciation by choirs, since in general, one can barely understand them anyway. This seems to be a French recording of Bach's Magnificat in which they soften the c's before i or e.  I wouldn't bother about pronunciation anyway but I happen to teach singing and coach choirs, so it is something I notice.

https://www.youtube.com/v/q8Oeq12zjZk
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 14, 2017, 02:11:16 PM
Quote from: Florestan on February 14, 2017, 12:16:22 AM
Wow, I had no idea I would provoke a historical / philological / dialectological tsunami.

I wouild pronounce it in the Italianate way, shio.

Anyway, the Latin scio turned into the Romanian ştiu, pronounced shteew (ee like in creed, w like in few).

Silent t in tsunami?

  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 15, 2017, 01:10:30 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 14, 2017, 02:11:16 PM
Silent t in tsunami?

The same as in "cats".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 15, 2017, 02:38:30 AM
Silent u in sukiyaki
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 17, 2017, 08:45:02 AM
Ooops
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 18, 2017, 07:13:08 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 15, 2017, 02:38:30 AM
Silent u in sukiyaki

Or in kawai des(u).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 18, 2017, 07:16:43 AM
Soo desu, nee.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on February 18, 2017, 08:08:47 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 18, 2017, 07:13:08 AM
Or in kawai des(u).

You mean kawaii (cute)?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 18, 2017, 08:15:24 AM
Quote from: Mahlerian on February 18, 2017, 08:08:47 AM
You mean kawaii (cute)?

I see there is a difference between Kawai as in the name of the piano company and kawaii (cute), that has two i's at the end. Actually I thought it was "cute piano" until now...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on February 18, 2017, 08:22:41 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 18, 2017, 08:15:24 AM
The 2nd "i" seems to be silent, although it is spelled: かわいい

It's not silent at all.  Nor is it unvoiced (which is not the same thing) like the "u" in desu.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 18, 2017, 08:23:47 AM
Quote from: Mahlerian on February 18, 2017, 08:22:41 AM
It's not silent at all.  Nor is it unvoiced (which is not the same thing) like the "u" in desu.

I already corrected that post... ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 18, 2017, 11:14:19 AM
The doubling of い lengthens the syllable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 18, 2017, 12:23:16 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 18, 2017, 11:14:19 AM
The doubling of い lengthens the syllable.

I need to tune my ear to that...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 18, 2017, 02:06:56 PM
:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 18, 2017, 07:13:54 PM
Tragic grammar describing a tragic accident: the following sentence comes to you from a 20-something T.V. reporter!

"The skier was killed when he ran into a steel pole going 25 miles an hour." ??? :o ::) :o ???

Those steel poles need to slow down! 0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 19, 2017, 01:44:59 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 18, 2017, 07:13:54 PM
Tragic grammar describing a tragic accident: the following sentence comes to you from a 20-something T.V. reporter!
"The skier was killed when he ran into a steel pole going 25 miles an hour." ??? :o ::) :o ???
Those steel poles need to slow down! 0:)

The problem is a language that depends on word placement, a source of fun nevertheless.

ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 19, 2017, 03:25:13 AM
With gleeful frequency.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 19, 2017, 03:28:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 18, 2017, 07:13:54 PM
Tragic grammar describing a tragic accident: the following sentence comes to you from a 20-something T.V. reporter!

"The skier was killed when he ran into a steel pole going 25 miles an hour." ??? :o ::) :o ???

Those steel poles need to slow down! 0:)

When the poles go professional, they're eager to push the speed envelope:  Polar Pro

https://www.youtube.com/v/5ZpX99EMaKM
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 23, 2017, 04:08:14 AM
Things like this conjure up fear for the future of civilization...

Local ABC television news reporter says the following statement about some poor teenager and his sister, both recently orphaned:

"For Johnny Smith, his mother meant the world to he ??? ??? :o :o...(dramatic pause, which only emphasized the reporter's thermonuclear mistake)...and his sister."

"To he" was not caught by anyone editing the story or hearing the story before it aired!

And so Nominative forms are just fine as objects?????  Reporters were supposed to be the guardians of good grammar, but now they are the barbarians at the gates!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 04:33:44 AM
Quote from: Cato on February 23, 2017, 04:08:14 AM
Local ABC television news reporter says the following statement about some poor teenager and his sister, both recently orphaned: "For Johnny Smith, his mother meant the world to he ??? ??? :o :o...(dramatic pause, which only emphasized the reporter's thermonuclear mistake)...and his sister."
"To he" was not caught by anyone editing the story or hearing the story before it aired!
And so Nominative forms are just fine as objects?????  Reporters were supposed to be the guardians of good grammar, but now they are the barbarians at the gates!

Maybe he was unsure of the pronoun the person preferred. Not knowing or slipping up in New York can get ze into a lot of trouble and heavy fines, besides:
(http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/pronouns-e1463583391272.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 23, 2017, 04:48:56 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 04:33:44 AM
Maybe he was unsure of the pronoun the person preferred. Not knowing or slipping up in New York can get ze into a lot of trouble and heavy fines, besides:
(http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/pronouns-e1463583391272.jpg)
You mean it can get hir into a lot of trouble. Cato did write about erroneous use of the nominative form, after all...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2017, 04:54:04 AM
(* chxyrstle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 05:24:23 AM
Quote from: North Star on February 23, 2017, 04:48:56 AM
You mean it can get hir into a lot of trouble. Cato did write about erroneous use of the nominative form, after all...

Thanks for the correction. I am still illiterate as to the use of the brave new world pronouns.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2017, 05:44:02 AM
Well, but you posted the chart  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 05:51:32 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2017, 05:44:02 AM
Well, but you posted the chart  0:)

I don't use them, nor intend to incorporate them in my everyday speech.
"Themself" sounds repugnant to my ears, like scratching on a blackboard.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 23, 2017, 05:53:36 AM
Yes, themselves would be better.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2017, 06:00:12 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 05:51:32 AM
I don't use them, nor intend to incorporate them in my everyday speech.

Understood, but (not to flog a prone Lipizzaner) I know you can read the chart, and the chart, you furnished  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 06:02:52 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2017, 06:00:12 AM
Understood, but (not to flog a prone Lipizzaner) I know you can read the chart, and the chart, you furnished  :)

I don't acknowledge any of the new forms as being valid. So there!  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2017, 06:03:56 AM
Nor do we require you to, dear.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 23, 2017, 08:56:50 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2017, 06:03:56 AM
Nor do we require you to, dear.
Don't call him dear! His prefered pronoun is "supreme galactic overlord."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 09:04:46 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 23, 2017, 08:56:50 AM
Don't call him dear! His prefered pronoun is "supreme galactic overlord."

I am not a militant feminist. Therefore, I don't find "dear" condescending.
(You're not the first to mistake my pronoun...)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 23, 2017, 09:20:58 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 23, 2017, 08:56:50 AM
Don't call him dear! His prefered pronoun is "supreme galactic overlord."
OOPS

Don't call supreme galactic overlord dear! supreme galactic overlord's prefered pronoun is "supreme galactic overlord."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 23, 2017, 09:39:55 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 09:04:46 AM
I am not a militant feminist. Therefore, I don't find "dear" condescending.
(You're not the first to mistake my pronoun...)

May I address you as Supreme Galactic Overmistress?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 23, 2017, 10:28:18 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2017, 09:39:55 AM
May I address you as Supreme Galactic Overmistress?
Find yourself a  Supreme Galactic Undermistress and you could have a Supreme Galactic Sandwich.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 09:42:31 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 23, 2017, 09:39:55 AM
May I address you as Supreme Galactic Overmistress?

"Zamyra-byrd" is just fine, which can be translated to singing or nightingale bird.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 24, 2017, 03:29:02 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 09:42:31 PM
"Zamyra-byrd" is just fine, which can be translated to singing or nightingale bird.

One of my little 7th-Grade girls is named "Philomena."  (Ancient Greek for "nightingale.")  An old-fashioned name!  A tombstone near those of my great-grandparents bears the name Philomena: she was born in the 1860's.

Speaking of my grade-school students, the previous grumble about "to he" outraged or amazed all of them: they easily spotted the error, after I had written the offensive sentence on the board.

How many adult ears at the T.V. station heard the report during editing and preparation? >:(

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 24, 2017, 03:58:54 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 23, 2017, 09:42:31 PM
"Zamyra-byrd" is just fine, which can be translated to singing or nightingale bird.

And, familiarly, zb  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 24, 2017, 05:21:48 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 24, 2017, 03:58:54 AM
And, familiarly, zb  8)

Z flat
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 24, 2017, 05:46:36 AM
Zb!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 24, 2017, 06:08:38 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 24, 2017, 05:46:36 AM
Zb!

That looks like Z to the b power.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 24, 2017, 06:11:48 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 24, 2017, 06:08:38 AM
That looks like Z to the b power.
You mean Z to the power of b.  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 24, 2017, 06:19:15 AM
eb ln z
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 24, 2017, 06:21:57 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 24, 2017, 06:19:15 AM
eb ln z

Muß Es sein?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 24, 2017, 06:33:26 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 24, 2017, 06:21:57 AM
Muß Es sein?

Es muß sein.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on February 24, 2017, 07:00:52 AM
Quote from: North Star on February 24, 2017, 06:11:48 AM
You mean Z to the power of b.  0:)

All power to "B"!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 24, 2017, 08:59:19 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on February 24, 2017, 07:00:52 AM
All power to "B"!!!

Bs rule.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 24, 2017, 09:47:06 AM
Bs wax!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 24, 2017, 01:12:55 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 24, 2017, 09:47:06 AM
Bs wax!
May they never wain.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 19, 2017, 05:51:52 AM
Not a grammar grumble per se, just a rather astonishing use of an adjective with a certain occupation:

Courtesy of a reporter on CBS:  "...legendary shoe designer..."  ??? ??? ??? ;)

Well, I am sure the shoe designer is a millionaire... 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 19, 2017, 03:01:33 PM
Bleaching out all the color of the language . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 20, 2017, 08:53:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 19, 2017, 05:51:52 AM
Courtesy of a reporter on CBS:  "...legendary shoe designer..."  ??? ??? ??? ;)

Well, I am sure the shoe designer is a millionaire... 0:)

Maybe the shoe designer doesn't exist in real life - maybe he or she is a piece of fake news.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2017, 10:26:28 AM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on March 20, 2017, 08:53:49 AM
Maybe the shoe designer doesn't exist in real life - maybe he or she is a piece of fake news.

The glories of PhotoShop!

Our English teacher reported to me that she witnessed a television interview with a college student who happens to play basketball...or maybe a basketball player who happens to attend a college class now and then, like Basketball 101.  She was horrified to hear the stoont speak because "not one sentence had a verb!!!  I am not exaggerating!!!  Not one verb the whole time!!!" ??? ??? ???

This reminded me of an old Steve Martin routine: "I wrote a novel a few years ago, and it didn't sell too well.  So in my second novel, I started using verbs!  Sales really picked up after that!" :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 20, 2017, 11:24:46 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2017, 10:26:28 AM
The glories of PhotoShop!

Our English teacher reported to me that she witnessed a television interview with a college student who happens to play basketball...or maybe a basketball player who happens to attend a college class now and then, like Basketball 101.  She was horrified to hear the stoont speak because "not one sentence had a verb!!!  I am not exaggerating!!!  Not one verb the whole time!!!" ??? ??? ???

This reminded me of an old Steve Martin routine: "I wrote a novel a few years ago, and it didn't sell too well.  So in my second novel, I started using verbs!  Sales really picked up after that!" :D
Read a recent James Ellroy novel. Or, try to.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2017, 12:55:46 PM
Quote from: Ken B on March 20, 2017, 11:24:46 AM
Read a recent James Ellroy novel. Or, try to.

Thanks for the reco... the warning!  8)  I know nothing of the author, so I will skim through a book at a store or the library! ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 20, 2017, 02:33:12 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 20, 2017, 10:26:28 AM
I am not exaggerating!!! Not one verb the whole time!!!

I note here that sometimes Microsoft is to blame. It should of course be:
I am not exaggerating!!! not one verb the whole time!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on March 21, 2017, 05:39:42 PM
Some people seem to treat exclamation points like legal forms, seeming unable to process less than triple usage. (!!!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 21, 2017, 06:00:22 PM
Quote from: jochanaan on March 21, 2017, 05:39:42 PM
Some people seem to treat exclamation points like legal forms, seeming unable to process less than triple usage. (!!!)

;)  Aesthetic opinion: I do not like the look of two exclamation points.  So, either I use one, or for greater emphasis (or irony) I use three!!!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 22, 2017, 04:01:55 AM
It works, mate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 22, 2017, 04:20:26 AM

Quote from: jochanaan on March 21, 2017, 05:39:42 PM
Some people seem to treat exclamation points like legal forms, seeming unable to process less than triple usage. (!!!)

Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2017, 06:00:22 PM
;)  Aesthetic opinion: I do not like the look of two exclamation points.  So, either I use one, or for greater emphasis (or irony) I use three!!!  0:)


Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 22, 2017, 04:01:55 AM
It works, mate.

Well, I think so!   ;)

I will now quote a "sentence" in a letter from a company whose name begins with "3" and ends in "M." 0:)

Mrs. Cato had sent a letter complaining about the complete failure of one of their products.  4 weeks later, a response came containing the following monstrosity:

"We may require that pictures for quality control purposes and you did send us a sample of your tape so thank you!"  ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o

The letter also has this curiosity: "If you call, please mention this email..."

It used to be that a Jane Hathaway would scrutinize such letters, before they hit the mail, and fix any errors.  But today, "Spellcheck" is good enough, and Jane Hathaway is nowhere to be found.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on March 23, 2017, 05:21:59 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2017, 06:00:22 PM
;)  Aesthetic opinion: I do not like the look of two exclamation points.  So, either I use one, or for greater emphasis (or irony) I use three!!!  0:)

I really must edit my carol book:
"Hark!!! the herald angels sing."
"Ding, dong!!! merrily on high"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 23, 2017, 05:44:14 PM
Quote from: Ten thumbs on March 23, 2017, 05:21:59 AM
I really must edit my carol book:
"Hark!!! the herald angels sing."
"Ding, dong!!! merrily on high"

Well, three is a mystical number!   :D

Our most recent grumble comes from my Latin class: one of the students wanted to know if the "word" yolo was from Latin.  This is not the first time I have heard the claim that "yolo" is Latin.

Latin has no "y" except in words borrowed from Greek. 

You Only Live Once is about as profound as Yodo, and would of course be disputed by the billion or so people who believe  in reincarnation. 0:)

Yoda of course is quite profound!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 23, 2017, 05:50:51 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 23, 2017, 05:44:14 PM
Well, three is a mystical number!   :D

Our most recent grumble comes from my Latin class: one of the students wanted to know if the "word" yolo was from Latin.  This is not the first time I have heard the claim that "yolo" is Latin.

Latin has no "y" except in words borrowed from Greek. 

You Only Live Once is about as profound as Yodo, and would of course be disputed by the billion or so people who believe  in reincarnation. 0:)

Yoda of course is quite profound!  8)

There is a simple answer. Yolo is a stupid word, hence it comes from French.

:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 23, 2017, 06:15:16 PM
Quote from: Ken B on March 23, 2017, 05:50:51 PM
There is a simple answer. Yolo is a stupid word, hence it comes from French.
:D

Yes!  So obvious!  ;D  I have often commented about English spelling: in general, if it makes no sense, blame French!  $:) ;)

Title: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 24, 2017, 02:12:40 AM
Eaudious!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 24, 2017, 04:57:30 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 24, 2017, 02:12:40 AM
Eaudious!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
A meretricious coinage!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 25, 2017, 04:12:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 24, 2017, 02:12:40 AM
Eaudious!

Quote from: Ken B on March 24, 2017, 04:57:30 AM
A meretricious coinage!

Bilingual puns!  Great stuff!  The rule seems to be: if you have a chance to make fun of French, do it!  ;)

Today's Wall Street Journal carries a book review of a biography of Mussolini's (main) mistress.  Toward the end of the piece, the reviewer notes the following about the author and his "mangled" technique in English:

Quote...Mr. Bosworth can write with verve, and the two earlier books I read in part, "Mussolini's Italy" and "Whispering City: Rome and Its Histories," have many fine passages. But they also have many blunders, and my failure to finish them was due to the pervasive not-quite-rightness of their prose. In "Claretta," this errancy reaches a whole new level, with solecisms and bafflingly inept formulations at every turn.

For starters, there are redundancies worthy of Dan Brown, such as "personal emotions" and the statement that Mussolini, looking in the mirror, spotted "new wrinkles on his face that had not been there before." Nonsensical word choices abound: contempt is scribbled, evidence is hostile, stereotypes are aroused, hindsight remarks, opinion reads rumors, and someone protests vivaciously.

As for Mr. Bosworth's sentences, they tend to be long and muddled. At times he is inadvertently funny in his clumsiness, as when he says that Mussolini, during sex, once "scratched [Claretta's] nose painfully with the explanation that, sometimes, 'I lose control.' " But it's hard to do other than groan at a sentence like this: "On 30 January . . . Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler chancellor of Germany, a rise to power destined to set Europe ablaze." The chancellor is a rise? The rise sets Europe ablaze? (Never mind that Churchill's famous phrase was an injunction to his own Special Operations Executive.)

One expects this sort of thing from Wikipedia but not from the normally rigorous Yale University Press. "My book might be best read," Mr. Bosworth advises the reader, "with the Sturm und Drang of Clara and Ben's favourite music, Beethoven's 7th Symphony, playing loudly in the background." Perhaps, but not even a German symphony could drown out the screech of English being mangled.

(My emphasis above.)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-bed-with-il-duce-1490382122 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-bed-with-il-duce-1490382122)

One assumes that this Bosworth is NOT a descendant of the more famous James Bosworth! 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on March 26, 2017, 05:26:39 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 25, 2017, 04:12:14 AM
One assumes that this Bosworth is NOT a descendant of the more famous James Bosworth! 0:)

I've heard of James Boswell, but not Bosworth. Who is he? Googling didn't help.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 01, 2017, 08:22:27 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on March 26, 2017, 05:26:39 AM
I've heard of James Boswell, but not Bosworth. Who is he? Googling didn't help.

My joke was too obscure: a character in an American TV show called Halt and Catch Fire, and no, he isn't famous!  8)

During a trip to the American South, we encountered some interesting curiosities in language. 0:)

A docent in Tennessee at an antebellum mansion kept saying "Mainsion," which we had never heard before.  The central part of Tennessee is never referred to as the "central" part of Tennessee.  Everywhere in central Tennessee, one sees instead "Middle Tennessee," from TV stations to trucks proclaiming "Middle Tennessee Plumbing."  And there are no short or single vowels which cannot be squeezed into annoying-sounding long ones (e.g. "eeny" = "any") or into diphthongs (e.g. "cla-owset" for "closet").

Also noticed: local T.V. reporters have a proper (or almost proper) Midwest (north of the Ohio River) pronunciation, but the T.V. weatherman is allowed to drawl like the local yokels.  ;)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 02, 2017, 03:20:30 AM
Another curiosity: two docents at the Andrew Jackson estate in Nashville insisted several times that his wife had been accused of being a "bigot."  The accusation was used against him in his political campaigns and apparently led to the duel where he killed wife's slanderer.

To be sure, slavery was present on the estate, but that was not the docents' context.  They claimed she was called a "bigot" because her divorce from her abusive first husband had not quite been approved by a court before her second marriage to Jackson.

We sent the management a little note about the difference between "bigot" and "bigamist." ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 05, 2017, 04:45:33 PM
Another use of a certain term...but not the right use!  Seen in Cincinnati!

Legendary Lawn and Garden Services  ??? ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 05, 2017, 05:41:02 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 05, 2017, 04:45:33 PM
Another use of a certain term...but not the right use!  Seen in Cincinnati!

Legendary Lawn and Garden Services  ??? ???
Oh I've heard of them. They are storied, a fabled outfit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2017, 04:10:42 AM
Quote from: Ken B on April 05, 2017, 05:41:02 PM
Oh I've heard of them. They are storied, a fabled outfit.

:D  Wow!  Legendary, storied, AND fabled!

But are they...epic ?!

I had a professor of Byzantine History many moons ago, who opined that a society may be showing signs of trouble, when it constantly exaggerates its language, and inflates things which should not be inflated.

Or, as one learns in the cartoon movie The Incredibles, "if everyone is super, then nobody is."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2017, 04:27:18 AM
Well, perhaps they only service legendary lawns & gardens?—

The Lawn at UVa . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2017, 04:28:19 AM
. . . the Longwood Gardens . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2017, 05:05:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2017, 04:27:18 AM

Well, perhaps they only service legendary lawns & gardens?—


Wow!  Quite a sight! 

And I see that the Grumble has reached 200 pages!   8)

Is that epic and/or legendary?! :D  It is quite a bit of grumbling!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2017, 05:18:24 AM
The Persistence of Grumblery
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2017, 05:26:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2017, 05:18:24 AM
The Persistence of Grumblery

I have an image of a "soft" grammar book hanging down from a dead tree.   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2017, 07:56:34 AM
Every year, our 8th Grade puts on a "Passion Play" before Easter.  Some years ago, the text was changed, and the booklets given to the audience have several typographical errors, the most egregious one being in LARGE BOLD type:

THE SCOURING OF JESUS

which has nothing to do with the washing of feet at the Last Supper!  0:)

My problem is that - after somebody  0:) has been pointing out the errors every year - they have never been fixed.  These booklets are given to parents and any other visitors watching the play!

Okay, so the sun will still rise tomorrow in spite of the mistakes.  Still...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2017, 07:57:29 AM
The Divine De-lousing?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on April 06, 2017, 08:19:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 06, 2017, 04:10:42 AM


Or, as one learns in the cartoon movie The Incredibles, "if everyone is super, then nobody is."

"If everyone is somebody, then no one's anybody."
The Gondoliers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 06, 2017, 08:29:04 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 06, 2017, 04:10:42 AM
:D  Wow!  Legendary, storied, AND fabled!

But are they...epic ?!


They are. Also renowned.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 06, 2017, 10:50:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 06, 2017, 07:56:34 AM
Every year, our 8th Grade puts on a "Passion Play" before Easter.  Some years ago, the text was changed, and the booklets given to the audience have several typographical errors, the most egregious one being in LARGE BOLD type:

THE SCOURING OF JESUS

which has nothing to do with the washing of feet at the Last Supper!  0:)

My problem is that - after somebody  0:) has been pointing out the errors every year - they have never been fixed.  These booklets are given to parents and any other visitors watching the play!

Okay, so the sun will still rise tomorrow in spite of the mistakes.  Still...

Perhaps in the spirit of Vatican II they wanted a modernized version, and imagined the Roman soldiers giving him a thorough going over with Brillo pads.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2017, 10:57:44 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on April 06, 2017, 10:50:38 AM
Perhaps in the spirit of Vatican II they wanted a modernized version, and imagined the Roman soldiers giving him a thorough going over with Brillo pads.


"Rub, rub here
Rub, rub there
Whether you're tin or bronze
That's how we keep you in repair
In the merry old land of Oz!"  0:)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 06, 2017, 10:58:40 AM
Goldarnit, Don Rickles has left the building. ← flagrantly off topic, I know.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Monsieur Croche on April 06, 2017, 12:42:58 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 06, 2017, 07:56:34 AM
THE SCOURING OF JESUS

Would this refer to all those medieval and later paintings and statues that make Jesus look like a flour-white north European?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on April 06, 2017, 12:55:52 PM
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on April 06, 2017, 12:42:58 PM
Would this refer to all those medieval and later paintings and statues that make Jesus look like a flour-white north European?

But surely someone who spoke English so well would be European!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2017, 01:19:29 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2017, 10:58:40 AM
Goldarnit, Don Rickles has left the building. ← flagrantly off topic, I know.

Don Rickles had a way with language!

His famous joke to Frank Sinatra: "I see Frank Sinatra is in the audience tonight.  Hey Frank!  Make yourself at home!  Hit somebody!

(Aside) Is he laughing?  Is he laughing?"

So maybe the angels are saying: "Hey Don!  Make yourself at home!  Insult somebody!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Monsieur Croche on April 06, 2017, 01:47:37 PM
Cato... Just how much do you love this guy? 
He's been called The Banksy of punctuation.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-39459831
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2017, 02:12:20 PM
Quote from: Monsieur Croche on April 06, 2017, 01:47:37 PM
Cato... Just how much do you love this guy? 
He's been called The Banksy of punctuation.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-39459831

Excellent!  The Apostrophiser!!! ;D

So it is not just the Americans!  How hard is it to remember that "it's" = "it is" ?

Many thanks, Monsieur Croche!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Perseverance and Perseveration
Post by: Cato on April 07, 2017, 10:59:20 AM
Today's (Apr. 7th) Wall Street Journal contains an article on the latest stupidity from academia, specifically Stanford.

Perseverance was not involved, but perseveration was!  0:)

QuoteStanford University offered admission to only 4.65% of applicants this year, but that may not be low enough.

Every year, Stanford asks its applicants an excellent question: "What matters to you, and why?" Ziad Ahmed of Princeton, N.J., summed up his answer in three words. His essay consisted of the hashtag "#BlackLivesMatter" repeated 100 times. He got in....Mr. Ahmed, who is not black, considers himself "a BLM ally." As anyone on a college campus today knows, the role of an "ally" is not to ask questions, or to answer them....The Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, in "Concluding Unscientific Postscript" (1846), tells the story of a young man who escapes from a mental asylum. He quickly realizes that to evade detection, he needs to convince the mentally sound that he is one of them. He reasons that if he sticks to the objective truth, no one will doubt his sanity. Consequently, every step he takes and to every person he meets, the patient repeats, "The Earth is round. The Earth is round. The Earth is round." He is returned to the asylum immediately...The truth that black lives matter—and that racism still exists—is obvious, just like the roundness of the Earth. That is the problem. These truths are so self-evident that repeating them without adding anything substantive seems crazy. It eliminates the possibility of conversation.

Yet no one questions Mr. Ahmed's mental health. On the contrary, adult society celebrates him at every turn. Princeton and Yale have accepted him too. Mic reports that he was previously invited to the Obama White House and "recognized as a Muslim-American change-maker."....

See:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-a-stanford-applicant-perseveration-pays-off-1491520784 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-a-stanford-applicant-perseveration-pays-off-1491520784)

I am also reminded of a story from Mao's China, during the Great Cultural Revolution.  A teacher asked the class to write essays on a certain topic.  One of the students was the brutish son of a brutish official in the Chinese Communist government.  This student wrote down an obscenity and turned it in as his essay.

The teacher gave him the top grade and chastised the others for their lack of creativity! $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 07, 2017, 11:06:24 AM
Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perseveration . . . .

QuoteEvery year, Stanford asks its applicants an excellent question: "What matters to you, and why?" Ziad Ahmed of Princeton, N.J., summed up his answer in three words. His essay consisted of the hashtag "#BlackLivesMatter" repeated 100 times.

He was tiresome about the what, and never got to the why.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 08, 2017, 04:15:30 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 07, 2017, 11:06:24 AM

Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perseveration . . . .


Apparently that is the newest appalling trend! 0:)



Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 07, 2017, 11:06:24 AM

He was tiresome about the what, and never got to the why.


Too many of my students answer "why" with a shrug: perhaps Mr. Ahmed is similar to them (?). ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on April 08, 2017, 05:50:49 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 06, 2017, 05:18:24 AM
The Persistence of Grumblery

The Growlery (or Silent Scream)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 08, 2017, 07:27:51 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on April 08, 2017, 05:50:49 AM
The Growlery (or Silent Scream)

That's the purpose of the Grumble: take those growls or silent screams and soften them into a grumble!  ;)

Today's latest outrage, thanks to local television news!  From a report on the latest killings in a low-class area of town:

"The cops (sic) still don't know what went down (sic) here, and residents aren't talking to the cops afraid of being targeted."

Whether they talk to "the cops" not afraid of being targeted remains unknown!  (And no, there was no pause between "cops" and "afraid." $:)

And the "slangy" phrase of "what went down here" is not the first time I have heard '70's slang - and "cops" - used on television news.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on April 08, 2017, 07:36:43 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 08, 2017, 07:27:51 AM
...the "slangy" phrase of "what went down here" is not the first time I have heard '70's slang - and "cops" - used on television news.

Do innovations in language, as in science, "start as heresies but end up as dogmas"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 08, 2017, 04:06:59 PM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on April 08, 2017, 07:36:43 AM
Do innovations in language, as in science, "start as heresies but end up as dogmas"?

Not in this case!   8)  It's still '70's slang! 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 08, 2017, 06:45:28 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 08, 2017, 04:06:59 PM
Not in this case!   8)  It's still '70's slang! 0:)
Can you dig it? To the max, man. Like, right on.

Catch you on the flip-side Cato!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 09, 2017, 12:17:45 PM
Quote from: Ken B on April 08, 2017, 06:45:28 PM
Can you dig it? To the max, man. Like, right on.

Catch you on the flip-side Cato!

I can dig it dude, I ain't no jive turkey! 0:)

Peace out, 10-4, good buddy! ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 10, 2017, 03:02:04 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 09, 2017, 12:17:45 PM
Peace out, 10-4, good buddy! ;)

"The bold and intelligent Masters of the Road with their secret language . . . ."

http://www.youtube.com/v/KiCW00seugk
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Dreaming of The Guardian of Proper Grammar
Post by: Cato on April 10, 2017, 10:43:48 AM
For your consideration from The Guardian in an article on the latest dream research: anything wrong here or there? 0:)

Quote...Writing in the journal Nature Neuroscience, Siclari and colleagues from the US, Switzerland and Italy, reveal how they carried out a series of experiments involving 46 participants, each of whom had their brain activity recorded while they slept by electroencephalogram (EEG) – a noninvasive technique that involved placing up to 256 electrodes on the scalp and face to monitor the number and size of brainwaves of different speeds.

While the experiments probed different aspects of the puzzle, all involved participants being woken at various points throughout the night and asked to report whether they had been dreaming.



One of them I am willing to ignore!  8)

See:

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/apr/10/scientists-identify-parts-of-brain-involved-in-dreaming (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/apr/10/scientists-identify-parts-of-brain-involved-in-dreaming)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 27, 2017, 04:10:00 AM
So...this morning my wife was listening to a certain radio station, which has very nice traffic news, but which also too often plays "songs" with some boozy off-key chanteuse whose tendency to shout, chant, and occasionally gargle is highly grating.

Today this boom-shaka-laka-clabberer was wheezing about something that ended up...

"...under a breeedge." ???  This prepositional phrase was repeated again and again in that dull-minded way that supposedly makes Top 40 songs so endearing.

I have never heard "bridge" pronounced "breeedge."  Maybe it is some sort of poetic license, but if so, I would revoke their license.

And...

We have a new entry in the "different from" (Correct) vs. "different than" (INCORRECT) debate, and yes, I know that German uses "anders als" (different than).  ;)

A T.V. commercial about a local 2-year college has a woman enthusing that the school is "different to other colleges." ???   ???    ???   

Given that an institution of "higher learning" did not notice such an anomaly in their own advertisement tells us something unpleasant about said institution of "higher learning."

Or did they think it was one of those endearing expressions that will seem attractive to the dull-minded? ;)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on April 27, 2017, 05:05:24 AM
I know which song you are referring to.   Her voice is a very jagged little pill to swallow.
My ears insist she's singing "under the breach" ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: I have one more ... ask (?)
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2017, 06:46:31 AM
So, on television my wife likes to catch the news in the morning to check on the latest Autogeddon  ??? on the unfreeways. :o

An "infomercial" was concluding, and a very earnest and very Botoxed 50-something blonde pushing a miracle cream says:

"I have one more ask: pick up your phone...."

No, she did not say "task," for the "ask" was quite clear, and "task" would not seem to make sense with "pick up your phone..."

Has anyone ever heard "ask" used as a noun, as a replacement for "request" or "favor" ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 01, 2017, 06:50:51 AM
Definitely a current buzzword in corporatespeak.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 01, 2017, 11:51:01 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 01, 2017, 06:50:51 AM
Definitely a current buzzword in corporatespeak.

Oy!  So let's use a 3-letter monosyllable rather than the multi-lettered bi-syllabic "request" or "favor" in an effort to do...what?!  Sound like a foreigner?

In the infomercial the word was used as a synonym for "request," but is it also being used in "corporatespeak" as "question" ?

I can see a 40-something boss leaning back in his chair and saying: "Hey Sam!  I got an ask for ya!"  :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 01, 2017, 01:15:36 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 01, 2017, 11:51:01 AM
Oy!  So let's use a 3-letter monosyllable rather than the multi-lettered bi-syllabic "request" or "favor" in an effort to do...what?!  Sound like a foreigner?

In the infomercial the word was used as a synonym for "request," but is it also being used in "corporatespeak" as "question" ?

I can see a 40-something boss leaning back in his chair and saying: "Hey Sam!  I got an ask for ya!"  :P

I've got a thank for you on this. And a like.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on May 01, 2017, 01:38:47 PM
For more on this peculiar phenomenon which gets on my pecs, too : https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/those-irritating-verbs-as-nouns/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 02, 2017, 03:45:01 AM
Quote from: Ghost Sonata on May 01, 2017, 01:38:47 PM
For more on this peculiar phenomenon which gets on my pecs, too : https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/those-irritating-verbs-as-nouns/

Many thanks for the link!

Quote from: Ken B on May 01, 2017, 01:15:36 PM
I've got a thank for you on this. And a like.

8) 8) 8) 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 02, 2017, 07:03:07 AM
Quote from: Ghost Sonata on May 01, 2017, 01:38:47 PM
For more on this peculiar phenomenon which gets on my pecs, too : https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/30/those-irritating-verbs-as-nouns/

From the article, it seems like "ask" as a noun is already official.
However, I never came across it used that way, just found "ask" useful in place of as* (not a donkey).

There are other reasons for favoring nominalizations. They can have a distancing effect. "What is the ask?" is less personal than "What are they asking?" This form of words may improve our chances of eliciting a more objective response. It can also turn something amorphous into a discrete conceptual unit, of a kind that is easier to grasp or sounds more specific. Whatever I think of "what is the ask?" it focuses me on what's at stake...
"Ask" has been used as a noun for a thousand years* — though the way we most often encounter it today, with a modifier ("a big ask"), is a 1980s development.


* I find this hard to believe. ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 02, 2017, 07:14:53 AM
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's ask.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 02, 2017, 07:23:47 AM
Better they give you an ask than an asp.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 02, 2017, 07:33:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 01, 2017, 11:51:01 AM
Oy!  So let's use a 3-letter monosyllable rather than the multi-lettered bi-syllabic "request" or "favor" in an effort to do...what?!  Sound like a foreigner?
In the infomercial the word was used as a synonym for "request," but is it also being used in "corporatespeak" as "question" ? I can see a 40-something boss leaning back in his chair and saying: "Hey Sam!  I got an ask for ya!"  :P

I just looked up "ask" in the Concise Oxford Dictionary (1995) and found only 7 verb references.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 02, 2017, 07:34:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 02, 2017, 07:14:53 AM
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's ask.

"Ask and you shall receive."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 02, 2017, 07:35:31 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 02, 2017, 07:23:47 AM
Better they give you an ask than an asp.

I like to keep them guessing as to the final letter...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 02, 2017, 07:59:47 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 02, 2017, 07:35:31 AM
I like to keep them guessing as to the final letter...

8)

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 02, 2017, 09:18:05 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 02, 2017, 07:14:53 AM
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's ask.

Do you have a covet?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 02, 2017, 09:19:05 AM
Not since they instituted a covet charge.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 10, 2017, 01:48:38 PM
Quote from: Ken B on May 02, 2017, 09:18:05 AM
Do you have a covet?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 02, 2017, 09:19:05 AM
Not since they instituted a covet charge.

Wocka Wocka!   8)

Recent monstrosity sightings...

On a T.V. spot about childhood hunger, a poverty bureaucrat was being interviewed about poor children, who, during the school year, "can get their feedings at school," but who, during the summer, "might not get taken to a feeding station."

One wonders if such a farmyard phrase is symbolic of the bureaucrat's attitude toward the poor in general!  To use the phrase "feeding station" in reference to people is simply monstrous.

On the radio, a local Ford dealership asked listeners to stop in and talk to a "product specialist" about a deal on a new Ford.

In the good ol' days, you would talk to a "salesman" or a "saleslady."  0:) 0:)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on May 11, 2017, 03:48:05 PM
That's almost as bad as "pre-owned vehicles" for used cars!  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 15, 2017, 05:22:20 AM
Vincent Canby of The New York Times (20 Dec 1969):

The film has no one on the order of James Stewart or Cary Grant on which to depend....

You know, I should have said on whom.  Is which right?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 15, 2017, 08:05:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 15, 2017, 05:22:20 AM
Vincent Canby of The New York Times (20 Dec 1969):

The film has no one on the order of James Stewart or Cary Grant on which to depend....

You know, I should have said on whom.  Is which right?
No. The referent of which is 'no-one'. 'No-one whom' not 'no-one which' is correct. If he had said 'no performance like Cary Grant's on which to depend' that would haven bee correct.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 15, 2017, 08:08:19 AM
Thanks.  I was 90% certain, but I am grateful to have that 10% doubt eradicated.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 24, 2017, 04:31:22 PM
Quote from: Ken B on May 15, 2017, 08:05:54 AM
No. The referent of which is 'no-one'. 'No-one whom' not 'no-one which' is correct. If he had said 'no performance like Cary Grant's on which to depend' that would haven been correct.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 15, 2017, 08:08:19 AM
Thanks.  I was 90% certain, but I am grateful to have that 10% doubt eradicated.

Right!  People are never "which," unless they are a "witch." 0:)

Not a grammar point, but I was recently told by a parent NOT to try to improve the handwriting of his student "because nobody cares about it any more with computers!" :P ??? ::)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 24, 2017, 05:23:45 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 24, 2017, 04:31:22 PM
Right!  People are never "which," unless they are a "witch." 0:)

Not a grammar point, but I was recently told by a parent NOT to try to improve the handwriting of his student "because nobody cares about it any more with computers!" :P ??? ::)
Wyz addvys, spelink iz obsoleet tu, wy waist tym onit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 25, 2017, 03:33:05 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 24, 2017, 05:23:45 PM
Wyz addvys, spelink iz obsoleet tu, wy waist tym onit.

:D  Oh, don't get me started!

Actually, the latest research is showing that cursive handwriting - when one is taking notes - is much better than  typing them into a computer.  Overall comprehension and long-term retention are on higher levels with cursive penmanship compared to note-typing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 25, 2017, 04:18:22 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 25, 2017, 03:33:05 AM
Actually, the latest research is showing that cursive handwriting - when one is taking notes - is much better than  typing them into a computer.  Overall comprehension and long-term retention are on higher levels with cursive penmanship compared to note-typing.


I am not surprised.

Or is that confirmation bias?  0:)   ;D    8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 25, 2017, 05:07:58 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 25, 2017, 03:33:05 AMActually, the latest research is showing that cursive handwriting - when one is taking notes - is much better than  typing them into a computer.  Overall comprehension and long-term retention are on higher levels with cursive penmanship compared to note-typing.
Yes, I've come across similar research results years ago - and also mentioned them a while back when the Ministry of Education here decided to drop teaching cursive to make room for teaching kids how to use computers - as if they didn't learn that well enough on their own..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 25, 2017, 06:43:55 AM
Quote from: North Star on May 25, 2017, 05:07:58 AM
Yes, I've come across similar research results years ago - and also mentioned them a while back when the Ministry of Education here decided to drop teaching cursive to make room for teaching kids how to use computers - as if they didn't learn that well enough on their own..

I cannot name one successful educational "innovation" in the last 50 years or before!  Movies in the classroom, projectors, "classrooms without walls," "contract grading," "televisions in every classroom," "computers in every classroom," "no grades," etc. etc. etc. all were supposed to bring about a rosy future.

And every year the scores go down, and the amount of ignorance of basics seemingly increases.

And then we have this unpleasant fact:

(http://ctbythenumbers.info/files/2013/12/coaches-salaries.jpg)

And apparently, according to the article below (and I have read this elsewhere) despite the c. $100 million that a team might generate, the team still loses money or does not contribute much at all to the university's operation.

See:http://deadspin.com/infographic-is-your-states-highest-paid-employee-a-co-489635228 (http://deadspin.com/infographic-is-your-states-highest-paid-employee-a-co-489635228)

See also:

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-states-highest-paid-public-employee-college-coach-2016-9 (http://www.businessinsider.com/us-states-highest-paid-public-employee-college-coach-2016-9)

And to show that Education vs. Football has been a long-standing problem, let's go back 85 years to Wagstaff College!  0:)

https://www.youtube.com/v/3skIjrkta2Q&t=127s


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 25, 2017, 07:07:53 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 25, 2017, 06:43:55 AM
I cannot name one successful educational "innovation" in the last 50 years or before!  Movies in the classroom, projectors, "classrooms without walls," "contract grading," "televisions in every classroom," "computers in every classroom," "no grades," etc. etc. etc. all were supposed to bring about a rosy future.

And every year the scores go down, and the amount of ignorance of basics seemingly increases.

The blackboard and the overhead projector were good ones. The document camera, while not terrible, isn't much of an improvement on the overhead projector.

QuoteAnd then we have this unpleasant fact:

And apparently, according to the article below (and I have read this elsewhere) despite the c. $100 million that a team might generate, the team still loses money or does not contribute much at all to the university's operation.

See:http://deadspin.com/infographic-is-your-states-highest-paid-employee-a-co-489635228 (http://deadspin.com/infographic-is-your-states-highest-paid-employee-a-co-489635228)
Unpleasant, and unsurprising.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 25, 2017, 07:51:38 AM
It somehow seems appropriate that the best paid person in Nevada is a plastic surgeon!

TD, sort of, since it's not really a flaw in grammar....I picked up in the used books store a copy of a c.2000 quasi urban fantasy (quasi, in that is set in 19th century England), and less than five pages in found that an Oxford professor had ordered, in England, an American made desk,  for his house in England, for which he paid the amount of "twenty five dollars".


sigh....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 25, 2017, 07:57:37 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 25, 2017, 07:51:38 AM
It somehow seems appropriate that the best paid person in Nevada is a plastic surgeon!

TD, sort of, since it's not really a flaw in grammar....I picked up in the used books store a copy of a c.2000 quasi urban fantasy (quasi, in that is set in 19th century England), and less than five pages in found that an Oxford professor had ordered, in England, an American made desk,  for his house in England, for which he paid the amount of "twenty five dollars".


sigh....

And I cannot get my novels published... 0:)

My one experience with an editor was unpleasant: she apparently thought "editing" meant that she needed to rewrite every other sentence to make them bad and clumsy.

But in the above case, the author should have caught that error first!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 25, 2017, 08:36:39 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 25, 2017, 07:51:38 AM
It somehow seems appropriate that the best paid person in Nevada is a plastic surgeon!

TD, sort of, since it's not really a flaw in grammar....I picked up in the used books store a copy of a c.2000 quasi urban fantasy (quasi, in that is set in 19th century England), and less than five pages in found that an Oxford professor had ordered, in England, an American made desk,  for his house in England, for which he paid the amount of "twenty five dollars".


sigh....
There is nothing peculiar or necessarily wrong here. It's an import, right?
When I bought -- maybe! -- the Richard Strauss operas sitting in America I paid pounds.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 25, 2017, 08:43:21 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 25, 2017, 08:36:39 AM
There is nothing peculiar or necessarily wrong here. It's an import, right?
When I bought -- maybe! -- the Richard Strauss operas sitting in America I paid pounds.

If you ordered off of Amazon UK, you paid with pounds because you were paying a UK entity directly. 

BTW, you don't use Amazon's currency converter? Pay in dollars and usually avoid the credit card charges for foreign transactions.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 25, 2017, 08:52:29 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 25, 2017, 08:43:21 AM
If you ordered off of Amazon UK, you paid with pounds because you were paying a UK entity directly. 

BTW, you don't use Amazon's currency converter? Pay in dollars and usually avoid the credit card charges for foreign transactions.

You are missing the point Jeffrey. Amazon does do a conversion, but not all sites do, and more to the point there was no Amazon in the 19th century. You would import directly through an agent, or through an importer, and in neither case would it be odd to know the price in the native currency. Nor to mention it as part of emphasizing that it's not just from the corner shop but an imported, possibly bespoke, and exotic item.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on May 25, 2017, 08:59:44 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 25, 2017, 08:52:29 AM
You are missing the point Jeffrey. Amazon does do a conversion, but not all sites do, and more to the point there was no Amazon in the 19th century. You would import directly through an agent, or through an importer, and in neither case would it be odd to know the price in the native currency. Nor to mention it as part of emphasizing that it's not just from the corner shop but an imported, possibly bespoke, and exotic item.

And you would pay the import agent in your local currency.  Which in Oxford England was pounds shilling pence.   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 25, 2017, 09:08:03 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on May 25, 2017, 08:59:44 AM
And you would pay the import agent in your local currency.  Which in Oxford England was pounds shilling pence.
1. You might not if you were importing directly. You wouldn't if you ordered it directly from the maker, or purchased it for later shipment to Britain. I have friends who told me about how much they paid in USD for crates of wine they had shipped to Canada (when they toured California wineries).

2. More to the point you might SAY the price in the foreign currency. If you are talking about a desk you had specially ordered from America you might easily do that, right? It highlights its specialness. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 28, 2017, 06:39:16 AM
Courtesy of my brother, currently on a tour of China: a menu item in "Englese" (or Chineslish) at a restaurant:

"Beautiful Skinning Cattle - Taste Delicious"  ??? ;)

Maybe they are offering a nice, lean steak? $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: jochanaan on May 30, 2017, 06:15:25 AM
That one's on the same order as the "American Dog Sausage" I once ate in the Seoul airport!

A grammatical error I've been seeing recently is "one of the only". If it's an "only," by definition it is one. If not, it may be one of a very few, but it is not an "only." Example: "Kwik Lok remains one of the only manufacturers of bread clips in the world." (Atlas Obscura, May 25)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 30, 2017, 06:44:42 AM
Quote from: jochanaan on May 30, 2017, 06:15:25 AM
That one's on the same order as the "American Dog Sausage" I once ate in the Seoul airport!

A grammatical error I've been seeing recently is "one of the only". If it's an "only," by definition it is one. If not, it may be one of a very few, but it is not an "only." Example: "Kwik Lok remains one of the only manufacturers of bread clips in the world." (Atlas Obscura, May 25)

Oy!  Groucho Marx used to be introduced on his old TV show: "The one, the only, Groucho!"

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 06, 2017, 03:48:23 AM
In today's Wall Street Journal there is an article lamenting the lackluster performance of American colleges and universities in "critical thinking" (an interesting phrase in itself).  One of the worst universities in that area - according to scores from the "CLA +" examination - is The Citadel.  The article then states:

Quote"(An English professor) has begun incorporating lessons on critical reasoning into her classes.  She asks sophomores to read "Beowulf" and pretend they are journalists covering a presidential race between three characters..."

Critical thinking and editing could be a problem for the article's author!  ;)

Of more interest is the phrase "has begun incorporating lessons on critical reasoning into her classes."  How do you teach much of anything at any level without "critical reasoning" !   ??? :o   What did the good professor do before this?

Oh well!  At least the problem has been recognized!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 09, 2017, 06:05:32 AM
An interesting article in spite of the grumble:

My daughter is a junior in high school, and she is sure that she wants to major in music in college.

She wants to attend a music conservatory. That plan scares my husband and I greatly. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizryan/2017/06/04/ten-reasons-to-let-your-kid-major-in-music/#3c4a34191062)


Ten Reasons To Let Your Kid Major In Music
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 09, 2017, 02:40:18 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 09, 2017, 06:05:32 AM
An interesting article in spite of the grumble:

My daughter is a junior in high school, and she is sure that she wants to major in music in college.

She wants to attend a music conservatory. That plan scares my husband and I greatly. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizryan/2017/06/04/ten-reasons-to-let-your-kid-major-in-music/#3c4a34191062)


Ten Reasons To Let Your Kid Major In Music

If they stopped and thought for a second about whether they would ever say "That plan scares I," maybe they would be more careful!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 10, 2017, 04:42:44 AM
"I find your poor grammar deeply disturbing, mother."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 12, 2017, 04:35:50 AM
[...] a group of vampire hunters whom call themselves the Nightstalkers.

I think we see the nadir of self-editing in "whom call themselves."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on June 12, 2017, 07:55:13 AM
It should be noted that grammar grumbles can be found in all sorts of places, some of them rather famous.

For instance, this one, which was noted by, of all people, the Dowager Duchess of Denver*

QuoteIn an experience of women which extends over many nations and three separate continents, I have never looked upon a face which gave a clearer promise of a refined and sensitive nature."

Her Grace correctly noted that continents are of their nature, separate, and Dr. Watson's statement is therefore a bit nonsensical.   Her Grace might have pointed out that the proper word to use would be different.

*Actually, of course, Dorothy L. Sayers in one of the Lord Peter Wimsey mysteries.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2017, 06:07:58 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 12, 2017, 07:55:13 AM
It should be noted that grammar grumbles can be found in all sorts of places, some of them rather famous.

For instance, this one, which was noted by, of all people, the Dowager Duchess of Denver*

Her Grace correctly noted that continents are of their nature, separate, and Dr. Watson's statement is therefore a bit nonsensical.   Her Grace might have pointed out that the proper word to use would be different.

*Actually, of course, Dorothy L. Sayers in one of the Lord Peter Wimsey mysteries.

Nice!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2017, 06:08:29 AM
Not truly a Grumble, just a wry appreciation of Legal Agreement Usage:

You is defined in the third paragraph of this Agreement.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on June 14, 2017, 04:54:16 AM
The 'Real World' significance of grammar* :  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/us/oxford-comma-lawsuit.html

*edit:  technically, punctuation is not an element of grammar; it forms a subgroup of what's called "Mechanics."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 19, 2017, 11:08:24 AM
[...] despite its status as the lesser of the original series' trio of seasons [....]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 19, 2017, 11:50:21 AM
Quote from: Ghost Sonata on June 14, 2017, 04:54:16 AM
The 'Real World' significance of grammar* :  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/us/oxford-comma-lawsuit.html

*edit:  technically, punctuation is not an element of grammar; it forms a subgroup of what's called "Mechanics."

I have always liked and advocated the Oxford comma. However this position is the minority view; standard English, even amongst the educated who should know better, deems the Oxford comma an error.  One imagines a benighted editor, blundering about a musical essay removing commas but leaving untouched any praise for La Mer. Sigh.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: BasilValentine on June 19, 2017, 11:56:46 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 12, 2017, 07:55:13 AM
It should be noted that grammar grumbles can be found in all sorts of places, some of them rather famous.

For instance, this one, which was noted by, of all people, the Dowager Duchess of Denver*

Her Grace correctly noted that continents are of their nature, separate, and Dr. Watson's statement is therefore a bit nonsensical.   Her Grace might have pointed out that the proper word to use would be different.

*Actually, of course, Dorothy L. Sayers in one of the Lord Peter Wimsey mysteries.

Apparently not for those who believe there are seven. For the rest of us, a good point.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2017, 08:14:53 AM
Cato, this is for you.
I recently stumbled on an article discussing the use of "friend" as a verb. Are people too lazy to add the first syllable to "befriend"? It looks like there is some pernicious trend (or plot) to preempt nouns as verbs.
I also was about to write a correction to someone's use of  "interestingness" but checked an online dictionary so as not to seem foolish. Well, the word does exist but I have not seen it until yesterday. The extra baggage of "ness" doesn't seem to add anything the meaning, in my opinion.

ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2017, 08:16:22 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 13, 2017, 06:08:29 AM
Not truly a Grumble, just a wry appreciation of Legal Agreement Usage:

You is defined in the third paragraph of this Agreement.

Shouldn't "you" be put into quotes, so as not to be ambiguous?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 20, 2017, 08:24:06 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2017, 08:14:53 AM
Cato, this is for you.
I recently stumbled on an article discussing the use of "friend" as a verb. Are people too lazy to add the first syllable to "befriend"? It looks like there is some pernicious trend (or plot) to preempt nouns as verbs.
I also was about to write a correction to someone's use of  "interestingness" but checked an online dictionary so as not to seem foolish. Well, the word does exist but I have not seen it until yesterday. The extra baggage of "ness" doesn't seem to add anything the meaning, in my opinion.

ZB

Hardly a sign of modern man's laziness or the degrading influence of social media..

Quote from: OED.comFriend, verb.

†1. trans. (refl.). To gain friends for oneself; to make friends. Obs. rare.
?c1225  (▸?a1200)    Ancrene Riwle (Cleo. C.vi) (1972) 308   Ne Make ȝe nane Purses forto freonden ow wið.
▸a1470   Malory Morte Darthur (Winch. Coll. 13) (1990) I. 427   He woll so frende hym there [sc. at King Arthur's court] that he woll nat sette by your malyce.


†2. trans. To bring (two or more persons) together in friendship; to join (a person) to or with another in friendship. Chiefly in pass. Obs.
1483   in J. Stuart Misc. Spalding Club (1852) V. 26   Eftir that thai wer frendit and accordit apon certane debate..betuixt thame.
a1500  (▸c1425)    Andrew of Wyntoun Oryg. Cron. Scotl. (Nero) vii. l. 1008   And eftyr son freyndit weyr Þe kynge Dauid of Scotlande And Stewyn þan kynge of Inglande.
1532  (▸c1385)    Usk's Test. Loue in Wks. G. Chaucer iii. f. ccclxi   Charyte is loue, and loue is charyte, god graunt vs al therin to be frended.
1587   A. Fleming et al. Holinshed's Chron. (new ed.) III. Contin. 1346/2   What freendship he had shewed..both by his owne purse, as also by freending them to some of the popes chamber.
1604   T. Wright Passions of Minde (new ed.) i. x. 37   Others you have, soone angrie, soone friended.
a1700   in R. Pitcairn Hist. Kennedy Families (1830) 42   The King gart thame drink togidder, and schaik handis, and freindit thame.

3. trans.
a. To offer friendship or support to (a person, cause, etc.); to befriend; to assist, help. Now rare.

1550   J. Heywood Hundred Epigrammes iii. sig. Av   Freende they any, That flater many?
1591   H. Savile tr. Tacitus Ende of Nero: Fower Bks. Hist. iv. 198   Kings which frended the cause.
1608   G. Chapman Conspiracie Duke of Byron ii. i. 170   Who cannot friend himself is foe to any.
a1618   J. Sylvester tr. Fracastorius Maidens Blush (1620) sig. D   Shee all the gods requires To friend her love, and further her desires.
a1698   W. Row Suppl. in R. Blair Life (1848) (modernized text) xii. 434   Reports came that the King would friend Lauderdale.
1725   J. Strype Ann. Reformation (ed. 2) II. xvi. 571   Hoping he would friend him in his reasonable 'Causes'.
1729   S. Madden Themistocles iv. i. 42   Her friending, or opposing our Designs, Import us highly.
1855   R. C. Singleton tr. Virgil Eclogues iv, in tr. Virgil Wks. I. 27   Do thou but at his birth the boy..O chaste Lucina, friend.
1896   A. E. Housman Shropshire Lad lxii   And I will friend you, if I may, In the dark and cloudy day.
1931   J. L. Mitchell Cairo Dawns vi. 163   Lost, fantastically tragic, perhaps I could have helped him, perhaps friended him.
1981   S. King in Mag. Fantasy & Sci. Fiction July 146/1   'The hawk..a fine weapon. How long did it take you to train the bastard?'.. 'I friended him.'

b. fig. Of a thing: to be useful or helpful to (a person). Also intr. Now rare.

1598   R. Barret Theorike & Pract. Mod. Warres v. 143   If they be not friended with hedge, ditch, or some such place of aduantage.
1609   Shakespeare Troilus & Cressida i. ii. 74   Well the Gods are aboue, time must friend or endwell. 
a1616   Shakespeare Henry V (1623) iv. v. 16   Disorder that hath spoyl'd vs, friend vs now. 
1622   M. Drayton 2nd Pt. Poly-olbion xxii. 35   But friended with the Flood, the Barons hold their strength.
1719   T. Southerne Spartan Dame i. i. 7   There the Street is narrow, and may friend our Purpose well.
1860   M. Arnold St. Brandan in Fraser's Mag. July 134   That germ of kindness..outlives my doom, And friends me in the pit of fire.
1896   A. E. Housman Shropshire Lad xlv. 69   'Twill hurt, but here are salves to friend you, And many a balsam grows on ground.
1933   H. M. Ayres Beowulf, Paraphr. 80   So I shall do ever while my sword holds out. Oft it has friended me, ere ever I slew Daeghrefn before the eyes of the Frankish host.
1984   M. S. K. Baluch Literary Hist. Baluchis II. ii. 296   Both time and circumstances friended him, and never made him fawn, beg and seek.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2017, 08:30:11 AM
Thanks a lot, North Star. However, I wasn't talking about historical usage, but modern.
Apart from translations of Beowulf and the need to fit words into poetic scansion by chopping off a syllable, honestly, I don't remember "to friend" being a common usage in the latter half of the 20th century.
I never heard "He is friending her" or said it, for that matter.

ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on June 20, 2017, 08:44:47 AM
Quote from: Ken B on June 19, 2017, 11:50:21 AM
I have always liked and advocated the Oxford comma. However this position is the minority view; standard English, even amongst the educated who should know better, deems the Oxford comma an error.  One imagines a benighted editor, blundering about a musical essay removing commas but leaving untouched any praise for La Mer. Sigh.
Well, things are not always black or white...there's lots of gray in between. The (in)famous Oxford comma can be very useful in many instances (particularly in legal texts), but in this CD cover (which has been discussed on GMG in the past) it can only be described as an eyesore  >:( ::) :

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/515Vpq6g35L.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on June 20, 2017, 09:00:49 AM
Quote from: ritter on June 20, 2017, 08:44:47 AM
Well, things are not always black or white...there's lots of gray in between. The (in)famous Oxford comma can be very useful in many instances (particularly in legal texts), but in this CD cover (which has been discussed on GMG in the past) it can only be described as an eyesore  >:( ::) :

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/515Vpq6g35L.jpg)

"Complete Symphonies" or "The Symphonies" would have solved the problem.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 20, 2017, 10:06:47 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on June 12, 2017, 07:55:13 AM
It should be noted that grammar grumbles can be found in all sorts of places, some of them rather famous.
For instance, this one, which was noted by, of all people, the Dowager Duchess of Denver*
Her Grace correctly noted that continents are of their nature, separate, and Dr. Watson's statement is therefore a bit nonsensical.   Her Grace might have pointed out that the proper word to use would be different.
*Actually, of course, Dorothy L. Sayers in one of the Lord Peter Wimsey mysteries.

I find this sort of nitpicking nonsensical. "Separate" serves as emphasis, as in for instance: "exact same thing".
In fact, there are plenty of examples in English that one can quibble over but are used painlessly everyday.
It might be interesting to list some of them here.

ZB

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on June 20, 2017, 10:54:46 PM
Each continent is "by nature" (meaning) a continous landmass that hangs together. Nothing is implied about its separateness from other continents. When the old world had only three continents they were also all hanging together with each other despite there being no obvious border between Europe and Asia.
(And I don't think this is a *grammar* quibble but one about nuances and meaning. As has been pointed out, logically superfluous adjectives might well be justified for reasons of stress or rhetoric.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 21, 2017, 12:07:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 09, 2017, 06:05:32 AM
An interesting article in spite of the grumble:
My daughter is a junior in high school, and she is sure that she wants to major in music in college. She wants to attend a music conservatory. That plan scares my husband and I greatly. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/lizryan/2017/06/04/ten-reasons-to-let-your-kid-major-in-music/#3c4a34191062)
Ten Reasons To Let Your Kid Major In Music

Truly, an excellent article. I didn't know we were so great (just kidding).

Here are 7 out of the 10:

1. Musical kids are hardy. They get that way sitting on a freezing bus at five in the morning going to a band or orchestra competition. They practice for countless hours. They compete, lose, compete, win and then compete and lose again. You think your hardy kid is going to be daunted by a tough job market?

2. Musical kids know about focus. They know about giving up good things (time hanging out with their friends or playing video games, e.g.) to reach their longer-term goals. A kid who is good enough to get into music school and get through it will have no trouble reaching their other goals, whether they want to run a bank one day or create a whole new musical genre. Support their goals -- then stand back and watch them surpass them!

3. If you choose a program that you can afford without student loans, your child will have incurred no risk in pursuing their musical passion. If your child wants to work for a multinational corporation upon graduation or at any point in their career, they will get hired fast. Corporations know how smart and capable musical kids are.

4. If you worry about child being overwhelmed by the freedom and the social norms at college — too much partying, for instance — definitely let them major in music! They won't have enough spare time to go off the rails.

5. Music instruction is all about patience and listening. Over and over, music students are told "Listen to your tone. Listen to this phrasing. Is that what you're going for?" They know how to tune in. They know how to make course corrections. If the kid doesn't land a plum job working for a symphony orchestra straight of of school — and they won't — they know how to put one foot in front of the other and keep walking.

6. The real world favors confidence, tenacity and an entrepreneurial outlook — three things every music student cultivates.

7. Musical kids are scrappy. They know how to improvise when they forget notes, forget a piece of concert attire or lose a page from their sheet music. Managing a career these days is all about improvisation.  That is something all of us could learn from music students!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on June 21, 2017, 12:12:10 AM
The Oxford comma is, to me at least, not to say that it may be for others too, an eyesore, to use ritter's expression, just as any sentence with an overabundance of commas, such as this one, is more likely to confuse rather than, as one may prefer, especially in cases where it is vital that one understands the message correctly, to clarify.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on June 21, 2017, 12:40:19 AM
English punctuation has largely remained a riddle to me, despite decades of valiant struggle. The oxford comma is only the tip of the iceberg. One problem is that if one has been "drilled" in German punctuation for about 10 years (punctuation is far more difficult than orthography in German) before even getting to the intricacies of the English one (because in foreign language teaching punctuation is not really focussed on much), one's brain seems to have become incompatible with English punctuation because the principles are rather different.
E.g. subclauses always have to be separated by commas in German, so lots of English cases are counterintuitive and "look wrong". And the Oxford comma contradicts the easiest and usually first taught German rule that in enumerations one uses either commas between the enumerated words or "und" or "oder" and never both. If one has not understoof anything about the subtleties one will still remember these two rules. And they unfortunately do not apply in English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 21, 2017, 05:22:09 AM
Quote from: jessop on June 21, 2017, 12:12:10 AM
The Oxford comma is, to me at least, not to say that it may be for others too, an eyesore, to use ritter's expression, just as any sentence with an overabundance of commas, such as this one, is more likely to confuse rather than, as one may prefer, especially in cases where it is vital that one understands the message correctly, to clarify.
Well your example shows the Jessop comma. That has never had any defenders.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 21, 2017, 05:28:29 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on June 21, 2017, 12:40:19 AM
English punctuation has largely remained a riddle to me, despite decades of valiant struggle. The oxford comma is only the tip of the iceberg. One problem is that if one has been "drilled" in German punctuation for about 10 years (punctuation is far more difficult than orthography in German) before even getting to the intricacies of the English one (because in foreign language teaching punctuation is not really focussed on much), one's brain seems to have become incompatible with English punctuation because the principles are rather different.
E.g. subclauses always have to be separated by commas in German, so lots of English cases are counterintuitive and "look wrong". And the Oxford comma contradicts the easiest and usually first taught German rule that in enumerations one uses either commas between the enumerated words or "und" or "oder" and never both. If one has not understoof anything about the subtleties one will still remember these two rules. And they unfortunately do not apply in English.

German punctuation is stricter and is driven by the parse tree. English punctuation is often driven by rhythm. That's why we sometimes see these cases in English where there is ambiguity. But consider a menu. You may choose a soup from sweet and sour, split pea and ham, and tomato. That's three choices, not funf.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on June 21, 2017, 06:39:32 AM
Fünf
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on June 21, 2017, 06:48:58 AM
Sure. But in this case in German we would write it exactly the same way, only drop the last conjunctional "and"/"und".
From context it would be clear that the commas separate the types of soups and the "ands"/"unds" conjoin the ingredients that characterize the soup types.
One loses the freedom to close the enumeration with an "und" or one would create an ambiguity. But no natural language and grammar is free of ambiguity.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on June 21, 2017, 11:34:15 PM
This is why the British Empire fell, I bet. Thankfully people put a stop to German domination.........
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 22, 2017, 02:34:28 AM
The American Empire will never fall, but it may slouch into an irrecoverable cramp.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 22, 2017, 03:30:12 AM
Many thanks for the comments above!

Your grammar grumbler is much in favor of the Oxford Comma.  $:) 


Quote from: Ken B on June 21, 2017, 05:28:29 AM
German punctuation is stricter and is driven by the parse tree. English punctuation is often driven by rhythm. That's why we sometimes see these cases in English where there is ambiguity. But consider a menu. You may choose a soup from sweet and sour, split pea and ham, and tomato. That's three choices, not funf.

Nice example!  And yes, I consider punctuation a kind of musical direction, slowing down the reader to emphasize a certain word or phrase, or allowing the reader to keep going and going and going until the lungs start crying and gasping and choking that they are about to run out of gas!

cf.

(...or allowing the reader to keep going and going and going, until the lungs start crying and gasping and choking, that they are about to run out of gas!)

(...or allowing the reader to keep going, and going, and going, until the lungs start crying, and gasping, and choking, that they are about to run out of gas!)

(...or allowing the reader to keep going, going, and going, until the lungs start crying, gasping, and choking, that they are about to run out of gas!)

etc.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 22, 2017, 09:41:36 AM
QuoteA spy has information which would be very damaging to the Polish resistance and they must prevent it's being delivered to the Germans.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 24, 2017, 07:23:54 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 22, 2017, 03:30:12 AM
Your grammar grumbler is much in favor of the Oxford Comma.  $:) 

Think of all the ink that can be saved not using superfluous commas!

Quote from: Cato on June 22, 2017, 03:30:12 AM
  And yes, I consider punctuation a kind of musical direction, slowing down the reader to emphasize a certain word or phrase, or allowing the reader to keep going and going and going until the lungs start crying and gasping and choking that they are about to run out of gas!


I prefer the above in a sort of stream of consciouness ambience... poetic in the manner of Gertrude Stein...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on June 24, 2017, 07:32:26 AM
PUNCTUATIONISFORWIMPSANYWAYFORMOSTOFTHEHISTORYOFWRITINGTHEREWASNOTANY.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 25, 2017, 07:33:37 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on June 24, 2017, 07:32:26 AM
PUNCTUATIONISFORWIMPSANYWAYFORMOSTOFTHEHISTORYOFWRITINGTHEREWASNOTANY.

Alphabet soup
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 25, 2017, 10:17:26 PM
Maybe someone can untangle this mess?

Jane Sanders' troubles began with accusations of bank fraud being levied in her general direction after accounting discrepancies were detected in her work with a local Vermont college.  Now, these allegations are turning even uglier, with Bernie now forced to hire big shot lawyers to keep he and his embezzling bride out of the clink.

http://constitution.com/bernie-busted-sanders-wife-lawyer-bank-fraud-case/

O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive! - Walter Scott

I am editing to include this intriguing idiosyncratic use and omission of capital letters:

While many left-leaning young voters were too easily wooed by Sanders campaign promises of universal health care and income equality, the truth behind the socialist's financial acumen could not have been more egregiously overstated.  Now, as we anticipate the possibility of Jailbird Bernie taking this case all they way to the end, we must wonder if the democratic party will run further away from the Vermont Senator, or embrace his criminal wrongdoings in the same manner in which they fell in love with Hillary Clinton.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 26, 2017, 01:05:33 AM
Chief among the offenses, I think, must be to keep he, fer gosh sakes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 26, 2017, 03:19:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 26, 2017, 01:05:33 AM
Chief among the offenses, I think, must be to keep he, fer gosh sakes.

I have recently heard such idiocies spoken on the T.V. news shows (sigh) more than a few times (SIGH).

The word "totally" is "totally" out of control.  (I believe this monster arose in the 1980's as part of DumbTeenSpeak/ValleyGrrrl nonsense in movies. )

Yesterday at church our poor deacon gave the sermon.  I use the word "poor" not in an economic sense, but in the sense of of someone who must speak in public, is terrified by the duty, and therefore very poor at executing it. 

Among his babbled words were the terms "totally unique"  ??? :o   and "totally empty"   ??? :o.

I suppose one could make the case that the speaker is simply trying to emphasize the adjectives, which I totally understand.  ;) 

I am reminded of The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T, a 1950's movie written by Dr. Seuss, where the villain (an insane piano teacher) asks the 9-year old hero who is holding an unknown weapon:

"Is it...ATOMIC?!"

Hero: "Yes sir, VERY ATOMIC!"   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 26, 2017, 03:30:46 AM
!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 26, 2017, 04:14:59 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 26, 2017, 01:05:33 AM
Chief among the offenses, I think, must be to keep he, fer gosh sakes.

Where are the editors and proofreaders?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 26, 2017, 04:16:09 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 26, 2017, 03:19:37 AM

"Is it...ATOMIC?!"

Hero: "Yes sir, VERY ATOMIC!"   ;)

Anything can be ATOMIC, in fact everything IS.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 26, 2017, 04:42:38 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 26, 2017, 04:14:59 AM
Where are the editors and proofreaders?

They just get in the way of my expressing myself!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: BasilValentine on June 26, 2017, 05:01:39 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 26, 2017, 04:16:09 AM
Anything can be ATOMIC, in fact everything IS.

Well, everything that isn't subatomic or energetic or plasmic or photonic or neutrinoish anyway.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on June 26, 2017, 05:05:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 26, 2017, 03:19:37 AM
The word "totally" is "totally" out of control.  (I believe this monster arose in the 1980's as part of DumbTeenSpeak/ValleyGrrrl nonsense in movies. )

Yesterday at church our poor deacon gave the sermon.  I use the word "poor" not in an economic sense, but in the sense of of someone who must speak in public, is terrified by the duty, and therefore very poor at executing it. 

Among his babbled words were the terms "totally unique"  ??? :o   and "totally empty"   ??? :o.

...
The deacon should at least be commended for having avoided the word "like" in front of "totally".   ;)

We do not employ "totally" in Spanish as you do in English, but its widespread use in America these days reminds me of a regional (Canary Islands) idiom, the use of which I think is dying out (praise the Lord!); people used the adverb "francamente" (frankly) on its own, as an adjective...If something was "francamente", it was beyond the pale, even if the (necessary) adjective was missing from the phrase.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on June 26, 2017, 05:39:36 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 26, 2017, 04:14:59 AM
Where are the editors and proofreaders?

Clive James describing his first job, as a proofreader, after arriving in England:

The typescript was for a children's book about dinosaurs.  'As massive as a modern home and weighing many tons, Man would have been dwarfed by these massive creatures...'  I spent the next two days sorting out tenses, expunging solecisms and re-allocating misplaced clauses to the stump from which they had been torn loose by the sort of non-writing writer for whom grammar is not even a mystery, merely an irrelevance.

And when James dies (which he seems in no hurry to do, despite having spent most of the decade telling us he's off any day now), we'll lose one more who knows and cares about its mysteries and irrelevances. :(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on June 26, 2017, 05:47:19 AM
Quote from: ritter on June 26, 2017, 05:05:19 AM
The deacon should at least be commended for having avoided the word "like" in front of "totally".   ;)

We do not employ "totally" in Spanish as you do in English, but its widespread use in America these days reminds me of a regional (Canary Islands) idiom, the use of which I think is dying out (praise the Lord!); people used the adverb "francamente" (frankly) on its own, as an adjective...If something was "francamente", it was beyond the pale, even if the (necessary) adjective was missing from the phrase.  ;D

In québécois, the adverb franchement (same as francamente or frankly) is used to convey disbelief, disgust, or simple bemusement. Not unlike the famous Rhett Butler line in GWTW, but the meaning is not quite the same.

French from France: C'est franchement stupide!
French from Québec: Franchement! C'est stupide!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 26, 2017, 06:16:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 26, 2017, 01:05:33 AM
Chief among the offenses, I think, must be to keep he, fer gosh sakes.

No. He uses he, he pronouns.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 06, 2017, 02:24:08 AM
Cross-post (and this where I really wanted to post this, only Tapatalk drills down only so far in the Sub-forum)

This year's nominee for best appearance of a string instrument in a movie review:

"Cut to some years later, after del Toro has established himself as one of the hottest directors worldwide and Disney sold their Miramax label: viola! director's cut."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 10, 2017, 04:54:46 AM
Not a finished thought/sentence, is it?

Celebrating our long history of open-minded curiosity and tolerance is not closed-minded bigotry, no matter how hard you try.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on July 10, 2017, 04:33:08 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/21/college-writing-center-proper-grammar-perpetuates-/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on July 11, 2017, 12:29:40 AM
Quote from: Ken B on July 10, 2017, 04:33:08 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/21/college-writing-center-proper-grammar-perpetuates-/

It all began going downhill about 350 years ago when vernacular languages crept into the university. If the language of the university is "universal" but nobody's mother tongue, there will be no grammar tribalism.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on July 11, 2017, 05:52:18 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on July 11, 2017, 12:29:40 AM
It all began going downhill about 350 years ago when vernacular languages crept into the university. If the language of the university is "universal" but nobody's mother tongue, there will be no grammar tribalism.
I blame Dante.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on July 13, 2017, 07:31:43 AM
I find myself cringing every time the word 'basically' comes out of a co-workers mouth.  Its a pretentious  equivalent of 'you know' or 'like'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 13, 2017, 07:33:15 AM
yakfill
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 13, 2017, 08:24:04 AM
Batman shineth in the darkness:

The premiere episode of the Batman TV show debuted a superhero with a flare for dancing and an weakness for attractive women.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on July 14, 2017, 09:18:34 AM
Newscasters seem to have forgotten about verbs. I frequently hear statements such as this: "The FBI investigating allegations that..." Grr...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on July 15, 2017, 07:50:30 AM
(http://www.geekfill.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/d112.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 15, 2017, 08:31:15 AM
Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on July 15, 2017, 07:50:30 AM
(http://www.geekfill.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/d112.jpg)

ROTFL  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: ROTFL
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 15, 2017, 09:20:27 AM
Very funny!
Title: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 15, 2017, 01:57:57 PM
Whether it was actually a poor line in Mario Puzo's screenplay, or whether Brando mangled it in delivery (or, the mistake is due to the editing—there is a cut in the middle of the line):

“This planet will explode within 30 days, if not sooner.”

(Of course, it works if we say in 30 days...)

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on July 15, 2017, 02:07:38 PM
I suggest a Brando bungle.

The line in the official screenplay
QuoteThis planet will explode within thirty
days! Sooner perhaps

https://www.supermanhomepage.com/movies/superman_I_shoot.txt

Mind you, the official version is not without flaws.  In the opening sequence,  General Zod and company are throughout entitled "Villans". :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 15, 2017, 04:52:02 PM
This planet will explode within thirty days! Sooner perhaps. is still . . . sloppy, meseems.  You can sort of read it to mean sooner rather than later within that span, but for a superintelligent scientist, it's regrettably phrased  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 15, 2017, 05:41:28 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on July 13, 2017, 08:24:04 AM
Batman shineth in the darkness:

The premiere episode of the Batman TV show debuted a superhero with a flare for dancing and a weakness for attractive women.

Maybe that spotlight on the clouds was generating too much heat!  8)

Quote from: Toccata&Fugue on July 14, 2017, 09:18:34 AM
Newscasters seem to have forgotten about verbs. I frequently hear statements such as this: "The FBI investigating allegations that..." Grr...

Readers of this topic know that newscasters cast new grumbles too often for us!   0:)

Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on July 15, 2017, 02:07:38 PM
I suggest a Brando bungle.


He was notorious for "sort of" knowing his lines.  According to one source, he sometimes asked fellow actors to wear taped notes with his lines on their clothing.

Speaking of such bungles, a radio D.J. (whom Mrs. Cato despises (she uses the term "idiot") ) recently announced:

"And let's hear it for the Smiths!  They're celebrating their anniversary!  30 years of wedding bliss!"

That is one looong wedding!  Imagine how many times they must have done the Chicken Dance!  ??? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kontrapunctus on July 15, 2017, 06:05:14 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 15, 2017, 05:41:28 PM

He was notorious for "sort of" knowing his lines.  According to one source, he sometimes asked fellow actors to wear taped notes with his lines on their clothing.
He also refused to learn his lines for The Island of Dr. Moreau, so he had the director feed him his lines via an earpiece, which is plainly visible at times!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: U.S. Bureaucrats DIslike Punctuation
Post by: Cato on July 18, 2017, 07:37:30 AM
So Mrs. Cato was earlier cursing a certain department of the U.S. government, because it was refusing to accept her message to them!

Why?  She was daring to use...punctuation!  ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o   $:) $:) $:)

She actually received a list of rules against punctuation, after she had spent 5 minutes typing her questions!  ???  The website rejected her message and forced her to remove the offending items!

"No quotation marks, no exclamation points, no parentheses, no colons or semi-colons, etc. etc. etc."

The whole experience seemed designed to frustrate users and, therefore, NOT to contact the department!  Eventually she reached a bureaucrat - whose messages contained punctuation! - and asked why the Message Box was programmed to annoy and frustrate people.  "Stacy" the bureaucrat, who might actually have been a a robot, of course had no idea why it was programmed that way.

The following is more about logic than grammar.

On television last night, a group of twenty protesters were on the T.V. news.

"We demand to be taken seriously!" said an earnest young woman...with blue (yes) hair...and a large ring through her nose...making her look like a cow.  The ring dangled above her top lip and somewhat interfered with her speech.

I will repeat: Life in America is beyond satire, because it has become a satire!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 18, 2017, 07:52:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 18, 2017, 07:37:30 AM
I will repeat: Life in America is beyond satire, because it has become a satire!  0:)

Fair.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: U.S. Bureaucrats DIslike Punctuation
Post by: Ken B on July 20, 2017, 06:56:15 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 18, 2017, 07:37:30 AM
So Mrs. Cato was earlier cursing a certain department of the U.S. government, because it was refusing to accept her message to them!

Why?  She was daring to use...punctuation!  ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o   $:) $:) $:)

She actually received a list of rules against punctuation, after she had spent 5 minutes typing her questions!  ???  The website rejected her message and forced her to remove the offending items!

"No quotation marks, no exclamation points, no parentheses, no colons or semi-colons, etc. etc. etc."

The whole experience seemed designed to frustrate users and, therefore, NOT to contact the department!  Eventually she reached a bureaucrat - whose messages contained punctuation! - and asked why the Message Box was programmed to annoy and frustrate people.  "Stacy" the bureaucrat, who might actually have been a a robot, of course had no idea why it was programmed that way.

The following is more about logic than grammar.

On television last night, a group of twenty protesters were on the T.V. news.

"We demand to be taken seriously!" said an earnest young woman...with blue (yes) hair...and a large ring through her nose...making her look like a cow.  The ring dangled above her top lip and somewhat interfered with her speech.

I will repeat: Life in America is beyond satire, because it has become a satire!  0:)
"Punctuation is not for the likes of you. Be thankful you are allowed to use lower-case, peasant!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on July 22, 2017, 04:10:58 AM
Not a grammar error but funny: an ad on my FB page from KlassikAkzente:

The World's largest conductors from the past and present - "111 the conductors" combines legendary recordings of herbet by karajan, Carlos Kleiber, Daniel Barenboim and many others in a box.


Did they choose the large conductors by weight or height? I'm surprised "herbet" made the cut. He was a rather short and slender fellow.  :D


Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 22, 2017, 04:41:19 AM
(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on July 22, 2017, 07:39:01 AM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on July 22, 2017, 04:10:58 AM
Not a grammar error but funny: an ad on my FB page from KlassikAkzente:

The World's largest conductors from the past and present - "111 the conductors" combines legendary recordings of herbet by karajan, Carlos Kleiber, Daniel Barenboim and many others in a box.


Did they choose the large conductors by weight or height? I'm surprised "herbet" made the cut. He was a rather short and slender fellow.  :D


Sarge
Leif Segerstam is surely in there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 22, 2017, 10:28:55 AM
Why not admit it?—I'm enjoying the misplacement of the modifying adverbial phrase . . .

. . . herbet by karajan, Carlos Kleiber, Daniel Barenboim and many others in a box.

Tight squeeze in there;  good thing all those conductors get along so well.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on July 22, 2017, 11:39:35 AM
Clearly Herbert von Karajan has been 'translated' to Herbert by Karajan, there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 22, 2017, 03:11:42 PM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on July 22, 2017, 04:10:58 AM
Not a grammar error but funny: an ad on my FB page from KlassikAkzente:

The World's largest conductors from the past and present - "111 the conductors" combines legendary recordings of herbet by karajan, Carlos Kleiber, Daniel Barenboim and many others in a box.

Sarge

Oh my!  And not to be confused with his twin brothers Sherbet and Sherbert.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on July 24, 2017, 09:29:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 22, 2017, 03:11:42 PM
Oh my!  And not to be confused with his twin brothers Sherbet and Sherbert.

or Thompson and Thomson...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: U.S. Bureaucrats DIslike Punctuation
Post by: zamyrabyrd on July 24, 2017, 09:49:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 18, 2017, 07:37:30 AM
I will repeat: Life in America is beyond satire, because it has become a satire!  0:)

Being ridiculous has replaced gentle, self-referential humor thanks to prim and grim political correctness.

ZB
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: U.S. Bureaucrats DIslike Punctuation
Post by: Cato on July 25, 2017, 04:45:29 PM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on July 24, 2017, 09:49:21 PM
Being ridiculous has replaced gentle, self-referential humor thanks to prim and grim political correctness.

ZB

Amen! 

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on July 25, 2017, 06:19:53 PM
Your prayer is a micro aggression.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on July 25, 2017, 09:11:23 PM
Quote from: Ken B on July 25, 2017, 06:19:53 PM
Your prayer is a micro aggression.

"Aggressive" words:

https://pjmedia.com/faith/2017/04/19/college-bans-on-campus-christian-preaching-as-fighting-words/

https://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/press-release-details/georgia-college-sued-for-censoring-student-speech-restricting-it-to-0.0015-of-campus
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 01, 2017, 07:26:50 AM
Quote from: Ken B on July 25, 2017, 06:19:53 PM
Your prayer is a micro aggression.

GOOD!!!    :D   0:)

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on July 25, 2017, 09:11:23 PM
"Aggressive" words:

https://pjmedia.com/faith/2017/04/19/college-bans-on-campus-christian-preaching-as-fighting-words/

https://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/press-release-details/georgia-college-sued-for-censoring-student-speech-restricting-it-to-0.0015-of-campus

Just sad!

On another note, which deals more with logic perhaps than grammar (but at times the two are difficult to disentangle) the local newspaper recently ran a curious subtitle to a headline:

"An Examination of the Future."   ???  :o

Precisely how one examines something which has not yet happened - without the help of Doc Brown - is unclear to me!  $:)

An Examination of Possible Futures, or some similar phrase, should have been used.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 03, 2017, 10:25:55 AM
Posted about this in the Reading thread, but for the benefit of those who missed it there.

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51SzS-W9LwL.jpg)

QuoteMasterfully snarkful look at how England is both a wonderful place to live yet falling apart at the cultural seams (in Bryson's view).
Including the English language.  This book will delight any denizen of Cato's Grammar Grumbles.

There are in fact a number of passages in the book which could be pasted here, but 1)they're usually too long to quote (one goes on for two pages or more) and 2)the book is a good read even on non-linguistic grounds.  Although Bryson might qualify as an honorary resident of this thread.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 03, 2017, 10:31:03 AM
That is a temptation, I do not deny it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 03, 2017, 11:12:23 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 03, 2017, 10:25:55 AM
Posted about this in the Reading thread, but for the benefit of those who missed it there.

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51SzS-W9LwL.jpg)

There are in fact a number of passages in the book which could be pasted here, but 1)they're usually too long to quote (one goes on for two pages or more) and 2)the book is a good read even on non-linguistic grounds.  Although Bryson might qualify as an honorary resident of this thread.

Many thanks for the recommendation! 

Latest grumble is another stupid name for a drug: Myrbetriq .

The obvious objection is that it sounds like the name of a cousin to a Superman villain!   ;)

Number One: the "y" is NOT pronounced as a "y."  On the television commercial it comes out as a long "e."  ???

And why a "q" for a "k" at the end?!   0:)

Recently overheard, and spoken without a trace of irony by a 20-something:

"Me 'n' my friend's been growin' beards, but his is a lot more, like, fullest..."

Sigh!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 03, 2017, 11:19:42 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 03, 2017, 11:12:23 AM

Recently overheard, and spoken without a trace of irony by a 20-something:

"Me 'n' my friend's been growin' beards, but his is a lot more, like, fullest..."

Sigh!

Recently overheard, and spoken without a trace of irony to a 20-something:
"Thanks for applying. NEXT!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 03, 2017, 12:05:18 PM
Opinions sought
QuoteEmpty cadences of sea-water licking its own wounds, sulking along the mouths of the delta, boiling upon those deserted beaches - empty, forever empty under the gulls: white scribble on the grey, munched by clouds. If there are ever sails here they die before the land shadows them. Wreckage washed up on the pediments of islands, the last crust, eroded by the weather, stuck in the blue maw of water ... gone!

and

QuoteDays became simply the spaces between dreams, spaces between the shifting floors of time, of acting, of living out the topical ... a tide of meaningless affairs nosing along the dead level of things, entering no climate, leading us nowhere, demanding of us nothing save the impossible - that we should be. [She]would say that we had been trapped in the projection of a will too powerful and too deliberate to be human - the gravitational field which [the city] threw down about those it had chosen as its exemplars ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 03, 2017, 12:46:18 PM
Quote from: Ken B on August 03, 2017, 12:05:18 PM
Opinions sought"


QuoteEmpty cadences of sea-water licking its own wounds, sulking along the mouths of the delta, boiling upon those deserted beaches - empty, forever empty under the gulls: white scribble on the grey, munched by clouds. If there are ever sails here they die before the land shadows them. Wreckage washed up on the pediments of islands, the last crust, eroded by the weather, stuck in the blue maw of water ... gone!

and

QuoteDays became simply the spaces between dreams, spaces between the shifting floors of time, of acting, of living out the topical ... a tide of meaningless affairs nosing along the dead level of things, entering no climate, leading us nowhere, demanding of us nothing save the impossible - that we should be. [She]would say that we had been trapped in the projection of a will too powerful and too deliberate to be human - the gravitational field which [the city] threw down about those it had chosen as its exemplars ...


To quote George Takei:  8)

OH MY!!! ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o ::) ::) ::)

Egregious rodomontade and snake-oil-salesman twaddle pretending to be poetic and profound when, in fact, no poetry and no profundity are present!  Nor can they be present, given that the concatenations of the words contradict themselves, or are just ridiculously oblique, and communicate therefore nothing.

WHO is responsible for this?  (A horsewhip is being unraveled as I write!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on August 03, 2017, 01:05:42 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 03, 2017, 12:46:18 PM.

WHO is responsible for this?  (A horsewhip is being unraveled as I write!)
Those two rather exalted but actually quite beautiful and, yes, poetic passages are from Lawrence Durrell's The Alexandria Quartet.

Quoting them like this, in isolation, is unfair  to the book(s) though, IMHO. Durrell's style varies widely form one novel to the other, and from one situation  to the next (and that's partly what the Quartet is all about).

Taken as a whole, I insist, the work is a splendid literary tour de force.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spineur on August 03, 2017, 01:26:34 PM
Quote from: ritter on August 03, 2017, 01:05:42 PM

Taken as a whole, I insist, the work is a splendid literary tour de force.
I did read the Alexandria quartet in my late teens and found it rather boring.  These sentences within sentences are (I find) an un-english way to express something.  In latin languages this is more common.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on August 03, 2017, 01:31:22 PM
Quote from: ritter on August 03, 2017, 01:05:42 PM
Taken as a whole, I insist, the [Quartet] is a splendid literary tour de force.

Agreed completely, and in places extremely funny - especially the episode where the debauched ex-policeman Scobie becomes, thanks to a linguistic mix-up, venerated as a local deity.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 03, 2017, 01:34:01 PM
Quote from: ritter on August 03, 2017, 01:05:42 PM
These two rather exalted but actually quite beautiful and, yes, poetic passages are from Lawrence Durrell's The Alexandria Quartet.

Quoting them like this, in isolation, is unfair  to the book(s) though, IMHO. Durrell's style varies widely from one novel to the other, and from one situation  to the next (and that's partly what the Quartet is all about).

Taken as a whole, I insist, the work is a splendid literary tour de force.

I can see where the passages - in the right context - could be taken as satirical or as some sort of commentary on a certain kind of character.

Still, certain things do make one wonder, e.g. "pediment" cannot possibly be an architectural reference, and therefore one must assume he is using the term from geology.  If so, then the islands must have mountains for the pediments to form.

And so...what is disappearing?  The wreckage, the pediments, or the islands?  Strictly speaking, the last singular noun to which the singular appositive "the last crust" can refer is "the wreckage."  But if something is "stuck," how can it also be "gone" ?  Or is "crust" somehow a collective singular referring to all of them?

And how do "empty cadences" "sulk" or "boil"...if they are empty?  And if everything is "forever empty," how can there be a "white scribble," since that would be a contradiction to the "forever empty" claim?

Quote from: DaveF on August 03, 2017, 01:31:22 PM
Agreed completely, and in places extremely funny - especially the episode where the debauched ex-policeman Scobie becomes, thanks to a linguistic mix-up, venerated as a local deity.

Thanks!  And so, I am willing to examine the context and hold my final verdict!  0:) $:) 8)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on August 03, 2017, 01:44:03 PM
Quote from: Spineur on August 03, 2017, 01:26:34 PM
I did read the Alexandria quartet in my late teens and found it rather boring.  These sentences within sentences are (I find) an un-english way to express something.  In latin languages this is more common.
Yes, that is perhaps true (about the "unenglishness" of these sentences), but that is not a demerit per se, I'd say.

If you read Hermann Broch, as I've recently been doing, with his two and one half pages long sentences describing the sunset on a mountain  (in Demeter), those Durrell passages appear downright epigrammatic  :D. But in Broch (as is the case with Durrell), the exalted passages may be followed by some straightforward, even pedestrian paragraphs (e.g. of dialogue) which act as a counterweight so to speak (and provide the prose with a kind of musical--operatic?--flow).

What surprises me is that the Quartet bored you. I found the characters, the tangle of relationships, the shifting angles, and the historical and political background quite gripping.

Regards,
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 03, 2017, 01:47:30 PM
Let me add my applause for Alexandria Quartet.  Each book adds another layer to the story. I don't remember the prose as being very purplish.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 03, 2017, 01:59:41 PM
Quote from: ritter on August 03, 2017, 01:05:42 PM

Taken as a whole, I insist, the work is a splendid literary tour de force.

It's better in its full 884 page glory?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nodogen on August 03, 2017, 01:59:55 PM
I've missed 207 pages of moaning???? Clearly, I won't be checking back through them but the two current "favourites" in this household are:

1. Responding to a question by beginning with "So.."
Just answer the question, "so" is entirely redundant!

2. The perennial favourite: the inappropriate rising inflection. My partner used to helpfully scream at the telly "IT'S NOT A FUCKING QUESTION!" but I think she's given up.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nodogen on August 03, 2017, 02:07:07 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 03, 2017, 10:25:55 AM
Posted about this in the Reading thread, but for the benefit of those who missed it there.

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51SzS-W9LwL.jpg)

There are in fact a number of passages in the book which could be pasted here, but 1)they're usually too long to quote (one goes on for two pages or more) and 2)the book is a good read even on non-linguistic grounds.  Although Bryson might qualify as an honorary resident of this thread.

I would rather strongly suggest that possibly the largest reason for Britain "falling apart at the cultural seams" is the influence of America. Stick that in your pipe Mr. Bryson.

(I did enjoy Notes from a Small Island.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 03, 2017, 02:09:54 PM
Quote from: nodogen on August 03, 2017, 01:59:55 PM
I've missed 207 pages of moaning???? Clearly, I won't be checking back through them but the two current "favourites" in this household are:

1. Responding to a question by beginning with "So.."
Just answer the question, "so" is entirely redundant!

2. The perennial favourite: the inappropriate rising inflection. My partner used to helpfully scream at the telly "IT'S NOT A FUCKING QUESTION!" but I think she's given up.

So few telly's respond, these days.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 03, 2017, 02:10:54 PM
Quote from: nodogen on August 03, 2017, 02:07:07 PM
I would rather strongly suggest that possibly the largest reason for Britain "falling apart at the cultural seams" is the influence of America.

Something to that.  Though there may be the question of where egg ends and where chicken begins.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nodogen on August 03, 2017, 02:12:36 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 03, 2017, 02:09:54 PM
So few telly's respond, these days.

Yes, we need more interactive devices. It did nothing for her blood pressure either.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: nodogen on August 03, 2017, 02:14:55 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 03, 2017, 02:10:54 PM
Something to that.  Though there may be the question of where egg ends and where chicken begins.

Before you know it they'll be having a Yank as a chancellor at a university.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on August 03, 2017, 02:16:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 03, 2017, 01:34:01 PM
I can see where the passages - in the right context - could be taken as satirical or as some sort of commentary on a certain kind of character.

Still, certain things do make one wonder, e.g. "pediment" cannot possibly be an architectural reference, and therefore one must assume he is using the term from geology.  If so, then the islands must have mountains for the pediments to form.

And so...what is disappearing?  The wreckage, the pediments, or the islands?  Strictly speaking, the last singular noun to which the singular appositive "the last crust" can refer is "the wreckage."  But if something is "stuck," how can it also be "gone" ?  Or is "crust" somehow a collective singular referring to all of them?

And how do "empty cadences" "sulk" or "boil"...if they are empty?  And if everything is "forever empty," how can there be a "white scribble," since that would be a contradiction to the "forever empty" claim?

Well, literality may not be Durrell's aim, and e.g. the contradiction of something "disappearing" while being "stuck" is actually  quite suggestive to me.

And the cadences may be empty, even if the sea water is boiling and sulking. There's loads of empty cadences in music which are overflowing with notes. ;)

Quote from: Ken B on August 03, 2017, 01:59:41 PM
It's better in its full 884 page glory?

Oh yes, very much so. Just as Wagner's Ring is infinitely superior in its full 14 hour glory than "The Ride of the Valkyries" on it's own, or any Mahler symphony is a much greater work than you would believe if you only listened to one of the (easy to find) vulgar, kitsch passages they all contain.

Regards,
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 03, 2017, 02:34:46 PM
Fair point Ritter. I did pick up the first book once but was put off by the over writing. Another writer once much lauded I seem unable to get into is Anthony Powell. I have had the start of Dance on my shelves for eons, but cannot get past page 3.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on August 03, 2017, 02:41:13 PM
Quote from: Ken B on August 03, 2017, 02:34:46 PM
Fair point Ritter. I did pick up the first book once but was put off by the over writing. Another writer once much lauded I seem unable to get into is Anthony Powell. I have had the start of Dance on my shelves for eons, but cannot get past page 3.
I read A Matter of Upbringing about 10 years ago, and haven't really felt the urge to continue further into A Dance... :-[
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 09, 2017, 03:45:08 AM
Not really a grammar problem per se, but a logic problem...

Headline on a television station: "Rise in opioid deaths leads to two deaths in Newark."   ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on August 09, 2017, 05:12:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 03, 2017, 02:10:54 PM
... there may be the question of where egg ends and where chicken begins.

When the egg is out of the chicken, there is already a bifurcation...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christo on August 11, 2017, 08:12:48 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 09, 2017, 03:45:08 AMRise in opioid deaths leads to two deaths in Newark."
If the two deaths are part of the 'rise', it's nonsense and wrong, of course. The only logical conclusion must be, that somehow this rise caused another (unknown) effect that led to two new deaths.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ten thumbs on August 11, 2017, 01:19:10 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 09, 2017, 03:45:08 AM

"Rise in opioid deaths leads to two deaths in Newark."

Or maybe, under the previous lower rate of opioid deaths, only one death in Newark would have been expected!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on August 13, 2017, 06:11:29 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHDrXttXkAApxik.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 13, 2017, 06:48:55 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on August 13, 2017, 06:11:29 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHDrXttXkAApxik.jpg)

A comma, a comma, my kingdom for a comma!  $:)
Title: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 13, 2017, 08:16:38 PM
A classic!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on August 16, 2017, 11:34:55 AM
Hatred, bigotry and bad grammar still exist in our country. 

FROM CNN: Ben Carson, Trump's secretary of housing and urban development, weighed in on the post-Charlottesville conversations, saying "hatred and bigotry unfortunately still exists in our country and we must all continue to fight it, but let's use the right tools."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 16, 2017, 12:15:17 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 13, 2017, 06:48:55 PM
A comma, a comma, my kingdom for a comma!  $:)

You know, it wouldn't be nearly as funny even with just the Oxford comma. "finds inspiration in cooking her family, and her dog." There's something about that added fillip of cooked canine, on top of cooked husband and cooked child, that suggests she has no decency at all.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 16, 2017, 12:19:15 PM
Quote from: Ghost Sonata on August 16, 2017, 11:34:55 AM
Hatred, bigotry and bad grammar still exist in our country. 

FROM CNN: Ben Carson, Trump's secretary of housing and urban development, weighed in on the post-Charlottesville conversations, saying "hatred and bigotry unfortunately still exists in our country and we must all continue to fight it, but let's use the right tools."

Bacon and eggs is a traditional breakfast, milk and honey is a common synechdoche for earthly paradise, Barnumand Bailey was a circus.  English Grammar is, not are, hit and miss.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost Sonata on August 16, 2017, 12:46:41 PM
Quote from: Ken B on August 16, 2017, 12:19:15 PM
Bacon and eggs is a traditional breakfast, milk and honey is a common synechdoche for earthly paradise, Barnumand Bailey was a circus.  English Grammar is, not are, hit and miss.

Yes, compound nouns.  Unfortunately, I can concede that hatred and bigotry is as common as bacon and eggs these days. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 16, 2017, 01:13:09 PM
Quote from: Ken B on August 16, 2017, 12:19:15 PM
Bacon and eggs is a traditional breakfast, milk and honey is a common synechdoche for earthly paradise, Barnumand Bailey was a circus.  English Grammar is, not are, hit and miss.

I recall some German authors who initially confused me by using a singular verb with a plural subject (connected by "und" ) in at least some of their works: they apparently treated the two things as a collective singular.  My German books are packed away at school, but I believe Hermann Hesse may have been one of them.

Today it was disturbing to hear assorted colleagues at school continually falling prey to the latest preciosity, i.e. using "I" as an object when "me" is required.  e.g. "He was talking to my husband and I
."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 16, 2017, 03:19:20 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 16, 2017, 01:13:09 PM
I recall some German authors who initially confused me by using a singular verb with a plural subject (connected by "und" ) in at least some of their works: they apparently treated the two things as a collective singular.  My German books are packed away at school, but I believe Hermann Hesse may have been one of them.

Today it was disturbing to hear assorted colleagues at school continually falling prey to the latest preciosity, i.e. using "I" as an object when "me" is required.  e.g. "He was talking to my husband and I
."

Huh? Why on earth would you not treat Hermann Hesse as a singular noun?

Now Ellery Queen on the other hand ...

(I am counting coup on you here Cato.)
(And on the Ghost, above btw)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on August 17, 2017, 05:59:41 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 16, 2017, 03:19:20 PM
Huh? Why on earth would you not treat Hermann Hesse as a singular noun?

Some people refer to themselves these days as "they", like the Royal "We".

Quote from: Ken B on August 16, 2017, 03:19:20 PM
Now Ellery Queen on the other hand ...

So what do you have on the other other hand?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 17, 2017, 07:35:00 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on August 17, 2017, 05:59:41 AM
So what do you have on the other other hand?

My other glove.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 18, 2017, 02:22:51 PM
Yesterday my youngest son visited us, which meant it was time to suffer watching these yawn-inducing T.V. shows where you see people...buying houses!

One show featured people in southern Alabama trying to decide which of 3 houses to buy: the realtor and the buyers were well nigh incomprehensible!  Now I grew up in an Ohio neighborhood with "refugees" from rural Tennessee and Kentucky.  But their accents did not prepare me for the incredible twisting and mangling of vowels and consonants heard on this show!

The worst (best) example of this torture:

Realtor: "Whale, layuz geeder roadup thayun!"  ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

Translation for non-Americans (and Americans): "Well. let's get her (i.e. the offer to buy the house) wrote up then!"  Of course, "wrote" should be "written."  Using the feminine "her" for "it" has been around for a long time in lower-level English.

Despite their accents, the people had money!  The house cost c. $300,000!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on September 18, 2017, 11:15:27 PM
When I was in the US for the first time as an 23 yo student somewhat struggling to get from textbook learning to everyday practical language I wondered why so many neutral things were referred to by feminine pronouns (recall that Twain has endless fun with the awful German having "die Rübe" feminine and "das Fräulein" neutral, so one would expect English to be better in that regard...).
My host answered that anything a man can have an affective relationship with can (and often will) be feminine. His example was: "I have to fix the lawnmower; she broke down yesterday."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 19, 2017, 03:46:57 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on September 18, 2017, 11:15:27 PM
When I was in the US for the first time as an 23 yo student somewhat struggling to get from textbook learning to everyday practical language I wondered why so many neutral things were referred to by feminine pronouns (recall that Twain has endless fun with the awful German having "die Rübe" feminine and "das Fräulein" neutral, so one would expect English to be better in that regard...).
My host answered that anything a man can have an affective relationship with can (and often will) be feminine. His example was: "I have to fix the lawnmower; she broke down yesterday."

Oh yes!  Cars, boats, airplanes, etc. can all become feminine for some.  Women occasionally have been known to give names to their cars: a television commercial for an auto insurance company shows a woman who has named her favorite car "Brad."  ??? :D   Men, of course, have been known to do the same e.g. "Yeah, Ol' Betsy broke down on me again!"

Concerning the accent comments yesterday: while checking a few things, I came across a debate on how to define "enunciation" vs. "pronunciation," and ended up finding people who said they were basically synonyms, that "enunciation" meant how clearly one spoke (although the sounds produced could be opposed to what should be produced), that "pronunciation" meant how a word should be said (clarity not being involved), and that the previous two definitions should be reversed!  ???

My Random House College Dictionary defines "enunciate" with: "to pronounce in an especially articulate manner."

However, it also defines "pronounce" with: "to enunciate or articulate (words, phrases, sounds, etc.)"  :o

And for "articulate" : "to pronounce clearly and distinctly"  (My emphasis)

So, this dictionary has nothing about whether the sound produced must also be considered standard, which was a big item in the Internet debates.

So Random House considers the two words synonyms, and the correctness irrelevant...or is correctness assumed?  $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 19, 2017, 04:01:56 AM
How about Oxford Dictionary?
"enunciate"

VERB [WITH OBJECT]
1 Say or pronounce clearly.
'she enunciated each word slowly'

Synonyms
1.1 Express (a proposition, theory, etc.) in clear or definite terms.
'a written document enunciating this policy'

Origin
Mid 16th century (as enunciation): from Latin enuntiat- 'announced clearly', from the verb enuntiare, from e- (variant of ex-) 'out' + nuntiare 'announce' (from nuntius 'messenger').
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 05:28:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 19, 2017, 03:46:57 AM
Oh yes!  Cars, boats, airplanes, etc. can all become feminine for some.  Women occasionally have been known to give names to their cars: a television commercial for an auto insurance company shows a woman who has named her favorite car "Brad."  ??? :D   Men, of course, have been known to do the same e.g. "Yeah, Ol' Betsy broke down on me again!"

Concerning the accent comments yesterday: while checking a few things, I came across a debate on how to define "enunciation" vs. "pronunciation," and ended up finding people who said they were basically synonyms, that "enunciation" meant how clearly one spoke (although the sounds produced could be opposed to what should be produced), that "pronunciation" meant how a word should be said (clarity not being involved), and that the previous two definitions should be reversed!  ???

My Random House College Dictionary defines "enunciate" with: "to pronounce in an especially articulate manner."

However, it also defines "pronounce" with: "to enunciate or articulate (words, phrases, sounds, etc.)"  :o

And for "articulate" : "to pronounce clearly and distinctly"  (My emphasis)

So, this dictionary has nothing about whether the sound produced must also be considered standard, which was a big item in the Internet debates.

So Random House considers the two words synonyms, and the correctness irrelevant...or is correctness assumed?  $:)

To enunciate is the opposite of to mumble or to slur, it is to articulate sounds and syllables clearly. You can clearly enunciate an incorrect pronunciation. But they tend to blend.  In Toronto "Toronto" often sounds like "Tronno". If someone clearly enunciates "tor on toe" he's probably not from Toronto.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 19, 2017, 06:20:22 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 05:28:19 AM
To enunciate is the opposite of to mumble or to slur, it is to articulate sounds and syllables clearly. You can clearly enunciate an incorrect pronunciation. But they tend to blend.  In Toronto "Toronto" often sounds like "Tronno". If someone clearly enunciates "tor on toe" he's probably not from Toronto.

We have a similar phenomenon here in Columbus: many say "C'lumbus" without the "o."    T.V. people and D.J.'s have in recent years been pushing "C-bus" (See-bus) as their "cool" way of referring to the city.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 06:26:17 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 19, 2017, 06:20:22 AM
We have a similar phenomenon here in Columbus: many say "C'lumbus" without the "o."    T.V. people and D.J.'s have in recent years been pushing "C-bus" (See-bus) as their "cool" way of referring to the city.

It's worse than you are admitting Cato! It's spelt O-H-I-O but the correct pronunciation is "lower Michigan".

;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 19, 2017, 06:27:42 AM
Ah, The TV People . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 19, 2017, 06:30:50 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 06:26:17 AM
It's worse than you are admitting Cato! It's spelt O-H-I-O but the correct pronunciation is "lower Michigan".

;)

;)

Here in "C-bus," the word "M...n" is pronounced "that state up north." :D

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 19, 2017, 06:27:42 AM
Ah, The TV People . . . .

"Round up the usual suspects!"  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 06:33:28 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 19, 2017, 06:30:50 AM
;)

Here in "C-bus," the word "M...n" is pronounced "that state up north." :D


Michigan is proof Canada won the war of 1812. At the end of the war we held Detroit. We must have won, because we forced you to take it back.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 19, 2017, 06:47:21 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 06:33:28 AM
Michigan is proof Canada won the war of 1812. At the end of the war we held Detroit. We must have won, because we forced you to take it back.

A similar joke exists about Toledo.

In the 1800's there was a border dispute between Michigan and Ohio, sometimes called "The Toledo War:" shots were fired now and then, but nobody was killed.  Ohio insisted that various surveys placed Toledo in Ohio.

The joke is that Michigan must have won, because Toledo stayed in Ohio! 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 08:59:14 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 19, 2017, 06:47:21 AM
A similar joke exists about Toledo.

In the 1800's there was a border dispute between Michigan and Ohio, sometimes called "The Toledo War:" shots were fired now and then, but nobody was killed.  Ohio insisted that various surveys placed Toledo in Ohio.

The joke is that Michigan must have won, because Toledo stayed in Ohio! 8)

I lived in northern Kentucky and worked in Cinci. Three states join nearby, Ind, Oh, Ky. There was a joke you could tell who lived in Indiana: they were the ones who would claim to live in Ohio.

(think about it.)

;) :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on September 19, 2017, 12:04:23 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 05:28:19 AM
To enunciate is the opposite of to mumble or to slur, it is to articulate sounds and syllables clearly. You can clearly enunciate an incorrect pronunciation. But they tend to blend.  In Toronto "Toronto" often sounds like "Tronno". If someone clearly enunciates "tor on toe" he's probably not from Toronto.

Correct. Montrealers make a point of clearly pronouncing its three syllables   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 12:13:06 PM
Quote from: André on September 19, 2017, 12:04:23 PM
Correct. Montrealers make a point of clearly pronouncing its three syllables   ;)

So do I! But then I pronounce the t in Montreal too.

I grew up an hour west of Toronto. When I was a kid I was the only Habs fan within 100 miles.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on September 19, 2017, 03:46:54 PM
Quote from: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 12:13:06 PM
So do I! But then I pronounce the t in Montreal too.

I grew up an hour west of Toronto. When I was a kid I was the only Habs fan within 100 miles.

Yes, it was a great team a few decades ago... ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 19, 2017, 04:52:16 PM
Heard tonight on T.V. from a Michigander  ;)  : "...ascared..."  (i.e. afraid)

I have never heard this curiosity  ("scared" + "afraid" ) before: sources say it is also British slang.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 19, 2017, 05:04:52 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 19, 2017, 04:52:16 PM
Heard tonight on T.V. from a Michigander  ;)  : "...ascared..."  (i.e. afraid)

I have never heard this curiosity  ("scared" + "afraid" ) before: sources say it is also British slang.
I'm afeared it is.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 21, 2017, 01:08:50 PM
Courtesy of my favorite local T.V. station: a new definition of the word "fight."

(I am not making this up!)  $:)

"Coming up: how a fight at a convenience store...led to violence!"   ??? ??? ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on September 21, 2017, 06:41:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 21, 2017, 01:08:50 PM
Courtesy of my favorite local T.V. station: a new definition of the word "fight."

(I am not making this up!)  $:)

"Coming up: how a fight at a convenience store...led to violence!"   ??? ??? ???

I give this a pass. I recall fight being used in the sense of "verbal and only verbal argumentation" as a kid fifty years ago.

This does give me a chance to mention one of my favorite Sydney Smith witticisms.

One day he saw two women arguing, each from a window in a different house. Quoth Rev. Smith: They will never agree. They are arguing from different premises.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 22, 2017, 01:17:09 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 21, 2017, 06:41:34 PM
One day he saw two women arguing, each from a window in a different house. Quoth Rev. Smith: They will never agree. They are arguing from different premises.

Nice!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 22, 2017, 03:16:48 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on September 21, 2017, 06:41:34 PM
I give this a pass. I recall fight being used in the sense of "verbal and only verbal argumentation" as a kid fifty years ago.

This does give me a chance to mention one of my favorite Sydney Smith witticisms.

One day he saw two women arguing, each from a window in a different house. Quoth Rev. Smith: They will never agree. They are arguing from different premises.

Wocka Wocka!   :D

"Quarrel" or "argument" rather than "fight" would have been the better choice, especially for a build-up to "violence," but for T.V. news such distinctions are usually not present. $:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 22, 2017, 04:28:12 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 22, 2017, 03:16:48 AM
Wocka Wocka!   :D

"Quarrel" or "argument" rather than "fight" would have been the better choice, especially for a build-up to "violence," but for T.V. news such distinctions are usually not present. $:)

I once read about a man injured when "a mugging went wrong".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 22, 2017, 04:30:05 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 22, 2017, 04:28:12 AM
I once read about a man injured when "a mugging went wrong".

That works, if the meaning is (e.g.) mugging for the camera . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 22, 2017, 04:47:55 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 22, 2017, 04:30:05 AM
That works, if the meaning is (e.g.) mugging for the camera . . . .
Robin Hood: Men in Tights
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 22, 2017, 04:49:01 AM
Manly men!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 22, 2017, 06:43:05 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 22, 2017, 04:28:12 AM
I once read about a man injured when "a mugging went wrong".

Great stuff!  Sad, but great!

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 22, 2017, 04:30:05 AM
That works, if the meaning is (e.g.) mugging for the camera . . . .

As in every Jerry Lewis movie! (R.I.P.)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 22, 2017, 07:18:48 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 22, 2017, 06:43:05 AM
As in every Jerry Lewis movie! (R.I.P.)

Aye, just so.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on September 22, 2017, 07:42:52 AM
Kim called Trump a dotard. Trump looked up his pocket dictionary, looking up for "doughturd". He should have looked at his pocket mirror instead.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 26, 2017, 11:35:49 AM
Not knelt?

QuoteJohn Middlemas kneeled in solidarity . . .

Is kneeled for real?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on September 26, 2017, 11:47:26 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 26, 2017, 11:35:49 AM
Not knelt?

Is kneeled for real?
Yes.

Quote from: OED.comkneel, v.

Pronunciation:  Brit.   /niːl/,  U.S. /nil/
Forms:  pa. tense and pple. kneeled /niːld/, knelt /nɛlt/. Forms: α. OE cnéowlian, ME cnewlen, ME cneoulen, kneuli(ȝen, ME kneulen, ME knewlen. β. ME cnylen, ME cneolen, cnelen, ME cneoli, cneoly, kneolien, kneoly, kneolen, ME knelen, ( kn-, cnely), ME–15 knele, (ME–15 knyl, Sc. kneil(l), 15–16 kneele, 16– kneel.(Show Less)
Frequency (in current use): 
Etymology: Early Middle English cneolen < Old English cnéowlian = Dutch knielen , Middle Low German, Low German knelen ; derivative of cnéow , knie , knee n. The past tense and participle knelt appear to be late (19th cent.) and of southern origin. Compare feel, felt.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 26, 2017, 11:57:28 AM
Okay, live and learn!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 26, 2017, 12:00:39 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 26, 2017, 11:35:49 AM
Not knelt?

Is kneeled for real?
I readed that, I feeled your pain, I knowed what you meaned. I sayed so to my co-worker. She understanded.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 27, 2017, 03:10:55 AM
Darn it, I like those irregular forms!

But of course, it was only late in life that I learnt that ahold is legit, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 04, 2017, 10:57:18 AM
QuoteThe Submit was successful
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on October 05, 2017, 09:02:59 AM
Nothing to do with grammar grumbling but here's Finnish National Broadcasting Company's Nuntii Latini (Latin News)
https://yle.fi/aihe/artikkeli/2013/05/24/nuntii-latini

QuoteNuntii Latini is the weekly bulletin of Yle (Finnish Broadcasting Company) in Latin. Launched in 1989, it is the longest-running Latin-language news broadcast in the world. In addition to the radio broadcast and podcasts, the programme can be listened to on the internet at yle.fi/nuntii.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 02, 2017, 08:56:37 AM
Of course, it should be wreak:

We will watch with pride as American justice takes its course — and with horror as Trump continues to wreck havoc from the Oval Office.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 02, 2017, 04:25:57 PM
Lest the havoc be wrecked, of course!

BTW, what is the origin of the word havoc ? Merriam Webster only mentions it was first used some 600 years ago.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 02, 2017, 04:43:45 PM
OED says a bit more:

QuoteEtymology: < Anglo-Norman havok, altered in some way from Old French havot (c1150 in Du Cange, havo), used in same sense, especially in phrase crier havot. Probably of Germanic origin.

1. In the phrase cry havoc, orig. to give to an army the order havoc!, as the signal for the seizure of spoil, and so of general spoliation or pillage. In later use (usually after Shakespeare) fig., and associated with sense 2.

[1385   Ord. War Rich. II in Black Bk. Admiralty (Rolls) I. 455   Item, qe nul soit si hardy de crier havok sur peine davoir la test coupe.
1405   Abp. Scrope in Historians Ch. York (Rolls) II. 296   Idem dominus Henricus..bona regia ubicunque fuerant inventa vastavit, et, clamando havok, fideles homines, tam spirituales quam temporales, quosdam spoliavit.]
1419   Ord. War Hen. V in Black Bk. Admiralty (Rolls) I. 462   That noman be so hardy to crye havok upon peyn that he that is founde begynner to dye therfore.
c1450   Jacob's Well (1900) 207   & for his euylle dedys his godys be cryed be þe kyng ‘haue ok’.
c1525   in Grose Hist. Eng. Army (1801) I. 194   Likewise be all manner of beasts, when they be brought into the field and cried havoke, then every man to take his part.
1604   Shakespeare Hamlet v. ii. 318   This quarry cries on hauock.
a1616   Shakespeare Julius Caesar (1623) iii. i. 276   Cæsars Spirit..Shall..with a Monarkes voyce, Cry hauocke, and let slip the Dogges of Warre.
1858   H. T. Buckle Hist. Civilisation Eng. (1869) II. i. 76   That bold and sceptical spirit which cried havoc to the prejudices and superstitions of men.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 02, 2017, 05:15:04 PM
Wow! Super, excellent, thanks ! My curiosity was aroused as I couldn't find a latin or greek origin to the word, nor an english one. Being a noun, one should be able to derive an adjective or some other word. But no, it stands alone in splendid isolation.

Havokado in Spanish or Japanese maybe ?  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 03, 2017, 01:32:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 27, 2017, 03:10:55 AM
Darn it, I like those irregular forms!

Me, too!

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 27, 2017, 03:10:55 AM
But of course, it was only late in life that I learnt that ahold is legit, too.

This article sums up the "a-" hybrids, very interesting:
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/a-hold-or-ahold

When it comes to pairs such as "apart" with no space and "a part" with a space, the spelling doesn't matter when you're talking; both sound the same. When you write the words, however, you might forget to add a space, or you might add an unnecessary one. This problem crops up with all kinds of words, but in this episode we're focusing on words beginning with the letter "a."

Words That Start With "A"

Here's a short list of pairs like "ahead" and "a head": "alight" and "a light," "abuzz" and "a buzz," "apart" and "a part," and, lastly, "ahold" and "a hold." As you can see from this list, the one-worders beginning with "a" can be various parts of speech: "ahead" is an adverb, "alight" is a verb," and "abuzz" is an adjective. The two-worders, on the other hand, consist of an article—the word "a"—and a noun: "light," "buzz," "part," and "hold." True, these words can sometimes be verbs, but when something follows the article "a," it's a noun (unless something such as an adjective comes between the article and the noun, as in "a delicious cake").


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 07, 2017, 04:56:28 AM
In recent days we have noticed the following curiosities...

Courtesy of our favorite* television news station:

"Statistics show that most children in foster care are the result of drug abuse."  ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o $:)

Actually, we always thought children were the result of love, but this is the 21st Century, so...all things are now possible!  0:)

Next we have a radio station, where one can hear the following sentence - spoken with great enthusiasm - several times a day:

"For more information, check licking events, dot com!"  :P :P :P ??? ??? ???

Okay, I suspect a good number of car accidents on our local freeways come from out-of-town people hearing this sentence, which follows a list of of otherwise saliva-free public meetings.  ;)

"Licking" is the name of a local county.  Because of a good number of salt licks, the area was called in pioneer years the "licking" district.   

A MUCH better Internet address would be "LickingCountyEvents.com"  0:)

* i.e. in the sense that their incompetence generates so many curious mistakes in the language.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 07, 2017, 06:09:06 AM
Oh, lawd.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 12, 2017, 10:37:47 AM
Courtesy of the local newspaper in an article about the construction of a new county jail:

Quote
"Part of the purpose of the jail will be a new system of rehabilitation.  Inmates will be connected to addiction and be offered other similar treatments."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2017, 06:10:47 AM
"Hook me up!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 18, 2017, 12:42:11 PM
For the non-Americans, in our football, when the ball is thrown toward the goal near the end of the game in the vague hope that it will be caught, thereby winning the game, the toss is called a "Hail Mary."

Wikipedia presents this for the origin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_Mary_pass (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_Mary_pass)

Now today, while showing highlights of a high school game from last night, a local television sportscaster said:

"And with 10 seconds left quarterback Johnny Smith heaves a long pass...and it turns out to be an Epic Fail Mary.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 18, 2017, 01:24:43 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 18, 2017, 12:42:11 PM
For the non-Americans, in our football, when the ball is thrown toward the goal near the end of the game in the vague hope that it will be caught, thereby winning the game, the toss is called a "Hail Mary."

Wikipedia presents this for the origin:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_Mary_pass (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_Mary_pass)

Now today, while showing highlights of a high school game from last night, a local television sportscaster said:

"And with 10 seconds left quarterback Johnny Smith heaves a long pass...and it turns out to be an Epic Fail Mary.  ;)
That's when you accidentally throw the ball toward the wrong goal?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Coech 'n' At'leat Grammer!
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2017, 05:12:03 AM
Just caught "sports news" on T.V. this morning.  The COLLEGE quarterback for a team in a playoff game was being interviewed:

"After 5 years, we have came so, uh, so close, so this time we're gonna gitter done."

Translation for the non-native speakers: "After 5 years, we have come so close (to winning the championship), so this time we will get her (i.e. "it" i.e. the task of winning the game) done."

17 years of education down the drain! $:)

The Ohio State University football coach was also interviewed about his team's game today: "Last night we practiced outstanding."   ??? ::) ;)

You might be able to practice standing out in a crowd, but...  ::) ...his $4,000,000 paycheck per year must not include a "good-grammar clause."   

At this point, we can only recall Professor Wagstaff:

https://www.youtube.com/v/3skIjrkta2Q
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2017, 05:58:22 AM
Nobody respects a football player who uses good grammar!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 02, 2017, 12:40:17 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 02, 2017, 05:58:22 AM
Nobody respects a football player who uses good grammar!

Apparently the NCAA passed a new rule about that!

I remember the well-spoken Cleveland Browns quarterback Frank Ryan  - he and the Browns won the 1964 NFL championship 27-0 against Unitas and the Baltimore Colts) - who had a Ph.D. in Mathematics

How many Ph.D.'s play in the NFL today? ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 05, 2017, 06:01:05 AM
Okay, kids, gather around:

. . . Langgaard's very first string quartet, which the composer began at the age of 21 in 1914.  Like the subsequent quartets it is shot through with moving musical references to the fateful summer the year before, when the composer met the (hopeless) love of his life.

Now, I come away from that sentence asking, What – all of his string quartets are shot through with musical references to the summer of 1913?

That's how the sentence is cast, right?

Edit :: minor typo
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on December 05, 2017, 06:35:36 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 05, 2017, 06:01:05 AM
Okay, kids, gather around:

. . . Langgaard’s very first string quartet, which the composer began at the age of 21 in 1914.  Like the subsequent quartets it is shot through with moving musical references to the fateful summer the year before, when the composer met the (hopeless) love of his life.

Now, I come away from that sentence asking, What – all of his string quartets are shot through with musical references to the summer of 1913?

That’s how the sentence is cast, right?

Edit :: minor typo
See the Lyre (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,575.msg1112093.html#msg1112093).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: "How to Survive the Ground!"
Post by: Cato on December 19, 2017, 07:11:41 AM
Today we examine a phrase from America's latest dwindling activity: football (NOT soccer  ;)   ).

From the Dec. 19, 2017 Wall Street Journal: a sportswriter named Jason Gay is commenting on what seemed to be a winning score during a Pittsburgh Steelers game:

Quote...Pittsburgh appeared to have grabbed a momentous, last-minute, come-from-behind home win over New England when Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger hit tight end Jesse James (yep, that's his real name) for a game-clinching touchdown catch....

The referees signaled touchdown, and there was pandemonium in Pittsburgh. With less than half of a minute left, it looked as if the Steelers were about to stop the rival Pats, taking firm control of the AFC with just two games left in the regular season.

Then the Replay Overlords intervened, and what very much looked like a catch became...

Not a catch.

The ruling on the replay was that the ball did not "Survive the Ground," which sounds like the title of a Liam Neeson movie.

BAD GUY: No! No don't throw me off this rooftop, Liam Neeson.

LIAM NEESON: If you don't tell me where she is, you'll never...survive the ground.

Anyway, upon further review, officials decided this: the Steelers' James may have "caught" the ball and crashed forward into the end zone, but in order to complete the catch, he needed to maintain full control of the ball upon hitting the turf. In the replay, it appears that the ball wobbled slightly when James lunged forward and his hands—and the ball—crashed to the ground.

In other words...it did not survive the ground.

RIP, Steelers game-winning touchdown catch.


For the entire and very funny article, see:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-drop-that-enraged-pittsburgh-1513605372 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-drop-that-enraged-pittsburgh-1513605372)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 19, 2017, 07:15:34 AM
Quote from: North Star on December 05, 2017, 06:35:36 AM
See the Lyre (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,575.msg1112093.html#msg1112093).

Thanks.  Heckuva summer, eh?  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: "How to Survive the Ground!"
Post by: kishnevi on December 19, 2017, 09:15:00 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 19, 2017, 07:11:41 AM
Today we examine a phrase from America's latest dwindling activity: football (NOT soccer  ;)   ).

From the Dec. 19, 2017 Wall Street Journal: a sportswriter named Jason Gay is commenting on what seemed to be a winning score during a Pittsburgh Steelers game:

For the entire and very funny article, see:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-drop-that-enraged-pittsburgh-1513605372 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-drop-that-enraged-pittsburgh-1513605372)

Speaking as an impartial native of New England,  I applaud the referees for making the correct final call.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: "How to Survive the Ground!"
Post by: Cato on December 19, 2017, 09:21:14 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 19, 2017, 09:15:00 AM
Speaking as an impartial native of New England,  I applaud the referees for making the correct final call.

;D

Allow me to quote another section of the article:

Quote...The NFL's standards for a reception have gotten downright kooky. According to the rules, the receiver must now:

1. Make the catch.

2. Place both feet in bounds.

3. Hang onto the catch for the duration.

4. Oven bake the catch for 30 minutes at 450 degrees.

5. Take the catch on a three-day camping trip.

6. Agree to pay for the catch's college education—through grad school and a Ph.D. program.

7. Present a handwritten note to the referee that details reasons for making the catch.

8. Sing original composition about catch (OPTIONAL.)

As you can tell, this is a fairly lengthy and complicated list of requirements. And that's how you get an outrage like you have in Pittsburgh—an aggrieved city wondering how what looked so clearly like a catch could become, with the sinister co-conspiring of replay, not a catch....

;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: "How to Survive the Ground!"
Post by: Ken B on December 19, 2017, 09:21:58 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 19, 2017, 09:15:00 AM
Speaking as an impartial native of New England,  I applaud the referees for making the correct final call.
The ball was too hard. Just need to deflate it a wee bit. This sort of thing never happens to the patriots ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 19, 2017, 09:34:03 AM
Superinflation!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 19, 2017, 09:36:48 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 19, 2017, 09:34:03 AM
Superinflation!

With celebrity culture I prefer the term hyperinflation :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: "How to Survive the Ground!"
Post by: kishnevi on December 19, 2017, 09:38:32 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 19, 2017, 09:21:14 AM
;D

Allow me to quote another section of the article:

;)

The article was obviously written by a Steelers fan whose investigation was hopelessly biased against President Trump from the beginning.


ETA: 
Sorry for confusing my threads there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2017, 01:47:57 AM
The phrase male gigolo really is a redundancy, right?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 21, 2017, 05:30:33 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 21, 2017, 01:47:57 AM
The phrase male gigolo really is a redundancy, right?

Oh you are so far from woke my friend!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2017, 05:32:33 AM
I hang my head in shame . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 21, 2017, 08:31:18 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 21, 2017, 01:47:57 AM
The phrase male gigolo really is a redundancy, right?

Well, if the gigolo is female, then she is not a gigolo: another word is used!   0:)

And if the gigolo is neuter,  ???   then, well, you know!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2017, 08:32:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 21, 2017, 08:31:18 AM
Well, if the gigolo is female, then she is not a gigolo: another word is used!   0:)

Gigola?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 21, 2017, 09:08:54 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 21, 2017, 08:32:38 AM
Gigola?

Funiculi, Funicula !!!

Still laughing about this:

Quote

The ruling on the replay was that the ball did not "Survive the Ground," which sounds like the title of a Liam Neeson movie.

BAD GUY: No! No don't throw me off this rooftop, Liam Neeson.

LIAM NEESON: If you don't tell me where she is, you'll never...survive the ground.   

Recently, the word "sponge" offered an opportunity to exploit its multiple meanings.

A new colleague, a 40-or-50 something lady, came into my classroom and asked:

"Do you know where I can find a sponge?"

I: "Well, yes, but all the ones I know live over in Dayton!"   8)

She had no idea what I was talking about, and looked at me as if I were more than just eccentric!    0:)  So, I added quickly: "The sponges we have are in the laboratory."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 21, 2017, 09:51:42 AM
Who knew this figurative reading would drop out of consciousness!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: "Cupcaking" and "Political Theater"
Post by: Cato on December 27, 2017, 05:18:24 AM
Concerning the phrases "political theater," "trigger words," and "safe space" as found on our modern college campuses, linguist John McWhorter has these comments:

Quote  (Interviewer)...when you say political theater, you're not so much concerned with the theatrical aspect per se as you are with the idea that the goal of the political theater is to make certain ideas anathema. Is that correct?

John: Definitely. When I say theater, yes, there's theater in any kind of protest. The very fact that you're making a loud noise in a public forum is theater. The very fact that you're trying to attract people's attention who otherwise would not be inclined to give it, that's theater. That's part of politics. But there's a particular theatrical aspect to all of this in that I find it simply incoherent—it's not believable—that a psychologically healthy person and one intelligent and ambitious enough to have gotten into a selective school, in particular, is somebody who is constitutionally unable to bear hearing somebody express views that they don't agree with, or that they even find nauseous. It's one thing to find views repugnant. It's another thing to claim that—to hear them constitute a kind of injury that no reasonable person should be expected to stand up to. That's theatrical because it's not true. Nobody is hurt in that immediate, lasting and intolerable way by some words that a person stands up and addresses, in the abstract, to an audience at a microphone....

To claim that is a kind of theater in itself. You are pretending—and that really is the only appropriate word—you're pretending that something that you find unpleasant to behold is injurious. And I think that the theatricality of that kind in the argument is a response in part to the fact that to make your case otherwise—that somebody just shouldn't be heard—is difficult. You have to pretend that it's hurting you like a punch in the stomach, because otherwise it becomes a little inconveniently transparent that, really, you're just insisting that you have your own way because you've decided that a certain way of thinking is what's on the side of the angels.... 

See: https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/12/14/an-interview-with-john-mcwhorter/ (https://heterodoxacademy.org/2017/12/14/an-interview-with-john-mcwhorter/)

I also came across the term "cupcaking" thanks to certain members of the student body at Ohio State University.  No, it has nothing to do with cupcakes from an oven.  ;)

Apparently it is a variation on "sweet-talking."  The difference is that one "cupcakes" by cupping your hand over your phone, so that others cannot hear you sweet-talking to your girlfriend (or boyfriend, although I have the impression this is an expression used primarily by young men).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on December 27, 2017, 09:55:36 PM
I just posted this on the "Royal Wedding" thread after someone was castigated for using the term "Oriental":

I would like to know WHO decides that neutral terms like "Oriental" can be offensive. Somehow I think the late Edward Said made that into a pejorative term. UGH!

There must be a secret Academie deciding what words are acceptable to use and which ones should be eradicated.
These Gremlins coerce the media, publications and of course, educational institutions.
I find their made up terms like"micro-aggression" and weird pronouns amusing, though.

Come out, come out, wherever you are! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 28, 2017, 03:57:31 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on December 27, 2017, 09:55:36 PM
I just posted this on the "Royal Wedding" thread after someone was castigated for using the term "Oriental":

I would like to know WHO decides that neutral terms like "Oriental" can be offensive. Somehow I think the late Edward Said made that into a pejorative term. UGH!

There must be a secret Academie deciding what words are acceptable to use and which ones should be eradicated.
These Gremlins coerce the media, publications and of course, educational institutions.
I find their made up terms like"micro-aggression" and weird pronouns amusing, though.

Come out, come out, wherever you are! 

These days it seems that people go out of their way to discover an insult in the most benign of expressions and intentions.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 28, 2017, 05:56:27 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 28, 2017, 03:57:31 AM
These days it seems that people go out of their way to discover an insult in the most benign of expressions and intentions.
Your claim of being benign is itself a micro aggression because it invalidates the lived experience of feeling your racist hatred.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 28, 2017, 07:14:26 AM
http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/2017/12/linguitic-patrol-rides-again.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 28, 2017, 08:54:29 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 28, 2017, 07:14:26 AM
http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/2017/12/linguitic-patrol-rides-again.html

Many thanks for the link!


Quote from: Ken B on December 28, 2017, 05:56:27 AM
Your claim of being benign is itself a micro aggression because it invalidates the lived experience of feeling your racist hatred.

"There you go again!"   :D  Yes, I suppose these days a German last name ipso facto indicates racism, at the very least "unconscious racism" !  Even being a full-bodied, equal-opportunity, unreconstructed misanthrope offers no exoneration!  8)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2017, 03:08:23 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 28, 2017, 07:14:26 AM
http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/2017/12/linguitic-patrol-rides-again.html (http://twowheeledmadwoman.blogspot.com/2017/12/linguitic-patrol-rides-again.html)

At a casual glance, linguistic was misspelled.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 29, 2017, 03:58:51 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 29, 2017, 03:08:23 PM
At a casual glance, linguistic was misspelled.

Only in the URL.  And she is by her own admission, subject to making typos rather often. I do, too, so I willingly give her a pass on that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 29, 2017, 05:10:29 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 29, 2017, 03:58:51 PM
Only in the URL.  And she is by her own admission, subject to making typos rather often. I do, too, so I willingly give her a pass on that.
Aye. 'Twas but what caught my eye.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 30, 2017, 12:41:06 PM
Even the National Review stumbles from time to time

http://amp.nationalreview.com/article/454973/jane-austen-madame-de-stael-women-society-sexual-harassment-discrimination


Speaking of Miss Jane Austen
Quoteand no other English novelist since Dickens has been so widely loved.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 30, 2017, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 30, 2017, 12:41:06 PM
Even the National Review stumbles from time to time

http://amp.nationalreview.com/article/454973/jane-austen-madame-de-stael-women-society-sexual-harassment-discrimination


Love your picture of my fellow Ohioan William Tecumseh Sherman!  Have you ever visited his restored house in Lancaster?

Yesterday we had breakfast - thanks to a gift-card Christmas present from a student - at a fancy-schmancy, trendy-schmendy, "breakfast-and-lunch-only" diner.

On the menu were three words which should never be used in succession:

"Meditative Kale Smoothie - $4.95"

Perhaps one meditates upon the kale, or the exorbitant price, or the seeming impossibility of "kale" ever being "smooth."  No mantras or gurus were offered, but perhaps the kale has no need of such mundane items.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 30, 2017, 05:25:49 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 30, 2017, 04:42:56 PM
Love your picture of my fellow Ohioan William Tecumseh Sherman!  Have you ever visited his restored house in Lancaster?

Yesterday we had breakfast - thanks to a gift-card Christmas present from a student - at a fancy-schmancy, trendy-schmendy, "breakfast-and-lunch-only" diner.

On the menu were three words which should never be used in succession:

"Meditative Kale Smoothie - $4.95"

Perhaps one meditates upon the kale, or the exorbitant price, or the seeming impossibility of "kale" ever being "smooth."  No mantras or gurus were offered, but perhaps the kale has no need of such mundane items.

Found on the web
QuoteAfter the mani-pedi, pair this book with a meditative kale smoothie, a gab-fest Diet Coke, or a leisurely Pinot Grigio...

"It's Ohio, Jake."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on December 30, 2017, 06:57:06 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 30, 2017, 04:42:56 PM
Love your picture of my fellow Ohioan William Tecumseh Sherman!  Have you ever visited his restored house in Lancaster?

Yesterday we had breakfast - thanks to a gift-card Christmas present from a student - at a fancy-schmancy, trendy-schmendy, "breakfast-and-lunch-only" diner.

On the menu were three words which should never be used in succession:

"Meditative Kale Smoothie - $4.95"

Perhaps one meditates upon the kale, or the exorbitant price, or the seeming impossibility of "kale" ever being "smooth."  No mantras or gurus were offered, but perhaps the kale has no need of such mundane items.

Alas! Beyond one weekend spent entirely in the confines of Hebrew Union College, when I was a college lad, I have never been to Ohio. In fact, my most vivid memory of that trip is of the Kentucky bluegrass which lined the road from the airport (Cincinnati's airport is in Kentucky, just across the river) to the city.

That was the time when I scandalized the HUC (the seminary of Reform Judaism) by wearing a skullcap and prayer shawl to Shabbat morning services....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 31, 2017, 03:15:20 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on December 30, 2017, 06:57:06 PM
Alas! Beyond one weekend spent entirely in the confines of Hebrew Union College, when I was a college lad, I have never been to Ohio. In fact, my most vivid memory of that trip is of the Kentucky bluegrass which lined the road from the airport (Cincinnati's airport is in Kentucky, just across the river) to the city.

That was the time when I scandalized the HUC (the seminary of Reform Judaism) by wearing a skullcap and prayer shawl to Shabbat morning services....

The view of downtown Cincinnati from the Kentucky side on I-75 is magnificent, but you would find the traffic and the urban sprawl immense since your visit.  ;)

Ken B.'s quotation is from a review of a children's activity book called the Me Museum  ???

Here is the Amazon summary:

Quote   It has come to our attention that most museums will not let you draw on the walls. And most museums will not let you make your own statues. And most museums are not actually all about you. Is this true?! Then the Me Museum is pretty much exactly unlike any other museum you've ever seen—here you can do all of that, and then paint portraits of your favorite people, decide what's for lunch, create your own secret hideout, and then invite your family and friends to tour the whole building for themselves.

An excellent activity book for car trips, rainy days, or anytime that will become a keepsake for years to come

(My emphasis above)

And here is the review with the curious phrase "meditative kale smoothie."  I thought it would be worth quoting the whole thing because it is just sooo precious and appallingly symbolic of certain people today:

QuoteFor adults too! I'm pretty sure this gorgeous book is meant for kids—and it would be really wonderful for shy kids especially, with its message of "letting people in" sometimes.The artwork makes it clear that everyone is special just because they are themselves; what kid doesn't need to hear that message? But being sans kids, I'm thinking more about how fun this would be for a girls weekend—one of those review-and-renew retreats. The debossed cover engaged me right away...you pick it up and go "wow!" just because it feels like a party. The art works for adults, too. And answering the questions lets you feel a little silly and a lot good about yourself. It's nice to step away from negativity and play in a happy space...even if you are an adult. After the mani-pedi, pair this book with a meditative kale smoothie, a gab-fest Diet Coke, or a leisurely Pinot Grigio...

I prefer a leisurely Topo Gigio!  8)

I will confess that I might be judging all of this unfairly,  perhaps becoming too sensitive to certain things because I am reading a book on The Seven Deadly Sins as seen in society in the 1970's. 

Or maybe not!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 31, 2017, 03:32:05 AM
Quote from: Ken B on December 30, 2017, 05:25:49 PM
"It's Ohio, Jake."

A year ago, I should not have twigged this.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 31, 2017, 06:00:04 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 31, 2017, 03:32:05 AM
A year ago, I should not have twigged this.
Were you from Ohio a year ago?



>:D ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 08, 2018, 05:44:20 AM
I don't see the phrase "in countries" as any value added to the sentence at all, at all.

[Name of company]'s products are sold in countries around the world.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 08, 2018, 06:00:48 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 08, 2018, 05:44:20 AM
I don't see the phrase "in countries" as any value added to the sentence at all, at all.

[Name of company]'s products are sold in countries around the world.

Not at all in any  way at all.   

I am reminded of my trip to the South Pacific: I saw the H-Bomb site Bikini Atoll, but the best atoll was no Bikini Atoll!   :o ???

Okay, so...

Our "favorite" local T.V. station has a 20-something weatherman who said yesterday:

"This unseasonable cold will continue through Tuesday."

Well, the single-digit cold some might find "unreasonable," but precisely in which other season would we find such temperatures?  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on January 08, 2018, 04:35:17 PM
Ran into what was is a debatable style guide presented as an iron law of grammar which is to not start a sentence with an Arabic (rather than spelled out number).  Starting a sentence with 'Three' vs '3' is good and there are very few instances where beginning a sentence with an number carried out to six significant digits is good - however I see nothing wrong with beginning a sentence with '37% of what people believe are die hard grammar rules are just style conventions that can be broken'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 08, 2018, 04:59:20 PM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on January 08, 2018, 04:35:17 PM
Ran into what was is a debatable style guide presented as an iron law of grammar which is to not start a sentence with an Arabic (rather than spelled out number).  Starting a sentence with 'Three' vs '3' is good and there are very few instances where beginning a sentence with an number carried out to six significant digits is good - however I see nothing wrong with beginning a sentence with '37% of what people believe are die hard grammar rules are just style conventions that can be broken'

Interesting: what say ye, Fellow Grammar Grumblers?

Which seems better?

37% say that some grammar rules are actually biases.

Thirty-seven per cent say that some grammar rules are actually biases.

And what if our number is a decimal?   ??? :o

Ninety-three point five per cent voted against the introduction of Cheese on campus.  Those in favor hailed from Limburg.

93.5% voted against the introduction of Cheese on campus.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 08, 2018, 05:05:26 PM
100% is my preference for 37%. But for natural numbers of modest size, "Thirteen curses upon you", words not digits. I think the split is measurements vs items, but I doubt there is a hard and fast rule.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 08, 2018, 05:44:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 08, 2018, 04:59:20 PM
Interesting: what say ye, Fellow Grammar Grumblers?

Which seems better?

37% say that some grammar rules are actually biases.

Thirty-seven per cent say that some grammar rules are actually biases.

And what if our number is a decimal?   ??? :o

Ninety-three point five per cent voted against the introduction of Cheese on campus.  Those in favor hailed from Limburg.

93.5% voted against the introduction of Cheese on campus.

Who is Cheese and why do the swains abhor him (her)?

(Since you capitalized it in midsentence, I must assume Cheese is a person and not an edible derivative of milk.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 08, 2018, 05:52:59 PM
On the actual question, what I learned was that if a written out number was  inappropriate, the sentence should be rewritten so the sentence starts with something else:

The poll revealed that 37% of those asked believed some grammar rules are merely biases.
Of those asked, 37% believed, etc.

The vote was a decisive rejection of Cheese, with 93.5 percent voting to bar him from campus.  The only dissenting votes were cast by Limburgers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on January 08, 2018, 06:28:02 PM
When I was in high school way back in the early seventies, we were taught not to use numerals to open a sentence.

I have forgotten most of these rules now (conventions, really) and when in doubt, go by instinct rather than check a reliable source  :-[.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 12, 2018, 06:25:14 AM
Of course, it's only a typo, and not the writer's native language;  but I admit that my eye recoiled . . .

. . . Georges Franju's haunting French thriller Eyes Without a Face (Les yeaux sans visage) . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 12, 2018, 06:38:32 AM
Quote from: Jeffrey Smith on January 08, 2018, 05:52:59 PM
On the actual question, what I learned was that if a written out number was  inappropriate, the sentence should be rewritten so the sentence starts with something else:

The poll revealed that 37% of those asked believed some grammar rules are merely biases.
Of those asked, 37% believed, etc.

The vote was a decisive rejection of Cheese, with 93.5 percent voting to bar him from campus.  The only dissenting votes were cast by Limburgers.

Pffft. Never end a sentence with a preposition, never split an infinitive, never begin a sentence with a conjunction. Piffling rules that never applied. Brevity is a virtue.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 12, 2018, 06:55:44 AM
Snowflake.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 12, 2018, 06:58:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 12, 2018, 06:55:44 AM
Snowflake.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/06/dont-call-us-snowflakes-damages-mental-health-say-young-people/ (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/06/dont-call-us-snowflakes-damages-mental-health-say-young-people/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on January 12, 2018, 10:27:07 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 12, 2018, 06:25:14 AM
Of course, it's only a typo, and not the writer's native language;  but I admit that my eye recoiled . . .

. . . Georges Franju's haunting French thriller Eyes Without a Face (Les yeaux sans visage) . . . .

Shades of Billy Idol...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 12, 2018, 11:18:03 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 12, 2018, 06:25:14 AM
Of course, it's only a typo, and not the writer's native language;  but I admit that my eye recoiled . . .

. . . Georges Franju's haunting French thriller Eyes Without a Face (Les yeaux sans visage) . . . .

From the French version of Rocky
QuoteYeaux, Adrian!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 17, 2018, 12:28:57 PM
From the website of an alleged literary agent:


"We only take on clients in which we truly believe."
  :P ::) ???

Well, I would want to deal only with an agent who knows English!  0:)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on January 17, 2018, 08:39:09 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 17, 2018, 12:28:57 PM
From the website of an alleged literary agent:


"We only take on clients in which we truly believe."
  :P ::) ???

Well, I would want to deal only with an agent who knows English!  0:)

I am sure they wouldn't like to see you write 'I would want to deal only with an agent which knows English!'
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on January 17, 2018, 08:43:21 PM
Quote from: Ken B on January 12, 2018, 06:38:32 AM
Pffft. Never end a sentence with a preposition, never split an infinitive, never begin a sentence with a conjunction. Piffling rules that never applied. Brevity is a virtue.

Prepositions are not words to end sentences with! It is wrong to ever split an infinitive! And never begin a sentence with a conjunction!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 18, 2018, 06:36:25 AM
Quote from: jessop on January 17, 2018, 08:43:21 PM
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with! It is wrong to ever split an infinitive! And never begin a sentence with a conjunction!
Never use that many exclamation marks !!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 18, 2018, 06:43:34 AM
DON'T SHOUT!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 18, 2018, 10:17:14 AM
Quote from: jessop on January 17, 2018, 08:39:09 PM
I am sure they wouldn't like to see you write 'I would want to deal only with an agent which knows English!'

:D  Would they notice?  I do wonder...

Quote from: jessop on January 17, 2018, 08:43:21 PM
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with! It is wrong to ever split an infinitive! And never begin a sentence with a conjunction!

You are in good company there (i.e. Winston Churchill).  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 25, 2018, 04:23:41 PM
Recent headline:

  Man Hit By Train In Quest for Perfect Selfie    :o ??? ::)

Yes, even trains these days want "The Perfect Selfie" to show to their fellow locomotives!

And it is from the BBC!  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-42815483 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-42815483)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on January 25, 2018, 04:49:07 PM
Quote from: Cato on January 25, 2018, 04:23:41 PM
Recent headline:

  Man Hit By Train In Quest for Perfect Selfie    :o ??? ::)

Yes, even trains these days want "The Perfect Selfie" to show to their fellow locomotives!

And it is from the BBC!  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-42815483 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-42815483)

Was the fine to cover damages to the train?

Gym trainer T Siva ignored warnings from a person nearby and the train driver while filming near Borabanda railway station on 21 January. Mr Siva survived but has suffered head injuries, according to South Central Railways Police.

He has appeared in court and been fined 500 rupees ($7.87, £5.50).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on January 26, 2018, 06:17:39 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd link=topic=10977.msg1123571#msg1123571 date=1516931347

Was the fine to cover damages to the train?

/quote]

:D  "HEY!  What's the big idea?!  Smashing your head into my engine!"

And shame, shame on the BBC! 0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 31, 2018, 07:38:43 AM
Misspelling? Typo?  But I cannot help a chuckle:

The local preacher/Texas Ranger Sam Clayton (It's a Wonderful Life) soon after arrives and informs the family that one of their neighbors' corals was broken into and several of their best livestock were stolen.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 31, 2018, 09:43:57 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 31, 2018, 07:38:43 AM
Misspelling? Typo?  But I cannot help a chuckle:

The local preacher/Texas Ranger Sam Clayton (It's a Wonderful Life) soon after arrives and informs the family that one of their neighbors' corals was broken into and several of their best livestock were stolen.
Seahorses Karl. Duh.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 31, 2018, 09:57:13 AM
Well, all right, Ken.

What about?—

Actress Hailee Steinfeld discusses how she landed the roll . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on January 31, 2018, 10:20:17 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 31, 2018, 09:57:13 AM
Well, all right, Ken.

What about?—

Actress Hailee Steinfeld discusses how she landed the roll . . . .
This is clearly about the time Steinfeld was walking on a street, eating a sausage roll, as she suddenly slipped and fell, throwing the sausage roll in the air, but miraculously managed to land it safely in her hands. She's been doing tons of interviews about it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 31, 2018, 10:31:47 AM
Hmm . . . something on the lines of gymnastics/kung fu might be more elegant.  But the lure of the foodstuffs is undeniable!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Baron Scarpia on January 31, 2018, 10:36:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on January 25, 2018, 04:23:41 PM
Recent headline:

  Man Hit By Train In Quest for Perfect Selfie    :o ??? ::)

Yes, even trains these days want "The Perfect Selfie" to show to their fellow locomotives!

And it is from the BBC!  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-42815483 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-42815483)

There is nothing wrong with that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 31, 2018, 10:45:25 AM
Darwin rawks!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Baron Scarpia on January 31, 2018, 10:48:37 AM
...grammatically.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on January 31, 2018, 11:30:51 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on January 31, 2018, 09:57:13 AM
Well, all right, Ken.

What about?—

Actress Hailee Steinfeld discusses how she landed the roll . . . .

An extremely daring and difficult flying maneuver, usually only attempted in a short-wing biplane. And good for her!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 02, 2018, 05:17:54 AM
Quote from: Ken B on January 31, 2018, 11:30:51 AM
An extremely daring and difficult flying maneuver, usually only attempted in a short-wing biplane. And good for her!


Sweet!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 02, 2018, 05:22:35 AM
Separately . . . First, find water which boils at 90° . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on February 02, 2018, 05:29:51 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 02, 2018, 05:22:35 AM
Separately . . . First, find water which boils at 90° . . . .
Instructions for mountaineers, perhaps?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 02, 2018, 05:35:40 AM
;^)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on February 02, 2018, 10:54:52 AM
« ...the Eight symphony gives us Schuman at his boldest and most provocative best » (liner notes to Sony SMK 63163).

Isn't there something superfluous in this collection of superlatives ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 03, 2018, 05:59:10 AM
A surfeit, 'tis true.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 03, 2018, 05:30:30 PM
Quote from: André on February 02, 2018, 10:54:52 AM
« ...the Eighth symphony gives us Schuman at his boldest and most provocative best » (liner notes to Sony SMK 63163).

Isn't there something superfluous in this collection of superlatives ?

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 03, 2018, 05:59:10 AM
A surfeit, 'tis true.

I suppose you can be at your best, but not be at your boldest?  Or most provocative?  However, if one is provocative, is not boldness required?

What say ye?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 03, 2018, 05:42:52 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2018, 05:30:30 PM
I suppose you can be at your best, but not be at your boldest?  Or most provocative?  However, if one is provocative, is not boldness required?

What say ye?
No. Examples.

Czerny was a greater composer than Beethoven— bold but too silly to be provocative.
Abortion should always be legal  — provocative, at least in some company, but too common and conventional, especially in some different company, to be bold.
Ives is rarely worth listening to — bold, provocative.
Bach is a great composer — neither.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 05, 2018, 10:06:25 AM
QuoteStarting with this film, there was been two Alien movies every decade up.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Baron Scarpia on March 05, 2018, 10:15:25 AM
Quote from: Ken B on February 03, 2018, 05:42:52 PMIves is rarely worth listening to — bold, provocative.

Who knew I was so bold?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: kishnevi on March 05, 2018, 06:25:14 PM
Quote from: Cato on February 03, 2018, 05:30:30 PM
I suppose you can be at your best, but not be at your boldest?  Or most provocative?  However, if one is provocative, is not boldness required?

What say ye?

One can be provocative with intending to be. Ask anyone who was run afoul of the SJW twittersphere.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on March 05, 2018, 06:28:08 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on March 05, 2018, 10:06:25 AM
QuoteStarting with this film, there was been two Alien movies every decade up.

Is that even English?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 06, 2018, 01:06:01 AM
Quote from: Mahlerian on March 05, 2018, 06:28:08 PM
Is that even English?

Not as we know it . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on March 06, 2018, 04:31:11 AM
Quote from: Mahlerian on March 05, 2018, 06:28:08 PM


Is that even English?

The google translate kind, maybe?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 07, 2018, 02:43:11 PM
Recent monstrosities:

Two college stoonts: one used the grammar goblin "has went," the other used "had saw," and she was not a carpenter!   Hence the ironic spelling for "students."

My "favorite" local T.V. news show offered: "Ohio Lawmakers Get Sexual Harassment Training"  ??? ??? ??? :o :o :o  Yes, what a shock!  Who knew that they are spending our tax dollars to get training in such a thing?!

Another grammar goblin from this same station: "Juvenile Judge Steps Down"  ??? ??? ???  :o :o :o  Maybe they should have written: "Juvenile Court Judge", but as they used to say in the '70's when tongue-tiedness struck:  "I think YOU know what I'm trying to say!"

And from an upper-level banker who has two college degrees: "We usually go to the movies with she and her husband."  :'( :'( :'(

Yes, I will send that to she.  And I will never gossip about she.  Maybe I should check on she. $:)

Oy!  The barbarians are everywhere! 0:)

And don't get me started on the increasing number of people saying the article "a" like the "a" in "day."  :-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on March 07, 2018, 02:45:44 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 07, 2018, 02:43:11 PM
Recent monstrosities:


And don't get me started on the increasing number of people saying the article "a" like the "a" in "day."  :-X

Oh dear........I almost never hear this. Why is it even a thing?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 07, 2018, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: jessop on March 07, 2018, 02:45:44 PM
Oh dear........I almost never hear this. Why is it even a thing?

You are in Australia, I  believe?   0:)

Here in America it is a thing, unfortunately.  My theory is that the Illiterati* think it makes them sound smarter...except....it does just the opposite!

*The Illiterati are often slopping over with education!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 07, 2018, 09:05:52 PM
Quote from: jessop on March 07, 2018, 02:45:44 PM
Oh dear........I almost never hear this. Why is it even a thing?

It can be a form of emphasis to emphasize just one. "I said a man, not a pair", The a would be long there. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on March 08, 2018, 01:01:29 AM
When I first came into extended contact with native speakers I was also puzzled at the "long" indefinite article, but I also think that is is often used in way the Ken suggests. Still it is strange because unlike in several other languages (German "ein", Italian "un/o/a"...) in English one could say "*one* man, not several" without having to distinguish the indef article from the number.
And this "a" is pronounced like "day" in "standard" English, not like in Australia where the first letter of the alphabet rhymes with "bye".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 09, 2018, 10:48:10 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on March 08, 2018, 01:01:29 AM
When I first came into extended contact with native speakers I was also puzzled at the "long" indefinite article, but I also think that is is often used in way the Ken suggests. Still it is strange because unlike in several other languages (German "ein", Italian "un/o/a"...) in English one could say "*one* man, not several" without having to distinguish the indef article from the number.
And this "a" is pronounced like "day" in "standard" English, not like in Australia where the first letter of the alphabet rhymes with "bye".

The way Australians torture all vowels is...scary!  0:) ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 09, 2018, 10:52:00 AM
Hence:  "Strine" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strine)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 09, 2018, 11:08:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 09, 2018, 10:48:10 AM
The way Australians torture all vowels is...scary!  0:) ;)

Do they really count as native speakers of English?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on March 09, 2018, 01:53:57 PM
Don't start that debate. The French sometimes express doubt about Quebecers being native speakers of French  :P.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 16, 2018, 05:41:04 PM
So...a story about a "language" I have called "Educationalese."

Recently our faculty was spiritually and intellectually assaulted by an educational terrorist known as a "downtown bureaucrat," i.e. a failed teacher who became a paper-pusher and worthless-form creator to present the appearance that she/he still has any kind of competence in anything.

Supposedly she was addressing us on the topic of our new no-grade grading system.  :o

Our question: "How do we explain to parents that this is an improvement over A through F  or percentages?

(I am not making this up!  Recorded and transcribed by one of my colleagues (English teacher))

"We decided that you should, in terms of the old grading system, uh, be, uh, that you can be more subjective now, because uh, the uh, the standards give you more flexibility, because you have to uh, follow them, the standards, so you can be more subjective because the standards are objective, and so you can tell the parents that uh, that, that kind of uh, flexibility just wasn't possible."  ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

Long stunned pause, until Cato dared to raise his angry hand (a colleague said he saw steam coming out of my ears more than once):

"How can standards, which we must follow, give us flexibility?  Are we free to change or ignore them?"

"Uh,well, no!"

"So how is this new syetem flexible?  And it still is not clear how it's an improvement.  And can you define the words "subjective" and "objective" please, just to be sure we are understanding you?"  ;) ;) ;)

Long stunned pause while the bureaucrat turns red: a 40-something woman, who is sitting at the edge of a table.  "Well, you have uh, more, more flexibility in the classroom now because of the standards, and so that uh, that leads to more subjectivity because you can change grades now, if, if, uh, if you don't think the grade is accurate."   ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???

I (innocently): "I'm sorry!  Weren't you told that we very easily adjusted grades when they were letters and percentages?  How is this any better or more accurate, when it smears together grades from 95 to 77 into one grade?"  (Yes, behold the new "nobody is better than anyone else" system.  The "A" kid is really equal to the "C-" kid: all distinctions are artificial anyway!  0:)   )

More hemming and hawing and run-on sentences, and no, she never defined "subjective" or "objective" for us, words she obviously does not understand.

Our Third Grade teacher muttered: "And she's making 50% more than we are!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Dante's Inferno via South Park?
Post by: Cato on March 23, 2018, 07:52:16 AM
One of my more brilliant yet highly erratic Seventh Graders was sporting a "New Version" of Dante's Inferno.

The "blurb" on the book's jacket lionized this version by mentioning how the translator had used references to "Shakespeare and Dickinson, Freud and South Park, Kierkegaard and Stephen Colbert."   ??? :o

(For the non-Americans here, South Park is an obscene, satirical cartoon show not suitable for children  8), and Stephen Colbert is a left-wing political humorist (for the Germans, er ist dem Zyniker Harald Schmidt aehnlich.)

https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/kultur/fernsehen/Schmidt-ist-der-uebelste-Zyniker-den-ich-jemals-getroffen-habe/story/19564342 (https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/kultur/fernsehen/Schmidt-ist-der-uebelste-Zyniker-den-ich-jemals-getroffen-habe/story/19564342)

The book is decorated with ink-and-pen drawings by an Edward Gorey wannabe. :D

So color me skeptical, but I am thinking I should take a look through it.  Certainly The New Yorker was skeptical:

Quote...She (i.e. Professor Mary Bang) writes, "I will be most happy if this postmodern, intertextual, slightly slant translation lures readers to a poetic text that might seem otherwise archaic and off-putting"—especially, I presume, to nineteen-year-olds. On the surface, this appears to be a laudable purpose, but whenever you hear those words "true to contemporary life," run for cover.

The trouble starts on the first page. The pilgrim speaks of his relief upon issuing from the dark wood. He says that he felt like a person who, almost drowned at sea, arrives, panting, on the shore. Bang places him, instead, at the edge of a swimming pool. But these two things—the ocean and the neighborhood pool—are nowhere near the same, and every nineteen-year-old knows what the ocean is. Other anachronisms create worse problems. Bang, in her lines, includes references to Freud, Mayakovsky, Colbert, you name it. She picks up swatches of verse from T. S. Eliot and Sylvia Plath. But, if readers get into the swing of these, what are they going to do when they encounter the Roman Catholic theology that is the spine of the Divine Comedy, and which Bang says, in her introduction, that she will honor? ("God has to look down from Heaven; Satan has to sit at the center of Hell.") Wouldn't it be better if she let the reader know that there are old things as well as new things—that there is such a thing as history? She is not unaware of this, as her learned footnotes demonstrate. Why is she keeping it from her readers? If they knew it, they might find out who Mayakovsky is, which I doubt that they have done.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/05/27/what-the-hell (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/05/27/what-the-hell)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on April 10, 2018, 01:41:42 AM
The danger of the insufficiently-observed comma in speech - heard on BBC Radio 3 this morning:

"A concert by the BBC National Orchestra of Wales, featuring music by Welsh composers Mozart and Gluck."

I knew there was something good about those two guys.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on April 10, 2018, 03:28:10 PM
Recently I read an article about how to best approach the writing tests for one Australia's standardised school tests called NAPLAN. Les Perelman, a retired professor from MIT University from the USA recently wrote a handy guide for students who want highest marks possible on this particular test. I would love to hear what Cato has to say about it. ;D

Quote from: Dr. PerelmanDR PERELMAN'S GUIDE TO A TOP SCORING NAPLAN ESSAY
1. Memorise the list of Difficult and Challenging Spelling Words and sprinkle them throughout
the paper. Feel free to repeat them, and do not worry very much about the meaning.
2.  If you are not sure how to spell a word, do not use it.
3.  Repeat the language and ideas in the Writing Task throughout the paper.
4.  Begin at least one sentence with the structure, "Although x (sentence), y (sentence)." For
example: "Although these instructions are stupid, they will produce a high mark on the
NAPLAN essay."
5.  Master the five-paragraph form.
   a)  Have a minimum of four paragraphs, preferably five.
   b)  Each paragraph, except the last one, should have a minimum of four sentences. Do
not worry about repeating ideas.
   c)  The first paragraph should end with your thesis sentence.
   d)  The next-to-last paragraph should modify your thesis sentence by taking the other
side of the issue in special cases.
   e)  The last paragraph should begin with "In conclusion" and then repeat the thesis
sentence from the first paragraph. Then just repeat two or three ideas from the other
paragraphs.
6.  Increase your score on the "Audience" and "Persuasive Devices" categories by addressing
the reader using "you" and ask questions. For example: "So you think you wouldn't mind
writing a stupid essay?"
7.  Use connective (Velcro) words such as "Moreover," "However," "In addition", "On the other
hand" at the beginning of sentences.
8.  Begin sentences with phrases such as "In my opinion", "I believe that", "I think that" etc.
9.  Repeat words and phrases throughout your paper.
10.  Employ the passive voice frequently throughout your paper.
11.  Use referential pronouns, such as "this", without a reference noun following it. For
example, "This will make the marker think you are a coherent writer".
12.  Make arguments using forms such as "We all believe that we should do X" or "We all know
that Y is harmful".
13.  Always have at least one, preferably two adjectives next to nouns. Thus, not "the dog" but
the "frisky and playful dog".
14.  If you are writing a narrative essay, think quickly if there is a television program, movie, or
story that you know that fits the requirements of the narrative writing task. If there is one
use it as your narrative, embellishing it or changing it as much as you want. Markers are
explicitly instructed to ignore if they recognise any stories or plots and mark the script on
its own merits as if it was original.
15.  Never write like this except for essay tests like the NAPLAN.

It appeared in a news article from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation this week: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-09/naplan-writing-test-bizarre-heres-how-kids-can-get-top-marks/9625852
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 10, 2018, 04:04:41 PM
Quote from: jessop on April 10, 2018, 03:28:10 PM
Recently I read an article about how to best approach the writing tests for one Australia's standardised school tests called NAPLAN. Les Perelman, a retired professor from MIT University from the USA recently wrote a handy guide for students who want highest marks possible on this particular test. I would love to hear what Cato has to say about it. ;D

It appeared in a news article from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation this week: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-09/naplan-writing-test-bizarre-heres-how-kids-can-get-top-marks/9625852

:D  Great stuff!  And the good professor is not very subtly criticizing both American stoonts and their professors, the latter being guilty of some of the world's worst writing in their various academic journals.  Because... yes, Professor Perelman (any relation to the great writer S. J. Perelman?)  has undoubtedly gleaned his list from his own stoonts, who have been taught various stupid "rules" about how to write in their elementary and high schools, and from his colleagues at M.I.T.  0:)

Number 10 is usually perpetrated with abandon by the professors!   ;)   And I have seen composition textbooks advising students to follow things very close to Rule #5, especially 5A and 5C.

Many thanks for the information!

Today I saw a Fourth Grade girl, the daughter of one of our teachers, gazing at the lockers of the 8th Grade girls, who often decorate the lockers of their friends for birthdays.   I asked her if she thought she would one day have a locker in the 8th-Grade area.

She: (scoffing) No!
Daddy: No?  Well, what school will you be going to then?
She: (reflecting on the problem) Okay!  I might will have one of those!   :D

In Southern areas, one can hear such expressions.  They are called "double modals."   e.g.  "I might could go to the game."

A study from Yale has collected examples of "multiple modals," e.g.  "It's a long way, and he might will can't come."  :o ???

See:

https://ygdp.yale.edu/phenomena/multiple-modals (https://ygdp.yale.edu/phenomena/multiple-modals)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on April 10, 2018, 04:47:16 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 10, 2018, 04:04:41 PM:D  Great stuff!  And the good professor is not very subtly criticizing both American stoonts and their professors, the latter being guilty of some of the world's worst writing in their various academic journals.

Yes!!!  I've read some hideously twisted prose in academic writing.

Quote from: Cato on April 10, 2018, 04:04:41 PMBecause... yes, Professor Perelman (any relation to the great writer S. J. Perelman?)  has undoubtedly gleaned his list from his own stoonts, who have been taught various stupid "rules" about how to write in their elementary and high schools, and from his colleagues at M.I.T.  0:)

I had a writing teacher in middle school that taught students to write more or less as described above, telling us all that it would impress college professors.  I ignored everything she said.

Unfortunately, the exact same kind of writing gets better marks on standardized tests in the US as well, from the SAT to the GRE.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 10, 2018, 05:04:07 PM
Quote from: Mahlerian on April 10, 2018, 04:47:16 PM
Yes!!!  I've read some hideously twisted prose in academic writing.

I had a writing teacher in middle school that taught students to write more or less as described above, telling us all that it would impress college professors.  I ignored everything she said.

Unfortunately, the exact same kind of writing gets better marks on standardized tests in the US as well, from the SAT to the GRE.


By giving the graders what they want, no matter how awful their demands are, one gives them something that is easy to grade!  No thought involved for them: rubber stamp it quickly and move on!

When I was grading Advanced Placement European History examinations for the College Board, we were told specifically that grammar, punctuation, and spelling could NOT be taken into consideration.  No matter how badly expressed, if one could glean the material needed for a correct answer, the kid's essay made it out of the gate!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on April 10, 2018, 10:00:06 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 10, 2018, 05:04:07 PM

When I was grading Advanced Placement European History examinations for the College Board, we were told specifically that grammar, punctuation, and spelling could NOT be taken into consideration.  No matter how badly expressed, if one could glean the material needed for a correct answer, the kid's essay made it out of the gate!  $:)

WHO decided grammar or punctuation are not important? This is really shocking to those who believed that an impartial jury would apply the highest standards. However, what goes on in academe according to Gad Saad and others, is far worse than can be imagined. As an example, the BA thesis of Michelle Robinson (Obama) written more than 30 years ago in 1985, show that feelings and emotions trump thought and logic when smothered in self-pity and political correctness.  Christopher Hitchens wrote that it "wasn't written in any known language."

http://www.dineshdsouza.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/MichelleObamaThesis.pdf
https://www.politico.com/pdf/080222_MOPrincetonThesis_26-501.pdf
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on April 11, 2018, 04:36:40 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on April 10, 2018, 10:00:06 PM
WHO decided grammar or punctuation are not important? This is really shocking to those who believed that an impartial jury would apply the highest standards. However, what goes on in academe according to Gad Saad and others, is far worse than can be imagined. As an example, the BA thesis of Michelle Robinson (Obama) written more than 30 years ago in 1985, show that feelings and emotions trump thought and logic when smothered in self-pity and political correctness.  Christopher Hitchens wrote that it "wasn't written in any known language."

http://www.dineshdsouza.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/MichelleObamaThesis.pdf
https://www.politico.com/pdf/080222_MOPrincetonThesis_26-501.pdf

Some day some one (presumably not Christopher Hitchens) will dig for Trump's BA Thesis.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 13, 2018, 08:02:05 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on April 10, 2018, 10:00:06 PM
WHO decided grammar or punctuation are not important? This is really shocking to those who believed that an impartial jury would apply the highest standards.

That decision came down from the College Board. ??? :o

From a book review in today's Wall Street Journal by Henry Hitchings for The Prodigal Tongue by Professor Lynne Murphy:

Quote...An American arriving in Britain for the first time is likely to be puzzled that "getting pissed" is a twice-weekly recreation, and even a seasoned visitor might be nonplussed by the following: "Feeling peckish, I put on my trainers and a khaki jumper and left my flat, only to find that some tosser had parked his lorry right across the pavement." There is even a curious subspecies of Brit who conveys the wish to be woken after a night's sleep with the words: "Will you knock me up in the morning?"

Lynne Murphy is an American-born professor of linguistics at the University of Sussex on Britain's south coast. She has had plenty of exposure to the discrepancies between the language of her birthplace and that of her adopted home, and since 2006 has written a blog exploring them. In "The Prodigal Tongue" she draws on extensive research to sink some of the myths kept afloat by this trans-Atlantic love-hate relationship, and she carefully investigates its psychology.

Ms. Murphy begins by noticing how much British commentary on American usage eschews expertise in favor of vitriol. Never mind that American usage tends to be more consistent than its British counterpart—its spellings a little leaner, its grammar a bit less leaky....

"The Prodigal Tongue" is acute about the more subtle differences between America and Britain, not least in perspectives on class and race. For instance, Americans refer to "the middle class" five times as often as Britons do, and Britons refer five times as often to "the middle classes"—one of many small but telling signs of Brits' addiction to precisely placing one another socially. Another intriguing detail: Americans add "please" to requests only half as frequently as Brits do, because in American English this use of "please" is a marker of urgency—suggesting bossiness or desperation, not solicitude....

See:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-prodigal-tongue-review-more-trouble-in-the-colonies-1523571821 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-prodigal-tongue-review-more-trouble-in-the-colonies-1523571821)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on April 13, 2018, 09:29:13 AM
Very interesting. Having been schooled with the english (british) terms and vocabulary, but being closer geographically to the US and more often exposed to american media, I often get mixed up between the two.

There are similar differences, sometimes downright bizarre, between french and québécois terms. And I don't doubt one second that the same holds true of the Spanish language when Spoken by Spaniards, Argentinians or Peruvians for example.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 13, 2018, 09:30:30 AM
Oh, puh-leeeze!

(j/k)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on April 15, 2018, 03:51:05 PM
Quote from: André on April 13, 2018, 09:29:13 AMThere are similar differences, sometimes downright bizarre, between french and québécois terms. And I don't doubt one second that the same holds true of the Spanish language when Spoken by Spaniards, Argentinians or Peruvians for example.

https://www.youtube.com/v/4LjDe4sLER0

;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on April 16, 2018, 06:01:08 AM
Loved the video. Very funny ! My daughter speaks Spanish quite well, travels to many different countries and says it's not that easy to adjust from one place to another. This is hard to understand when you are not confronted with the differences.

In France, « embrasser ses gosses » means kiss one's kids. All dads do that before going to work. In Québec, « gosses » is a dirty word meaning balls. Nobody here kiss their « gosses » before going to work unless they are from Cirque du Soleil  ;D. OTOH « patente à gosses » has no dirty connotation. It simply means a silly contraption, a last minute, half-baked plan. And so on...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 16, 2018, 06:14:04 AM
Quote from: André on April 16, 2018, 06:01:08 AM
Loved the video. Very funny ! My daughter speaks Spanish quite well, travels to many different countries and says it's not that easy to adjust from one place to another. This is hard to understand when you are not confronted with the differences.

In France, « embrasser ses gosses » means kiss one's kids. All dads do that before going to work. ... And so on...

Somewhat like the Britishism in the quote above! :o ??? 0:)

"English!  Who needs that?  I'm never going to England!"  - Homer Simpson
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on April 16, 2018, 08:26:17 AM
How about fractured German?

Valet will ich dir geben
I will give a deer to the valet

Kommt, Seelen, dieser Tag
Come, seals, this day

Wie bist du, Seele
How are you, seal?

Christus, der uns selig macht
Christ, make us a salad

Nun lob mein Seel den Herren
Don't throw that herring to my seal

Was willst du dich, o meine Seele
What are you gonna do now, O my seal?

Christ lag in Todes Banden
Christ is late to every band rehearsal

Schmücke dich, o liebe Seele
My dear seal, you are such a schmuck

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/titles-of-bach-chorales-as-translated-by-my-niece-after-one-semester-of-german
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumblep
Post by: Ken B on April 16, 2018, 11:46:16 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 16, 2018, 06:14:04 AM
Somewhat like the Britishism in the quote above! :o ??? 0:)

"English!  Who needs that?  I'm never going to England!"  - Homer Simpson

Grumble, grumble. Briticism. Grumble.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spineur on April 16, 2018, 12:11:02 PM
Quote from: André on April 13, 2018, 09:29:13 AM
There are similar differences, sometimes downright bizarre, between french and québécois terms.
You bet ! and most of the time it is because in Quebec you make litteral translation from english that have no meaning in french.  Example:  when you enter a gravel road in France you may see a panel "gravillons".  In Quebec the corresponding panel says "roches volantes", which in french means that you may see some UFO that have the shape of rocks.  I suppose it is because it is a translation from "flying rocks" which should really be "flying gravel".  Delightful Quebecois !
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 16, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: Ken B on April 16, 2018, 11:46:16 AM
Grumble, grumble. Briticism. Grumble.

:D

I was tempted to use the possibly even more inappropriate Britischism for the context!  0:)
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on April 16, 2018, 08:26:17 AM
How about fractured German?

Valet will ich dir geben
I will give a deer to the valet

Kommt, Seelen, dieser Tag
Come, seals, this day

Wie bist du, Seele
How are you, seal?

Christus, der uns selig macht
Christ, make us a salad

Nun lob mein Seel den Herren
Don't throw that herring to my seal

Was willst du dich, o meine Seele
What are you gonna do now, O my seal?

Christ lag in Todes Banden
Christ is late to every band rehearsal

Schmücke dich, o liebe Seele
My dear seal, you are such a schmuck

https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/titles-of-bach-chorales-as-translated-by-my-niece-after-one-semester-of-german  (https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/titles-of-bach-chorales-as-translated-by-my-niece-after-one-semester-of-german)

Great stuff! ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on April 16, 2018, 01:40:11 PM
Quote from: Spineur on April 16, 2018, 12:11:02 PM
You bet ! and most of the time it is because in Quebec you make litteral translation from english that have no meaning in french.  Example:  when you enter a gravel road in France you may see a panel "gravillons".  In Quebec the corresponding panel says "roches volantes", which in french means that you may see some UFO that have the shape of rocks.  I suppose it is because it is a translation from "flying rocks" which should really be "flying gravel".  Delightful Quebecois !

Where did you get that ?  ??? Never saw such a thing. Show me that road sign please.

I'm afraid you're talking à travers votre chapeau, my friend! 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Spineur on April 16, 2018, 01:47:48 PM
Quote from: André on April 16, 2018, 01:40:11 PM
Where did you get that ?  ??? Never saw such a thing. Show me that road sign please.

I'm afraid you're talking à travers votre chapeau, my friend! 8)
Saw it driving around the Gaspesie penisula.  Absolument véridique !
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on April 16, 2018, 02:55:50 PM
Here's some help: try to find it here: 144 pages of official road signs.
http://www.rsr.transports.gouv.qc.ca/ (http://www.rsr.transports.gouv.qc.ca/)

And you turn that into a blanket statement about Québec road signs ? Fake news. !
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Baron Scarpia on April 16, 2018, 03:11:19 PM
Quote from: Spineur on April 16, 2018, 12:11:02 PM
You bet ! and most of the time it is because in Quebec you make litteral translation from english that have no meaning in french.  Example:  when you enter a gravel road in France you may see a panel "gravillons".  In Quebec the corresponding panel says "roches volantes", which in french means that you may see some UFO that have the shape of rocks.  I suppose it is because it is a translation from "flying rocks" which should really be "flying gravel".  Delightful Quebecois !

Reminds me of a gag from a movie. A bunch of Americans are trying to start a war with Canada, and they are driving on a Canadian highway with a sign "Death to Canada" on their vehicle. They are stopped by Canadian police who inform them, this is not allowed. They are required to display a French translation.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on April 16, 2018, 03:43:24 PM
Quote from: André on April 16, 2018, 02:55:50 PM
Here's some help: try to find it here: 144 pages of official road signs.
http://www.rsr.transports.gouv.qc.ca/ (http://www.rsr.transports.gouv.qc.ca/)

And you turn that into a blanket statement about Québec road signs ? Fake news. !

My Parisianfriend tells me some of those signs are in French!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on April 16, 2018, 05:13:41 PM
Quote from: Baron Scarpia on April 16, 2018, 03:11:19 PM
Reminds me of a gag from a movie. A bunch of Americans are trying to start a war with Canada, and they are driving on a Canadian highway with a sign "Death to Canada" on their vehicle. They are stopped by Canadian police who inform them, this is not allowed. They are required to display a French translation.

Another canadian bacon story  8)...


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pbfBzWJVbX4 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pbfBzWJVbX4)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on April 17, 2018, 07:28:19 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 16, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Great stuff! ;)

Not to forget what is sometimes said in choirs when standing too close:

Wachet auf! (Watch it, ouch!)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 30, 2018, 09:38:31 AM
And, for those of you who thought you cannot count 'em:

Change the world, one canned good at a time.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 01, 2018, 05:30:38 AM
I spotted what I believe to be the word 'latter' used incorrectly by Cato himself!

Quote from: Cato on May 01, 2018, 03:58:52 AM
I found myself listening to Goetterdaemmerung the most, followed by Das Rheingold, Die Walkuere, and Siegfried.

The latter was not uninteresting musically, and I did enjoy especially the interaction between Mime and Siegfried.

The latter of four? Good grief!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 01, 2018, 05:51:47 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 01, 2018, 05:30:38 AM
I spotted what I believe to be the word 'latter' used incorrectly by Cato himself!

The latter of four? Good grief!
Egads! He will probably explain that he was distracted by his older child!  >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on May 01, 2018, 11:45:39 AM
What would be the correct wording ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 01, 2018, 12:04:26 PM
Quote from: André on May 01, 2018, 11:45:39 AM
What would be the correct wording ?
Last. Latter is of two. Ceci, cela. Except it's backwards in French (as ever ;).
And children are eldest not oldest.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on May 01, 2018, 12:11:01 PM
Quote from: Ken B on May 01, 2018, 12:04:26 PM
Last. Latter is of two. Ceci, cela. Except it's backwards in French (as ever ;).
And children are eldest not oldest.

I thought that latter referred to the last of a list/group.  In French we'd say ce dernier/cette dernière, meaning the last one mentioned.


I've learned something. Thanks ! :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 02, 2018, 09:59:31 AM
Quote from: jessop on May 01, 2018, 05:30:38 AM
I spotted what I believe to be the word 'latter' used incorrectly by Cato himself!

The latter of four? Good grief!

From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

Quote"Can latter be used of more than two?"

There is some controversy afoot regarding the use of latter, particularly regarding its use to refer to items in a series. Many commentators insist that latter can only be used of a series that consists of two:

We have a chicken entree and a vegetarian entree: do you prefer the former or the latter?

When presented with a series of three or more, they say, anyone wishing to highlight the last item in the series should use last and not latter:

We had soup, fish, and dessert, and the last was uninspiring.

But our evidence shows that latter is used to refer to the last in a series regardless of number:


"After Ethel's action at Oxford, the ultimate sacrifice that symbolizes her self-discipline, the focus moves away to other members of her family for the latter third of the novel..."
— Melissa Schaub, Studies in the Novel, Spring 2007

"...I am getting crosser and snappier and sadder every minute straining and struggling to type and to read and to draw (the latter is the easiest)."
— James Thurber, letter, 9 June 1939

"...bee not over-power'd with policie, nor with enforcement of arguments, nor with the approach of Souldiers, and Troopers; the two first may seeme to perswade you, the latter may terrifie you into an everlasting undoing...
— A.L., To all the honest, wise, and grave-citizens of London, but more especially to all those that challenge an interest in the Common-Hall, 1648"

This use is common enough that most modern dictionaries make mention of it in their definitions for latter—and indeed they should, since our evidence for this particular use is several hundred years old. Despite this evidence, however, there are still those who object to its use; if you are concerned about such things, use last to refer to the last item in a series of three or more.
0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 02, 2018, 10:03:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 02, 2018, 09:59:31 AM
From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:
   0:)
Of course if you lower your standards then such things are allowed. Merriam-Webster defines literally as figuratively.

What next Cato? Good, better, better? Fast, faster, faster?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 02, 2018, 10:06:09 AM
A latter-day objection?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 02, 2018, 10:09:59 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 02, 2018, 10:06:09 AM
A latter-day objection?
Still a dichotomy between former days and latter ones. You can use the phrase of an objection made two days ago and so not on the last day.

Last minute reprieve, last chance saloon.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 02, 2018, 02:22:51 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 02, 2018, 10:06:09 AM
A latter-day objection?

A Latter-Day Saint?  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 03, 2018, 12:31:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 02, 2018, 09:59:31 AM
From the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

"...I am getting crosser and snappier and sadder every minute straining and struggling to type and to read and to draw (the latter is the easiest)."
— James Thurber, letter, 9 June 1939

"Last" to my mind has more of a finality about it. If it is an ongoing process, as in Thurber's example, or undefined as in "Latter-Day Saint", I'd say that "latter" is a better choice.

Someone could also carp about the prolix use of "and" in Thurber's letter. However, as the repetition conveys the frustration of choice, there is no need to submit it to the critiques of a juries or editors.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 03, 2018, 04:11:53 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 03, 2018, 12:31:55 AM
"Last" to my mind has more of a finality about it. If it is an ongoing process, as in Thurber's example, or undefined as in "Latter-Day Saint", I'd say that "latter" is a better choice.

Someone could also carp about the prolix use of "and" in Thurber's letter. However, as the repetition conveys the frustration of choice, there is no need to submit it to the critiques of a juries or editors.

Amen!  Second-guessing James Thurber is probably not a good idea!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 03, 2018, 05:28:46 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 03, 2018, 12:31:55 AM
as in "Latter-Day Saint", I'd say that "latter" is a better choice.


Latter day there is still a dichotomy between former and latter and so still latter of two not of many.

This supposed counter example doesn't fit because Cato is saying you use latter for the LAST and the LAST day was yesterday. The phrase does not refer to yesterday.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 03, 2018, 05:35:57 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 03, 2018, 05:28:46 AM
Latter day there is still a dichotomy between former and latter and so still latter of two not of many.

This supposed counter example doesn't fit because Cato is saying you use latter for the LAST and the LAST day was yesterday. The phrase does not refer to yesterday.

Not quite: I am saying that it is allowed (q.v. above), and personally have no objection to it.  Feel free to continue with using "latter" only for "the former...the latter" situations.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 03, 2018, 08:17:41 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 03, 2018, 05:28:46 AM
Latter day there is still a dichotomy between former and latter and so still latter of two not of many.


I don't see a dichotomy between former and latter day saints. Where is the cut off? Mother Teresa is a modern saint (although she and those like her may not be recognized by Mormons).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 03, 2018, 09:28:01 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 03, 2018, 08:17:41 AM
I don't see a dichotomy between former and latter day saints. Where is the cut off? Mother Teresa is a modern saint (although she and those like her may not be recognized by Mormons).
Latter Day Saints is the Mormon term for Mormons.
The cut off is  the time of the Bible vs the later Book of Mormon. That is EXPLICITLY what they mean by Latter-day Saints.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 03, 2018, 02:53:24 PM
Quote from: Ken B on May 03, 2018, 09:28:01 AM

The cut off is  the time of the Bible vs the later Book of Mormon.

Which later Book of Mormon? The text that some dude buried in his backyard or the musical? The former or the latter? ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 03, 2018, 04:48:25 PM
Quote from: jessop on May 03, 2018, 02:53:24 PM
Which later Book of Mormon? The text that some dude buried in his backyard or the musical? The former or the latter? ;D
The answer to the last is the former.  :laugh:  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 04, 2018, 02:07:49 AM
Quote from: Ken B on May 03, 2018, 04:48:25 PM
"Which later Book of Mormon? The text that some dude buried in his backyard or the musical? The former or the latter?"

The answer to the last is the former. 

Only a dual choice, should be "latter".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on May 04, 2018, 05:51:14 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 04, 2018, 02:07:49 AM
Only a dual choice, should be "latter".
Sigh. Sad to have to explain. He asked three questions. Last refers to the third of the three questions. The third question asked former or latter and the answer is former.
But thanks for playing.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on May 04, 2018, 06:49:26 AM
I got the joke btw
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 08, 2018, 02:53:57 AM
Quite a musical typo, actually . . .

Quote
I will be out of the office on business, retuning Monday, May 14th.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 08, 2018, 04:01:01 AM
Just the thing that Mondays need.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 08, 2018, 04:11:00 AM
Grandma used to threaten that any malefactor would "change his tune" after she got done with him! :D

You don't hear that phrase very much these days!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 08, 2018, 04:17:25 AM
Quote from: North Star on May 08, 2018, 04:01:01 AM
Just the thing that Mondays need.

Monday the 14th, most especially, perhaps  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on May 09, 2018, 08:55:40 AM
"Be Best"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 10, 2018, 05:09:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 08, 2018, 04:11:00 AM
Grandma used to threaten that any malefactor would "change his tune" after she got done with him! :D
You don't hear that phrase very much these days!

We do hear "song and dance" however, or at least did!

Maybe this is OT and too much for you to answer here but there were two prompts recently for me to rethink how Latin was taught to us back then. One of them was a reunion (virtual in my case) of former high school classmates, some of whom like myself had 4 years of it. Another was reading a short story by Somerset Maugham in which a character teaches herself to read Latin mainly by the aid of English translations, took only 10 months!

None of us were expected to become fluent so we never had the conversational variety. In fact, learning languages at university was mainly aimed at reading, so where I went at least there was more emphasis on structure and conjugations. Of course without grammar one may as well devote years in learning a language the way children do by stringing everything together, except that structure is implied. Hearing patterns over and over though seems to be the best way for me to grasp a language and make inner connections, also being forced somehow to speak it.

What I am saying is maybe there is a middle way to teach classical languages that are not spoken anymore, so at least some it sticks. Catholic prayers back then were still in Latin as they are in some parts of the world, so there is a chance to recognize phrases and expressions in vivo.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 10, 2018, 05:10:21 AM
mirabile dictu  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 10, 2018, 07:19:11 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 10, 2018, 05:10:21 AM
mirabile dictu  0:)

Sure, it's nice to understand some Latin text when singing or listening to Oratorios and Masses, not to mention, Oedipus Rex. 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 10, 2018, 07:25:03 AM
Indeed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 10, 2018, 07:33:37 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 10, 2018, 07:25:03 AM
Indeed.

Spoken like a gentleman!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 10, 2018, 07:56:30 AM
One tries.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 10, 2018, 08:11:11 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 10, 2018, 05:09:18 AM
We do hear "song and dance" however, or at least did!

Maybe this is OT and too much for you to answer here but there were two prompts recently for me to rethink how Latin was taught to us back then. One of them was a reunion (virtual in my case) of former high school classmates, some of whom like myself had 4 years of it. Another was reading a short story by Somerset Maugham in which a character teaches herself to read Latin mainly by the aid of English translations, took only 10 months!

None of us were expected to become fluent so we never had the conversational variety. In fact, learning languages at university was mainly aimed at reading, so where I went at least there was more emphasis on structure and conjugations. Of course without grammar one may as well devote years in learning a language the way children do by stringing everything together, except that structure is implied. Hearing patterns over and over though seems to be the best way for me to grasp a language and make inner connections, also being forced somehow to speak it.

What I am saying is maybe there is a middle way to teach classical languages that are not spoken anymore, so at least some it sticks. Catholic prayers back then were still in Latin as they are in some parts of the world, so there is a chance to recognize phrases and expressions in vivo.

Yes, and that is what I attempt to do, at least some of the time, in my Latin course for the 6th, 7th, and 8th Grades.  While I do not push "Conversational Latin" in the same way as I would in my German courses, I do try to make it an element.  My text (the Cambridge Latin Series) does in fact have recordings of part of the books for "Listening and Speaking Practice."

Our instructional periods, however, are all of 40 minutes, which actually equals less than that by the time everyone is settled and ready to go!  So Conversational Latin becomes something of a luxury.  Nevertheless, I do try to speak the language out loud, so that the music can be sensed.

And speaking of music, I have used excerpts from Stravinsky's Oedipus Rex, Mozart's Latin opera Apollo et Hyacinthus, and a good number of religious works by Bruckner, Theodore Dubois, et al. with Latin texts.

There was a professor named Waldo Sweet (Sic!) who published a textbook designed to be used for learning Latin in an oral/aural fashion.  Latin: A Structural Approach used hundreds of "pattern sentences" in a question-and-answer format, along with stick-figure drawings  8) , and expected students to glean what was happening from assorted cues and clues.  To be sure, charts were still present, but the method used a more intuitive approach.

Perhaps it is still in print?  My copy dates from 1957!  ???   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 10, 2018, 08:42:33 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 10, 2018, 08:11:11 AM
Yes, and that is what I attempt to do, at least some of the time, in my Latin course for the 6th, 7th, and 8th Grades.  While I do not push "Conversational Latin" in the same way as I would in my German courses, I do try to make it an element.  My text (the Cambridge Latin Series) does in fact have recordings of part of the books for "Listening and Speaking Practice."

Our instructional periods, however, are all of 40 minutes, which actually equals less than that by the time everyone is settled and ready to go!  So Conversational Latin becomes something of a luxury.  Nevertheless, I do try to speak the language out loud, so that the music can be sensed.

And speaking of music, I have used excerpts from Stravinsky's Oedipus Rex, Mozart's Latin opera Apollo et Hyacinthus, and a good number of religious works by Bruckner, Theodore Dubois, et al. with Latin texts.

There was a professor named Waldo Sweet (Sic!) who published a textbook designed to be used for learning Latin in an oral/aural fashion.  Latin: A Structural Approach used hundreds of "pattern sentences" in a question-and-answer format, along with stick-figure drawings  8) , and expected students to glean what was happening from assorted cues and clues.  To be sure, charts were still present, but the method used a more intuitive approach. Perhaps it is still in print?  My copy dates from 1957!  ???   ;)

Hooking up with my girlfriends and trading anecdotes from way back when sort of opened that question for me as I struggled with quite a few different languages over the years. I went through about 100 videos on Classical Arabic last year but somehow it reminded me of Latin when I didn't have too much takeaway unless I wanted to dig deeper into the historical texts. We did of course Julius Caesar and Aeneid that I hardly remember.

This year I am getting much more out of spoken Japanese by different teachers on youtube. These stick better because I have some grammar background but never really tuned my ear in the two university courses I took some time ago, even having been in Japan for some short periods. It's great to be able to go back or repeat the lessons which eventually fills in the gaps that didn't register the 1st or 2nd time when hearing them.

Learning about learning is always part of what I can't help myself doing when taking courses, so I thought that Latin could and should have some more practical applications. As much as I appreciated my teacher back then, I am not even sure that she could herself converse in basic Latin. Meanwhile, I have been listening to lectures on the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg (!688-1772) who wrote in Latin and must have been quite conversant in it. The fact he published his books in Latin must have meant that there were those sufficiently able to read them without consulting a dictionary.

Do you use Italian or German pronunciation? In my school the Italian was used.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 10, 2018, 08:52:08 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 10, 2018, 08:42:33 AM
This year I am getting much more out of spoken Japanese by different teachers on youtube. These stick better because I have some grammar background but never really tuned my ear in the two university courses I took some time ago, even having been in Japan for some short periods. It's great to be able to go back or repeat the lessons which eventually fills in the gaps that didn't register the 1st or 2nd time when hearing them.

Good on ya!  I applied myself to Japanese for some four or five years, but in my honest appraisal, I did not get very much of anywhere.  My nephew dabbles in Japanese, I should sound him out, in a non-threatening way  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on May 10, 2018, 08:58:28 AM
I read Japanese passably well (enough to read a newspaper without needing a dictionary too often, though a lot of names are difficult), but I haven't had a real conversation in the language in a while.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 10, 2018, 09:40:05 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 10, 2018, 08:42:33 AM

Do you use Italian or German pronunciation? In my school the Italian was used.


Well, I use what here is called the Classical Pronunciation, i.e. what the Romans (supposedly) used for all the sounds, e.g. v = w, c = k (all the time), etc.  As a pre-Vatican II Catholic I also can use the Ecclesiastical Pronunciation (is that what you mean by Italian?) where a "c" before certain vowels or diphthongs becomes a "ch" ("tsch" in German) sound.

But the inherent music in my pronunciation has a certain italienisches Geschmack !   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 11, 2018, 02:22:50 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 10, 2018, 08:52:08 AM
Good on ya!  I applied myself to Japanese for some four or five years, but in my honest appraisal, I did not get very much of anywhere.  My nephew dabbles in Japanese, I should sound him out, in a non-threatening way  8)

Well, Otoosan is Japanese so that makes my kids half-Nipponese.
The order of words in a Japanese sentence is backwards from English, so it is really hard for a person like me to change my way of thinking, a real stumbling block. Maybe Germans have an easier time of it since their verbs are usually at the end of a sentence.
I find their transcriptions of foreign words into their katakana mind-boggling.
Also somewhat amusing is the way they truncate foreign words to make their own idiomatic abbreviations. What they don't realize is splitting of roots so they become unrecognizable. You can break your head over say, "Pasu-con" (personal computer), until it sinks in that only one or two syllables of the words have been retained.
They use this type of abbreviation in Chinese derived combinations that for them make sense, or as in days of the week where an equivalent might be Mon for Monday or Wed for Wednesday.
To sum up, my conclusion over many years of assocation is their thinking, and not only having to do with language, is really different, sometimes from a different planet.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2018, 03:39:29 AM
And let us not forget:  toiretto peepaa!


Say, have you ever tried Pokkari Sweat?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 11, 2018, 03:55:34 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 11, 2018, 03:39:29 AM

And let us not forget:  toiretto peepaa!


Is that an "epic fail" of sorts?  :D

I recall that the term "epic fail" is credited to - or blamed on - a Japanese video game.

One source says the origin is unknown, but here is another claim from ten years ago:

QuoteI would link to a wiki site explaining it, but it's not exactly SFW, so I'll paraphrase.

It started from a blurb from an old game called Blazing Star for the Neo-Geo. It was a side-scrolling shooter game that had an awful case of Engrish. When you lost, it would pop up with this quote:

Quote from Blazing Star »

Quote"You fail it! Your skill is not enough, see you next time, bye-bye!"


The popular imageboard website 4chan took the image and started applying it as an internet meme, simply condensing it into 'You fail', and 'fail.' This was combined with another popular meme term, 'Epic', meaning something of enormous magnitude or significance. Essentially, "Epic Fail" means you totally screwed up and are a total loser.[/font][/i][/size]

https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/talk-and-entertainment/459196-what-is-the-origin-of-epic-fail (https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/talk-and-entertainment/459196-what-is-the-origin-of-epic-fail)

On the other hand, Merriam-Webster says "fail" as a noun is not unknown in earlier English.  So perhaps the term is not so "outre" after all!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 11, 2018, 04:10:57 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 11, 2018, 03:39:29 AM
And let us not forget:  toiretto peepaa!
Say, have you ever tried Pokkari Sweat?

Cal-pis is quite good to drink though, of Mongolian origin.

We used to bring home "Creap", dried creamy powder to put in hot drinks because it was so much fun to giggle at time and again. "Creap" was available for years. I don't know if they still make it.

The funniest though is the ongoing NHK BS News. NHK World without the BS is the foreign equivalent. It's like no one had the nerve to inform them what BS means in English.
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHK_BSニュース

My son was dumbfounded at a summer camp in Oshima seeing a woman counselor wearing a sweat shirt with the word "bitch" plastered on it. I mean, what can one say?

Cos-puray (Costume play) gives me the creeps, the word and the concept.

zb
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 11, 2018, 04:23:56 AM
You can read here about "What makes Creap so great?"

http://www.creap.jp/english/lineup/index.html

Creap can be paired with Blendy:
http://www.backofthecerealbox.com/2012/03/adventures-of-creap-and-blendy.html

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y1vnoPm0MzA/T2ra_Ufz4EI/AAAAAAAAH2M/1PHIDabbGQk/s1600/kidicarus222-creap.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-igyc3KktEw8/T2ra-xQgHqI/AAAAAAAAH2E/Gyilw6huyRo/s640/kidicarus222-blendy.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2018, 04:57:29 AM
Wonderful!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on May 11, 2018, 05:12:52 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 11, 2018, 03:39:29 AMSay, have you ever tried Pokkari Sweat?

One time on Miyajima and severely dehydrated, an overpriced bottle of Pokkari Sweat was the best tasting drink I'd ever had...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2018, 05:14:47 AM
The question remains open, then  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 11, 2018, 05:44:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 11, 2018, 03:55:34 AM
On the other hand, Merriam-Webster says "fail" as a noun is not unknown in earlier English.  So perhaps the term is not so "outre" after all!  ;)
It certainly wouldn't be the first time when that has happened in English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2018, 06:09:33 AM
Verily.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 11, 2018, 06:27:04 AM
Quote from: Mahlerian on May 11, 2018, 05:12:52 AM
One time on Miyajima and severely dehydrated, an overpriced bottle of Pokkari Sweat was the best tasting drink I'd ever had...

I never knew what to make of Pocari Sweat so hardly ever drank it, maybe the 2nd word put me off. Prompted by you guys I finally know what it is:

POCARI SWEAT is a health drink that contains a balance of ions (electrolytes) that resembles the natural fluid balance in the human body. Quickly and easily replenishes the water and ions that your body needs, and quenches every part of you.

https://www.otsuka.co.jp/en/nutraceutical/products/pocarisweat/

There are some other intriguing products at the bottom of the page like SOYJOY, theCALCIUM, Beanstalk, and Jogmate PROTEIN JELLY.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 11, 2018, 06:40:17 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on May 11, 2018, 04:23:56 AM
You can read here about "What makes Creap so great?"

http://www.creap.jp/english/lineup/index.html

Creap can be paired with Blendy:
http://www.backofthecerealbox.com/2012/03/adventures-of-creap-and-blendy.html

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y1vnoPm0MzA/T2ra_Ufz4EI/AAAAAAAAH2M/1PHIDabbGQk/s1600/kidicarus222-creap.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-igyc3KktEw8/T2ra-xQgHqI/AAAAAAAAH2E/Gyilw6huyRo/s640/kidicarus222-blendy.jpg)

I am reminded of a brochure I obtained long ago..

Yes, from the depths of the vast Cato Archives comes a brochure from Taiwan concerning (I am NOT making this up)...

Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills!!! ??? :o

Underneath the logo (a cow's head of course) one reads:

Quote: "Take care of the imitation and recognize our chop, please!"  ???

Now, you are undoubtedly asking yourself: "What exactly will Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills do for me?

I'm glad you asked that!

Quote: "Angiosclerosis is attributed to overfatigue, overworking, insomnia or influence of food which cause blood overstrong or poison black, to become arteriosclerosis and vascular spasm, the unbalance of blood circulation to cause rise of blood, when you have such diseases you fell always headache, dizzy, neckache, ear deaf, and can't sleep, palsy, nostalgia, lumbago, muscleache, boneache, skin and flesh or whole body always feel bounce and ache, etc.  If you have such diseases you'd better use Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills and the blood will be balanced and circulated well, which will not invite the danger of life!"


My emphasis above...although... ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on May 11, 2018, 06:52:29 AM
I'll remember Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills the next time I'm suffering from nostalgia or when my "whole body always feel bounce".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 11, 2018, 06:58:40 AM
Quote from: North Star on May 11, 2018, 06:52:29 AM
I'll remember Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills the next time I'm suffering from nostalgia or when my "whole body always feel bounce".

The ingredients include cinnamon, frankincense, and myrrh!  $:) :D  Who knew?!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 11, 2018, 07:08:37 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 11, 2018, 06:40:17 AM
I am reminded of a brochure I obtained long ago..

Yes, from the depths of the vast Cato Archives comes a brochure from Taiwan concerning (I am NOT making this up)...

Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills!!! ??? :o

Underneath the logo (a cow's head of course) one reads:

Quote: "Take care of the imitation and recognize our chop, please!"  ???

Now, you are undoubtedly asking yourself: "What exactly will Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills do for me?

I'm glad you asked that!

Quote: "Angiosclerosis is attributed to overfatigue, overworking, insomnia or influence of food which cause blood overstrong or poison black, to become arteriosclerosis and vascular spasm, the unbalance of blood circulation to cause rise of blood, when you have such diseases you fell always headache, dizzy, neckache, ear deaf, and can't sleep, palsy, nostalgia, lumbago, muscleache, boneache, skin and flesh or whole body always feel bounce and ache, etc.  If you have such diseases you'd better use Cow's Head Brand Tung Shueh Pills and the blood will be balanced and circulated well, which will not invite the danger of life!"


My emphasis above...although... ;)

You can't believe everything you read however. This Cow Ghee doesn't have any cow in it either:

Startlingly... what Patanjali often sells as "cow" ghee is not cow ghee at all. It is actually ghee that is made from white butter that is, in turn, made of the milk of various animals, not just cows, that is procured from small and marginal producers in various parts of the country...white butter is cooked until all the milk solids are caramelised and strained, you get ghee.

(https://5.imimg.com/data5/AT/LE/MY-40919660/patanjali-cow-ghee-500x500.png)

Many years ago, I used ghee or samna (what they call it around here) for cooking, in particular deep frying and it is excellent!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2018, 07:16:57 AM
My whole body always feel bounce, and the only remedy is more vibraslap.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on May 11, 2018, 07:22:48 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 11, 2018, 07:16:57 AM
My whole body always feel bounce, and the only remedy is more vibraslap.

I just bang on the piano, doesn't cost money either.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 11, 2018, 10:31:57 AM
Good strategy!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Kennel Konundrum + Curious Aksayents
Post by: Cato on June 15, 2018, 02:17:19 PM
So, my favorite local television news does it again!   8)

They recently pushed a story about "Children Kept in a Kennel!"

(Depending on the children, that can be a good idea!  ;)  )

Anyway, it turns out that what they mean by "kennel" is actually a traveling cage for dogs.  They show some grandmother opening up the back of a van, and a child hops out of a cage used for transporting dogs.  The scene was captured by one of the ubiquitous cameras in a cellular phone, whose owner promptly called the police to report this (non) tragedy.  It seems the child was so rambunctious that grandma decided the dog cage was the only solution to transporting him, since he constantly unbuckled his seat belt.  We were supposed to be horrified by this solution!  $:)

Throughout the story, however, the cage is constantly referred to as a "kennel."

Has anyone ever seen or heard "kennel" being used as a synonym for "cage" ?  The Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries do not agree, neither do two others, one specifically using the definition "a place where dogs are bred, raised, and trained" as the only definition.  The others agreed with this, however one also used the term "shelter" and one used the term "doghouse" for either primary or secondary definitions.

And now...Curious Aksayents! 0:)

The car radio often has "Country Music" from a local radio station: two songs played (too often) offer "singers"  who somehow manage to twist three or four sounds out of one vowel!

One example:   a woman "singer"  (I do not know her name or the name of the song)  somehow pronounces "closet" as "clu-au-zet" (with an up-and-down wiggle on the "au") and then makes it "ram" (rhyme) with "lost it"  (lu-au-stit).  A second troubadour is able to spit out the word "ice" so that it is a homonym with the three-letter word for the donkey-like animal which carried Jesus into Jerusalem!  :o ???  Another is able to make "dance" come out as "da-yunz" (the "a" as in "as") and make it rhyme with "fra-yunz" (i.e. "friends").

As Mr. Spock would say...

https://www.youtube.com/v/W6MkESn1v1w

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Kennel Konundrum + Curious Aksayents
Post by: Sergeant Rock on June 15, 2018, 02:32:31 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 15, 2018, 02:17:19 PM
Has anyone ever seen or heard "kennel" being used as a synonym for "cage" ?

Check out Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=dog+kennel

Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Kennel Konundrum + Curious Aksayents
Post by: Cato on June 15, 2018, 03:16:06 PM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on June 15, 2018, 02:32:31 PM
Check out Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=dog+kennel

Sarge

Interesting: I wonder if "cage" has become too primitive for our dog-obsessed populace, and so the Yuppies cannot bear the thought of putting their pooches in a "cage"!  8)   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Kennel Konundrum + Curious Aksayents
Post by: Ken B on June 15, 2018, 05:43:29 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 15, 2018, 03:16:06 PM
Interesting: I wonder if "cage" has become too primitive for our dog-obsessed populace, and so the Yuppies cannot bear the thought of putting their pooches in a "cage"!  8)   ;)

The daughter in law bought a dog ( :( ) We have both a "crate" and a "pen". I searched Amazon for "blender" but found none big enough.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Kennel Konundrum + Curious Aksayents
Post by: Cato on June 15, 2018, 06:04:21 PM
Quote from: Ken B on June 15, 2018, 05:43:29 PM
The daughter in law bought a dog ( :( ) We have both a "crate" and a "pen". I searched Amazon for "blender" but found none big enough.

Don't get me started!  My son and daughter-in-law have 3 (THREE!!!) big, dumb, shedding, slobbering dogs, and have spent way too much money on cages, crates, pens, and "doggie day-care," i.e. a kennel!  ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 16, 2018, 02:51:24 AM
Quote from: Ken B on June 15, 2018, 05:43:29 PM
The daughter in law bought a dog ( :( ) We have both a "crate" and a "pen". I searched Amazon for "blender" but found none big enough.

Try key word pooch processor
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble: Kennel Konundrum + Curious Aksayents
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 16, 2018, 07:30:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on June 15, 2018, 02:17:19 PM
The car radio often has "Country Music" from a local radio station: two songs played (too often) offer "singers"  who somehow manage to twist three or four sounds out of one vowel!

One example:   a woman "singer"  (I do not know her name or the name of the song)  somehow pronounces "closet" as "clu-au-zet" (with an up-and-down wiggle on the "au") and then makes it "ram" (rhyme) with "lost it"  (lu-au-stit).  A second troubadour is able to spit out the word "ice" so that it is a homonym with the three-letter word for the donkey-like animal which carried Jesus into Jerusalem!  :o ???  Another is able to make "dance" come out as "da-yunz" (the "a" as in "as") and make it rhyme with "fra-yunz" (i.e. "friends").


I am writing without source material, only from memory right now, so there may be some errors. When I was more into phonetics I read some articles about language shifts once they crossed the pond from East to West. Some of the results in English were dipthongization (in your example, more like tripthong or even more) and palatization. (Maybe there are some linguists here who actually know the subject better than I do.)

Lengthening vowels has a built in tendency for their integrity to be altered but it is not impossible to resist that trend with some prodding by a voice teacher, in my case, who patiently corrected me everytime I slid from an eh to ayyy.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 16, 2018, 08:06:28 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 16, 2018, 07:30:36 AM
Lengthening vowels has a built in tendency for their integrity to be altered but it is not impossible to resist that trend with some prodding by a voice teacher, in my case, who patiently corrected me everytime I slid from an eh to ayyy.

Pretty regularly, it is necessary to remind my choir to sing Al-leh-luia, rather than Al-lay-luia . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 16, 2018, 08:13:48 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 16, 2018, 08:06:28 AM
Pretty regularly, it is necessary to remind my choir to sing Al-leh-luia, rather than Al-lay-luia . . . .

Honestly, I didn't hear myself until my Russian teacher mimicked what I was doing.
It could have been Manuel Garcia, the famous 19th century mentor, who suggested reproduction as an excellent way to point out errors.
Now we have recording, of course, something I usually shrinked from.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 16, 2018, 08:16:28 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on June 16, 2018, 08:13:48 AM
Honestly, I didn't hear myself until my Russian teacher mimicked what I was doing.
It could have been Manuel Garcia, the famous 19th century mentor, who suggested reproduction as an excellent way to point out errors.
Now we have recording, of course, something I usually shrinked from.

Over time, they are apt to forget;  but then when they correct the vowel, they hear, themselves, how much better the tuning is.

But, yes . . . I periodically need to remind them  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on June 16, 2018, 08:31:32 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 16, 2018, 08:16:28 AM
Over time, they are apt to forget;  but then when they correct the vowel, they hear, themselves, how much better the tuning is. But, yes . . . I periodically need to remind them  :)

It's REALLY important in choirs that EVERYONE is singing the SAME vowel quality.
This makes for a really clean sound.
Not all conductors are aware of it, because their ears may not be attuned to this aspect.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ComposerOfAvantGarde on June 17, 2018, 02:24:09 AM
Cats > dogs. When will humans ever learn?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2018, 02:58:33 AM
Geo. Will ought to know better!

Merriam-Webster.com : "to attack or defeat (a nominee or candidate for public office) unfairly through an organized campaign of harsh public criticism or vilification." For further illustration of the verb, stay tuned to what is sure to greet whomever is nominated to replace Kennedy.

Ought to be whoever is nominated, of course—subject of the clause, it is the clause which is the object of the verb greet, not the pronoun.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on June 28, 2018, 09:06:49 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 28, 2018, 02:58:33 AM
Geo. Will ought to know better!

Merriam-Webster.com : "to attack or defeat (a nominee or candidate for public office) unfairly through an organized campaign of harsh public criticism or vilification." For further illustration of the verb, stay tuned to what is sure to greet whomever is nominated to replace Kennedy.

Ought to be whoever is nominated, of course—subject of the clause, it is the clause which is the object of the verb greet, not the pronoun.
Yup. Famous example:  "Let him who is without sin sit next to someone else"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 26, 2018, 01:47:18 PM
From the Wall Street Journal...(Shame, shame!)...

Quote
"In this edition: A "prime place" to look for life on Mars, how Steve Jobs saw the future and high-tech help for eating disorders and insomnia."
Except...Steve Jobs is never mentioned in the article!  There is nothing about how Steve Jobs saw "high-tech help for eating disorders and insomnia."   ;)

One could quibble about the "A" after the colon.   $:)   But...baby steps!   0:)

So let's fix things!
Quote
In this edition: A "prime place" to look for life on Mars, how Steve Jobs saw the future, and high-tech help for eating disorders and insomnia.

The "ironic" (?) quotation marks around "prime place" I did not understand as ironic: the article informs us that an area with underground water is the prime place to search for Martian life.  Why it was so important to make that phrase a "quotation" was unclear.  Perhaps an attempt at a pun, e.g. "priming the pump" to look for life (?).   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mahlerian on August 02, 2018, 09:39:48 AM
Apparently some are up in arms about some of the wording found in a new health and wellness textbook.  The whole article is about how people lack reading comprehension, but this passage in particular stood out to me.

QuoteAnother much-criticized passage says that "when obsessed with weight, many if not most women and some men have become habitual dieters." Some have read it to mean that most women are habitual dieters.

???

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/08/02/face-criticism-hes-holocaust-victim-blamer-co-author-wellness-textbook-says-he-meant
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 02, 2018, 09:46:37 AM
Quote from: Mahlerian on August 02, 2018, 09:39:48 AM
Apparently some are up in arms about some of the wording found in a new health and wellness textbook.  The whole article is about how people lack reading comprehension, but this passage in particular stood out to me.

???

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/08/02/face-criticism-hes-holocaust-victim-blamer-co-author-wellness-textbook-says-he-meant
When unable to breathe most people suffocate.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 06, 2018, 08:45:33 AM
Great little typo, in a legitimate professional e-mail message:  IMPORTANT INFORMTATION
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on August 06, 2018, 08:54:08 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 06, 2018, 08:45:33 AM
Great little typo, in a legitimate professional e-mail message:  IMPORTANT INFORMTATION
...and I suppose they can't blame that one on autocorrect.  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 06, 2018, 08:55:06 AM
In fact, one would think that is the sort of obvious "fat finger" mistake that autocorrect ought to help us with . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on August 06, 2018, 08:59:47 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 06, 2018, 08:55:06 AM
In fact, one would think that is the sort of obvious "fat finger" mistake that autocorrect ought to help us with . . . .
The problem is that, in my experience, on some devices/programs autocorrect can be double-edged sword: if you somehow "insist" on a mistake once for whatever reason (poor eyesight?  :D), it'll automatically add the mistaken word in its memory, and suggest it to you even when you've written the correct one...  >:(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 06, 2018, 09:52:06 AM
Quote from: ritter on August 06, 2018, 08:59:47 AM
The problem is that, in my experience, on some devices/programs autocorrect can be double-edged sword: if you somehow "insist" on a mistake once for whatever reason (poor eyesight?  :D), it'll automatically add the mistaken word in its memory, and suggest it to you even when you've written the correct one...  >:(

Aye, I have seen that in operation, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 06, 2018, 10:38:00 AM


Quote from: ritter on August 06, 2018, 08:59:47 AM
The problem is that, in my experience, on some devices/programs autocorrect can be double-edged sword: if you somehow "insist" on a mistake once for whatever reason (poor eyesight?  :D), it'll automatically add the mistaken word in its memory, and suggest it to you even when you've written the correct one...  >:(

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 06, 2018, 09:52:06 AM
Aye, I have seen that in operation, too.

I have indeed wondered about "computers that learn:" is it never possible that they learn the wrong things?

Should we quote the famous computer HAL about human errors?   :D

Quote from: Mahlerian on August 02, 2018, 09:39:48 AM
Apparently some are up in arms about some of the wording found in a new health and wellness textbook.  The whole article is about how people lack reading comprehension, but this passage in particular stood out to me.

???

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/08/02/face-criticism-hes-holocaust-victim-blamer-co-author-wellness-textbook-says-he-meant

I heard about this controversy, but did not look into it very much.  Is this another case of people trying to feel insulted and outraged about something?

Today this was heard on a radio ad for a dentist/orthodontist company:

"Dental implants will give you increased comfort and chewability."   ???

Mrs. Cato found the word odd, and thought that "chewing ability" would be much clearer.  "Better mastication" could be used, except some might misunderstand it for something very, very different!  ;)

"Chewable" of course is used for things like soft pills.  I suppose one could understand "chewability" as the degree of a pill's chewiness.

What say ye? 



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 06, 2018, 10:41:38 AM
On a previous phone (or, this phone, before however many System Updates) it was an easy process to get the phone to erase an erroneous word which had somehow sidled into the Dictionary.  Now, it's User-Proof!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 06, 2018, 10:42:32 AM
I don't care for that application of chewability, no.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 06, 2018, 11:04:12 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 06, 2018, 10:42:32 AM
I don't care for that application of chewability, no.

I found this in a pharmacological journal on-line:

Quote The official Pharmacopeia does not include a test procedure for the in vitro estimation of the chewability of tablets and publications in the scientific literature on this subject are rare. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a number of different test procedures for assessing chewability, starting from standard breaking force and strength testing and progressing to develop new procedures that simulate the actual chewing action on tablets. A further goal was to apply these test procedures to characterize the chewability of the novel phosphate binder PA21

To be sure, I could not find the word on-line from a standard dictionary.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 07, 2018, 03:24:08 AM
I accept chewability as a property of the chewed, but not of the chewer  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 07, 2018, 12:10:12 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 07, 2018, 03:24:08 AM
I accept chewability as a property of the chewed, but not of the chewer  0:)

But what about self-chewing bubble-gum?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-licking_ice_cream_cone (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-licking_ice_cream_cone)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 10, 2018, 03:31:13 AM
From a theater review in today's (Aug. 10, 2018) Wall Street Journal:

Quote...Mr. Leaf is the author of... "The Germans in Paris"...about...an... encounter between Heinrich Heine, Karl Marx (,) and Richard Wagner.

Sigh! Complaining about the misuse of "between" when more than two items are involved is seeming ever more quixotic.  And for some reason a few years ago the Wall Street Journal became infected by such sloppiness (I suspect there are fewer copy editors/proof-readers) along with the mistake of dropping the Oxford comma.  In earlier days such errors were very, very rare: now they are easily found every day!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 10, 2018, 03:35:58 AM
Between you and I . . . .











:laugh:   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 10, 2018, 04:33:01 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 10, 2018, 03:35:58 AM
Between you and I . . . .











:laugh:   0:)

Oh, don't get me started!!!    :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 10, 2018, 04:38:17 AM
(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on August 10, 2018, 05:42:21 AM
Oh, the Oxford comma, that peculiarity of  English syntax....

Remember this eyesore?

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/515Vpq6g35L.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: MN Dave on August 10, 2018, 06:23:31 AM
Lots of writers I know LOVE the Oxford comma.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 10, 2018, 07:28:27 AM
Quote from: MN Dave on August 10, 2018, 06:23:31 AM
Lots of writers I know LOVE the Oxford comma.
I try to remember to use it. It makes sense and as a bonus it pisses some people off.

The OED disagrees with Cato.  https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/between (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/between) The OED is correct. Between numerous parties is a perfectly idiomatic usage. There are, as is often the case, subtle differences between the animate and inanimate cases. So in all other usages a pair of alternatives is correct, but not so with people.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 12, 2018, 04:25:49 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 10, 2018, 07:28:27 AM
I try to remember to use it. It makes sense and as a bonus it pisses some people off.

The OED disagrees with Cato.  https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/between (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/between) The OED is correct. Between numerous parties is a perfectly idiomatic usage. There are, as is often the case, subtle differences between the animate and inanimate cases. So in all other usages a pair of alternatives is correct, but not so with people.

The Oxford comma does indeed make sense, and I find its demise just another sign of civilizational decline, right up there with "then" replacing "than" among the illiterati.  8)

I will agree to disagree with the esteemed Oxford   0:)  English   0:)   Dictionary!   :D    I have great experience in being a minority of one.   ;)   Using "between" when three people are listed just strikes me as odd.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 12, 2018, 04:40:08 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 10, 2018, 07:28:27 AM
I try to remember to use it. It makes sense and as a bonus it pisses some people off.

But . . . does it make sense in Brahms Symphonies Nos. 1, 2, 3, & 4?  To my eye it looketh unnecessitated.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 12, 2018, 05:50:43 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 12, 2018, 04:40:08 AM
But . . . does it make sense in Brahms Symphonies Nos. 1, 2, 3, & 4?  To my eye it looketh unnecessitated.
It does look odd in that I agree. My first thought was it was the &, but actually that explanation is wrong. Examples of lines: straight, red, Mason & Dixon. So maybe it's the numerals.

However it's a great example that I am certain will piss people off trying to respond to it.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 12, 2018, 06:04:54 AM
I suppose it is inevitable that we piss some people off, and the fact that we enjoy doing so is a bonus . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 12, 2018, 07:13:41 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 12, 2018, 04:40:08 AM
But . . . does it make sense in Brahms Symphonies Nos. 1, 2, 3, & 4?  To my eye it looketh unnecessitated.

Easier: The Complete Brahms Symphonies !  0:)  Or one could use I-IV.

Here is something I have seen on a labor union's billboard:  "Knockout Right to Work Laws!"

These can be found around Columbus (the state capital of Ohio). 

(For the non-Americans, "right-to-work laws" allow employees to be hired at a company and NOT pay dues to the union (at least partially, depending on the state), if they disagree with the union's assorted extra-workplace activities.)

Anyway, nobody has taken a red pen to the billboards yet!   ;)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 17, 2018, 06:15:59 AM
At a school meeting, we were supposed to come up with phrases about how we approach grading, testing, etc.  (Yes, a worthless exercise.)

One of my colleagues said: "How about Opportunity to Exceed ?"

This was automatically written down, and nobody said anything about the odd phrase.

So I said: "That really needs a direct object.  How about Opportunity to Exceed Mediocrity ?"   ;)

"Mediocrity" was unacceptable, and was replaced by "standards," i.e. the minimum acceptable achievement, i.e. mediocrity!  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 17, 2018, 06:44:08 AM
Opportunity to Excess!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 17, 2018, 08:30:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on August 17, 2018, 06:15:59 AM
At a school meeting, we were supposed to come up with phrases about how we approach grading, testing, etc.  (Yes, a worthless exercise.)

One of my colleagues said: "How about Opportunity to Exceed ?"

This was automatically written down, and nobody said anything about the odd phrase.

So I said: "That really needs a direct object.  How about Opportunity to Exceed Mediocrity ?"   ;)

"Mediocrity" was unacceptable, and was replaced by "standards," i.e. the minimum acceptable achievement, i.e. mediocrity!  0:)

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 17, 2018, 06:44:08 AM
Opportunity to Excess!

8)  That misinterpretation was my fear, along with parents thinking we did not know the difference between "exceed" and "succeed."    $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 17, 2018, 08:31:51 AM
Your Path to Maxi-ocrity!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 20, 2018, 05:10:33 AM
He prayeth well, who loveth well
Both man and bird and beast


According to Ken, this is wrong. But he is a mathematician so there is a way to make it right:

He prayeth well, who loveth well
Both man and (bird and beast)
.

:laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 20, 2018, 07:53:02 AM
Quote from: Florestan on August 20, 2018, 05:10:33 AM
He prayeth well, who loveth well
Both man and bird and beast


According to Ken, this is wrong. But he is a mathematician so there is a way to make it right:

He prayeth well, who loveth well
Both man and (bird and beast)
.

:laugh:

Finally someone who understands the right associative law!

But I was the one who said that between can be more than two when persons are involved, this seems more like a shot you should aim at Cato, et al.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 20, 2018, 09:16:48 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 20, 2018, 07:53:02 AM
Finally someone who understands the right associative law!

Well, I'm a mechanical engineer by trade, so the basics of mathematics is no stranger to me.  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 20, 2018, 09:22:55 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 20, 2018, 07:53:02 AM
a shot you should aim at Cato

Here is one:

Quote from: Cato on August 20, 2018, 07:42:27 AM
Theodore Dubois: Symphonie Francaise.

Française, dear Leo, française --- pour l'amour de Dieu!  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 21, 2018, 03:07:08 PM
Quote from: Florestan on August 20, 2018, 09:22:55 AM
Here is one:

Française, dear Leo, française --- pour l'amour de Dieu!  ;D

:D    My mind was obviously in English "capitalize major words in a title" mode, e.g.  The Scarlet Letter

One would never see (or should never see) The scarlet Letter, although lower case for adjectives also works in German as well as French, e.g.  Die vertauschten Koepfe  (by Thomas Mann).  The exception to that in German would be a title where the adjective is the first word, e.g. Koenigliche Hoheit (by Thomas Mann).

Speaking of curious things...

Yesterday at school I met the grandmother of one of my 7th Grade Latin students.  Now the hallway is full of noise, and I hear the grandmother speaking to me in what seems to be a thick foreign accent.  I am trying to determine which country she might be from, until the noise dissipates and I hear her say:

"Moi dohder heah took Latin in wunna da best  public high schools, but she don't know fer nuddin' now!"

I asked: "So where in Brooklyn did you live?" 

"Greenpurnt!  Howja know dat?"   8)  (Greenpoint!  How did you know that?)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on August 21, 2018, 03:15:20 PM
I think it was a case of the missing cédille, Leo !
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 21, 2018, 04:59:36 PM
Quote from: André on August 21, 2018, 03:15:20 PM
I think it was a case of the missing cédille, Leo !

Aha!  My computer probably has those special characters for documents off the Internet, but will not add them on things like GMG.  That's why e.g. for German umlauts,  I must write them as "ae," "oe," or "ue."

Occasionally I can paste them in from a neutral source, but that does not always work.  I believe it has to do with LINUX, which my son installed on my computer, since he despises "the junk from Bill Gates."   :o ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 21, 2018, 08:48:03 PM
Quote from: André on August 21, 2018, 03:15:20 PM
I think it was a case of the missing cédille, Leo !
I misplaced mine months ago.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 22, 2018, 07:13:21 AM
Quote from: André on August 21, 2018, 03:15:20 PM
I think it was a case of the missing cédille, Leo !

Quote from: Ken B on August 21, 2018, 08:48:03 PM
I misplaced mine months ago.

To quote (almost) the Disney song from The Little Mermaid, it might be "Under the C."  ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 05, 2018, 01:14:13 AM
https://youtu.be/IzNGkwGYE4E (https://youtu.be/IzNGkwGYE4E)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 05, 2018, 05:38:59 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 05, 2018, 01:14:13 AM
https://youtu.be/IzNGkwGYE4E (https://youtu.be/IzNGkwGYE4E)

TRIGGER WARNING!   8) :D

"Luis gets it!"  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: EddieRUKiddingVarese on September 05, 2018, 03:02:05 PM
I just wont even start...............
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on September 07, 2018, 04:56:41 PM
A common eggcorn perhaps, but finding it in the Washington Post was a surprise nonetheless: « free reign » instead of « free rein » at the end of the first paragraph.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/09/07/obama-just-delivered-his-answer-to-trumps-authoritarianism/?utm_term=.36b16987baa1 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/09/07/obama-just-delivered-his-answer-to-trumps-authoritarianism/?utm_term=.36b16987baa1)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 07, 2018, 05:26:40 PM
Quote from: André on September 07, 2018, 04:56:41 PM
A common eggcorn perhaps, but finding it in the Washington Post was a surprise nonetheless: « free reign » instead of « free rein » at the end of the first paragraph.

Free rain would be worse.   :D 

There is also a "rane," according to Oxford Dictionaries.com

Quote

"Scottish
rare

    A prolonged or repeated cry or utterance; a long string of words; a rhyme, a song."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 08:03:51 AM
Not exactly a grumble but I don't know where to post it.

Here are the first lines of Keats' poem "A Draught of Sunshine".

Hence Burgundy, Claret, and Port,
Away with old Hock and madeira,
Too earthly ye are for my sport;
There's a beverage brighter and clearer.


Am I right in inferring that in this context "hence" means "away with"? I confess it's a meaning I have never encountered yet.

Oh, and that rhyme: madeira / clearer --- pure euphonic genius, Keats might have as well been a composer.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 27, 2018, 08:34:09 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 08:03:51 AM
Not exactly a grumble but I don't know where to post it.

Here are the first lines of Keats' poem "A Draught of Sunshine".

Hence Burgundy, Claret, and Port,
Away with old Hock and madeira,
Too earthly ye are for my sport;
There's a beverage brighter and clearer.


Am I right in inferring that in this context "hence" means "away with"? I confess it's a meaning I have never encountered yet.

Aye, since hence means from here.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 09:36:38 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 27, 2018, 08:34:09 AM
Aye, since hence means from here.

Thanks.

Could Vade retro, Satanas! be translate as "Hence, Satan!"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 27, 2018, 09:45:20 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 09:36:38 AM
Thanks.

Could Vade retro, Satanas! be translate as "Hence, Satan!"?

Imperfectly, since retro does specify "behind [ me ]."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 09:50:42 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 27, 2018, 09:45:20 AM
Imperfectly, since retro does specify "behind [ me ]."

Yes, I thought about that myself. So, what's the right English translation of Vade retro, Satanas? Is it Get behind [me], Satan?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 27, 2018, 09:51:26 AM
It's traditionally rendered as Get thee behind me, Satan!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 09:54:27 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 27, 2018, 09:51:26 AM
It's traditionally rendered as Get thee behind me, Satan!

Thanks. Makes sense.

Next time a fly or a mosquito annoyed me, I'd say Hence, you beast!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 27, 2018, 10:19:39 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 09:54:27 AM
Thanks. Makes sense.

Next time a fly or a mosquito annoyed me, I'd say Hence, you beast!  :D

Exquisite!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 27, 2018, 10:21:57 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 09:50:42 AM
Yes, I thought about that myself. So, what's the right English translation of Vade retro, Satanas? Is it Get behind [me], Satan?

There is, by the way, nothing amiss with Get behind me, Satan . . . the additional pronoun was an occasional emphasis in Elizabethan/Jacobean-era English, as well as (I think) something of a holdover in English from the reflexive pronouns in French.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on September 27, 2018, 10:34:35 AM
All very interesting, but I'd rather have Satan back away from me, than have him get behind me. A perhaps inelegant, but IMO more accurate, translation of "Vade retro, Satanas!" would be "Back away, Satan!"

Just sayin'  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 27, 2018, 11:05:35 AM
Back off, man—we're scientists.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 27, 2018, 11:05:58 AM
Quote from: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 09:36:38 AM
Thanks.

Could Vade retro, Satanas! be translate as "Hence, Satan!"?
It is in the imperative. So a command to those drinks to get thee hence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on September 27, 2018, 11:08:06 AM
Quote from: Ken B on September 27, 2018, 11:05:58 AM
It is in the imperative. So a command to those drinks to get thee hence.

???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on September 27, 2018, 11:20:56 AM
The interesting point is that this phrase (Vade retro me, Satanas) is used when Jesus talks to Peter after having announced that he will be crucified and disciples are horrified about this message and want to prevent it (Mark 8:33).
In the temptation scene (Matthew 4:10) with the actual Satan he just says "vade Satanas" in the response to the last temptation.

As for English, this seems to be another case where the  simplified/streamlined in the last centuries. There apparently used to be "whence" (where from?) "whither" (where to?) and "where" as well as hence and hither etc. Nowadays most of them seem obsolete or very old-fashioned and there is only "where" and "there".

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 28, 2018, 10:43:33 AM
Okay, I have consulted my bi-lingual (Latin and Ancient Greek) New Testament on this question.

The Greek uses "opiso" which Saint Jerome translated with "post," not "retro."

The Greek word means "backwards," or "the way one came."  Curiously, it can also mean with "Deuro" "Come on along, follow along."

"Post" has (as far as I know, and my reference books say nothing about it) no indication of motion, but only position.

When Jesus sees Satan in the desert, he says "Hup-age" in Greek, ("Vade" in Latin) meaning basically "get out of here, scram!"

And yes, as mentioned by Jo498, with Peter the word "opiso/post/behind" is added.  I believe the point is that Peter is not someone whom Jesus wants to see right now, because his opinion represents a distraction from His mission, and therefore Peter should literally "get behind" Jesus...but not leave him permanently.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on September 28, 2018, 11:50:51 AM
Most illustrative, Cato. Many thanks!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 28, 2018, 11:45:40 PM
In a way it is pity that most of the NT was written in Greek because the feel of the Semitic languages is different. Some utterances by Jesus survive from the original Aramaic, such as "Talitha kumi" and "Eli, lama sabachthani".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on September 29, 2018, 12:20:32 AM
Actually in my Nestle-Aland bilingual edition it says "Vade retro me, satana" in Mark 8:33. This is the "Nova Vulgata", I think, so apparently this text not identical to straight St. Hieronymus.
Without a comprehensive dictionary, I'd say that "retro"usually means "back into the direction you came from" whereas "post" can mean both back, behind and after (also temporal and it can also indicate movement, not only position, cf. "trahe me post te" in the medieval carol "In dulci jubilo"). But this understanding might be more due to the meaning these words have acquired in later words.

AFAIK there were probably "proto-gospels" in Aramaic but this was a locally restricted language. Remember that many hellenized Jews (and even Paul usually first preached to the Jewish communities on his travels) were so shaky in Hebrew even a century before Christ that they made the Septuaginta translation of what was later called Old Testament into Greek. Except for Matthew, the other 3 gospels were mostly intended for people with more Greek than Hebrew/Aramaic backgrounds.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 29, 2018, 01:50:32 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on September 29, 2018, 12:20:32 AM
Actually in my Nestle-Aland bilingual edition it says "Vade retro me, satana" in Mark 8:33. This is the "Nova Vulgata", I think, so apparently this text not identical to straight St. Hieronymus.

Without a comprehensive dictionary, I'd say that "retro"usually means "back into the direction you came from" whereas "post" can mean both back, behind and after (also temporal and it can also indicate movement, not only position, cf. "trahe me post te" in the medieval carol "In dulci jubilo"). But this understanding might be more due to the meaning these words have acquired in later words.

AFAIK there were probably "proto-gospels" in Aramaic but this was a locally restricted language. Remember that many hellenized Jews (and even Paul usually first preached to the Jewish communities on his travels) were so shaky in Hebrew even a century before Christ that they made the Septuaginta translation of what was later called Old Testament into Greek. Except for Matthew, the other 3 gospels were mostly intended for people with more Greek than Hebrew/Aramaic backgrounds.

There is no "retro" in my text for Mark.

If that is so about post, then it is a much later development: my Classical Latin sources indicate that post is for position.  One source said that "retro" is a later Latin word developed from an Ablative form.

And all the hyoptheses about the origins of the gospels will leave you dizzy!   0:)  e.g. The Gospel of Thomas, known in both Greek and Coptic, has been a candidate for "Q," (short for the German "Quelle" for "source"), or a parallel text with Q, or not!  It has been theorized to be from c. 40 A.D. and from the second or even third centuries A.D.!  And we are not sure whether only one Gospel of Thomas existed, or if there were other versions.  There are claims that it is a Gnostic text, and that it is no such thing.

Anyway, the Gospel of Thomas is a fascinating text!  There is little to no narrative: it is basically a list of wise sayings, a few parables sprinkled here and there.  It is easy to see why it is a candidate for the role of "Q."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 29, 2018, 02:15:31 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on September 29, 2018, 12:20:32 AM

AFAIK there were probably "proto-gospels" in Aramaic but this was a locally restricted language. Remember that many hellenized Jews (and even Paul usually first preached to the Jewish communities on his travels) were so shaky in Hebrew even a century before Christ that they made the Septuaginta translation of what was later called Old Testament into Greek. Except for Matthew, the other 3 gospels were mostly intended for people with more Greek than Hebrew/Aramaic backgrounds.

What I am saying is a bit different. Jesus preached to the mainly uneducated in Aramaic. He must have known Hebrew because he read Scripture in the synagogues. There is no way of telling what might have gotten lost in translation from Aramaic/Hebrew into the more sophisticated Greek. Biblical Hebrew is less abstract, more earthy.

Some believe that Hellenistic ideas made its way into the NT by way of language and Paul himself. I am not a scholar on this, but the notion of a mind/body duality is not typically Semitic.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on September 29, 2018, 08:04:23 AM
One of the traditional prayers said in the evening prayer contains the phrase
"hasair satan m'lefananu v'acharanu". remove [the] adversary from before and behind us. No telling when or where it originated, although it pretty certainly was in general use by about 500CE. And the word "satan" is ambigous. It may refer to an individual demonic entity, to a personalized concept of temptation and bad influence, or anything that may be classified as adversarial. (Hebrew and Aramaic even in modern times do not use capital letters, whether for proper names or first words of sentences.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on September 29, 2018, 09:42:13 AM
Quote from: JBS on September 29, 2018, 08:04:23 AM
One of the traditional prayers said in the evening prayer contains the phrase
"hasair satan m'lefananu v'acharanu". remove [the] adversary from before and behind us. No telling when or where it originated, although it pretty certainly was in general use by about 500CE. And the word "satan" is ambigous. It may refer to an individual demonic entity, to a personalized concept of temptation and bad influence, or anything that may be classified as adversarial. (Hebrew and Aramaic even in modern times do not use capital letters, whether for proper names or first words of sentences.)

Thanks, that's brilliant!  I wonder if there are more sayings like that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on September 30, 2018, 12:55:29 PM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on September 29, 2018, 09:42:13 AM
Thanks, that's brilliant!  I wonder if there are more sayings like that.

Putting Jesus in Jewish context can illuminate.
For instance the event commemorated by Palm Sunday almost certainly took place at this time of year, not the spring, if it took place at all. Perhaps it happened on an earlier visit to Jerusalem or perhaps Jesus in fact spent the last six months of his life there. But now (technically today is the last day, the holy day that starts tomorrow is actually a different festival) is Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles /Booths/Huts. One main feature is processions inside the synagogue (in Jesus time, this was done in the Temple) reciting hoshanot. The word derives from hoshana, meaning "Save/Deliver us!", and is likely the word from which Hosanna derives. While doing this, the participants hold the Four Species, usually called lulav from its most visible element, a palm frond.
IOW Jerusalemites marching around with palm leaves, crying Hoshana (Hosanna).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 30, 2018, 02:03:03 PM
Quote from: JBS on September 30, 2018, 12:55:29 PM
Putting Jesus in Jewish context can illuminate.
For instance the event commemorated by Palm Sunday almost certainly took place at this time of year, not the spring, if it took place at all. Perhaps it happened on an earlier visit to Jerusalem or perhaps Jesus in fact spent the last six months of his life there. But now (technically today is the last day, the holy day that starts tomorrow is actually a different festival) is Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles /Booths/Huts. One main feature is processions inside the synagogue (in Jesus time, this was done in the Temple) reciting hoshanot. The word derives from hoshana, meaning "Save/Deliver us!", and is likely the word from which Hosanna derives. While doing this, the participants hold the Four Species, usually called lulav from its most visible element, a palm frond.
IOW Jerusalemites marching around with palm leaves, crying Hoshana (Hosanna).

Most interesting, thanks.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sergeant Rock on October 17, 2018, 01:40:34 PM
(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/june2017/grammer.jpg)


Sarge
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 17, 2018, 06:31:13 PM
Quote from: Sergeant Rock on October 17, 2018, 01:40:34 PM
(http://photos.imageevent.com/sgtrock/june2017/grammer.jpg)


Sarge
Awesum.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on October 18, 2018, 12:05:42 AM
They are actually almost all spelling errors or is this part of the joke?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 18, 2018, 01:03:58 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on October 18, 2018, 12:05:42 AM
They are actually almost all spelling errors or is this part of the joke?

It is indeed, although your true grammar nerd maintains a distinction between poor grammar and bad spelling  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 18, 2018, 08:01:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on October 18, 2018, 01:03:58 AM
It is indeed, although your true grammar nerd maintains a distinction between poor grammar and bad spelling  8)
"Orthography nerd" never caught on.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on October 18, 2018, 08:13:36 AM
And I wonder why!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on October 18, 2018, 08:55:15 AM
Semantics.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Sydney Nova Scotia on October 21, 2018, 09:47:37 PM
Semwomantics
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 22, 2018, 05:53:31 AM
A gift mug for grumblers

(https://whyevolutionistrue.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/44433157_10216568859832230_3127023735253499904_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on November 03, 2018, 10:41:25 PM
(https://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_500/MI0004/198/MI0004198769.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

Why is there an apostrophe in 100 years' [sic]  war?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 03, 2018, 11:08:50 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on November 03, 2018, 10:41:25 PM
(https://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_500/MI0004/198/MI0004198769.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

Why is there an apostrophe in 100 years' [sic]  war?
The possessive of a plural with s is s'. The dogs' kennels need cleaning. The voters' ignorance was profound.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 04, 2018, 09:05:46 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 03, 2018, 11:08:50 PM
The possessive of a plural with s is s'. The dogs' kennels need cleaning. The voters' ignorance was profound.

Actually, it's ----s's, even though the ----s' is generally used and comes more easily off the tongue.   But neither applies to the Hundred Years War, so demerit to Hyperion's graphics department.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on November 04, 2018, 01:43:04 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 22, 2018, 05:53:31 AM
A gift mug for grumblers

(https://whyevolutionistrue.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/44433157_10216568859832230_3127023735253499904_n.jpg)

I want one, not only because I work in a library where my colleagues routinely make all of these errors, but because, apart from writing, I do nearly everything else left-handed, so in my sinister grip all these merry grammatical hints would be displayed to the world rather than being shared only with my shirt-front.  Unless the same text appears on the other side of the mug, of course.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 01:50:50 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 04, 2018, 09:05:46 AM
Actually, it's ----s's, even though the ----s' is generally used and comes more easily off the tongue.   But neither applies to the Hundred Years War, so demerit to Hyperion's graphics department.
No that is wrong. S's only when a singular ends in s. John Adams's

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 01:54:16 PM
Rules of possessive for plurals.

https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/nouns/plural-possessive-noun.html
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on November 04, 2018, 02:10:53 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on November 03, 2018, 10:41:25 PM
(https://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_500/MI0004/198/MI0004198769.jpg?partner=allrovi.com)

Why is there an apostrophe in 100 years' [sic]  war?

Probably because it's a war of 100 years, and the typesetter or designer has interpreted that 'of' to mean 'belonging to'.  You do see it quite a lot ("3 days' duration", "6 weeks' holiday" etc.) but it strikes me as fairly pedantic, if not indeed wrong.  Hyperion's word-order is rather odd, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 04, 2018, 02:57:43 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 01:54:16 PM
Rules of possessive for plurals.

https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/nouns/plural-possessive-noun.html

Not the way I learned it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 04:43:47 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 04, 2018, 02:57:43 PM
Not the way I learned it.
That's why I said you were wrong Jeffrey.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 04:58:07 PM
It's "The Hundred Years' War". Not everyone uses the apostrophe, but the punctilious usually do. Some examples follow.

Here's Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_War (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_War), history.com gets it right too
https://www.history.com/topics/middle-ages/hundred-years-war (https://www.history.com/topics/middle-ages/hundred-years-war)
Some publishers https://www.amazon.com/Hundred-Years-War-Anne-Curry/dp/1841762695/ref=sr_1_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1541382499&sr=8-19&keywords=100+years+war (https://www.amazon.com/Hundred-Years-War-Anne-Curry/dp/1841762695/ref=sr_1_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1541382499&sr=8-19&keywords=100+years+war)

So, it is not universally used, but is technically correct at least in the Queen's English. That is why it's there.  :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 04, 2018, 05:11:05 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 01:54:16 PM
Rules of possessive for plurals.

https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/parts-of-speech/nouns/plural-possessive-noun.html


Quote from: JBS on November 04, 2018, 02:57:43 PM
Not the way I learned it.

Quote from: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 04:43:47 PM
That's why I said you were wrong Jeffrey.  :laugh:

Quote from: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 04:58:07 PM
It's "The Hundred Years' War". Not everyone uses the apostrophe, but the punctilious usually do. Some examples follow.

Here's Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_War (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_War), history.com gets it right too
https://www.history.com/topics/middle-ages/hundred-years-war (https://www.history.com/topics/middle-ages/hundred-years-war)
Some publishers https://www.amazon.com/Hundred-Years-War-Anne-Curry/dp/1841762695/ref=sr_1_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1541382499&sr=8-19&keywords=100+years+war (https://www.amazon.com/Hundred-Years-War-Anne-Curry/dp/1841762695/ref=sr_1_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1541382499&sr=8-19&keywords=100+years+war)

So, it is not universally used, but is technically correct at least in the Queen's English. That is why it's there.  :)

:D   When I was teaching European History, I made a special effort to awaken my charges to  The 30 Years' War.

Concerning this again...

Quote from: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 01:50:50 PM

No that is wrong. S's only when a singular ends in s. John Adams's


Interesting: 60 years ago, we were taught fairly early at my Catholic grade school that e.g. "John Adams' library was impressive" was the proper way to handle a word or name ending in -s.  We were also told NOT to pronounce such words with an extra possessive "s," even though we might hear our parents and other adults (apparently mistakenly) say e.g. "John Adams's" with a double s.  Certainly "John Adams' library..." looks more elegant aesthetically.  (Or at least it does to me: the extra "-'s" is rather ugly.)  0:)

To be sure, I puzzled over the common phrase "Keeping up with the Jones'(s)" which everyone seemed to say with a double s.

"Sister Marian" explained that people did this because of the "-e" in Jones, but that one could avoid the nasty mispronunciation by simply adding "family," i.e. "Keeping up with the Jones family."

Sister Marian's ideas still seem correct to me!  0:)

Many thanks for the discussion!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 05:41:46 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 04, 2018, 05:11:05 PM
:D   When I was teaching European History, I made a special effort to awaken my charges to  The 30 Years' War.

Concerning this again...

Interesting: 60 years ago, we were taught fairly early at my Catholic grade school that e.g. "John Adams' library was impressive" was the proper way to handle a word or name ending in -s.  We were also told NOT to pronounce such words with an extra possessive "s," even though we might hear our parents and other adults (apparently mistakenly) say e.g. "John Adams's" with a double s.  Certainly "John Adams' library..." looks more elegant aesthetically.  (Or at least it does to me: the extra "-'s" is rather ugly.)  0:)

To be sure, I puzzled over the common phrase "Keeping up with the Jones'(s)" which everyone seemed to say with a double s.

"Sister Marian" explained that people did this because of the "-e" in Jones, but that one could avoid the nasty mispronunciation by simply adding "family," i.e. "Keeping up with the Jones family."

Sister Marian's ideas still seem correct to me!  0:)

Many thanks for the discussion!

Regarding Adams and his possessions I have two words for you Cato. Strunk. White.

There is an interesting subtlety of amount vs count here, under the surface. The Hundred Years' War was not a hundred year (sic) war. Nor was it a hundred years of (sic) war. I don't know the technical term for what is going on here alas, but it's like the 100 yard dash, which involves running 100 yards.

PS I believe it is keeping up with the Joneses. There are other typical families out there — the Jones family — and you are trying to keep up with the bunch of them — the plural of Jones is Joneses. You are trying to keep up with the Smiths as well, and the Browns, and ... the Adamses.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 04, 2018, 05:51:29 PM
I always thought the Joneses with whom everyone kept up were plural, and therefore the plural form of Jones was used, no reference to apostrophes needed.

That extra s in plural possessives is unsightly and does not roll easily off  the tongue. I think the rule you were taught is a case of vernacular usage overcoming grammatical exactitude.

Wait, I see Ken is right for a change
Quote from: Ken B on November 04, 2018, 05:41:46 PM
Regarding Adams and his possessions I have two words for you Cato. Strunk. White.

There is an interesting subtlety of amount vs count here, under the surface. The Hundred Years' War was not a hundred year (sic) war. Nor was it a hundred years of (sic) war. I don't know the technical term for what is going on here alas, but it's like the 100 yard dash, which involves running 100 yards.

PS I believe it is keeping up with the Joneses. There are other typical families out there — the Jones family — and you are trying to keep up with the bunch of them — the plural of Jones is Joneses. You are trying to keep up with the Smiths as well, and the Browns, and ... the Adamses.

I was just checking Elements of Style. Which says that barring certain specific names, none of which are Adams, the singular possessive is always  's.  But maddeningly it says nothing about plural possessives.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 05, 2018, 03:15:13 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 04, 2018, 05:51:29 PM
[...] But maddeningly it says nothing about plural possessives.

Prejudiced against collectivization, is it?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2018, 04:45:05 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 04, 2018, 05:11:05 PM
:D   When I was teaching European History, I made a special effort to awaken my charges to  The 30 Years' War.

I hope you don't mind my being a nudnik but when I see Hundred or Thirty Years' War, my mind immediately wants to know what is the difference without the apostrophe. I hear in my brain: "yearses" attempting to figure it out, then after a few tries give up in frustration.  Also I think there should be some consistency when using figures or numerals. In the first case, the word "hundred" is used but "30 " in the other.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 05, 2018, 05:48:10 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2018, 04:45:05 AM
I hope you don't mind my being a nudnik but when I see Hundred or Thirty Years' War, my mind immediately wants to know what is the difference without the apostrophe. I hear in my brain: "yearses" attempting to figure it out, then after a few tries give up in frustration.  Also I think there should be some consistency when using figures or numerals. In the first case, the word "hundred" is used but "30 " in the other.
Its unusual on Catos Grammar Grumble to hear poster's wanting to abuse apostrophe's.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 05, 2018, 05:53:36 AM
Sould the Vaughan Williams's Veranda thread be renamed ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2018, 06:05:27 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 05, 2018, 05:48:10 AM
Its unusual on Catos Grammar Grumble to hear poster's wanting to abuse apostrophe's.

No, I just think sometimes they are unnecessary.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 05, 2018, 07:43:00 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 05, 2018, 05:48:10 AM
Its unusual on Catos Grammar Grumble to hear poster's wanting to abuse apostrophe's.

:D

Quote from: André on November 05, 2018, 05:53:36 AM
Should the Vaughan Williams's Veranda thread be renamed ?

Sister Marian  0:)   says it should indeed be renamed! 

Quote from: JBS on November 04, 2018, 05:51:29 PM
I always thought the Joneses with whom everyone kept up were plural, and therefore the plural form of Jones was used, no reference to apostrophes needed.

That extra s in plural possessives is unsightly and does not roll easily off  the tongue. I think the rule you were taught is a case of vernacular usage overcoming grammatical exactitude.

Wait, I see Ken is right for a change
I was just checking Elements of Style. Which says that barring certain specific names, none of which are Adams, the singular possessive is always  's.  But maddeningly it says nothing about plural possessives.

Interesting again: on the little yard signs, which people sometimes display to identify their residences in quaint ways, one often sees (around here at least) things like "The Brubaker's" etc.  I have also seen makers of such signs offer samples in various styles using the name "Jones" and displaying "The Jones's."

"Joneses" again to my eyes appears inelegant, although one can - with difficulty -  make a case for it from our language's history, since (I was once told, and my references are not right now at hand) the apostrophe stands in for a missing "-e," parallel with the "-es" ending for the Genitive of masculine and neuter monosyllabic nouns in German, e.g. Das Buch, Des Buches ("of the book" or "the book's"), although I have seen many Germans contract away the "e" into "Des Buchs" in their writing...and without an apostrophe.

From "Oxford Dictionaries" on the Internet:

Quote

Personal names that end in –s

With personal names that end in -s: add an apostrophe plus s when you would naturally pronounce an extra s if you said the word out loud:

He joined Charles's army in 1642.

Dickens's novels provide a wonderful insight into Victorian England.

Thomas's brother was injured in the accident.

Note that there are some exceptions to this rule, especially in names of places or organizations, for example:

St Thomas' Hospital

If you aren't sure about how to spell a name, look it up in an official place such as the organization's website.

With personal names that end in -s but are not spoken with an extra s: just add an apostrophe after the -s:

The court dismissed Bridges' appeal.

Connors' finest performance was in 1991.


So they agree with Sister Marian only if people are adding an "-s" in actual speech.  She would still have been against it!  0:)   :D


And this also might be of interest from "Oxford Dictionaries" on apostrophes and plurals:


Quote

It's very important to remember this grammatical rule.

There are one or two cases in which it is acceptable to use an apostrophe to form a plural, purely for the sake of clarity:

you can use an apostrophe to show the plurals of single letters:

I've dotted the i's and crossed the t's.

Find all the p's in appear.

you can use an apostrophe to show the plurals of single numbers:

Find all the number 7's.

These are the only cases in which it is generally considered acceptable to use an apostrophe to form plurals: remember that an apostrophe should never be used to form the plural of ordinary nouns, names, abbreviations, or numerical dates.


So they would prefer to see "The Best Bands of the 1980s" rather than 1980's.  Hmmm!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on November 05, 2018, 07:59:59 AM
In Spanish (and other Romance languages, e.g. French) part of the problem is solved by altogether avoiding plurals for family names. Thus, the relatives of Señor López are "los López", not "los lópezes". The original French title of Roger Martin du Gard's cycle of novels The Thibaults is Les Thibault.

Seeing family names in the plural (also used in German—"die Wagners", "die Manns") looks awkward to us. Then again, we don't use apostrophes either, so actually the whole problem is alien to us... :D

Quote from: Cato on November 05, 2018, 07:43:00 AM

So they would prefer to see "The Best Bands of the 1980s" rather than 1980's.  Hmmm!
Again, from a non-native speaker's perspective, "the 1800s" looks much more reasonable and elegant than "the 1800's".  That apostrophe (mentally) would indicate to me that there's a contraction, which is not the case. If we spelled it out, we'd say "the eighteen hundreds", not "the eighteen hundred's", no?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 05, 2018, 08:40:46 AM
Quote from: ritter on November 05, 2018, 07:59:59 AM
In Spanish (and other Romance languages, e.g. French) part of the problem is solved by altogether avoiding plurals for family names. Thus, the relatives of Señor López are "los López", not "los lópezes". The original French title of Roger Martin du Gard's cycle of novels The Thibaults is Les Thibault.

Seeing family names in the plural (also used in German—"die Wagners", "die Manns") looks awkward to us. Then again, we don't use apostrophes either, so actually the whole problem is alien to us... :D
Again, from a non-native speaker's perspective, "the 1800s" looks much more reasonable and elegant than "the 1800's".  That apostrophe (mentally) would indicate to me that there's a contraction, which is not the case. If we spelled it out, we'd say "the eighteen hundreds", not "the eighteen hundred's", no?

I'm in full agreement of the above comments. 50 years after learning such rules one tends to forget them, while still applying them automatically. Sometimes I have doubts and take a chance, so I'm always glad to be corrected when I make a mistake.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 05, 2018, 08:55:06 AM
Re the VW Veranda ...

One could just use the name adjectivally in apposition, the VW Veranda, like the Carnegie library, the Jefferson mansion, or the Landini cadence.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on November 09, 2018, 08:26:26 AM
The (hundred or thirty or seven or whatever) years' war makes no sense in that how can the time period possess the war?  You have Queen Anne's War which makes sense but wars with geographic locations that would have more of a possessive logic than a time period are not treated as possessive- i.e.  either as a noun as in The Vietnam War or are treated as an adjective like the Korean War.  Wars named after participants are not possessive either - The Spanish-American War.  Most other usage of time periods are as adjective - seven year itch or ten year prison term not seven year's itch
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 09, 2018, 08:33:25 AM
I suppose the Hundred years' war is called that because they had a hundred years of war.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 09, 2018, 09:41:09 AM
Yes. The genitive does not only have a possessive function. "five pints of beer", the pints do not possess the beer. Cato probably knows the Latin name for that kind of genitive.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 09, 2018, 11:18:29 AM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on November 09, 2018, 08:26:26 AM
The (hundred or thirty or seven or whatever) years' war makes no sense in that how can the time period possess the war?  You have Queen Anne's War which makes sense but wars with geographic locations that would have more of a possessive logic than a time period are not treated as possessive- i.e.  either as a noun as in The Vietnam War or are treated as an adjective like the Korean War.  Wars named after participants are not possessive either - The Spanish-American War.  Most other usage of time periods are as adjective - seven year itch or ten year prison term not seven year's itch

Yes, I pointed out adjectival apposition above, to use the technical term.

AsJo points out, possessive is only the most common use of the genitive. We — most people — talk about the possessive because we don't know the formal grammar. But a careful grammarian will note that in some uses the present participle takes the genitive. The simplest way to explain that is to say you use the possessive: "his being a liar" or "I was shocked by his lying." No one really believes he owns lying, or owns being, but the genitive/possessive is correct there.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 10, 2018, 01:50:02 PM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 09, 2018, 09:41:09 AM
Yes. The genitive does not only have a possessive function. "five pints of beer", the pints do not possess the beer. Cato probably knows the Latin name for that kind of genitive.

There is a Genitive of Measurement, although others would lump it into the Partitive Genitive, which I would not do.

We can say both "I'll take some more pie," and "I'll take some more of the pie."  The latter would be used especially if one enthusiastically said: "I'd like to have some more of that pie."  This would be a Partitive Genitive.

Compare that to: "I'd like about a quarter of the pie,"  or "We have two feet of snow on the ground."  Those use a Genitive of Measurement.  I do not believe anyone would drop the "of the" or the "of" in those sentences.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 12, 2018, 12:53:18 AM
Quote from: ritter on November 05, 2018, 07:59:59 AM
In Spanish (and other Romance languages, e.g. French) part of the problem is solved by altogether avoiding plurals for family names. Thus, the relatives of Señor López are "los López", not "los lópezes". The original French title of Roger Martin du Gard's cycle of novels The Thibaults is Les Thibault.

Ahem! This is not quite altogether avoiding plurals for family names, because los Lopez or les Thibault are plural forms alright. What you actually avoid is doubling the plural because it is unnecessary, los Lopezes would be a pleonasm since los already implies the plural. In English, though, putting the plural in the very family name is a necessity because the can be both plural and singular and the only way to distinguish between them is to pluralize (is this a word?) the name.

Martin du Gard's cycle is translated in Romanian as Familia Thibaut, ie The Thibault Family. No plural is used yet the sense of many people is perfectly conveyed.  :)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2018, 01:06:44 AM
If a year can "possess" an end (year's-end), why cannot years "possess" a war?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 06:22:23 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 12, 2018, 01:06:44 AM
If a year can "possess" an end (year's-end), why cannot years "possess" a war?
What an excellent point.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 12, 2018, 06:47:27 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 09, 2018, 11:18:29 AM
Yes, I pointed out adjectival apposition above, to use the technical term.

AsJo points out, possessive is only the most common use of the genitive. We — most people — talk about the possessive because we don't know the formal grammar. But a careful grammarian will note that in some uses the present participle takes the genitive. The simplest way to explain that is to say you use the possessive: "his being a liar" or "I was shocked by his lying." No one really believes he owns lying, or owns being, but the genitive/possessive is correct there.

Sorry I had not caught up!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 12, 2018, 08:56:33 AM
Use of the Genitive can be rather odd among the Indo-European languages.

German has a Genitive of Indefinite Time, e.g. Eines Tages or Eines Abends (one day, one evening).

In poetry Ancient Greek and Latin occasionally used a Genitive of Exclamation, perhaps with an implied "the existence of..." as part of the idea. e.g.  "Oh, ( the existence of...) the Genitive!!!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 09:11:40 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 12, 2018, 08:56:33 AM
Use of the Genitive can be rather odd among the Indo-European languages.

German has a Genitive of Indefinite Time, e.g. Eines Tages or Eines Abends (one day, one evening).

So does English. Of an evening we would go walking. Eines Abends, gehen wir spazieren.
It sounds a bit formal and old timey in English.

I saw once a nice definition of the genitive in English, but of course now forget it. (When you get to be almost half Cato's age the memory goes.) Pretty much anytime it is "of" something.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 12, 2018, 10:22:54 AM
Same in French, I think. We will use a qualifier to indicate an indefinite time in the future, like "un beau jour", or "une bonne fois pour toutes". The first term is also used in Italian, as when Cio-Cio San pictures the day Pinkerton's ship will drop anchor in Nagasaki Bay: Unbel di vedremo. It's usually translated as "One fine day" in English. Nothing particularly fine or "bel" about that particular day, just an indication of an indefinite future.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 03:11:08 PM
If I have a beef with Cato, then I have a beef with Cato. But if I have two of them, why don't I have two beeves with Cato?
;) >:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 12, 2018, 04:09:43 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 03:11:08 PM
If I have a beef with Cato, then I have a beef with Cato. But if I have two of them, why don't I have two beeves with Cato?
;) >:D

Thief - thieves, reef - reefs.   8)  Why is English so messed up?

Mouse goes to mice, and louse goes to lice, yet we say "houses" instead of "hice," and "blouses" instead of "blice."  We could also ask why "mouses" is not possible.

Checking my yellowing linguistics books, I think I can deduce that perhaps gender groups from Old English might be involved.  cf.  Das Haus in German is Neuter, but Die Maus is Feminine.  Their plurals are similar, but not the same: Haeuser vs. Maeuse.  (I have no umlaut capability on this computer.)  On the other hand, it might just be one of those things.   :D

People speak languages, and people are not always consistent and logical.  Therefore, our languages have illogical and inconsistent items.   

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 12, 2018, 04:44:28 PM
What I find especially confusing, sometimes maddeningly so, is the inconsistency in the pronunciation of the vowel "i".

Miser, misery, fir, fire. And direct is pronounced differently if an American or an Englishman says it. Go figure... ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 04:46:46 PM
Quote from: André on November 12, 2018, 04:44:28 PM
What I find especially confusing, sometimes maddeningly so, is the inconsistency in the pronunciation of the vowel "i".

Miser, misery, fir, fire. And direct is pronounced differently if an American or an Englishman says it. Go figure... ???
Ghoti, pronounced "fish".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 12, 2018, 04:48:55 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 04:46:46 PM
Ghoti, pronounced "fish".

I had to look that one up ;D.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 12, 2018, 05:03:34 PM
Quote from: André on November 12, 2018, 04:44:28 PM
What I find especially confusing, sometimes maddeningly so, is the inconsistency in the pronunciation of the vowel "i".

Miser, misery, fir, fire. And direct is pronounced differently if an American or an Englishman says it. Go figure... ???

Don't worry. French orthography has challenges of its own to an Anglophone, especially that habit of not pronouncing final letters, or even worse, hooking it onto the next word.

Fir and fire are sort of logical, since they derive from different roots in the Germanic family. Although pronouncing the i in fir as u might confuse, it seems to reflect the Old Norse word from which our modern word is said to derive.
However miser/misery is totally illogical, since miser directly derives from misery/miserable (stingy people were thought of as miserable people).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 12, 2018, 05:16:01 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 12, 2018, 05:03:34 PM
Don't worry. French orthography has challenges of its own to an Anglophone, especially that habit of not pronouncing final letters, or even worse, hooking it onto the next word

Fir and fire are sort of logical, since they derive from different roots in the Germanic family. Although pronouncing the i in fir as u might confuse, it seems to reflect the Old Norse word from which our modern word is said to derive.
However miser/misery is totally illogical, since miser directly derives from misery/miserable (stingy people were thought of as miserable people).

That's called a liaison. As in "dangerous liaisons »  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 06:20:42 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 12, 2018, 05:03:34 PM
Don't worry. French orthography has challenges of its own to an Anglophone, especially that habit of not pronouncing final letters, or even worse, hooking it onto the next word.

Fir and fire are sort of logical, since they derive from different roots in the Germanic family. Although pronouncing the i in fir as u might confuse, it seems to reflect the Old Norse word from which our modern word is said to derive.
However miser/misery is totally illogical, since miser directly derives from misery/miserable (stingy people were thought of as miserable people).

French is worse than English for silent letters. In French entire paragraphs are silent. I think Victor Hugo once wrote an entire novel pronounced é.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 13, 2018, 12:01:15 AM
Quote from: André on November 12, 2018, 04:44:28 PM
What I find especially confusing, sometimes maddeningly so, is the inconsistency in the pronunciation of the vowel "i".

Miser, misery, fir, fire. And direct is pronounced differently if an American or an Englishman says it. Go figure... ???

https://www.learnenglish.de/pronunciation/pronunciationpoem.html

As I probably said here before, it is a strange irony of history, that not only one but two of the languages worst fit for the task became global languages: English and French.
If the Armada had prevailed in 1588 it would be Spanish or Latin both of which would be much better for non-native learners, not only but above all in pronunciation. (French is not as irregular and messy as English, of course, but it is still a nightmare if one compares sounds and printed letters.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 13, 2018, 12:13:15 AM
Beef is from French (boeuf), so it wouldn't have an anglo-saxon plural. It is also a mass term, so plural is problematic anyway. This does not explain reef or house, of course.
I am not a linguist but I suspect that there is a general trend in many languages to assimilate unusual (like strong past tense etc.) to the standard. But apparently some words remain in the older forms.
This is obviously the case with strong vs. weak flexion in German verbs (the strong past of "backen" (bake) "buk" is still understood but uncommon and becoming obsolete, in favor of the weak "backte") and also "irregular" (actually foreign) plurals have been assimilated. The plural of "Thema" has been "Themen" for a long time while more technical words retain the Greek plural form, e.g. Lemmata.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 13, 2018, 12:17:00 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 13, 2018, 12:01:15 AM
If the Armada had prevailed in 1588 it would be Spanish or Latin both of which would be much better for non-native learners, not only but above all in pronunciation.

Which pronunciation of Latin? French, German or Italian?  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 13, 2018, 12:19:22 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 13, 2018, 12:13:15 AM
he plural of "Thema" has been "Themen" for a long time while more technical words retain the Greek plural form, e.g. Lemmata.

Parerga und Paralipomena.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 13, 2018, 12:22:25 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 13, 2018, 12:01:15 AM
https://www.learnenglish.de/pronunciation/pronunciationpoem.html

Great fun!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 13, 2018, 12:35:26 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 13, 2018, 12:17:00 AM
Which pronunciation of Latin? French, German or Italian?  :laugh:
This would probably have depended on the particular circumstances of this alternative history*
But doesn't matter, even all of them used in parallel would have a stricter correspondence between letter and sound than English, it is mainly "c", "g", "gn" and of course the French totally mangle several vowels but even then it's better than English or French.

*There is an episodic novel based on a similar scenario. Unfortunately, rather boring, I don't think I ever read all of the episodes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavane_(novel)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 13, 2018, 12:42:16 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 13, 2018, 12:35:26 AM
*There is an episodic novel based on a similar scenario. Unfortunately, rather boring, I don't think I ever read all of the episodes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavane_(novel)

Roman Catholic ban on technological innovation, especially electricity... I'll never waste my time with such nonsense.  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2018, 02:13:54 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 04:46:46 PM
Ghoti, pronounced "fish".

Seeing that in a Batman episode was a high point in this word geek's life.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on November 13, 2018, 04:13:53 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 12, 2018, 03:11:08 PM
If I have a beef with Cato, then I have a beef with Cato. But if I have two of them, why don't I have two beeves with Cato?
;) >:D

You do!: "Ye shall offer at your own will a male without blemish, of the beeves, of the sheep, or of the goats." (Leviticus 22:19, KJV)

Quote from: Cato on November 12, 2018, 04:09:43 PM
Thief - thieves, reef - reefs.   8)  Why is English so messed up?

Not at all; I have a Welsh grammar that lists all the different ways in which Welsh nouns form plurals.  The authors claim there are 7 ways, but with subdivisions I make the final count 13, of which method 13 is "by means other than the above".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 13, 2018, 07:15:16 AM
Quote from: DaveF on November 13, 2018, 04:13:53 AM
You do!: "Ye shall offer at your own will a male without blemish, of the beeves, of the sheep, or of the goats." (Leviticus 22:19, KJV)


Beeves is indeed the correct plural of beef referring to cattle.  But not beef as in gripe, grudge, complaint.
This is like that year/years thing, with count nouns and mass nouns. Five hundred cows is 500 beeves but 500 head of beef. For some reason the odd "head of beef" has become the standard and beeves fallen into desuetude.

How big is the string section? 30 head of violin, 10 head of viola ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 13, 2018, 07:24:32 AM
Speaking of odd plurals, and Shaw's ghoti, consider the two plurals of fish

Fish, referring to more than one creature. I caught two fish.
Fishes, referring to multiple kinds of fish. I caught red fish, blue fish, Brown fish, all kinds of fishes.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 14, 2018, 03:23:39 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 13, 2018, 07:24:32 AM
Speaking of odd plurals, and Shaw's ghoti, consider the two plurals of fish

Fish, referring to more than one creature. I caught two fish.
Fishes, referring to multiple kinds of fish. I caught red fish, blue fish, Brown fish, all kinds of fishes.

Sounds ghoti-y to me!   8)

I am not making up the following grumble.  0:)

I have often commented about assorted monstrosities of language unleashed by a local television news crew.

On November 11, once known as "Armistice Day," and now called "Veterans Day" (without an apostrophe   ;)  ), local news anchorwoman Blondie Bubblehead read a story about the "100th anniversary of the... Ar - MIST - ice ending World War I."  ???  :o  ???  :o   ::)

Yes, she placed the accent on the middle syllable, put the the "-t" with the "-s," and yes, she pronounced the "ice" as "ice," rhyming with "mice."

To paraphrase Cicero:

O tempora, o genus dicendi !
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 14, 2018, 05:47:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 14, 2018, 03:23:39 AM


O tempora, o genus dicendi !

Sounds like a Salvation Army sermon against gambling:
Dice'n'di(e)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 14, 2018, 05:55:45 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 14, 2018, 05:47:02 AM
Sounds like a Salvation Army sermon against gambling:
Dice'n'di(e)

:D :D :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on November 20, 2018, 02:56:17 AM
(https://whyevolutionistrue.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/44433157_10216568859832230_3127023735253499904_n.jpg)

Quote from: DaveF on November 04, 2018, 01:43:04 PM
I want one, not only because I work in a library where my colleagues routinely make all of these errors, but because, apart from writing, I do nearly everything else left-handed, so in my sinister grip all these merry grammatical hints would be displayed to the world rather than being shared only with my shirt-front.  Unless the same text appears on the other side of the mug, of course.

I had to order one (a set of two, actually) after seeing it posted. It arrived yesterday, and the text is on both sides.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on November 20, 2018, 05:33:49 AM
Quite a few common English phrases came from Cantonese pidgin where English words were used in Chinese grammar structures such as 'to make do'; 'long time no see'; 'no sabee' (don't understand from Portuguese 'saber'); 'how come?'; 'look see'; 'no can do' ; 'where to?'; 'no-go'; 'chop-chop' (hasten); 'chow' (food); 'no pain, no gain' and 'chicken fried rice'.


http://www.chinasage.info/langpidgin.htm
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 24, 2018, 05:15:39 PM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51CQK5vSiWL.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 24, 2018, 05:41:15 PM
Quote from: André on November 24, 2018, 05:15:39 PM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51CQK5vSiWL.jpg)

Sigh!  The Genitive is the current quixotic quest for the English teacher and me: I dread going back to school on Monday, since extraterrestrials usually during such vacations blast my students' brains with rays of Alzheimerium: gone will be the Genitive and many other things!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 24, 2018, 05:59:49 PM
Could be worse

Soldiers'
Soldiers's
Soldier's's
Soldier's'

Although I suppose the first could in some circumstances be possible.

At least it wasn't a soldier of the Hundred Years' War ...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 24, 2018, 07:25:33 PM
The Britons of a century ago could mangle English as well as any now alive.

Consider

QuoteAmong the nations nobliest chartered

QuoteShe fights the fraud that feeds desire on
Lies,
in a lust to enslave or kill,
The barren creed of blood and iron,
Vampire of Europe's wasted will

While not grammatically incorrect, these lines are certainly lousy poetry. They come from The Fourth of August by Laurence Binyon, as set to music by none other than Elgar (the first of the three poems which he used for The Spirit of England.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 24, 2018, 07:40:12 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 24, 2018, 07:25:33 PM
The Britons of a century ago could mangle English as well as any now alive.

Consider

While not grammatically incorrect, these lines are certainly lousy poetry. They come from The Fourth of August by Laurence Binyon, as set to music by none other than Elgar (the first of the three poems which he used for The Spirit of England.
A little reformatting and punctuation makes it clearer:

She fights the fraud
that feeds desire on lies, in a lust to enslave or kill —
The barren creed of blood and iron,
Vampire of Europe's wasted will

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 24, 2018, 07:48:37 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 24, 2018, 07:40:12 PM
A little reformatting and punctuation makes it clearer:

She fights the fraud
that feeds desire on lies, in a lust to enslave or kill —
The barren creed of blood and iron,
Vampire of Europe's wasted will

Yes but it's a quatrain, with desire on as the rhyme for and iron
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 24, 2018, 07:53:28 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 24, 2018, 07:48:37 PM
Yes but it's a quatrain, with desire on as the rhyme for and iron
Ahhh.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 25, 2018, 05:26:50 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 24, 2018, 05:59:49 PM
Could be worse

Soldiers'
Soldiers's
Soldier's's
Soldier's'

Although I suppose the first could in some circumstances be possible.

At least it wasn't a soldier of the Hundred Years' War ...

You should see how too many of my students spell "soldier."   ???

(I am not making these up!)

Solider, Soilder, Soljer, Soliger, and my favorite Souliger.

Our Latin book often focuses on stories about Roman soldiers, which is why I see these terrible spellings.  I tell my students that soldiers might die as a result of their service. So, unless they see the word "die" in their spelling of the word, they have made a mistake!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 25, 2018, 05:45:33 AM
Good trick, Cato! Hopefully your students know how to write die. imagine if they thought soldiers can dye? :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 25, 2018, 06:37:11 AM
Quote from: André on November 25, 2018, 05:45:33 AM
Good trick, Cato! Hopefully your students know how to write die. Imagine if they thought soldiers can dye? :laugh:

Well, they are too often confused enough!  I blame the Internet and Lawnmower parents, who stunt their child's thinking abilities by "mowing down" every obstacle facing the child!

On a different topic...

My favorite (i.e. appalling) local television station had the following headline this morning:

"BUCKEYE FANS CELEBRATE VICTORY OVER TTUN."

Mrs. Cato wondered what or who "TTUN" could be!  Possibly some Samoan football team? 

No, because yesterday Ohio State University's football team defeated Michigan (62-39, I think: we did NOT watch the game).

"TTUN" I pondered for a long second.  ::)

Then I recalled that among the many eccentrics born in Ohio (like a man who thought he could create light from electricity, or two brothers who thought they could build a machine that flies using bicycle technology and some aerodynamics  8)  ) was a character named Woody Hayes.

"General" Woody Hayes was the football coach for Ohio State from the early 1950's to 1978: he spurned throwing the football, saying that when you throw the football, three things can happen, and two of them are bad.   ;)

In the 1950's some bad blood began to boil between Michigan and Ohio State, mainly because of a personal rivalry between Woody and the Michigan coach Bo Schembechler.

Woody began banning the use of the word "Michigan" in his presence.  And when he had to refer to Michigan, he used the phrase...

"That Team Up North" !!!

And that explains "TTUN" which should have had periods, but...

A footnote: during the week before the Michigan game, Ohio State students go around with red tape and mask any signs bearing the letter "M" on the campus!

Apparently the professors do not give enough homework!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 25, 2018, 08:59:31 AM
Souliger, the soul-bearer. Someone mixed English and Latin here. Wasn't the "solidus" a Roman coin the soldiers were paid with?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 25, 2018, 09:46:38 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 25, 2018, 08:59:31 AM
Souliger, the soul-bearer. Someone mixed English and Latin here. Wasn't the "solidus" a Roman coin the soldiers were paid with?

One of the uses of the word solde in French means a soldier's pay.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 25, 2018, 11:12:20 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 25, 2018, 08:59:31 AM
Souliger, the soul-bearer. Someone mixed English and Latin here. Wasn't the "solidus" a Roman coin the soldiers were paid with?

Yes, in fact our word "soldier," and the French word "sou," are derived from solidus, which was a fairly pure gold coin introduced in the later empire.  It was designed to stabilize the currency, and therefore the economy, whose money had been debased (i.e. inflated) by assorted emperors throughout the disastrous 200's.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 25, 2018, 12:47:36 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 25, 2018, 11:12:20 AM
Yes, in fact our word "soldier," and the French word "sou," are derived from solidus, which was a fairly pure gold coin introduced in the later empire.  It was designed to stabilize the currency, and therefore the economy, whose money had been debased (i.e. inflated) by assorted emperors throughout the disastrous 200's.

Do you know if it's true that Roman soldiers were at one time paid in salt, and from that fact ultimately our word "salary" derives?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on November 25, 2018, 12:49:59 PM
Quote from: André on November 25, 2018, 09:46:38 AM
One of the uses of the word solde in French means a soldier's pay.
And in Spanish, sueldo is a synonym of salary (in its modern meaning).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 25, 2018, 01:16:10 PM
In German "Sold" is still used as a term for the payment in the military and also (or close derivatives) for some civil servants.

Of course, the spelling problem was not mainly the "sold-" but the remaining part of the word.
(Spelling is nightmarish in English but I think it is sometimes easier for us who learned it as a second or third language because while studying the language we usually spent far more time reading than listening,)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 25, 2018, 01:42:39 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 25, 2018, 12:47:36 PM
Do you know if it's true that Roman soldiers were at one time paid in salt, and from that fact ultimately our word "salary" derives?

There doesn't seem to be evidence to support this.

http://kiwihellenist.blogspot.com/2017/01/salt-and-salary.html
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/448865/is-the-etymology-of-salary-a-myth

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on November 25, 2018, 01:45:18 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 24, 2018, 07:25:33 PM
They come from The Fourth of August by Laurence Binyon, as set to music by none other than Elgar (the first of the three poems which he used for The Spirit of England.

The music being none other than a quote from the Demons' Chorus in Gerontius.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 25, 2018, 01:53:26 PM
Quote from: North Star on November 25, 2018, 01:42:39 PM
There doesn't seem to be evidence to support this.

http://kiwihellenist.blogspot.com/2017/01/salt-and-salary.html
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/448865/is-the-etymology-of-salary-a-myth

Thanks. I suppose the most probable origin is that salt, as a basic part of the diet, stood in for the entire amount of a soldier's food allowance.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 25, 2018, 02:28:00 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 25, 2018, 12:47:36 PM
Do you know if it's true that Roman soldiers were at one time paid in salt, and from that fact ultimately our word "salary" derives?

Quote from: North Star on November 25, 2018, 01:42:39 PM
There doesn't seem to be evidence to support this.

http://kiwihellenist.blogspot.com/2017/01/salt-and-salary.html
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/448865/is-the-etymology-of-salary-a-myth



Quote from: JBS on November 25, 2018, 01:53:26 PM
Thanks. I suppose the most probable origin is that salt, as a basic part of the diet, stood in for the entire amount of a soldier's food allowance.

I just happened to see this, so thanks to North Star for finding a trustworthy answer from a classicist!

As Peter Gainsford, The Kiwi Hellenist, points out, the evidence is just not there, especially since the myth depends upon a mistranslation of Pliny the Elder's comment.

So many myths floating around, so little time!  One of the main ones I deal with as a Latin teacher in a Catholic school: the myth of the constant persecution of Christians by the Roman government.  That did not happen: one of my Roman History professors had estimated the total length of official Roman Imperial persecutions of Christians to be c. 18-24 months.  Others have different estimates, but none are c. 300 years (i.e. from the Crucifixion to Constantine).

And more likely, it was local bigots who wanted to persecute the Christians, the Roman government being unwilling to stir the huge pot filled with religions from its empire!  The Romans were in general pantheists (vid. The Pantheon in Rome), and believed that Divinity, being infinite, could have an infinite number of manifestations.  e.g. In Britain, Celtic deities were paired with classical deities. e.g. Sulis, a goddess connected to a hot springs near modern Bath.   Sulis was paired with Minerva/Athena.

Pliny the Younger's famous exchange with the Emperor Trajan about anonymous denunciations of Christians shows that - under this emperor at least - the Roman government did not go around looking for a fight about religion.  In the Gospels, Pontius Pilate shows absolutely that he wanted nothing to do with internal disputes in Judaism!

And I have heard more wrong Roman History from priests on Sunday than I care to list!   0:)

Anyway...back to grumbling about grammar!    8) ;) :D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 25, 2018, 02:29:44 PM
Quote from: North Star on November 25, 2018, 01:42:39 PM
There doesn't seem to be evidence to support this.

http://kiwihellenist.blogspot.com/2017/01/salt-and-salary.html
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/448865/is-the-etymology-of-salary-a-myth

I remember thinking that was a stupid way to pay soldiers, when I "learnt" that in third or fourth grade, or whenever.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on November 27, 2018, 03:10:22 AM
I really strongly dislike adverbs

http://jasonzweig.com/why-i-hate-adverbs/ (http://jasonzweig.com/why-i-hate-adverbs/)

Had a guy working for me a while back that could seemingly not write a sentence without one (and also actually used the word basically in every sentence he really spoke), used to drive me literally and completely crazy
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 29, 2018, 05:47:40 AM
Quote from: bwv 1080 on November 27, 2018, 03:10:22 AM
I really strongly dislike adverbs

http://jasonzweig.com/why-i-hate-adverbs/ (http://jasonzweig.com/why-i-hate-adverbs/)

Had a guy working for me a while back that could seemingly not write a sentence without one (and also actually used the word basically in every sentence he really spoke), used to drive me literally and completely crazy

;)

I like the word "seemingly" now and then, as a replacement for " s/he, it seemed. "

Yesterday I saw a great example of irony.

A truck went past me in the opposite direction on a semi-circular exit ramp of the freeway.  The side of the truck was garishly decorated with a sign proclaiming: "THIS IS THE TRUCK OF THE FUTURE!"

(I am not making this up.)

Within a split second when I looked back and focused more carefully, I realized that this "truck of the future..."

...was being towed!!!  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: bwv 1080 on November 29, 2018, 06:52:49 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 29, 2018, 05:47:40 AM
;)

I like the word "seemingly" now and then, as a replacement for " s/he, it seemed. "

Yesterday I saw a great example of irony.

A truck went past me in the opposite direction on a semi-circular exit ramp of the freeway.  The side of the truck was garishly decorated with a sign proclaiming: "THIS IS THE TRUCK OF THE FUTURE!"

(I am not making this up.)

Within a split second when I looked back and focused more carefully, I realized that this "truck of the future..."

...was being towed!!!  :D

LOL

Yes, seemingly (and its synonyms apparently and evidently), unlike magnitude adverbs such as very or slightly do add relevant meaning to the verb modified
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on December 07, 2018, 11:31:02 PM
(https://postwc.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/eye-before-flea.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Christabel on December 08, 2018, 08:29:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 29, 2018, 05:47:40 AM
;)

I like the word "seemingly" now and then, as a replacement for " s/he, it seemed. "

Yesterday I saw a great example of irony.

A truck went past me in the opposite direction on a semi-circular exit ramp of the freeway.  The side of the truck was garishly decorated with a sign proclaiming: "THIS IS THE TRUCK OF THE FUTURE!"

(I am not making this up.)

Within a split second when I looked back and focused more carefully, I realized that this "truck of the future..."

...was being towed!!!  :D

Recently I was behind a truck with pictures of window furnishings on the outside;  curtains, blinds etc.  When overtaking the truck I noticed, in bold writing, above the front cabin "Blind Man Driving".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on December 08, 2018, 09:07:49 AM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51fgpvGDpfL.jpg)

Columbia is proud to advertise this as a nonbeakable record (bottom right). Aren't records supposed to be broken ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on December 10, 2018, 06:30:30 AM
Quote from: André on December 08, 2018, 09:07:49 AM

Columbia is proud to advertise this as a nonbeakable record (bottom right). Aren't records supposed to be broken ?

How about non-scratchable or non-meltable? I get a similar twinge when reading "this is a permanent book" after 30 or so years going through the yellowed or even brown pages falling out of a hastily bound cover.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on December 12, 2018, 01:44:15 PM
Motivated by a post from Facebook.
Are people actually using "chef" as a verb? As in "Norma's Diner has been cheffed by Harvey for the last ten years."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 12, 2018, 02:17:10 PM
Quote from: JBS on December 12, 2018, 01:44:15 PM
Motivated by a post from Facebook.
Are people actually using "chef" as a verb? As in "Norma's Diner has been cheffed by Harvey for the last ten years."
Joe's Diner has been cooked by Joe for ten years.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: schnittkease on December 12, 2018, 03:41:40 PM
My new pet peeve is the use of apostrophes to express plural subjects when they are (indeed) apple's and orange's.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on December 13, 2018, 07:59:49 AM
Quote from: schnittkease on December 12, 2018, 03:41:40 PM
My new pet peeve is the use of apostrophes to express plural subjects when they are (indeed) apple's and orange's.

That usage has been a favourite of the literately-challenged in the UK for ages, to the extent that it even has a name - the Greengrocer's Apostrophe (apple's and orange's indeed, along with carrot's, potato's and such like).  I must say that on my sole visit to the US I wasn't consciously affronted by it, so glad to hear that we now seem to be wrecking your language for a change ;).  Greengrocers and others get even more distressed when they're dimly aware that a noun changes its spelling in the plural - recently we at work were asked to display a poster (not prepared by us) advertising "Abergavenny Libraries Reading Group" - news to us all that there was more than one library in our small town.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on December 13, 2018, 08:03:12 AM
Quote from: André on December 08, 2018, 09:07:49 AM
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51fgpvGDpfL.jpg)

Columbia is proud to advertise this as a nonbeakable record (bottom right). Aren't records supposed to be broken ?

Shellac records were, not the newfangled vinyl LP's, apparently.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 13, 2018, 08:31:20 AM
Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on December 13, 2018, 08:03:12 AM
Shellac records were, not the newfangled vinyl LP's, apparently.
Shellac was better than vinyl! So much warmer.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 13, 2018, 10:58:32 AM
Quote from: Ken B on December 13, 2018, 08:31:20 AM
Shellac was better than vinyl! So much warmer.  ::)

Riiight!!!  ;)  I will take the lack of scratches, blips, bloops, and static of CD's any day!

Speaking of which, my first CD (London label: Ashkenazy conducting Schoenberg's Verklaerte Nacht and Wagner's Siegfried Idyll is now over 30 years old, and sounds great!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on December 13, 2018, 11:00:19 AM
Quote from: Ken B on December 13, 2018, 08:31:20 AM
Shellac was better than vinyl! So much warmer.  ::)

I just read that the first gramophone records Emil Berliner tried to market were made of rubber.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on December 13, 2018, 12:27:52 PM
Quote from: Ghost of Baron Scarpia on December 13, 2018, 11:00:19 AM
I just read that the first gramophone records Emil Berliner tried to market were made of rubber.
You haven't lived until you've heard gutta-percha cylinders.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on December 15, 2018, 07:46:05 AM
Quote from: JBS on December 12, 2018, 01:44:15 PM
Motivated by a post from Facebook.
Are people actually using "chef" as a verb? As in "Norma's Diner has been cheffed by Harvey for the last ten years."

A similar thing happened in French when Jacques Chirac said, to the astonishment and amusement of everyone, un chef c'est fait pour cheffer
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 25, 2018, 08:43:24 AM
From last year: Wall Street Journal sports reporter Jason Gay on the curious phrase from American football on whether or not a player had caught the football, namely, "survive the ground."  Video "Instant Replay" is now used to adjudicate a disputed catch! 

Which things came to mind when we are at a movie theater yesterday and saw a preview for Liam Neeson's latest revenge epic.

W.S.J. Dec. 21, 2017:

QuoteThen the Replay Overlords intervened, and what very much looked like a catch became...

Not a catch.

The ruling on the replay was that the ball did not "Survive the Ground," which sounds like the title of a Liam Neeson movie.

BAD GUY: No! No don't throw me off this rooftop, Liam Neeson.

LIAM NEESON
: If you don't tell me where she is, you'll never...survive the ground.

;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on December 25, 2018, 08:50:37 AM
A bit ago, SimonNZ posted a book by Antonia Fraser, Perilous Question, which prompted me to get a copy to read from the library.

The illustrated plates begin with a portrait of William IV  in the full robes of the Garter, captioned thus:

William IV by Sir Martin Archer Shee, who came to the throne in July 1830, aged 65.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 25, 2018, 09:24:38 AM
Quote from: JBS on December 25, 2018, 08:50:37 AM
A bit ago, SimonNZ posted a book by Antonia Fraser, Perilous Question, which prompted me to get a copy to read from the library.

The illustrated plates begin with a portrait of William IV  in the full robes of the Garter, captioned thus:

William IV by Sir Martin Archer Shee, who came to the throne in July 1830, aged 65.

OY!  Good ol' antecedent and ending problems!  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 28, 2018, 08:54:00 AM
Clause without a verb.

Lock control at foot of bed when oxygen administering equipment.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on December 28, 2018, 09:38:40 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 28, 2018, 08:54:00 AM
Clause without a verb.

Lock control at foot of bed when oxygen administering equipment.

You are getting fluent in Hospitalese, my friend  ;D.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 28, 2018, 03:45:53 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 28, 2018, 08:54:00 AM

Clause without a verb.

Lock control at foot of bed when oxygen administering equipment.



Quote from: André on December 28, 2018, 09:38:40 AM

You are getting fluent in Hospitalese, my friend  ;D.


:D

This reminded me of the old complaint about doctors' indecipherable handwriting.

The Ohio legislature recently voted to bring back penmanship instruction, because the latest research shows penmanship in the "digital age" is still crucial for eye-hand co-ordination, concentration, and reading.

See:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797614524581 (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797614524581)


And:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/06/more-cursive-schools-ohio-bill-encourages-penmanship/2227029002/ (https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/06/more-cursive-schools-ohio-bill-encourages-penmanship/2227029002/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on December 28, 2018, 09:52:47 PM
If you look at premont's posts there's a fabulous thing he got from a hospital in Denmark

Tiden læger alle sår,
heldigt nok at tiden går.

Anyway it's very good to see these posts from Karl, long may the recuperation continue.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on December 31, 2018, 08:56:58 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 28, 2018, 03:45:53 PM

This reminded me of the old complaint about doctors' indecipherable handwriting.


Now of course, they use computers. There was some mumbo-jumbo in Latin on prescriptions back in the Old Days.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 01, 2019, 05:44:38 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on December 31, 2018, 08:56:58 PM
Now of course, they use computers. There was some mumbo-jumbo in Latin on prescriptions back in the Old Days.


And the challenge now is training the voice -recognition software
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on February 09, 2019, 02:40:23 PM
Today in an antique shop I saw an actual Balalaika for sale.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/TenorBalalaika1.jpg/250px-TenorBalalaika1.jpg)

Or was it?  Because the tag said it was...


(https://images.media-allrecipes.com/userphotos/560x315/5500391.jpg)

BAKLAVA!!!   ;)   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on February 09, 2019, 06:20:15 PM
(https://img-cache.coolshop.com/504f0e8d-aed5-4f22-b148-ae48c4825904/balaclava-three-hole-new-ski-army-mask-fishing-snowboard-black-sas-style.jpg?width=580)

Visiting Cleveland?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 16, 2019, 05:14:38 AM
Another road where maybe I
Could see another kind of mind there.

Okay so I've only just noticed that "there" is superfluous.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: NikF4 on February 16, 2019, 05:21:59 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 16, 2019, 05:14:38 AM
Another road where maybe I
Could see another kind of mind there.

Okay so I've only just noticed that "there" is superfluous.

I often notice the same thing when people compose an image.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 01, 2019, 05:57:36 PM
YMCA Childrens Center
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on March 05, 2019, 09:40:52 AM
In today's Washington Post:

"It is extremely difficult to ascertain with real certainty and consensus the attribution of any Chinese painting."

If you ascertain something, is it not with real certainty ?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on March 05, 2019, 09:52:31 AM
Quote from: André on March 05, 2019, 09:40:52 AM
In today's Washington Post:

"It is extremely difficult to ascertain with real certainty and consensus the attribution of any Chinese painting."

If you ascertain something, is it not with real certainty ?
Or with fake certainty.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 08, 2019, 01:36:42 PM
Quote from: André on March 05, 2019, 09:40:52 AM
In today's Washington Post:

"It is extremely difficult to ascertain with real certainty and consensus the attribution of any Chinese painting."

If you ascertain something, is it not with real certainty ?

Quote from: Ken B on March 05, 2019, 09:52:31 AM
Or with fake certainty.

;)  Oh yes!

From the Amazon...the retailer.  On a page hawking a $100.00 + coat:

QuoteThe hem of the eiderdown garment adopts unique crumples. This was coupled with perfect stitches and manifested a unique charm of magnificence but at the same time not too overt.

Hmmm!  I suspect this was written by an author from Far Cathay!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on March 08, 2019, 04:36:05 PM
It is well known that unique crumples and perfect stitches do lend a unique charm of magnificence to an eiderdown garment  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: XB-70 Valkyrie on March 08, 2019, 09:25:37 PM
"We only serve water on request."

Hmmmm, the menu would certainly benefit from a bit more variety. Maybe I'll go next door and request some waffles and an Ayinger (on tap no less)!

:P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 10, 2019, 06:48:15 AM
Quote from: André on March 08, 2019, 04:36:05 PM
It is well known that unique crumples and perfect stitches do lend a unique charm of magnificence to an eiderdown garment  :D

Well, I know that now!  :D


Quote from: XB-70 Valkyrie on March 08, 2019, 09:25:37 PM
"We only serve water on request."

Hmmmm, the menu would certainly benefit from a bit more variety. Maybe I'll go next door and request some waffles and an Ayinger (on tap no less)!

:P

I hope the request is fresh like the water!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on March 19, 2019, 06:09:00 PM


Nice typo on this box cover:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71aIUqJgK7L._SX522_.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 20, 2019, 05:43:51 PM
Quote from: André on March 19, 2019, 06:09:00 PM

Nice typo on this box cover:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71aIUqJgK7L._SX522_.jpg)

Ouch!  Nobody caught that?

Last weekend I discovered that the Bureau of Jokes at the Ohio Department of Transportation had been hard at work!

What?  Why does the Ohio Department of Transportation need a Bureau of Jokes?  Apparently the bureaucrats decided that more humor was needed on the freeways to counterbalance the drunks, the texters, the incompetents, the speeders, and the blind who are driving around loose.

And so the bureaucrats have spent millions of dollars on electronic signs which occasionally carry "funny" messages.  On the weekend of Saint Patrick's Day we saw the following tidwit:

"Don't Drive Shamrocked!!!"  Stay Sober!

The poor shamrock!  Twisted into a symbol of inebriation by unwitty bureaucrats!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on June 20, 2019, 09:28:15 AM
In my spam mailbox today:

Quote
Dear friend,
I am Mrs. Mona Pereda, 71 years old, deaf and a widow. I was married to late Engr David Howard Pereda ,who worked with Shell Development Company in London for Twenty-Six years before he died in the year 2011 after a brief illness that lasted only five days. When my late husband was alive he deposited the sum of US$30 M in a firm here. Following my ill health(Cancer of the Lungs), my Doctor told me that I may not live longer than required due to my health condition. I am looking forward to seeing someone who can use this money in charitable works. More details will be made known to you upon your response.Kindly respond to my email below.
May God Bless You.
Mrs. Mona Pereda

Is it me, or even a 7 old would see through this mumbo jumbo ?

« I may not live longer than required »... ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on July 23, 2019, 04:55:03 AM
(https://media1.jpc.de/image/w600/rear/0/0761203500925.jpg)

I have a question: in the work titles on this cd I notice that Summer and Winter have the possessive apostrophe. Is this right ? Using here the apostrophe is weird IMO. Maybe I am missing on something here? I would have written Summer Tale and Tale of a Winter Evening. 

Thanks for commenting  :).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on July 23, 2019, 06:21:51 AM
Quote from: André on July 23, 2019, 04:55:03 AM
(https://media1.jpc.de/image/w600/rear/0/0761203500925.jpg)

I have a question: in the work titles on this cd I notice that Summer and Winter have the possessive apostrophe. Is this right ? Using here the apostrophe is weird IMO. Maybe I am missing on something here? I would have written Summer Tale and Tale of a Winter Evening. 

Thanks for commenting  :).
Both are perfectly correct, and would have been standard in the 19th century. Now we tend to be looser about such things. This is a bit reminiscent of The Hundred Year's War discussion.

A summer tale would be a tale suitable or intended for summer. Summer clothing, summer weather. The tale is a particular summer would be that summer's tale, and its weather would be that summer's weather. Ergo a summer's tale is a tale of a particular (but as yet unspecified) summer.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 23, 2019, 06:33:59 AM
And, from the annals of The point limping across, dodgy grammar notwithstanding:

"Better left unread than dead"

"If you feel faint or pain stop exercising immediately"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on July 23, 2019, 07:30:53 AM
I get it, thanks !

:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on August 13, 2019, 07:21:47 PM
Mangling English is not a new thing.

Started listening tonight to the Sony set of Alexis Weissenberg's Complete RCA recordings.
First item is a recording made in 1950 of works by Prokofiev and Scriabin ( supplemented in this set by three Rachmaninov preludes never released before). The back of the LP jacket notes describe one piece, Prokofiev's Suggestion Diabolique, as..

...."displayful"

The LP jacket proudly touts its status as
"long playing"
Mind you, in its original form, the record contained
19 minutes
of music. The Rachmaninov preludes bring the CD up to 28 minutes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 14, 2019, 08:55:04 AM
A 19-minute LP 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on August 15, 2019, 02:28:29 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 14, 2019, 08:55:04 AM
A 19-minute LP 8)

You spoiled brats with yer CDs!  :D Let's not forget that the playing time for a 12-inch 78 was four to five minutes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 15, 2019, 05:51:09 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on August 15, 2019, 02:28:29 AM
You spoiled brats with yer CDs!  :D Let's not forget that the playing time for a 12-inch 78 was four to five minutes.
5 minutes!? That was an eternity compared to cylinders you spoiled young sprat!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 30, 2019, 04:36:42 AM
GMG is working better today!  I can therefore take some time for a monstrosity written by an "educationalist."

I could have written a "fraudulent educationalist," which in one sense would be redundant, but not in another.

Here is the background: the completely worthless edumbcational bureaucrats in my diocese decided that it would have every teacher read a book during the summer, and then sit through 4-hours of blah-blah-blah by the author at a convention.

I tried to read the book, but after going through the first 16 pages, and finding an average of three errors and/or incomprehensible and/or ridiculous statements per page, I stopped reading.  Opening the book at random, I could find such things every time!

In fact, right now I am opening the book at random!  Page 93 has this:

"Teachers, teacher leaders, school leaders, curriculum writers, and central office personnel who support schools must also have access to a succinct and accurate interpretation of the standards to be taught and assessed Why?Teacher leaders, school leaders, curriculum writers, and central office personnel who support schools must also have access to the interpretation of the standards  so that they are able to provide meaningful feedback to teachers and make appropriate decisions for curricular programming.

WHERE TO START???  The lack of a period, so that the first "sentence" ends with "Why?"  The lack of a space between the sentences, the obvious cutting-and-pasting of the the opening of the first sentence into the next one, the curious part about giving "meaningful feedback" (as opposed to meaningless?), the preciosity of "curricular programming," etc. etc. etc.

One of my favorites from the end:

"When teachers, school leaders, and central office personnel who support schools authentically become members of the same culture of instruction..." (this goes on for a while)...(wait for it)..."then and only will the alchemy of student achievement become the resultant byproduct."

Again, WHERE TO START???  The ambiguity of "authentically"?  "Then and only will..."?  "...alchemy..."?   It would be bad enough if the statement said "student achievement" will be a "byproduct"?!  But why will it not be THE PRODUCT?  (What is therefore the product?)  And yet it is worse: "...the alchemy..." seems to be the "byproduct" with the redundant  "resultant."  Why do we want "alchemy"?  Does he perhaps mean "The magic/mystery of student achievement"?  If so, how is student achievement a mystery or an inscrutable, "magical" process?  Does his book not attempt to tell us how produce student achievement???

On top of all this, the book makes remarkable discoveries: e.g. teachers should know their subject, teachers should be organized, teachers should know how to communicate, blah-blah-blah-find-a-rope-for-me-please-so-I-can-end-it-all!  ;)

Upon further inspection of the author's background, one finds that he has been convicted of check-kiting and other offenses.  A $500,000 deal in New York county school system was for some reason kept hidden from the public.   He has "Ed.D." behind his name, and another "Ed.D." supposedly edited his book, which is published by the author's own "educational consulting firm."

So, it is not just the bad grammar and the ridiculous sentences, etc.  Teachers throughout the Catholic schools here are furious with the diocesan bureaucrats, who bought thousands of this huckster's books and then hired him to be the center of next week's convention (which we are "required" to attend)!

It will be difficult for me to keep from leading a massive walk-out!   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on August 31, 2019, 02:29:32 PM
Quote from: Cato on August 30, 2019, 04:36:42 AM
GMG is working better today!  I can therefore take some time for a monstrosity written by an "educationalist."

I could have written a "fraudulent educationalist," which in one sense would be redundant, but not in another.

Here is the background: the completely worthless edumbcational bureaucrats in my diocese decided that it would have every teacher read a book during the summer, and then sit through 4-hours of blah-blah-blah by the author at a convention.

I tried to read the book, but after going through the first 16 pages, and finding an average of three errors and/or incomprehensible and/or ridiculous statements per page, I stopped reading.  Opening the book at random, I could find such things every time!

In fact, right now I am opening the book at random!  Page 93 has this:

"Teachers, teacher leaders, school leaders, curriculum writers, and central office personnel who support schools must also have access to a succinct and accurate interpretation of the standards to be taught and assessed Why?Teacher leaders, school leaders, curriculum writers, and central office personnel who support schools must also have access to the interpretation of the standards  so that they are able to provide meaningful feedback to teachers and make appropriate decisions for curricular programming.

WHERE TO START???  The lack of a period, so that the first "sentence" ends with "Why?"  The lack of a space between the sentences, the obvious cutting-and-pasting of the the opening of the first sentence into the next one, the curious part about giving "meaningful feedback" (as opposed to meaningless?), the preciosity of "curricular programming," etc. etc. etc.

One of my favorites from the end:

"When teachers, school leaders, and central office personnel who support schools authentically become members of the same culture of instruction..." (this goes on for a while)...(wait for it)..."then and only will the alchemy of student achievement become the resultant byproduct."

Again, WHERE TO START???  The ambiguity of "authentically"?  "Then and only will..."?  "...alchemy..."?   It would be bad enough if the statement said "student achievement" will be a "byproduct"?!  But why will it not be THE PRODUCT?  (What is therefore the product?)  And yet it is worse: "...the alchemy..." seems to be the "byproduct" with the redundant  "resultant."  Why do we want "alchemy"?  Does he perhaps mean "The magic/mystery of student achievement"?  If so, how is student achievement a mystery or an inscrutable, "magical" process?  Does his book not attempt to tell us how produce student achievement???

On top of all this, the book makes remarkable discoveries: e.g. teachers should know their subject, teachers should be organized, teachers should know how to communicate, blah-blah-blah-find-a-rope-for-me-please-so-I-can-end-it-all!  ;)

Upon further inspection of the author's background, one finds that he has been convicted of check-kiting and other offenses.  A $500,000 deal in New York county school system was for some reason kept hidden from the public.   He has "Ed.D." behind his name, and another "Ed.D." supposedly edited his book, which is published by the author's own "educational consulting firm."

So, it is not just the bad grammar and the ridiculous sentences, etc.  Teachers throughout the Catholic schools here are furious with the diocesan bureaucrats, who bought thousands of this huckster's books and then hired him to be the center of next week's convention (which we are "required" to attend)!

It will be difficult for me to keep from leading a massive walk-out!   0:)

American education has become a 20 year Milgram experiment.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 31, 2019, 02:31:56 PM
Quote from: Ken B on August 31, 2019, 02:29:32 PM
American education has become a 20 year Milgram experiment.

Dang! You're right.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 01, 2019, 03:51:32 AM
Quote from: Ken B on August 31, 2019, 02:29:32 PM
American education has become a 20 year Milgram experiment.

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on August 31, 2019, 02:31:56 PM
Dang! You're right.

Among my colleagues there is not much obedience about this issue!   :D    Many - if not all - are planning to "protest" by doing other things at the convention (correcting papers, reading books, etc.).  I am still debating about attending: I could stay home and cut the grass, or do something really important, like breathing.   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 08, 2019, 05:23:20 AM
Concerning the fake "educational consultant" i.e. huckster mentioned below: at the convention he worked the crowd like Elmer Gantry, thereby proving our (my and those of my colleagues) suspicions about him.  It also turned out that he wants to sell his "consulting" forms to the diocese, of course.   ;)   No word yet on precisely how stupid the bureaucrats are!

I saw a report about the misuse of "milk" for "plant-based beverages," e.g. we have today "Oat Milk," "Almond Milk," "Soy Milk," etc.  Government bureaucrats saw no reason (for once!) to interfere, because they thought nobody would really think that a nut has milk.  Dairy farmers, however, have surveys showing that many people do think that real cow's milk is involved in e.g. almond "milk."  The farmers believe the term "milk" should be reserved only for moo juice.   0:)

   

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 08, 2019, 07:04:52 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 08, 2019, 05:23:20 AM
Concerning the fake "educational consultant" i.e. huckster mentioned below: at the convention he worked the crowd like Elmer Gantry, thereby proving our (my and those of my colleagues) suspicions about him.  It also turned out that he wants to sell his "consulting" forms to the diocese, of course.   ;)   No word yet on precisely how stupid the bureaucrats are!

I saw a report about the misuse of "milk" for "plant-based beverages," e.g. we have today "Oat Milk," "Almond Milk," "Soy Milk," etc.  Government bureaucrats saw no reason (for once!) to interfere, because they thought nobody would really think that a nut has milk.  Dairy farmers, however, have surveys showing that many people do think that real cow's milk is involved in e.g. almond "milk."  The farmers believe the term "milk" should be reserved only for moo juice.   0:)


Do they object to "prairie oysters" as misleading labeling?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on September 08, 2019, 11:49:55 AM
Quote from: Cato on September 08, 2019, 05:23:20 AM
Concerning the fake "educational consultant" i.e. huckster mentioned below: at the convention he worked the crowd like Elmer Gantry, thereby proving our (my and those of my colleagues) suspicions about him.  It also turned out that he wants to sell his "consulting" forms to the diocese, of course.   ;)   No word yet on precisely how stupid the bureaucrats are!

I saw a report about the misuse of "milk" for "plant-based beverages," e.g. we have today "Oat Milk," "Almond Milk," "Soy Milk," etc.  Government bureaucrats saw no reason (for once!) to interfere, because they thought nobody would really think that a nut has milk.  Dairy farmers, however, have surveys showing that many people do think that real cow's milk is involved in e.g. almond "milk."  The farmers believe the term "milk" should be reserved only for moo juice.   0:)



Does this proposed ban extend to mothers who breastfeed their babies?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 09, 2019, 10:13:00 AM
Second time I have tried this!

QuoteDoes this proposed ban extend to mothers who breastfeed their babies?

Heh-Heh!   ;)

I have heard no objections about the appropriation by this product of the word "milk."   ;)

(https://dylbs6e8mhm2w.cloudfront.net/productimages/500x500/OTC64916H_PRI02.JPG)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on September 10, 2019, 05:43:28 AM
The site's so slow I not even going to try to post a picture, but what about those Tiger's Milk bars, which do list "milk" in their ingredients, but I'm guessing it's not actually from tigers. While we're on the subject, shouldn't food labels be required to specify exactly which species of animal's milk they contain?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 12, 2019, 10:40:05 AM
Quote from: Wendell_E on September 10, 2019, 05:43:28 AM
The site's so slow I not even going to try to post a picture, but what about those Tiger's Milk bars, which do list "milk" in their ingredients, but I'm guessing it's not actually from tigers. While we're on the subject, shouldn't food labels be required to specify exactly which species of animal's milk they contain?

I would think so: supposedly goat's milk is easier to digest for some people, and so it is labeled as such.  Some of the Luddites who make their own soap will proudly tout "Goat's Milk Soap" on their products.

A person was complaining about the use of acronyms as words, specifically "yolo."

I may have written here before about how somebody asked me about "the Latin word yolo."  Apparently some wise guy on the Internet has a hoax about "yolo, yolare, yolavi" being a Latin verb (it isn't) and meaning "to live only once."

You Only Live Once.

The context of the complaint seemed to be a conversation about sky-diving, where the answer as to why one would do such a thing was a shrug with the comment "yolo."

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 15, 2019, 12:03:28 PM
For your consideration...a headline from today's local newspaper:

"After Dorian, Bahamas Avoid Newest Storm"   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on September 15, 2019, 02:48:17 PM
Quote from: Cato on September 15, 2019, 12:03:28 PM
For your consideration...a headline from today's local newspaper:

"After Dorian, Bahamas Avoid Newest Storm"   ;)
You can hardly blame the Bahamas but what do they actually do, cross the street?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on October 20, 2019, 08:49:32 AM
This WP article title may be grammatically correct (?), but it sure looks awkward:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/this-crisp-minerally-12-french-white-blend-evokes-the-mountains-where-its-grown/2019/10/18/e48b697c-ef6a-11e9-8693-f487e46784aa_story.html?arc404=true (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/this-crisp-minerally-12-french-white-blend-evokes-the-mountains-where-its-grown/2019/10/18/e48b697c-ef6a-11e9-8693-f487e46784aa_story.html?arc404=true)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on October 31, 2019, 07:54:12 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 05:49:19 AM
No. Queer is quite offensive.

The way friends use it, queer refers to a very politically active approach to questions posed by homosexual identity, in particular a provocative anti-assimilationist one. You may have come across this

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Queer_Nation_logo.svg/2560px-Queer_Nation_logo.svg.png)

I'm sure that it was offensive though, just like nigger. It has become reclaimed,

(Strange this, just this morning I was looking at the opening chapter of The Sound and the Fury.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 06:40:16 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on October 31, 2019, 07:54:12 AM
The way friends use it, queer refers to a very politically active approach to questions posed by homosexual identity, in particular a provocative anti-assimilationist one. You may have come across this

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Queer_Nation_logo.svg/2560px-Queer_Nation_logo.svg.png)

I'm sure that it was offensive though, just like nigger. It has become reclaimed,

(Strange this, just this morning I was looking at the opening chapter of The Sound and the Fury.)

Great source. Friends.

Queer is offensive. It is not simply a synonym for gay or homosexual. A little research would tell you this.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 31, 2019, 06:57:10 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 06:40:16 PM
Great source. Friends.

Queer is offensive. It is not simply a synonym for gay or homosexual. A little research would tell you this.
Explain LGBTQ
Explain "We're here, we're queer, get used to it"
Explain this website  http://www.queerevents.ca/event-city/hamilton (http://www.queerevents.ca/event-city/hamilton)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 07:02:53 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 31, 2019, 06:57:10 PM
Explain LGBTQ
Explain "We're here, we're queer, get used to it"
Explain this website  http://www.queerevents.ca/event-city/hamilton (http://www.queerevents.ca/event-city/hamilton)
They are attempts to 'reclaim' the word 'queer'. Yes. But they have not been, are not, and will likely never be successful. If I call you an effing queer. Am I saying something nice do you think?  Alternatively, look up the definition of queer and you will see that pretty much every source refers to it as offensive. Seriously, this should be common sense.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on October 31, 2019, 07:07:00 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 06:40:16 PM
Great source. Friends.

Queer is offensive. It is not simply a synonym for gay or homosexual. A little research would tell you this.

I think it's one of those insults which have been "claimed" by the insultees and repurposed as a term of honor.  I have met plenty of gay people who use it that way.

But I don't think queer is actually a synonym for gay.  Queer suggests an attitude that is agressive and in your face.

Gay is Pete Buttigieg talking about his marriage.
Queer is the person who attends the local Pride parade in fetishwear that provides a full view of his "equipment".

Gays want to be accepted as normal.
Queers demand to be accepted as abnormal .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 31, 2019, 07:19:42 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 07:02:53 PM
They are attempts to reclaim the word 'queer'. Yes. But they have not been, are not, and will likely never be successful. If I call you an effing queer. Am I saying something nice do you think?  Alternatively, look up the definition of queer and you will see that pretty much every source refers to it as offensive. Seriously, this should be common sense.
What a ridiculous answer. Fucking anything differs from anything by itself. Look at those goalposts move! "Fucking Beethoven fan" is probably an insult.

Queer is used extensively here in Canada. On websites, posters, signs. It is used in government websites and government publications. It as used in a government apology for past discrimination.

If I make a comment about "fucking Americans" telling Canadians how to talk you can draw a conclusion but not that American is an inherently offensive term. 

I don't think it's an exact synonym for gay, or even a fucking synonym for gay, but it might be a synonym for fucking gay. It's a bit more emphatic and in your face.

Example https://travel.gc.ca/travelling/health-safety/lgbt-travel
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 07:32:12 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 31, 2019, 07:19:42 PM
What a ridiculous answer. Fucking anything differs from anything by itself. Look at those goalposts move! "Fucking Beethoven fan" is probably an insult.

Queer is used extensively here in Canada. On websites, posters, signs. It is used in government websites and government publications. It as used in a government apology for past discrimination.

If I make a comment about "fucking Americans" telling Canadians how to talk you can draw a conclusion but not that American is an inherently offensive term. 

I don't think it's an exact synonym for gay, or even a fucking synonym for gay, but it might be a synonym for fucking gay. It's a bit more emphatic and in your face.
Nice offensive rant. You could have just said to ignore the word if it bothered you.

If I call you a queer, do you think I am saying a nice thing? Many dictioneries, Wikipedia, etc,, all say that it is offensive. It's nice to be idealistic, and try to turn a negative into a positive, but it has not taken hold in most places in my experience. And it is certainly incredibly misleading to claim that it is a synonym to gay or homosexual as was claimed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on October 31, 2019, 07:42:07 PM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 07:32:12 PM
Nice offensive rant. You could have just said to ignore the word if it bothered you.

If I call you a queer, do you think I am saying a nice thing? Many dictioneries, Wikipedia, etc,, all say that it is offensive. It's nice to be idealistic, and try to turn a negative into a positive, but it has not taken hold in most places in my experience. And it is certainly incredibly misleading to claim that it is a synonym to gay or homosexual as was claimed.

I'd say you were — if I called myself a queer. I call myself an atheist, and you can call me that. It's an insult in a lot of the world, and originated as an insult. But it's not an offensive word now, and I am not going to scold people if they use it, and tell them do do some research before speaking.

Tell me that webpage is offensive and anti gay.  ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 07:57:23 PM
Quote from: Ken B on October 31, 2019, 07:42:07 PM
I'd say you were — if I called myself a queer. I call myself an atheist, and you can call me that. It's an insult in a lot of the world, and originated as an insult. But it's not an offensive word now, and I am not going to scold people if they use it, and tell them do do some research before speaking.

Tell me that webpage is offensive and anti gay.  ::)
It could be considered that, yes. I'm actually quite surprised that the Canadian government has used it. And I think you've answered my question as well. In the US, I would never use that word. Never. Not spoken. Not written. And there's a good reason for that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 01, 2019, 05:23:45 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 07:57:23 PM
In the US, I would never use that word. Never. Not spoken. Not written. And there's a good reason for that.

Nor me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 01, 2019, 02:32:31 PM
This seems like the right thread for this. May you kern in hell! ...  https://hellveticafont.com/ (https://hellveticafont.com/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 02, 2019, 04:05:57 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on October 31, 2019, 06:40:16 PM
Queer is offensive. It is not simply a synonym for gay or homosexual. A little research would tell you this.

It used to be a synonym for "odd", so not intrinsically bad.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on November 02, 2019, 05:51:22 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 02, 2019, 04:05:57 AM
It used to be a synonym for "odd", so not intrinsically bad.
It's true that there are other meanings, most of which are historical at this point in the US. I've seen that particular usage more in the UK, but I cannot say if it still used at all or mostly been abandoned there. Context also plays a role.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 02, 2019, 08:25:16 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 02, 2019, 04:05:57 AM
It used to be a synonym for "odd", so not intrinsically bad.

Hello, zb! How are you doing?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on November 02, 2019, 09:10:44 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on November 02, 2019, 05:51:22 AM
It's true that there are other meanings, most of which are historical at this point in the US. I've seen that particular usage more in the UK, but I cannot say if it still used at all or mostly been abandoned there. Context also plays a role.

Did you not get the British TV series Queer as Folk in the states? I always assumed because of your monika that you were in the UK.

https://youtube.com/v/l5tQ8wBQKX8&feature=youtube

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 02, 2019, 10:03:40 AM
I only know the title of that series but by this alone I'd have thought that it was not an offensive term although by now less common (more regional?) than gay.
And of course the double meaning often only works with queer. Partly because the non-sexual meaning of gay all but disappeared in the last half century or so.
One did not really learn such things in English class in 1980s German school (although we had one teacher who frequently hinted about words one should know/recognize but never use, the four letter ones) but I am pretty sure I knew the common (sexual) meaning of gay before I went to the US in my twenties for a year of studies in the mid-1990s. I certainly did not know the meaning of queer before that time because I distinctly remember when someone used it and he had to explain it to me (and also used the phrase "queer as a three dollar bill" which I still find funny, admittedly).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on November 02, 2019, 11:26:05 AM
Quote from: Jo498 on November 02, 2019, 10:03:40 AM
I only know the title of that series but by this alone I'd have thought that it was not an offensive term although by now less common (more regional?) than gay.
And of course the double meaning often only works with queer. Partly because the non-sexual meaning of gay all but disappeared in the last half century or so.
One did not really learn such things in English class in 1980s German school (although we had one teacher who frequently hinted about words one should know/recognize but never use, the four letter ones) but I am pretty sure I knew the common (sexual) meaning of gay before I went to the US in my twenties for a year of studies in the mid-1990s. I certainly did not know the meaning of queer before that time because I distinctly remember when someone used it and he had to explain it to me (and also used the phrase "queer as a three dollar bill" which I still find funny, admittedly).

Bent as a nine bob note was the UK expression, at the time there was a ten bob note

(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/CC5AR3/ten-shillings-note-CC5AR3.jpg).

Bent means stolen or criminal or dishonest, bent goods = stolen goods, a bent lawyer = a dishonest lawyer. It can also mean homosexual (vide. the related (I think still very offensive) term for a gay man a bender.)

Queer as folk is a pun, obviously, on the expression queer as fuck.. As fuck in this context is just an intensifier -- queer as fuck just means very very queer, though clearly fuck still keeps a connotation of sex, which makes the expression fun.  There was a very common northern English expression, I've heard it very often -- there's nowt so queer as folk -- nowt a Northern dialect word for nothing.


(https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.589980058.6772/ra,unisex_tshirt,x2200,heather_grey,front-c,392,146,750,1000-bg,f8f8f8.u1.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 02, 2019, 07:00:27 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on November 02, 2019, 09:10:44 AM
Did you not get the British TV series Queer as Folk in the states? I always assumed because of your monika that you were in the UK.

https://youtube.com/v/l5tQ8wBQKX8&feature=youtube

There was a North American version that ran five seasons starting in 2000.
And we in the US had Queer Eye for the Straight Guy. Was there a UK version of that?

As for the Q word itself, it's been possibly a couple of decades since I heard it used as anything other than a self-affirmation by a gay person or a neutral decriptive term. My community has a somewhat above average percentage of gays, so perhaps that has something to with it.  It's been a number of years since I have heard the term "faggot" used as an insult by anyone older than 17 (and not often used by anyone else in any context), and even longer since I have heard anyone use the term "fairy" in any manner related to gays.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 02, 2019, 08:26:05 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 02, 2019, 08:25:16 AM
Hello, zb! How are you doing?

Thanks for asking. My husband has a hospital appointment today. It won't be much fun for anyone.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 03, 2019, 01:14:56 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 02, 2019, 08:26:05 PM
Thanks for asking. My husband has a hospital appointment today. It won't be much fun for anyone.

Good luck!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on November 03, 2019, 04:09:31 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 02, 2019, 08:26:05 PM
Thanks for asking. My husband has a hospital appointment today. It won't be much fun for anyone.
Sorry to hear that. Hope it goes as well as it can...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 03, 2019, 05:52:32 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 02, 2019, 08:26:05 PM
Thanks for asking. My husband has a hospital appointment today. It won't be much fun for anyone.
Good luck to him, and to you.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 03, 2019, 06:45:27 AM
Best Wishes to Zamyrabyrd and her family!

Time has been at a premium these past months, so I have not always had a chance to grumble here!   ;)

"Queer duck" is an expression which always seemed rather British to me: I cannot find much about it (at the moment) on the Internet, but do recall it being used in 19th-century writing, both British and American.   It also seems that I recall it from a Humphrey Bogart movie, but cannot find a reference.

A person from England recently wrote to me about the phrase "wagging the head," which the writer found very odd, because the writer thought (perhaps was taught) that it could only be used for tails.  Heads can be shaken and nodded, but not "wagged."

However, it seems authors have had no problem with the phrase: I recall it being used by Alma Mahler in the ( Basil Creighton ) translation of her Mahler memories to describe Schoenberg at the chaos connected with a performance of his op. 7.

I always heard it during Good Friday services or in late Lenten Masses, for it is used in a description of the Crucifixion, as Jewish leaders pass by the cross and are described as "wagging their heads" in disgust or in an "I-Told-You-So" fashion:

From an updated King James Version:

Quote

Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left. (39)  And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, (40) And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself.


https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-27-39/ (https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-27-39/)


My American Heritage Dictionary also has no problem with the phrase, the "wagging" showing disappointment, disgust, or embarrassment.

What say ye? 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: AlberichUndHagen on November 03, 2019, 07:20:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 03, 2019, 06:45:27 AM
It also seems that I recall it from a Humphrey Bogart movie, but cannot find a reference.

I recall that they said "queer-looking duck" in Welles's The Magnificent Ambersons, also.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on November 03, 2019, 07:30:06 AM
I remember once when I was a graduate student and about to change supervisors, someone said to me "He is very good but a queer fish."

The man in question is now quite a major professor of philosophy!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 03, 2019, 07:32:18 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 03, 2019, 06:45:27 AM
Best Wishes to Zamyrabyrd and her family!

Thanks, guys for your concern. It really means a lot. Suffice to say that if any of you are heavy smokers, please STOP NOW. He was warned, which makes everything worse...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 03, 2019, 07:47:22 AM
Quote from: AlberichUndHagen on November 03, 2019, 07:20:07 AM
I recall that they said "queer-looking duck" in Welles's The Magnificent Ambersons, also.

Yes!  Good memory!  It seems that it was a phrase about eccentricity in general.

Quote from: Mandryka on November 03, 2019, 07:30:06 AM
I remember once when I was a graduate student and about to change supervisors, someone said to me "He is very good but a queer fish."

The man in question is now quite a major professor of philosophy!

Yes, I have also heard that animal used.

Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 03, 2019, 07:32:18 AM
Thanks, guys for your concern. It really means a lot. Suffice to say that if any of you are heavy smokers, please STOP NOW. He was warned, which makes everything worse...

Well, it is sad.   One of the most addictive substances is readily available everywhere.  I was amazed, when I first visited (West) Germany 45 years ago, to see cancer-stick machines on somebody's fence in the middle of a residential neighborhood, often by a school-bus stop!   ???   The German cancer-stick companies knew how to find new customers!

I never ever was tempted to try it, since from earliest childhood I HATED the stink, the coating from the smoke on the windows, the rotting-Brussels-sprouts breath, the debris on the streets and even on the floors of buildings, I HATED the entire tobacco-kulcher.   My grandfathers died before age 68 from chewing (maternal side) and smoking (paternal).  My grandmother (paternal) also died before age 68.  On the other hand, my weed-free grandmother lived to be 90.  My parents had a miserable last decade when they were sick from smoking diseases.

Yes, I still hate it, along with marijuana, cloves, and anything else similar: lungs were designed for air, and weeds were designed to be pulled and mulched, not chewed, not inhaled.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: AlberichUndHagen on November 03, 2019, 08:28:07 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 03, 2019, 07:47:22 AM
Yes!  Good memory!  It seems that it was a phrase about eccentricity in general.

Thanks! Although one of the reasons for my remembering it is that the phrase was repeated several times.  :D

@zamyrabyrd: I wish strength to you and your family!

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 03, 2019, 04:43:58 PM
Quote from: Ken B on November 03, 2019, 05:52:32 AM
Good luck to him, and to you.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on November 03, 2019, 04:09:31 AM
Sorry to hear that. Hope it goes as well as it can...
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 03, 2019, 01:14:56 AM
Good luck!

Amen to all of that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 03, 2019, 09:41:35 PM
Quote from: JBS on November 03, 2019, 04:43:58 PM
Amen to all of that.

Thanks, all! I have been a basket case from yesterday but with still plenty more to go.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 03, 2019, 09:50:13 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 03, 2019, 07:47:22 AM

Well, it is sad.   One of the most addictive substances is readily available everywhere.  I was amazed, when I first visited (West) Germany 45 years ago, to see cancer-stick machines on somebody's fence in the middle of a residential neighborhood, often by a school-bus stop!   ???   The German cancer-stick companies knew how to find new customers!

I never ever was tempted to try it, since from earliest childhood I HATED the stink, the coating from the smoke on the windows, the rotting-Brussels-sprouts breath, the debris on the streets and even on the floors of buildings, I HATED the entire tobacco-kulcher.   My grandfathers died before age 68 from chewing (maternal side) and smoking (paternal).  My grandmother (paternal) also died before age 68.  On the other hand, my weed-free grandmother lived to be 90.  My parents had a miserable last decade when they were sick from smoking diseases.

Yes, I still hate it, along with marijuana, cloves, and anything else similar: lungs were designed for air, and weeds were designed to be pulled and mulched, not chewed, not inhaled.

You're spot on about the addictive element which after all, popular culture and advertising exploit not only for tobacco. They inflate the possible pleasures while downplaying and even lying about the nasty consequences.

It's interesting though even with warnings in bold print taking up almost half a box of cigs, those addicted just nonchalantly ignore them.  Addiction is definitely a mindset that ANYONE can fall into unawares. You can be addicted to almost anything and multiple addictions are not uncommon.  Fighting this mentality is harder than the actual illness in so far as it is riddled with denial.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on November 04, 2019, 12:33:48 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 03, 2019, 04:43:58 PM
Amen to all of that.

From me as well.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 04, 2019, 01:59:59 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 03, 2019, 07:47:22 AM
Well, it is sad.   One of the most addictive substances is readily available everywhere.  I was amazed, when I first visited (West) Germany 45 years ago, to see cancer-stick machines on somebody's fence in the middle of a residential neighborhood, often by a school-bus stop!   ???   The German cancer-stick companies knew how to find new customers!
The vending machines are still there, although fewer and one now has to be 18 to smoke. The official age used to be 16 until fairly recently and with the 1980s type vending machines of course every child tall enough could get a pack (now they use age verification from an ID card). That it was possible to increase the age for smoking and ban smoking in many areas where it used to be allowed is one of the very few public health/environmental issues that was apparently so successful that it makes me keep some hope for similar measures that would be advisable but seeem socially or politically impossible today.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 04, 2019, 05:24:02 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 03, 2019, 09:41:35 PM
Thanks, all! I have been a basket case from yesterday but with still plenty more to go.

Draw those deep breaths!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 04, 2019, 06:58:26 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 04, 2019, 05:24:02 AM
Draw those deep breaths!

Amen!  I saw my mother-in-law (age 71-72 at the time) die from lung cancer over a period of 18 months, and it was a dreadful way to go.  "Them doctors don't know what they're talkin' about!" was her response to every request to quit, because she knew all kinds of people who had smoked until "they was 90" and never got cancer.

Well, she knew of two in fact, and my response always was: "Perhaps they would have lived to be 120 or beyond without the habit?"

To which she would respond: "Who'd wanna live to 120?!"   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 04, 2019, 07:05:31 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 04, 2019, 05:24:02 AM
Draw those deep breaths!

Well, her husband did, and it did him no good  :-[.

ZB is right, addictions defy understanding and can befall anyone. It's the body that controls, manipulates and tricks the mind.

My best wishes in this time of stress  :-X
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 04, 2019, 09:44:13 AM
Quote from: André on November 04, 2019, 07:05:31 AM
Well, her husband did, and it did him no good  :-[.


Clean, fresh air!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2019, 04:23:35 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 04, 2019, 06:58:26 AM
Amen!  I saw my mother-in-law (age 71-72 at the time) die from lung cancer over a period of 18 months, and it was a dreadful way to go.  "Them doctors don't know what they're talkin' about!" was her response to every request to quit, because she knew all kinds of people who had smoked until "they was 90" and never got cancer.
Well, she knew of two in fact, and my response always was: "Perhaps they would have lived to be 120 or beyond without the habit?"
To which she would respond: "Who'd wanna live to 120?!"   0:)

Sounds like my father in a way. Despite a history of heart disease and late onset diabetes, he still smoked cigars and freely drank booze. He claimed there was no actuarial difference between those who abstain and anyway he wanted to "enjoy himself". (He was referring snidely to his brother-in-law a health freak, who succumbed about the same age, 78. But he missed an important point, the quality of life, not having to go around on a walker for his last two years due to the previous stroke and risking an amputation for part of his foot.

I actually found stubs in a hidden place after I washed out the ashtray completely! This is really NUTZ!

(Did you see my post about the cow shot by a bow and arrow? Some comedic relief:
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3326 on: November 04, 2019, 07:21:17 AM » )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2019, 04:24:22 AM
Quote from: André on November 04, 2019, 07:05:31 AM
Well, her husband did, and it did him no good  :-[.

Hah, it was tainted air!!!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2019, 04:28:28 AM
Quote from: Florestan on November 04, 2019, 12:33:48 AM
From me as well.

Merci.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: pjme on November 05, 2019, 04:30:58 AM
5.1 How could additives affect addictiveness of tobacco products?
The SCENIHR opinion states:

Possibilities to make tobacco more addictive or attractive

Tobacco products are manipulated by tobacco companies by the addition of chemical compounds, most of which are flavours. Obviously, the flavours are added to the natural tobacco to give the product a better taste thereby increasing the attractiveness of these products. This includes the addition of humectants which keep the humidity of the tobacco product at a desired level; dry tobacco generates an unpleasant harsh smoke.

"Light" cigarettes were introduced on the market in the 1970s. Typical for light cigarettes is their high grade of ventilation. Due to the delivery of less tar, the impact and taste of the "diluted" smoke is also decreased. It is therefore probable that the light cigarettes were "enriched" by adding more substances, and in higher amounts, to compensate for reduced taste and impact.

An important reason for using additives is to give the product a specific and standardised taste. A specific taste is important for the company to be competitive on the consumer market in view of the large variety of brands available. A unique product binds the customer/consumer to this specific product. The specific taste of a certain product must be preserved (standardised) to compensate for the yearly variation of the natural tobacco, because consumers do not like to smoke a product that changes from year to year. To circumvent this, some 40 or more substances per product are added to the majority of the brands in order to mask the variation. Additives with direct or indirect addictive potency

In the following two sections, various approaches to increase the addictive and attractive potency of tobacco products have been briefly described. Details of these additives and further information about their effectiveness can be found in later sections.

The addictive potency of tobacco products may in theory be increased by:

Direct enhancement of the nicotine content;

Addition of substances which increase the bioavailability of nicotine;

Addition of substances which facilitate the inhalation of tobacco smoke;

Addition of substances which generate compounds in the mainstream smoke which increase the addictiveness of nicotine;

Changing the physical properties of tobacco smoke, e.g. particle size.

The five approaches are briefly described below.

Direct enhancement of the nicotine content

No examples of increasing the content of nicotine in tobacco are known. Moreover, in cigarettes sold (or produced) in the EU nicotine yield has to remain below a maximal level of 1 mg per cigarette. Some Member States also have upper limits for roll your own (RYO) tobacco. Genetic techniques or classical selection of variants are available to produce tobacco with relatively high nicotine content. From public sources it cannot be deduced or concluded that such approaches are indeed used by tobacco growers or tobacco companies.

Addition of substances which increase the bioavailability of nicotine

Increase the bioavailability of nicotine by adding alkalising ingredients which increase the pH of tobacco (such as ammonium compounds). At higher pH (pH >8.0) more nicotine is in its free uncharged form, which would therefore more easily pass the (lung) membrane i.e. higher absorption leading to higher blood and brain nicotine levels. For details see section 3.8.3.2 on ammonia and other compounds affecting smoke pH.

Increase the bioavailability of nicotine by adding ingredients which serve as a carrier for nicotine.

Increase the effect of nicotine by inhibiting its metabolism.

Addition of substances which facilitate the inhalation of tobacco smoke Certain ingredients have local anaesthetic effects. As a result coughing due to inhalation of irritating smoke is dampened and the smoker can inhale the smoke deeper (and more frequently). Examples are etheric oils, such as menthol and thymol. For details see later sections e.g. section 3.8.1.

Compounds which have bronchodilating properties (opening/broadening the airways) would enable the smoker to inhale deeper (a larger volume of) tobacco smoke implying an increase in the bioavailability of nicotine. It has been proposed that theobromine, generated from cocoa, caffeine and glycyrrhizine, serves such a function.

Addition of substances which generate compounds in the mainstream smoke which increase the addictiveness of nicotine

It has been suggested that certain natural components in tobacco promote the addictiveness of nicotine. Examples are components like sugars, which when pyrolysed generate aldehydes. The combination of acetaldehyde and nicotine appears to be more addictive than nicotine alone. The addition of sugars may thus increase the addictive nature of tobacco products. In tobacco smoke or in vivo, tryptophan may react with aldehydes to form beta-carbolines, like harman and norharman. Both beta-carbolines are inhibitors of monoamine oxidases (MAO). Monoamine oxidases are enzymes that degrade neurotransmitters involved in addiction such as dopamine, serotonin and noradrenaline. As such, tryptophan as an ingredient may potentiate nicotine addiction.

Acetaldehyde and other aldehydes can react in vivo with biogenic amines to yield carbolines or isoquinolines, which have affinity for the opiate receptor. These ligands are, however, formed in very low amounts.

Changing the physical properties of tobacco smoke, e.g. particle size

It is possible to change the physical properties of tobacco smoke, for example the particle size of the tobacco smoke aerosol. Considering the entry of particles to deeper lung levels, there is probably an optimum in size. Cigarette paper and/or filters can be modified in a technological way to attain an optimal particle size (see section 3.5). The size and its distribution of smoke particles can be changed to obtain an optimum so that particles enter deeper levels of the lungs. As a result, a more efficient absorption of nicotine from the particles and higher blood nicotine levels can be attained. Examples of such applications are the use of cigarette paper with a higher porosity and filters with higher ventilation (see section 3.5).

Source: https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_layman/tobacco/en/l-3/5.htm

Don't smoke! It's as simple as that!

Peter
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on November 05, 2019, 04:47:19 AM
Quote from: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2019, 04:23:35 AM
Sounds like my father in a way. Despite a history of heart disease and late onset diabetes, he still smoked cigars and freely drank booze. He claimed there was no actuarial difference between those who abstain and anyway he wanted to "enjoy himself". (He was referring snidely to his brother-in-law a health freak, who succumbed about the same age, 78. But he missed an important point, the quality of life, not having to go around on a walker for his last two years due to the previous stroke and risking an amputation for part of his foot.

I actually found stubs in a hidden place after I washed out the ashtray completely! This is really NUTZ!

(Did you see my post about the cow shot by a bow and arrow? Some comedic relief:
Re: The unimportant news thread
« Reply #3326 on: November 04, 2019, 07:21:17 AM » )
Must have been a really lousy shot. Even small calves are big targets. But I hope it was a kid version or something, because real ones can be super dangerous, especially when you miss. Still, that is a WTF sort of article...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2019, 04:48:18 AM
Quote from: pjme on November 05, 2019, 04:30:58 AM
Don't smoke! It's as simple as that!
Peter

Yikes, I'm sure there is a lot of manipulation in marketed products.
FWIW, I reluctantly made the premises an alcohol free zone more than 4 years ago, as addictions usually are mutually reinforcing. It doesn't seem to have done a lot of good, or my intelligently informed diet, which is another slap in the face.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: zamyrabyrd on November 05, 2019, 04:49:30 AM
Quote from: mc ukrneal on November 05, 2019, 04:47:19 AM
Must have been a really lousy shot. Even small calves are big targets. But I hope it was a kid version or something, because real ones can be super dangerous, especially when you miss. Still, that is a WTF sort of article...

Yeah, I thought it was a shame to get buried and hence unnoticed, in another discussion, too absurd!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2019, 05:55:09 AM
Good grief! A news outlet headline: Arctic Blast Is at IT'S Peak...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on November 13, 2019, 07:05:26 AM
Terrible, isn' tits?

Joke apart, this mistake has become extremely common - and, yes, even here at GMG... :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2019, 07:12:46 AM
Quote from: André on November 13, 2019, 07:05:26 AM
Terrible, isn' tits?

Joke apart, this mistake has become extremely common - and, yes, even here at GMG... :-\

It's so common, I don't like to chide casual misuse. But journalists and editors ought, out of professional competence learn and use it right!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 13, 2019, 07:13:53 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 13, 2019, 07:12:46 AM
Its so common, I dont like to chide casual misuse. But journalist's and editor's ought, out of professional competence learn and use it right!

FTFY
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2019, 07:16:05 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 13, 2019, 07:13:53 AM
FTFY

Apostrophloozey!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on November 13, 2019, 07:42:09 AM
I too wish everyone could use it's right.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 13, 2019, 08:26:34 AM
Today I had an apostrophe apocalypse PLUS hit mine eyes!   0:)

One of my best 8th Grade girls wrote the following as a translation from a Latin original:

Quote

"You's are getting surrounded by the enemy."


??? ??? ???

Outside of New Jersey and the Bronx*, "youse" or "yous" or even "you's" is unknown in America.  To be sure, the original used Latin's "You-Plural" form, and so she was trying to get that idea across.   8)


* e.g. "All right, youse guys, toim t'  put Vinny t' bed wid da fishes."   ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 13, 2019, 09:41:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 13, 2019, 05:55:09 AM
Good grief! A news outlet headline: Arctic Blast Is at IT'S Peak...

Perhaps they were simply noting that the IT department was busiest during the cold spell?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on November 13, 2019, 09:44:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on November 13, 2019, 08:26:34 AM
Today I had an apostrophe apocalypse PLUS hit mine eyes!   0:)

One of my best 8th Grade girls wrote the following as a translation from a Latin original:

??? ??? ???

Outside of New Jersey and the Bronx*, "youse" or "yous" or even "you's" is unknown in America.  To be sure, the original used Latin's "You-Plural" form, and so she was trying to get that idea across.   8)


* e.g. "All right, youse guys, toim t'  put Vinny t' bed wid da fishes."   ;)

Getting surrounded...I trust you pointed out a more felicitious phrasing for that.

But I'm Southern enough to know that y'all is the plural form of you.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on November 13, 2019, 09:48:32 AM
The apostrophe is just ridiculous and should be banned, life's   lifes too short, especially the apostrophe of possession, with all the nonsense proper names ending in s.

Yous is just the plural of you. It is, I think, Irish -- I think you can spell it youze.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2019, 10:02:42 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on November 13, 2019, 09:48:32 AM
The apostrophe is just ridiculous and should be banned, life's   lifes too short, especially the apostrophe of possession, with all the nonsense proper names ending in s.

Yous is just the plural of you. It is, I think, Irish -- I think you can spell it youze.

You're likely right, and the Irish immigration bright it to the Bronx, Brooklyn & "greater Joisey City."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2019, 10:05:32 AM
Viz. the apostrophe, one of many fascinating things I find, as I study Dutch, is that they employ it to pluralize borrowed nouns: de baby's, de menu's, e.g.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 13, 2019, 10:37:21 AM
Quote from: JBS on November 13, 2019, 09:44:24 AM
Getting surrounded...I trust you pointed out a more felicitous phrasing for that.

But I'm Southern enough to know that y'all is the plural form of you.

Oh yes!

And not too far south of the Ohio River, one can find a suburb of Cincinnati in Kentucky with the name of Florence, whose water tower proudly proclaims:

"It's Florence, Y'all!"   :D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on November 13, 2019, 10:41:55 PM
I think it was the policeman in Top Cat who would say yous cats.

Didn't some cat say "I'll smash yous meecies to pieces!"?

And who used to say "yous twos"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 14, 2019, 05:56:38 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on November 13, 2019, 10:41:55 PM
I think it was the policeman in Top Cat who would say yous cats.

Didn't some cat say "I'll smash yous meecies to pieces!"?

And who used to say "yous twos"?

Mieces to pieces for sure, I remember that.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Ken B on November 14, 2019, 05:58:14 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 13, 2019, 10:05:32 AM
Viz. the apostrophe, one of many fascinating things I find, as I study Dutch, is that they employ it to pluralize borrowed nouns: de baby's, de menu's, e.g.
de bugger's
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: mc ukrneal on November 14, 2019, 07:04:59 AM
Quote from: Ken B on November 14, 2019, 05:58:14 AM
de bugger's
Good one.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: dissily Mordentroge on November 19, 2019, 07:37:36 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 13, 2019, 08:26:34 AM
Today I had an apostrophe apocalypse PLUS hit mine eyes!   0:)

One of my best 8th Grade girls wrote the following as a translation from a Latin original:

??? ??? ???

Outside of New Jersey and the Bronx*, "youse" or "yous" or even "you's" is unknown in America.  To be sure, the original used Latin's "You-Plural" form, and so she was trying to get that idea across.   8)


* e.g. "All right, youse guys, toim t'  put Vinny t' bed wid da fishes."   ;)
Youse guys should know youse is alive and well in Australia.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on March 01, 2020, 11:25:42 AM
Should there be a question mark at the end of this ode or has Dickens made a punctuation mistake!    mistake?    mistake!?


QuoteCan I view thee panting, lying
    On thy stomach, without sighing;
    Can I unmoved see thee dying
    On a log,
    Expiring frog!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: premont on March 01, 2020, 11:36:26 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on March 01, 2020, 11:25:42 AM
Should there be a question mark at the end of this ode or has Dickens made a punctuation mistake!    mistake?    mistake!?

Yes, that's the question.

In a way the ode is a long rhetoric question with implied answer, so the question mark is more a matter of formal correctness.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 25, 2020, 03:46:56 PM
Greetings!

I have a few spare moments for once, and would like to share a remarkable sentence written by an American high-school student 18 years of age.  Grammar is not the particular problem, but the essay's content is...rather disturbing!

The student was supposed to compose an essay on the topic: Capital Punishment and The Bible.

To be sure, the student has assorted learning problems with memory, and an inability to do basic arithmetic.  ("Which two whole numbers multiplied together give you 3?"  Long pause: "I really have no idea."  "Which number times 4 gives you 36?"  Long pause:  "I really have no idea." 

He says that last sentence quite often in a poor-pitiful-me drone.  The problem is that he does know the answer, if guided a la Socrates, but simply will not make any effort to start the cogitating.


Anyway, the opening sentence to this essay Capital Punishment and The Bible  was startling:

Quote



The bible (sic) is the oldest capital punishment in the world.



0:)    0:)     ;)     ;)

I do know a good number of people who would agree with that.

The second sentence went like this:

Quote



"There were three kinds: beheadings, hangings, stonings, and burnings."


???

Well, I said that arithmetic was a problem for him!  0:)   And I thought the three kinds of Biblical capital punishment were: Leviticus, Numbers, and Chronicles!   ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 25, 2020, 04:05:30 PM
Mercy!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on March 25, 2020, 09:12:36 PM
A survey found 31% of 1100 UK school children aged 10-16 thought Jesus spoke English (rather than could have spoken English if He had wanted to).

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13098197.31-of-children-think-jesus-spoke-english/ (https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13098197.31-of-children-think-jesus-spoke-english/)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 03, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
Does the adjective nude have a comparative form?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on April 03, 2020, 03:52:11 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 03, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
Does the adjective nude have a comparative form?

Does not the word already connote a maximal state of nakedness?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 03, 2020, 04:00:34 PM
Quote from: JBS on April 03, 2020, 03:52:11 PM
Does not the word already connote a maximal state of nakedness?

That was my thought. I am playing a word game which for some reason accepted the comparative . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:17:20 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 03, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
Does the adjective nude have a comparative form?

It has a superlative

Even the nudest nudist on the beach at San Tropez was wearing a necklace.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 05, 2020, 12:29:22 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 03, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
Does the adjective nude have a comparative form?
Nuder and nudest make sense if they are used for describing the colour, and not the person with the most clothing of which they are wearing none.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:29:47 AM
And the comparative is in Joyce, you can guess which book.

QuoteFantasy! Funtasy on fantasy! Amnaes fintasies. And there is nihil nuder under the clothing moon. When Ota, weewahrwificle of Tocelles, bumpsed her dumpsididdle down in her wooksark she mode our heuteyleutey girlery of peerlesses to set up in all their bombosities of feudal fierty, fanned, flounced and frangipaned . . . .
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:30:59 AM
Quote from: North Star on April 05, 2020, 12:29:22 AM
Nuder and nudest make sense if they are used for describing the colour, and not the person with the most clothing of which they are wearing none.

How can you say that when you have a line like "there is nihil nuder under the clothing moon" from one of the greatest poets since Homer?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 05, 2020, 12:42:21 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:30:59 AM
How can you say that when you have a line like "there is nihil nuder under the clothing moon" from one of the greatest poets since Homer?
Make more sense in everyday language, I should have written. Nuder is also a variant of no other, which surely didn't escape Joyce.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:55:07 AM
Fabulous though. I read more than a third, less than half, and then abandoned it about 30 years ago. Maybe lockdown is the time to revisit Finnegans Wake.

One problem I had is that I got annoyed by all the half baked philosophy - Giambattista Vico's cyclical time etc. Maybe I'm more tolerant of that sort of thing now.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:58:47 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 03, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
Does the adjective nude have a comparative form?

What about nuder fucker?

A brudder from a nuder mudder?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 05, 2020, 03:48:44 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:17:20 AM
It has a superlative

Even the nudest nudist on the beach at San Tropez was wearing a necklace.

Aye.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 05, 2020, 04:47:44 AM
Perhaps more logical than grammatical, but on quiz programme The Chase last night: "I couldn't have lost to a better contestant" :-\.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 05, 2020, 02:30:58 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 03, 2020, 03:22:52 PM
Does the adjective nude have a comparative form?

Quote from: Mandryka on April 05, 2020, 12:17:20 AM
It has a superlative

Even the nudest nudist on the beach at San Tropez was wearing a necklace.

Ah, the wonderful world of "Absolute Adjectives," also known as "Non-Degree" or "Non-Gradable" Adjectives!

I remember witnessing a debate of sorts between my Latin/Classics professor and another professor (possibly in the English Department, but more likely one of the incompetents from the Department of Education), when the latter was insisting that absolute adjectives are always impossible at the Comparative and Superlative Degrees.

My Latin professor smiled slyly and asked: "Tell me this: would you consider Thomas Jefferson a good writer?"
The other professor took the bait: "Jefferson was a genius!   He was a GREAT writer!"
"Then you must know that he used the adjective 'more perfect' in the Declaration of Independence...'in order to form a more perfect union...' ?"
"Oh, well, that was just for emphasis, or maybe irony!"
Still smiling, my Latin professor winked and said: "Nevertheless, there it is!"   8)

And I came here to offer a recent monstrosity from the media chattering about the chaos-causing virus:

"We're in unchartered waters right now!"

I wish that word had been unchattered!  ;)   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 05, 2020, 08:05:42 PM
Nobody will be chartering cruise ships now!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 06, 2020, 05:29:13 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 05, 2020, 08:05:42 PM
Nobody will be chartering cruise ships now!

Right!  Who would want to sail in unchartered waters?!

And a grumble from a few weeks ago: I am hearing more and more Americans on television who are incapable of pronouncing the two "T's" in important.

Women especially - with that bored, raspy, nasal, and highly annoying style of speaking known as "vocal fry" - are saying the word as if it were spelled "impor'uh" or "impor'eh" or even "impor'A" with the latter "A" pronounced like a 1920's car horn!

If you do not know what vocal fry sounds like, a show called Suburgatory had a character named Dahlia who was the perfect example:


https://www.youtube.com/v/_NhA1gHATVE

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on April 06, 2020, 07:12:11 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 06, 2020, 05:29:13 AM
Right!  Who would want to sail in unchartered waters?!

And a grumble from a few weeks ago: I am hearing more and more Americans on television who are incapable of pronouncing the two "T's" in important.

Women especially - with that bored, raspy, nasal, and highly annoying style of speaking known as "vocal fry" - are saying the word as if it were spelled "impor'uh" or "impor'eh" or even "impor'A" with the latter "A" pronounced like a 1920's car horn!

If you do not know what vocal fry sounds like, a show called Suburgatory had a character named Dahlia who was the perfect example:


https://www.youtube.com/v/_NhA1gHATVE

I am reminded of an old rusty joke concerning a man whose ego was greatly expanded when the doctor explained to him that he was "impotent"...which he mistook for "important".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 02:51:42 AM
According to Martin Kippenberger

https://www.phillips.com/detail/martin-kippenberger/NY010606/171

QuoteWhat is the difference between Casanova and Jesus: the facial expression when being nailed.

Should that be?

What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus?: the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus?: The facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus:? the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus:? The facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus? the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus? The facial expression when being nailed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kaga2 on April 17, 2020, 07:06:07 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 02:51:42 AM
According to Martin Kippenberger

https://www.phillips.com/detail/martin-kippenberger/NY010606/171

Should that be?

What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus?: the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus?: The facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus:? the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus:? The facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus? the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus? The facial expression when being nailed.
I like the last two, both are fine. The others are wrong. Emojis are not proper punctuation!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 17, 2020, 07:12:15 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 02:51:42 AM
According to Martin Kippenberger

https://www.phillips.com/detail/martin-kippenberger/NY010606/171

Should that be?

What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus?: the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus?: The facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus:? the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus:? The facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus? the facial expression when being nailed.
What is the difference between Casanova and Jesus? The facial expression when being nailed.

For what it's worth ($156,000  ::)) I'll go for number 2.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on April 17, 2020, 08:07:42 AM
The last one. As it's a different sentence, it should start with a capital letter. The colon shouldn't be there at all.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 08:19:10 AM
Quote from: André on April 17, 2020, 08:07:42 AM
The last one. As it's a different sentence, it should start with a capital letter. The colon shouldn't be there at all.

This is what I would have said.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 08:20:55 AM
By the way, is being nailed the same as being screwed? Is that what makes Kippenberger's comment interesting?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on April 17, 2020, 08:24:14 AM
I would take the next to last choice and insert an ellipsis before the facial expression.
My reasoning is similar to Andre's. The ellipsis is warranted by the second sentence actually being a fragment.

Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 08:20:55 AM
By the way, is being nailed the same as being screwed? Is that what makes Kippenberger's comment interesting?

In my neck of the swamps, yes.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 17, 2020, 08:28:16 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 02:51:42 AM
According to Martin Kippenberger

https://www.phillips.com/detail/martin-kippenberger/NY010606/171

Should that be?



Or "The difference between Casanova and Jesus: the facial expression when being nailed." But we're talking about a title of a work of art, translated from German.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kaga2 on April 17, 2020, 08:46:54 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 08:20:55 AM
By the way, is being nailed the same as being screwed? Is that what makes Kippenberger's comment interesting?
No. Nailed is pinned down, in a detrimental way. Who paid for the last supper? Jesus got nailed for it.  Being screwed is just being in a bad position with few options.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on April 17, 2020, 08:56:13 AM
Quote from: Kaga2 on April 17, 2020, 08:46:54 AM
No. Nailed is pinned down, in a detrimental way. Who paid for the last supper? Jesus got nailed for it.  Being screwed is just being in a bad position with few options.

Slang usage must be significantly different among different parts of the country.  My experience is that both sets of definitions--KAGA's and the sexual ones--are generally used, although "nailed" often has positive meaning (f.i. "He nailed that assignment" implies a superior result).
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 09:34:00 AM
Quote from: North Star on April 17, 2020, 08:28:16 AM


But we're talking about a title of a work of art, translated from German.

Hopefully a German speaker can explain the connotations of Der Gesichtsausdruck beim Nageln which make Kippenberger's remark interesting.

(Not the title, which is Fred the Frog Rings the Bell)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 09:37:27 AM
Quote from: JBS on April 17, 2020, 08:56:13 AM
Slang usage must be significantly different among different parts of the country.  My experience is that both sets of definitions--KAGA's and the sexual ones--are generally used, although "nailed" often has positive meaning (f.i. "He nailed that assignment" implies a superior result).

Are for me, being screwed could mean "having sex" -- and that came to mind because of the mention of Cassanova. And I was wondering if, in The States, you could say "being nailed" for sex (you can't in Britain, at least not in my house.)

Also the title is Fred the Frog Rings the Bell. I think when you ring someone's bell, it may mean, you screw nail make love to them.

But as North Star rightly points out, we need to understand the meaning of Nageln.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 09:43:49 AM
Who is Fred the Frog?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 17, 2020, 10:51:45 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 08:20:55 AM
By the way, is being nailed the same as being screwed? Is that what makes Kippenberger's comment interesting?

I didn't think so, in the case of Casanova.  It would be the girl who was, erm, nailed.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on April 17, 2020, 10:55:40 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 17, 2020, 09:37:27 AM
Are for me, being screwed could mean "having sex" -- and that came to mind because of the mention of Cassanova. And I was wondering if, in The States, you could say "being nailed" for sex (you can't in Britain, at least not in my house.)

Also the title is Fred the Frog Rings the Bell. I think when you ring someone's bell, it may mean, you screw nail make love to them.

But as North Star rightly points out, we need to understand the meaning of Nageln.

I thought it might mean "dying", like "kick the bucket". Perhaps when at death's door, the moment of death may be symbolized by ringing the doorbell. And there is the most common meaning of evoking a (possibly indistinct) memory ("that picture rings a bell for me"). But Urban Dictionary gives a totally different explanation
QuoteIn what is internally referred to as "The Business" (ie. any of the multitude of direct sales offices that sprung out of DS-Max, Cydcor, Granton, Smartcircle, Credico etc.), this is a term referring to hitting ones sales goal of selling enough to earn $100 personal profit for the day. This can equate to a certain number of sales dependent upon the campaign. For example, if one earns $50 commission per sale and then "ringing the bell" entails closing two sales.

This is not only an idiomatic expression as it refers to the literal ringing of a bell after returning to the office from a day in the field. All reps who earned the minimum $100 profit ring a large bell signifying their results and are congratulated by their fellow sales reps in a raucous, high-energy ceremony

And there's the song Ring My Bell, by Anita Ward.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kaga2 on April 17, 2020, 11:24:51 AM
Quote from: JBS on April 17, 2020, 08:56:13 AM
Slang usage must be significantly different among different parts of the country.  My experience is that both sets of definitions--KAGA's and the sexual ones--are generally used, although "nailed" often has positive meaning (f.i. "He nailed that assignment" implies a superior result).
Oh I fully agree, but I thought his context was being the object not the subject. Doing the nailing is good, being nailed not so much.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kaga2 on April 17, 2020, 11:27:40 AM
Quotescrewed could mean "having sex"

That is very common yes.

So can almost any phrase really. My second year textbook had pages and pages of examples.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 17, 2020, 08:33:26 PM
I took it as sexual and would probably have thought it funny when I was about 14 :-[.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 18, 2020, 12:39:54 AM
You guys are wasting too much time analyzing a piece of shit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 18, 2020, 01:42:48 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 18, 2020, 12:39:54 AM
You guys are wasting too much time analyzing a piece of shit.

This is true, though it did lead me to the story of Casanova's imprisonment and escape, which I didn't know about (I know nothing about Casanova.)

The CD which led me to the picture which led me to Deleuze's concept of "bare repetition", which may be another piece of shit.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 18, 2020, 01:47:20 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 18, 2020, 01:42:48 AM
This is true, though it did lead me to the story of Casanova's imprisonment and escape, which I didn't know about (I know nothing about Casanova.)

You can read French, you should read his Memoirs. He was an intelligent, cultivated, witty and fun writer.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Kaga2 on April 18, 2020, 05:22:49 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 18, 2020, 12:39:54 AM
You guys are wasting too much time analyzing a piece of shit.
Insert reference to GMG political threads here.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on August 09, 2020, 05:27:37 AM
Time has not been friendly to your host in the last months, and so some things which I wanted to share with you - here and under other topics...are now like Scarlett O'Hara!   ;)

Today, however, something rather awful was caught in the local newspaper by Mrs. Cato, and I do have a few spare minutes, so prepare to be appalled.

The local newspaper has deteriorated greatly - like many other things here   0:)   - since our first sojourn in this city c. 40 years ago.  As evidence of this, Mrs. Cato would present to you an article on Ohio archaeology, which should have been interesting, because it had nothing to do with viruses and the Nanny State admonishing us to wash our hands, cover our mouths when we cough or sneeze, be nice to our sisters, and not to drive on the railroad tracks!

However, the article was so badly written that she gave up: "It's written by somebody with severe ADHD!  Why didn't an editor see all the problems with this article?"

The next example shows why: the editors themselves apparently are incompetent.

In an article about two lady nonagenarians and their active lives, one reads that the women have no microwave ovens or cell phones:

" 'I don't like that newfangled stuff,' said the lady coining a new word.' ".   ??? ??? ???

Yes!  Neither the reporter nor any editor who screened the article had heard of the word "newfangled" !!!   And they did not check a dictionary, which shows that they are probably 40-somethings or younger, since checking a dictionary is something which my students have resisted for decades!   $:)

"Newfangled!"  Yes, Great-Great-Grandma was "coining a new word" !   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 09, 2020, 09:25:44 AM
Ach!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on August 09, 2020, 02:10:44 PM
Ouch!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: premont on August 09, 2020, 02:32:09 PM
Quote from: Kaga2 on April 17, 2020, 08:46:54 AM
Being screwed is just being in a bad position with few options.

Do you refer to the missionary position? :P :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: The Six on August 28, 2020, 06:10:19 PM
RIP the letter "d" in "supposed". It had a good run, but the end is near, so we might as well pay our respects now. It will be joining its brother, the fallen "d" in "iced cream".  :blank:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on August 30, 2020, 10:32:47 AM
Quote from: The Six on August 28, 2020, 06:10:19 PM
RIP the letter "d" in "supposed". It had a good run, but the end is near, so we might as well pay our respects now. It will be joining its brother, the fallen "d" in "iced cream".  :blank:

Oh was it "iced cream" originally? How about "it is supposed to be" though?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 10, 2020, 02:30:42 PM
Considering the more vital ways in which journalists are letting us down, the verbal slips may sem unimportant, but:
"Senate Republicans attempted to pass a more narrow coronavirus stimulus bill..." What, never heard of narrower?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 10, 2020, 04:50:01 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on September 10, 2020, 02:30:42 PM
Considering the more vital ways in which journalists are letting us down, the verbal slips may sem unimportant, but:
"Senate Republicans attempted to pass a more narrow coronavirus stimulus bill..." What, never heard of narrower?

I cringe more and more at seeing the word "more" instead of the "-er" ending for Comparative Adjectives.  A similar problem is evident with "most" and the Superlative.  e.g.  "Most stupid" instead of "stupidest."

I am also cringing more at the use of Ā, as in "late," for the pronunciation of the Indefinite Article.  e.g. "That is Ā new car."  :o ??? :'(  There are several Blondie Bubbleheads on the local T.V. news who use this monstrosity almost constantly.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 30, 2020, 11:55:10 AM
A machine-printed - not hand-written - sign seen recently at a grocery store:

"Coupons cant be used for shipt items."

To be sure, the second is the more grievous error, but both make us wonder: "Did the computer really not have Spell-Check?!"

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 30, 2020, 12:18:30 PM
Part II:

And we have this sign at a local Taco Bell restaurant:

             FREE JOBS!

Truly this puzzling sign fathers at least a few questions:

How many people are paying a company so that they may have the privilege of working there?  I know that I would gladly pay my school for the wonderful experiences of teaching students and  70+ hour weeks!  Yet, mirabile creditu, the Catholic Church in fact pays me to work there!   0:)

Are there jobs with entrance fees?  I know that with certain positions e.g. The Mafia, there are entrance tests involving the disposal of wise guys, but a fee?

Is the word "volunteer" perhaps more appropriate?   I do know some people who would work at Taco Bell just to be able to sample the food or smell the aromas.  And we all know, as we go through Life, we should take time to stop and smell the quesos!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on November 21, 2020, 09:41:32 PM
Our local Indian restaurant has a beautifully printed sign in the window - "Allergies and intolerance available on request. Please ask any member of staff". ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on February 06, 2021, 03:08:25 AM
Maybe of interest, maybe not

https://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 07:16:43 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on February 06, 2021, 03:08:25 AM
Maybe of interest, maybe not

https://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling

I didn't get this one: There is no A in "definitely". Can someone please explain it to me?



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: ritter on February 07, 2021, 07:21:10 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 07:16:43 AM
I didn't get this one: There is no A in "definitely". Can someone please explain it to me?
I think I've seen it spelled "definately" or even "definatly"

And then, I've many times heard "nuclear" pronounced "nukelar" (even by one of my professors at the University of Chicago!  ::))...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 07:41:32 AM
Quote from: ritter on February 07, 2021, 07:21:10 AM
I think I've seen it spelled "definatly"...

That's the problem with etymological spelling, even educated people can't have it right always. I was in France ca. 1999 and I asked a French Ph. D. candidate how to spell correctly, exercise or exercice. He scratched his head, took a pen, scribbled something and then told me: I believe it's exercice but I'm not sure. He was right, but there...  ;D

Quote
And then, I've many times heard "nuclear" pronounced "nukelar" (even by one of my professors at the University of Chicago!  ::))...

I wonder how that professor would have pronounce Puccini. (Puke-seeny seems a good guess  :laugh: )
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on February 07, 2021, 08:23:42 AM
It's very tempting for me to write definately as phonetically it's more accurate than an i, I in fact sometimes have to remind myself of the etymology.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 08:31:56 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on February 07, 2021, 08:23:42 AM
It's very tempting for me to write definately as phonetically it's more accurate than an i, I in fact sometimes have to remind myself of the etymology.

I've always pronounced it dee-fine-it-lee. Have I been wrong?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 08:38:29 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 08:31:56 AM
I've always pronounced it dee-fine-it-lee. Have I been wrong?

Def-in-ut-lee for me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 08:40:07 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 08:38:29 AM
Def-in-it-lee for me.
You might be just right, now that I think of it.

But then again, how do you pronounce define? Dee-fine, or Def-in?

But then again again, English pronunciation is the most illogical and counterintuitive of all the languages I can speak or read.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 08:41:19 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 08:40:07 AM
You might be just right, now that I think of it.

Sorry, meant to put Def-in-ut-lee.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 08:45:32 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 08:41:19 AM
Def-in-ut-lee.

Oh, dear! That's really counterintuitive.  :D


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 09:19:23 AM
Quote from: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 08:40:07 AM
But then again, how do you pronounce define? Dee-fine, or Def-in?

But then again again, English pronunciation is the most illogical and counterintuitive of all the languages I can speak or read.  :laugh:

Dif-ine although you should bear in mind that the primary function of any language is to identify the foreigners. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 09:43:53 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 09:19:23 AM
Dif-ine although you should bear in mind that the primary function of any language is to identify the foreigners. ;)

:D :D :D

Okay, how would you pronounce this:

În patria noastră multe păduri sunt.

The above is a legit, grammatically correct Romanian sentence which differs from the original Latin by one word* and two diacritics only.  ;)

* this one word being of Latin origin as well

Original Latin: In patria nostra multae silvae sunt,
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 07, 2021, 12:39:16 PM
Quote from: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 07:16:43 AM
I didn't get this one: There is no A in "definitely". Can someone please explain it to me?





As with many of the other examples, a too-common spelling error, among native speakers.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on February 07, 2021, 05:37:56 PM
Quote from: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 09:19:23 AM
Dif-ine although you should bear in mind that the primary function of any language is to identify the foreigners. ;)

I pronounce it deh-fine.

Quote from: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 09:43:53 AM
:D :D :D

Okay, how would you pronounce this:

În patria noastră multe păduri sunt.

The above is a legit, grammatically correct Romanian sentence which differs from the original Latin by one word* and two diacritics only.  ;)

* this one word being of Latin origin as well

Original Latin: In patria nostra multae silvae sunt,


How close we were to Shakespeare writing

Who is Padur and why do all the swains adore her?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on February 07, 2021, 08:04:59 PM
Quote from: JBS on February 07, 2021, 05:37:56 PM

How close we were to Shakespeare writing

Who is Padur and why do all the swains adore her?

Very good!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on February 07, 2021, 08:34:31 PM
Quote from: JBS on February 07, 2021, 05:37:56 PM
I pronounce it deh-fine.

Q.E.D. :P
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 08, 2021, 04:59:38 AM
divine
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 11, 2021, 05:32:15 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on November 21, 2020, 09:41:32 PM
Our local Indian restaurant has a beautifully printed sign in the window - "Allergies and intolerance available on request. Please ask any member of staff". ;D

Style counterbalances obscurity!   ;)

Concerning the word "definitely"...

Quote from: ritter on February 07, 2021, 07:21:10 AM

I think I've seen it spelled "definately" or even "definatly1

And then, I've many times heard "nuclear" pronounced "nukelar" 2  (even by one of my professors at the University of Chicago!  ::))...




Quote from: Florestan on February 07, 2021, 08:40:07 AM
You might be just right, now that I think of it.

But then again, how do you pronounce define? Dee-fine, or Def-in?

But then again again, English pronunciation is the most illogical and counterintuitive of all the languages I can speak or read 3.  :laugh:



1:  I have noticed the "a" mistake for a good number of years among my students, even though nobody (at least here in Ohio) would ever say "definately" with the "a" from "late," or (for "definatly") the "a" from "gnat."

Perhaps it creeps in from the "-ate" in words such as "literate" or "considerate" or the adjectival pronunciation of "moderate."  I have not often been hearing a short "i" in "definite" from speakers, but too often an incorrect short-e sound, i.e. closer to the pronunciation of "literate."


2 :  I have also heard "nuke-yoo-lar" as a pronunciation.  I think that comes mainly from southern states, but it could be more widespread.


3 :   Define =  "Dee-fine" with a long "e" and a long "i" and the accent on the second syllable.


You can blame William the Conqueror and his French-fried Vikings   ???   for the problems in English spelling: when they invaded England and brought along their early Medieval Norman French, things became muddled quickly!  8)



About a year ago I grumbled about the pronunciation of "Important," and nothing has improved. I have heard ever more people on television pronouncing the "impor-" and then making the sound of a goose being run over by a bus.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 11, 2021, 05:51:43 AM
Quote from: ultralinear link=topic=10977.msg1360591#msg136b][/b]0591 date=1618148601]
I have seen the origin of this usage credited to Eisenhower.  Don't know how true that is ... but it might account for its persistence. :-\

Interesting: with his presidency starting around the time when a majority of Americans had bought television sets (1952-1953), that could have been a factor.

A sign in front of chain restaurants called Taco Bell (which should be called Taco Hell, because of what happens to you after you eat their food, but...):



   "FREE JOBS!"


So, what does that mean?  Does one receive the opportunity to work without pay at Taco Bell?   ???    Does one not need to pay Taco Bell to receive employment?   :o    Is there no application fee?

Or is Steve Jobs NOT DEAD, but imprisoned somewhere in a taco factory?!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on April 11, 2021, 06:10:40 AM
steve ridgway's Indian restaurant sign called to mind a Vietnamese restaurant menu item, one I was esp. fond of, in fact :  Sesame Tofu with Circled Broccoli (steamed broccoli was served evenly distributed around the perimeter of the plate).  But then there's the name of a famous one:  the Pho King Good, Authentic Vietnamese Restaurant. 

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 11, 2021, 06:21:40 AM
And why not? ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on April 11, 2021, 06:28:24 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 11, 2021, 05:51:43 AM

   "FREE JOBS!"


So, what does that mean?  Does one receive the opportunity to work without pay at Taco Bell?   ???    Does one not need to pay Taco Bell to receive employment?   :o    Is there no application fee?

Or is Steve Jobs NOT DEAD, but imprisoned somewhere in a taco factory?!   ;)
I suspect that the sign was created to catch people's attention; as in, put "Free" in front of anything and it will catch their eye.  Everyone is always interested in something that's for free, non?  ;) :)

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 11, 2021, 06:49:45 AM
Many thanks for the signs from those curious restaurants!   ;)


Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on April 11, 2021, 06:28:24 AM
I suspect that the sign was created to catch people's attention; as in, put "Free" in front of anything and it will catch their eye.  Everyone is always interested in something that's for free, non?  ;) :)

PD

Yes, that was a joke 50 + years ago on bulletin boards at the university:  "FREE BEER! - - - Now that we have your attention, come to the NIetszsche is Peachy Society's weekly soiree..."   ???

Or, even edgier: "TEN GIRLS WANT SEX ON FRIDAY! ---- Now that we have your attention, come to the Trotsky Rehabilitation Society's weekly tea-time..."   8
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Stürmisch Bewegt on April 11, 2021, 06:56:02 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 11, 2021, 05:51:43 AM
A sign in front of chain restaurants called Taco Bell (which should be called Taco Hell, because of what happens to you after you eat their food, but...):

   "FREE JOBS!"

So, what does that mean?  Does one receive the opportunity to work without pay at Taco Bell?   ???    Does one not need to pay Taco Bell to receive employment?   :o    Is there no application fee?

Or is Steve Jobs NOT DEAD, but imprisoned somewhere in a taco factory?!   ;)

"Free" is meant, I'm sure, in the sense of open, available, not currently held... 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 11, 2021, 07:04:50 AM
Quote from: Stürmisch Bewegt on April 11, 2021, 06:56:02 AM
"Free" is meant, I'm sure, in the sense of open, available, not currently held...

Also possible!


The signs have brought back memories of a word which I never understood for the longest time: it was explained to me after I graduated.

Often there were signs for assorted non-educational get-togethers which began: LAGNAF!

I thought it was some sort of French word, like lagniappe (which I discovered was more Cajun French than official French), but no.

My mind rotated it to "FANGAL" which recalled "fan dancers"( a "fan gal")  from ribald burlesque shows earlier in the century, where a nearly naked dancer held two large feathery fans covering strategic parts of her body and almost revealing those parts, but not quite.   However, that was not the meaning...although I was getting closer!   ;)



It turned out to be an acronym for something rather rude (it was the 1960's!):  "Let's All Get Naked And Fornicate!"   ???
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 11, 2021, 10:25:08 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 11, 2021, 06:49:45 AM
Many thanks for the signs from those curious restaurants!   ;)

Now you've reminded me of the animal charity shop I saw while visiting the town of Bury, Lancashire. :-\

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Papy Oli on April 11, 2021, 10:44:58 AM
 :laugh:

...and they seem quite chirpy about it and all...  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 11, 2021, 11:02:25 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 11, 2021, 10:25:08 AM
Now you've reminded me of the animal charity shop I saw while visiting the town of Bury, Lancashire. :-\

0:) 8)

Quote from: Papy Oli on April 11, 2021, 10:44:58 AM
:laugh:

...and they seem quite chirpy about it and all...  ;D

Yes, indeed!

Do the natives by pronounce their town's name "Byoory" ?   And not as in "bury the dead" ?

I was wondering because...

...there was an historian of Ancient History named J. B. Bury and my professors always pronounced his name "Byoory."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 11, 2021, 09:04:21 PM
Quote from: Cato on April 11, 2021, 11:02:25 AM
Do the natives by pronounce their town's name "Byoory" ?   And not as in "bury the dead" ?

It's more like the u in "butter".
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 12, 2021, 10:54:58 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 11, 2021, 09:04:21 PM

It's more like the u in "butter".



Aha!  Many thanks!   My inner Professor Higgins is always interested in such things!   8)

In America "Bury" and "Berry" are basically homonyms.  The name "Barry" can also be considered a homonym with them in some areas.  Other areas pronounce the name with the "a" in "bat."


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 13, 2021, 04:44:08 AM
Just you wight, 'enry 'iggins, just you wight!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 13, 2021, 06:30:29 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 13, 2021, 04:44:08 AM
Just you wight, 'enry 'iggins, just you wight!


Heh-heh!

I sometimes refer to "The Rex Harrison School of Fine SInging" and most of the time the reaction is blank stares.   I have reached the age where most people do not understand the joke!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 13, 2021, 09:30:43 AM
A new exhibition shows that not even the people of Bury can agree the real pronunciation of the town
By Saiqa Chaudhari

https://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/15371909.a-new-exhibition-shows-that-not-even-the-people-of-bury-can-agree-the-real-pronunciation-of-the-town/

I had a Saturday job in Bury when I was a kid at school, I lived close to a train which ran from Manchester Victoria to Bury, I would take that train every day to get to school.

And I remember that it rhymed with cherry. But clearly, that's very disputable.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on April 13, 2021, 09:37:15 AM
(https://i.ibb.co/BBck1Jf/Capture.png)


https://www.flickr.com/photos/tonyworrall/7069045571


A light sculpture at the Bury Metrolink



Bury's 'Light Night', a public artwork by poet Ron Silliman illuminates a line from his poem 'Northern Soul' in glowing red neon.


But you've got to be careful because, amazingly, it turns out that Ron Silliman is a yank! So what does he know about how to pronounce it? Here he is reading Northern Soul.

https://www.poetryinternational.org/pi/poem/22198/auto/0/0/Ron-Silliman/from-NORTHERN-SOUL/en/tile
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 13, 2021, 09:47:12 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 13, 2021, 09:37:15 AM
But you've got to be careful because, amazingly, it turns out that Ron Silliman is a yank! So what does he know about how to pronounce it?

I cringe most at London on Tangerine Dream's Tyger album in which American singer Jocelyn B. Smith, singing poetry by William Blake, pronounces Thames as Fames. :'(
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 13, 2021, 12:57:22 PM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 13, 2021, 09:47:12 AM
I cringe most at London on Tangerine Dream's Tyger album in which American singer Jocelyn B. Smith, singing poetry by William Blake, pronounces Thames as Fames. :'(

Yowch!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 13, 2021, 05:10:13 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on April 13, 2021, 09:30:43 AM
A new exhibition shows that not even the people of Bury can agree the real pronunciation of the town
By Saiqa Chaudhari

https://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/15371909.a-new-exhibition-shows-that-not-even-the-people-of-bury-can-agree-the-real-pronunciation-of-the-town/

I had a Saturday job in Bury when I was a kid at school, I lived close to a train which ran from Manchester Victoria to Bury, I would take that train every day to get to school.

And I remember that it rhymed with cherry. But clearly, that's very disputable.

Great article!  Many thanks!

Quote from: steve ridgway on April 13, 2021, 09:47:12 AM
I cringe most at London on Tangerine Dream's Tyger album in which American singer Jocelyn B. Smith, singing poetry by William Blake, pronounces Thames as Fames. :'(

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on April 13, 2021, 12:57:22 PM

Yowch!



Double YOWCH!

An unpardonable sin against English and the English!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 17, 2021, 03:52:07 AM
Last night Mrs. Cato and I happened to come a across a T.V. show about lottery winners in England who search for and buy a new house for themselves.  Normally such shows are not on the radar, but this one seemed intriguing as soon as we happened to hear the husband of the married couple, who had won the lottery, attempting to speak English in the opening blurb: he is from an area "20 minutes north of London."

Now we had visited London 2 years ago and had never heard anything like this:

"Oi ge' oil gi' i' a bi' uh uh go."    :o ??? :o ???

Fortunately we have "rewind" for broadcast shows, so we replayed this a few times.  It was an excerpt from later in the show, and subtitles at times would have been nice for our American/Ohio ears.   8)

In context I was able to decipher the above:

"I guess I'll give it a bit of a go,"    ;)  Meaning, I assume, that the man would give a certain house-for-sale a chance to impress him, even though he was highly skeptical that it would do so because of its location and price.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 07:04:42 AM
That sounds like where I grew up in the Midlands. We tended to miss out "T"s like that, much to the annoyance of our teachers. The one exception was when singing "Away in a Manger" which went something like

Away in a manger
No crib for a bed
The li'el Lor Jesus
Lay down is swee Ed
The stars in the brigh sky
Look down where E lay
The li'el Lor Jesus
Asleep on the ay
The ca'el are lowing
The Baby awakes
But li'el Lor Jesus
No crying E makes
I love You, Lor Jesus
Look down from the sky
An stay by my side
Until morning is nigh...T
>:D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 07:25:45 AM
Quote from: Cato on April 17, 2021, 03:52:07 AM
Last night Mrs. Cato and I happened to come a across a T.V. show about lottery winners in England who search for and buy a new house for themselves.  Normally such shows are not on the radar, but this one seemed intriguing as soon as we happened to hear the husband of the married couple, who had won the lottery, attempting to speak English in the opening blurb: he is from an area "20 minutes north of London."

Now we had visited London 2 years ago and had never heard anything like this:

"Oi ge' oil gi' i' a bi' uh uh go."    :o ??? :o ???

Fortunately we have "rewind" for broadcast shows, so we replayed this a few times.  It was an excerpt from later in the show, and subtitles at times would have been nice for our American/Ohio ears.   8)

In context I was able to decipher the above:

"I guess I'll give it a bit of a go,"    ;)  Meaning, I assume, that the man would give a certain house-for-sale a chance to impress him, even though he was highly skeptical that it would do so because of its location and price.

This only reinforce my idea that English is the most illogical and counterintuitive language in the world, both spelling-wise and pronunciation-wise. That it should have become the lingua franca of modernity is one of God's inscrutable mysteries.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 17, 2021, 08:00:31 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 07:04:42 AM
That sounds like where I grew up in the Midlands. We tended to miss out "T"s like that, much to the annoyance of our teachers. The one exception was when singing "Away in a Manger" which went something like

Away in a manger
No crib for a bed
The li'el Lor Jesus
Lay down is swee Ed
The stars in the brigh sky
Look down where E lay
The li'el Lor Jesus
Asleep on the ay
The ca'el are lowing
The Baby awakes
But li'el Lor Jesus
No crying E makes
I love You, Lor Jesus
Look down from the sky
An stay by my side
Until morning is nigh...T
>:D

(* chor'le *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 08:48:12 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 07:25:45 AM
That it should have become the lingua franca of modernity is one of God's inscrutable mysteries.  ;D

Why when we say English is the French language of the world, do we say it in Latin? :-\
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 08:51:35 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 08:48:12 AM
Why when we say English is the French language of the world, do we say it in Latin? :-\

False friend, my friend!  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 09:00:18 AM
Quote from: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 08:51:35 AM
False friend, my friend!  ;)

I suppose it's one of those phrases that doesn't mean the same in English as in the language it was taken from. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 09:19:22 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 09:00:18 AM
I suppose it's one of those phrases that doesn't mean the same in English as in the language it was taken from. ;)

I am not aware of any phrase that means the same in English as in the language it was taken from.  >:D :P  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on April 17, 2021, 01:39:04 PM
Quote from: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 07:25:45 AM
This only reinforce my idea that English is the most illogical and counterintuitive language in the world, both spelling-wise and pronunciation-wise. That it should have become the lingua franca of modernity is one of God's inscrutable mysteries.  ;D

History frequently defies logic, so it only makes sense.

Quote from: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 09:00:18 AM
I suppose it's one of those phrases that doesn't mean the same in English as in the language it was taken from. ;)
You can say that encore.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on April 18, 2021, 02:18:57 PM
Quote from: steve ridgway on April 17, 2021, 07:04:42 AM
That sounds like where I grew up in the Midlands. We tended to miss out "T"s like that, much to the annoyance of our teachers. The one exception was when singing "Away in a Manger" which went something like

Away in a manger
No crib for a bed
The li'el Lor Jesus
Lay down is swee Ed
The stars in the brigh sky
Look down where E lay
The li'el Lor Jesus
Asleep on the ay
The ca'el are lowing
The Baby awakes
But li'el Lor Jesus
No crying E makes
I love You, Lor Jesus
Look down from the sky
An stay by my side
Until morning is nigh...T
>:D


Wow!   8)    But even that has more consonants than the lottery winner used!

Quote from: Florestan on April 17, 2021, 07:25:45 AM

This only reinforce my idea that English is the most illogical and counterintuitive language in the world, both spelling-wise and pronunciation-wise. That it should have become the lingua franca of modernity is one of God's inscrutable mysteries.  ;D


Yes, very inscrutable!    0:)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 24, 2021, 02:45:27 PM
Solve this sudoku puzzle for relax!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 27, 2021, 08:38:05 AM
Read it on Wikipedia: "John Lennon was an English singer-songwriter and one of the four principal members of the Beatles."
Someone explain to me the adjective "principal," there.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: T. D. on June 27, 2021, 08:53:35 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2021, 08:38:05 AM
Read it on Wikipedia: "John Lennon was an English singer-songwriter and one of the four principal members of the Beatles."
Someone explain to me the adjective "principal," there.

To distinguish the Fab Four (band was a quintet for a while in early days) from Stu Sutcliffe, Pete Best et al.?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: T. D. on June 27, 2021, 09:25:34 AM
Quote from: ultralinear on April 11, 2021, 05:43:21 AM
...

2 :  I have also heard "nuke-yoo-lar" as a pronunciation.  I think that comes mainly from southern states, but it could be more widespread....

I have seen the origin of this usage credited to Eisenhower.  Don't know how true that is ... but it might account for its persistence. :-\

Jimmy Carter famously pronounced "nuclear" that way. It was often remarked on / imitated.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 27, 2021, 10:06:01 AM
Quote from: T. D. on June 27, 2021, 08:53:35 AM
To distinguish the Fab Four (band was a quintet for a while in early days) from Stu Sutcliffe, Pete Best et al.?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles

Seems unnecessarily fussy, all the same.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: T. D. on June 27, 2021, 10:35:15 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2021, 10:06:01 AM
Seems unnecessarily fussy, all the same.

True, but I have some sympathy for the people writing the Wikipedia entries (not that I'd ever want to contribute).
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the "principal" was added after legions of Internet pedants noisily objected "What about <so and so>...???"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 27, 2021, 10:36:45 AM
Quote from: T. D. on June 27, 2021, 10:35:15 AM
True, but I have some sympathy for the people writing the Wikipedia entries (not that I'd ever want to contribute).
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the "principal" was added after legions of Internet pedants noisily objected "What about <so and so>...???"

Aye, I see it ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 29, 2021, 11:48:33 AM
Quote from: T. D. on June 27, 2021, 10:35:15 AM
True, but I have some sympathy for the people writing the Wikipedia entries (not that I'd ever want to contribute).
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the "principal" was added after legions of Internet pedants noisily objected "What about <so and so>...?"

Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 27, 2021, 10:36:45 AM
Aye, I see it ....

"...Internet pedants..."  Good phrase to describe such a "pinkelig" (as they would say in Germany) person!

Recently there has been a surfeit of jobs here in Ohio, which has led to Help-Wanted signs sprouting on street corners and telephone poles.  Many of the jobs are in warehouses....or are they?

"WEARHOUSE WORK $19.00 AN HOUR TO START!"

Now there is a clothing store chain called The Men's Wearhouse, but this sign was not from them!  Given that the sign is one of dozens, if not hundreds, around town, and was professionally printed, it is sad that nobody caught the error.

On television news, a station often slopping over with grammatical errors in its news broadcasts, we recently heard:

"Is the Tokyo Olympics in danger of being postponed or canceled?"

The Olympics as a collective singular?  "Physics," all right, but...?

The report was consistent in keeping Olympics singular.    ::)



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: North Star on June 30, 2021, 02:02:13 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 29, 2021, 11:48:33 AM
"...Internet pedants..."  Good phrase to describe such a "pinkelig" (as they would say in Germany) person!

Recently there has been a surfeit of jobs here in Ohio, which has led to Help-Wanted signs sprouting on street corners and telephone poles.  Many of the jobs are in warehouses....or are they?

"WEARHOUSE WORK $19.00 AN HOUR TO START!"

Now there is a clothing store chain called The Men's Wearhouse, but this sign was not from them!  Given that the sign is one of dozens, if not hundreds, around town, and was professionally printed, it is sad that nobody caught the error.

On television news, a station often slopping over with grammatical errors in its news broadcasts, we recently heard:

"Is the Tokyo Olympics in danger of being postponed or canceled?"

The Olympics as a collective singular?  "Physics," all right, but...?

The report was consistent in keeping Olympics singular.    ::)
Are the Tokyo Olympics a multi-sport event, or is the Tokyo Olympics a multi-sport event?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 22, 2021, 08:05:35 AM
A new phrase caught my eye today, apparently coined just a few years ago.

"Desire paths" might sound like the circuitous route to a church altar with Wagner's march from Lohengrin in the background.

On the other hand, it might also be a euphemism for the directions to a cheap motel!  ???  8)

But no:

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/90aedf870f5e4e462e956c9231fe4ca518599bb3/0_152_4608_2765/master/4608.jpg?width=1020&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=da0b877507106b28470aa854591adfaf)

Quote "..."desire paths" – described by Robert Macfarlane as "paths & tracks made over time by the wishes & feet of walkers, especially those paths that run contrary to design or planning"; he calls them "free-will ways". The New Yorker offers other names: "cow paths, pirate paths, social trails, kemonomichi (beast trails), chemins de l'âne (donkey paths), and Olifantenpad (elephant trails)". JM Barrie described them as "Paths that have Made Themselves".

Reddit has desire path threads, tens of thousands of people strong, delighting in the more mysterious or illogical-seeming of them...."




https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners (https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on July 22, 2021, 08:24:10 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 22, 2021, 08:05:35 AM
A new phrase caught my eye today, apparently coined just a few years ago.

"Desire paths" might sound like the circuitous route to a church altar with Wagner's march from Lohengrin in the background.

On the other hand, it might also be a euphemism for the directions to a cheap motel!  ???  8)

But no:

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/90aedf870f5e4e462e956c9231fe4ca518599bb3/0_152_4608_2765/master/4608.jpg?width=1020&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=da0b877507106b28470aa854591adfaf)



https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners (https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners)
Interesting!  Perhaps "desire paths" are also good clues/suggestions as to future construction plans?  ;)

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on July 22, 2021, 10:22:51 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 22, 2021, 08:05:35 AM
A new phrase caught my eye today, apparently coined just a few years ago.

"Desire paths" might sound like the circuitous route to a church altar with Wagner's march from Lohengrin in the background.

On the other hand, it might also be a euphemism for the directions to a cheap motel!  ???  8)

But no:

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/90aedf870f5e4e462e956c9231fe4ca518599bb3/0_152_4608_2765/master/4608.jpg?width=1020&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=da0b877507106b28470aa854591adfaf)



https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners (https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners)

Interesting. Around here we call them shortcuts   :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 22, 2021, 10:32:43 AM
Quote from: André on July 22, 2021, 10:22:51 AM
Interesting. Around here we call them shortcuts   :D

(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on July 22, 2021, 12:11:54 PM
Quote from: Cato on July 22, 2021, 08:05:35 AM
A new phrase caught my eye today, apparently coined just a few years ago.

"Desire paths" might sound like the circuitous route to a church altar with Wagner's march from Lohengrin in the background.

On the other hand, it might also be a euphemism for the directions to a cheap motel!  ???  8)

But no:

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/90aedf870f5e4e462e956c9231fe4ca518599bb3/0_152_4608_2765/master/4608.jpg?width=1020&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=da0b877507106b28470aa854591adfaf)




https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners (https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners)

The image reminded me of some of the things that happened a few years ago when London decided to pioneer some new approaches to road design -- they wanted to see whether they could just remove the barriers between road and sidewalk, as there was good evidence that (paradoxically) if pedestrians wondered aimlessly, drivers would pay more attention and there would be less accidents. The pilots were in busy areas -- Oxford Circus and South Kensington. What they found is that pedestrians were natural pythagorians, they took the diagonal route by preference. These images shows what happens at South Ken and Oxford Circus quite nicely


(https://www.publicspace.org/documents/220568/503077/23154exhibition_road_NHM2.jpg/23f5d806-75a7-d57e-0d96-84bf031fc611?version=1.0&t=1525251503906)

(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/BFB4EP/the-new-oxford-circus-pedestrian-crossing-note-image-has-a-narrow-BFB4EP.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 22, 2021, 01:17:55 PM
Quote from: André on July 22, 2021, 10:22:51 AM
Interesting. Around here we call them shortcuts   :D

Same here in Ohio, U.S.A!

Quote from: Mandryka on July 22, 2021, 12:11:54 PM

The image reminded me of some of the things that happened a few years ago when London decided to pioneer some new approaches to road design -- they wanted to see whether they could just remove the barriers between road and sidewalk, as there was good evidence that (paradoxically) if pedestrians wondered aimlessly, drivers would pay more attention and there would be less accidents. The pilots were in busy areas -- Oxford Circus and South Kensington. What they found is that pedestrians were natural Pythagoreans, they took the diagonal route by preference. These images shows what happens at South Ken and Oxford Circus quite nicely


(https://www.publicspace.org/documents/220568/503077/23154exhibition_road_NHM2.jpg/23f5d806-75a7-d57e-0d96-84bf031fc611?version=1.0&t=1525251503906)

(https://c8.alamy.com/comp/BFB4EP/the-new-oxford-circus-pedestrian-crossing-note-image-has-a-narrow-BFB4EP.jpg)


"Natural Pythagoreans"!  I like that!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on August 10, 2021, 01:32:56 AM
(https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=29665.0;attach=76407;image)

I think this is wrong.

It should read either

Unless you feel that this is an attempt to deprive you of your liberty, stop driving!

or

If you feel that this is an attempt to deprive you of your liberty, then keep driving!

The original formulation makes no sense at all. Not to mention that I don't think a construction like unless...then is correct..
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: listener on November 12, 2021, 12:41:51 AM
on an amazon page: "LifeSky High Waist Yoga Pants Workout Leggings for Women with Pockets..."
Should be  "leggings with pockets"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Jo498 on November 12, 2021, 01:09:43 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 22, 2021, 08:05:35 AM
A new phrase caught my eye today, apparently coined just a few years ago.

"Desire paths" might sound like the circuitous route to a church altar with Wagner's march from Lohengrin in the background.

On the other hand, it might also be a euphemism for the directions to a cheap motel!  ???  8)

But no:

(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/90aedf870f5e4e462e956c9231fe4ca518599bb3/0_152_4608_2765/master/4608.jpg?width=1020&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=da0b877507106b28470aa854591adfaf)



https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners (https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/05/desire-paths-the-illicit-trails-that-defy-the-urban-planners)

In German they are called "Trampelpfad" (trample(d) path), to be taken quite literally. And unlike the not always well founded prejudices about German order they exist not only in the forest but also on campuses or other constellations with many buildings and possible shortcuts.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 13, 2021, 07:38:13 AM
I am chuckling at a line in a newspaper article: "Some [animals], like the opossum, vividly feign death."
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 18, 2021, 04:05:21 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 13, 2021, 07:38:13 AM
I am chuckling at a line in a newspaper article: "Some [animals], like the opossum, vividly feign death."


Wow!  Nobody caught that before it went to press?!!   :D


Many thanks for the responses above!  As some might remember, I have not been able to visit GMG very much recently because of the purchase of our so-called "retirement house," which STILL after 5 months of repairing and cleaning and fixing and arranging and repairing and fixing and repairing...is not finished to my satisfaction, so I now understand Mick Jagger's frustration from many years ago!  On top of that we have been dealing with my brother-in-law, who has been in a coma twice and in the hospital or a rehabilitation center 4 times since the beginning of September with pneumonia!  A month ago, the (cowardly and/or incompetent) doctors, pressured by insurance bureaucrats proclaimed him cured and sent him forth into the world.  He spent precisely one day in our house and collapsed: the diagnosis three hours later at the hospital was "SEVERE PNEUMONIA, INFLUENZA, and (my favorite - drum roll, please) DEHYDRATION."

Yes, the medical establishment never really checked his lungs to see if the pneumonia had actually been cured ("Well, he was on those antibiotics for the allowed time and seemed better").  And how exactly do doctors and nurses never check on a patient's fluid intake and output?!

Right now, after more than two weeks of treatments, and back in the rehabilitation center, he does indeed seem "cured."

Perhaps I should start a new topic: Cato's Medical Malpractice Mantras!   8)


Anyway, I cannot tell you how many grammar items, ranging from curiosities  to monstrosities, I have seen in the past months and thought: "That would be of interest to the good people on GMG!"  But then a new crisis like the above would erupt!

So, right now, here are some I do recall.

On the sign of a Burger King fast-food restaurant the management was begging for workers:

"GET PAID WEAKLY!"  ???  Is it possible the Burger King Corporation is brutally honest about their oppression of proletariat?  ;)

And then came English via Ancient Hebrew   :o   :

"FLXBL SCHDL - TXT ....." 

If they had used their Hebraicized English for the first line, they might have more applicants!   8)

On a similar note, Mrs. Cato noticed a curious phrase in an employment notice in the newspaper for a local government position in Criminal Justice:

"Applicant must be able to speak and write English in a formal register."

Cato is always happy, of course, to support formal English!   :D    The use of the word "register" in such a context is rare, but not unknown.  The word has about 10 definitions, depending on the dictionary consulted, and "style of language" is on the list, albeit not near the top.

I have grumbled about this before: on television we are hearing the slurring of the word "important" more and more.   In two recent interviews with government bureaucrats we heard how it was "really impor-ăăă" to do blah-blah-blah..."  Where did that goose come from?"

The "T's" in the last part of "important" are sledgehammered into an unpleasant, nasal honk!

Time's up!  To quote Patrick McGoohan: "Be seeing you!"
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 18, 2021, 06:57:55 AM
Zowie!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 23, 2021, 04:55:00 PM
I was reading an article about a fusion reactor called SPARCS being built at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and which should be producing energy by 2025.

Everything was going fine, until I hit this sentence:

"...SPARC is expected to generate at least twice as much as 10 times more energy as is pumped in, the studies found."

??? ??? ???




Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on November 23, 2021, 04:58:13 PM
Quote from: Cato on November 23, 2021, 04:55:00 PM
I was reading an article about a fusion reactor called SPARCS being built at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and which should be producing energy by 2025.

Everything was going fine, until I hit this sentence:

"...SPARC is expected to generate at least twice as much as 10 times more energy as is pumped in, the studies found."

??? ??? ???






Some studies, they muat be ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on November 24, 2021, 09:35:55 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on November 23, 2021, 04:58:13 PM
Some studies, they must be ....

Aye!  Mrs. Cato said: "They're scientists, not English teachers."

True, however, the journalist first, and then his editors, should have caught the curiosity.  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on December 02, 2021, 12:54:21 AM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 02, 2021, 12:49:26 AM
What does " ready to file for U.S. authorization" mean? Does it mean that they'll have sufficient test data by then to say to the relevant bodies "We're ready to roll it out to the general public?"

Is the above post punctuated correctly? Especially the second sentence

Does it mean that they'll have sufficient test data by then to say to the relevant bodies "We're ready to roll it out to the general public?"

The problem I have is that the vaccine companies are not asking a question, so it bugs me that I've put a question mark inside the quotation mark. I also am not sure if there ought to be a comma after bodies. I'm pretty sure that the capital W in we're is OK.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on December 02, 2021, 04:04:37 AM
Speaking of correct punctuation
https://twitter.com/RamsesThePigeon/status/1466168057676578818
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 02, 2021, 07:07:30 AM
Quote from: JBS on December 02, 2021, 04:04:37 AM
Speaking of correct punctuation
https://twitter.com/RamsesThePigeon/status/1466168057676578818

(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 07, 2021, 02:57:04 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 02, 2021, 12:54:21 AM
Is the above post punctuated correctly? Especially the second sentence

Does it mean that they'll have sufficient test data by then to say to the relevant bodies "We're ready to roll it out to the general public?"

The problem I have is that the vaccine companies are not asking a question
, so it bugs me that I've put a question mark inside the quotation mark. I also am not sure if there ought to be a comma after bodies. I'm pretty sure that the capital W in we're is OK.

Greetings Mandryka!

You are right to be "bugged" about the sentence.  ;)

One way to solve it is through re-phrasing and not using an imaginary question: e.g. 

Does it mean they will have sufficient test data by then, and can say to the relevant bodies that their company is ready to roll out their product to the general public?

If you want to keep (most) of your original sentence, I would suggest this:


Does it mean that they'll have sufficient test data by then and can say to the relevant bodies: "We're ready to roll it out to the general public" ?

Quote from: JBS on December 02, 2021, 04:04:37 AM
Speaking of correct punctuation
https://twitter.com/RamsesThePigeon/status/1466168057676578818

FUN WITH PUNCTUATION!!!
  8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 08, 2021, 04:04:28 AM
There is a fast-food restaurant in America called "Arby's" (a joke on Roast  Beef), which I do not order, preferring instead fish or turkey.

Anyway, I noticed on the side of their ice machine a sign warning employees: "Water in drains must be ran slow."   ??? ??? ??? :( :( :(

The machine was "Made in America."  Certainly such grammar comes from Planet Duhhh!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 08, 2021, 06:13:17 AM
Woof!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on December 08, 2021, 10:33:45 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 07, 2021, 02:57:04 PM


Does it mean that they'll have sufficient test data by then and can say to the relevant bodies: "We're ready to roll it out to the general public" ?

FUN WITH PUNCTUATION!!!
  8)

It looks so strange to me to have no punctuation between public and the final quotation mark. I've got Hart's Rules somewhere I think, it may say something about this.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on December 09, 2021, 10:12:45 AM
This sign in a local Chinese restaurant has afforded me much amusement over the last few years. ::)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 09, 2021, 11:49:33 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on December 09, 2021, 10:12:45 AM
This sign in a local Chinese restaurant has afforded me much amusement over the last few years. ::)



Nice!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 09, 2021, 03:53:55 PM
Quote from: Mandryka on December 08, 2021, 10:33:45 AM

It looks so strange to me to have no punctuation between public and the final quotation mark. I've got Hart's Rules somewhere I think, it may say something about this.



Cato is quite flexible on this question!   :D


Feel free to do the following, if you insist on keeping it a direct statement rather than rephrasing it into an indirect clause...


"Does it mean that they'll have sufficient test data by then and can say to the relevant bodies: "We're ready to roll it out to the general public," ?



"Does it mean that they'll have sufficient test data by then and can say to the relevant bodies: "We're ready to roll it out to the general public." ?


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 15, 2021, 01:47:37 PM
I was reminded of a pronunciation grumble recently.

The nasalized and highly annoying pronunciation by (especially) young women on television of the (usually) simple word "Food."

The double "o" is beaten and smeared through their noses, as if they had smelled a skunk: "EWWW!"  It also sounds similar - but not quite - to the o-umlaut in German.

It is not quite a rhyme with "feud," as it lacks a "y" sound.  I suspect this is a descendant of the "Valley-Girl" accent from the 1980's.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2021, 02:25:41 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 15, 2021, 01:47:37 PM
I was reminded of a pronunciation grumble recently.

The nasalized and highly annoying pronunciation by (especially) young women on television of the (usually) simple word "Food."

The double "o" is beaten and smeared through their noses, as if they had smelled a skunk: "EWWW!"  It also sounds similar - but not quite - to the o-umlaut in German.

It is not quite a rhyme with "feud," as it lacks a "y" sound.  I suspect this is a descendant of the "Valley-Girl" accent from the 1980's.



Grody to the max!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 15, 2021, 02:54:25 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2021, 02:25:41 PM

Grody to the max!


Did kids say that back then...for real?   0:)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 15, 2021, 03:02:32 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 15, 2021, 02:54:25 PM
Did kids say that back then...for real?   0:)



fer sher!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 16, 2021, 03:39:39 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2021, 02:25:41 PM
Grody to the max!
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on December 15, 2021, 03:02:32 PM
fer sher!
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Oh, 'the good ole days'--not!

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 16, 2021, 07:30:26 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 16, 2021, 03:39:39 AM
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Oh, 'the good ole days'--not!

PD

(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 17, 2021, 05:10:32 PM
In an Ohio newspaper article about a local "chicken factory" applying for a renewal of its permit to operate with "2.2 million laying hens," also known these days as "hens a-laying," we find the following very interesting information and euphemism:

"Each year the facility produces 18,633 tons of solid poultry manure and 48 tons of composted mortality material."

So, I am wondering: Can we assume the existence of "liquid" poultry manure?   ???

And "mortality material" - composted or otherwise - is a fascinating euphemism for "entrails, beaks, feet, and bones."  0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 17, 2021, 06:18:17 PM
Could almost make me a vegetarian.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on May 11, 2022, 10:29:11 PM
I saw this and thought of you Cato. ;D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 13, 2022, 06:10:39 PM
Quote from: steve ridgway on May 11, 2022, 10:29:11 PM
I saw this and thought of you Cato. ;D

Thank you!

What's next?  Grammar Crackers?   8)

Mrs. Cato and I have recently been noticing advertisements for new drugs which use a "Q" in the name...but without a "u" following, and therefore without the "kw" sound.

Why not use a "K" therefore?

e.g. A medicine whose chemical name is tramadol hydrochloride somehow has a brand name of Qdolo   ??? ??? :o.

(I have not heard the seemingly unpronounceable name spoken, but assume it might be "Cue-dolo" (?).   Otherwise "Kwadolo" or "Ka-dolo" ?)

Then we have "Collagenase clostridium histolyticum" sold under the inscrutable name of "Qwo."   ::)   "Cue-wo"?  or is it the same as Latin's "Quo" ?  And if the latter, why not just call the drug Quo?

Not to be forgotten: Rinvoq where the "q" makes no sense, since it is a "K" sound.  Why not "Rinvoak" or "Rinvoke"?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on June 13, 2022, 06:13:14 PM
Quote from: Cato on June 13, 2022, 06:10:39 PM
Thank you!

What's next?  Grammar Crackers?   8)

Mrs. Cato and I have recently been noticing advertisements for new drugs which use a "Q" in the name...but without a "u" following, and therefore without the "kw" sound.

Why not use a "K" therefore?

e.g. A medicine whose chemical name is tramadol hydrochloride somehow has a brand name of Qdolo   ??? ??? :o.

(I have not heard the seemingly unpronounceable name spoken, but assume it might be "Cue-dolo" (?).   Otherwise "Kwadolo" or "Ka-dolo" ?)

Then we have "Collagenase clostridium histolyticum" sold under the inscrutable name of "Qwo."   ::)   "Cue-wo"?  or is it the same as Latin's "Quo" ?  And if the latter, why not just call the drug Quo?

Not to be forgotten: Rinvoq where the "q" makes no sense, since it is a "K" sound.  Why not "Rinvoak" or "Rinvoke"?

Most likely a ploy to increase name recognition and memorability.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 13, 2022, 06:15:03 PM
I guess Geo. Eastman shoulda gone with Qodaq 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 14, 2022, 03:15:43 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 13, 2022, 06:15:03 PM

I guess Geo. Eastman shoulda gone with Qodaq 8)


8) :D ;) ;D

Yes, think of the possibilities for new states or cities!  Qansas, Qentuqy,  Qoqomo (Indiana), and my favorite: Qanqaqee, Illinois!   0:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 15, 2022, 11:53:05 AM
I am temporarily in the center of Ohio, home of certain television reporters who are very inept with the English language.

This morning - (and I am not making this up, sadly) - a 30-something, becoming the victim of a scrambled vocabulary on camera, used the following word quite naturally, as if he had used it often:


"...un-understansible.


I believe the full statement was similar to: "Everybody seemed to like Jack's Restaurant.   Why it closed down is just un-understansible!"


While this curious coinage is comprestandible, I suspect it will not catch on!   8)


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 15, 2022, 12:37:39 PM
It baffles Science!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on June 15, 2022, 02:59:50 PM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 15, 2022, 12:37:39 PM

It baffles Science!


Ah yes, it does indeed! 

(https://www.latimes.com/includes/projects/hollywood/portraits/wc_fields.jpg)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on June 17, 2022, 11:42:37 AM
How do you un-un something ? 🧐
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 17, 2022, 01:43:43 PM
Quote from: André on June 17, 2022, 11:42:37 AM
How do you un-un something ? 🧐

Indeed!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on June 17, 2022, 02:16:30 PM
Although in this case the un is part of "under", so one under-stands something.
It might help to point to the German verb meaning "understand" is verstehen, while the verb meaning "stand" is stehen.

This does raise the question why we don't refer to lack of understanding as overstanding. Such are the quirks of English.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: André on June 17, 2022, 02:27:49 PM
Sometimes, avoiding quirkiness is an underarching consideration.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on June 18, 2022, 06:14:58 AM
A few years ago, for the sake of filling in the gaps in the periodic table, the as yet undiscovered chemical elements up to 118 were given temporary names such as Ununtrium (113), Ununpentium (115), Ununseptium (117) and Ununoctium (118). These are now known as Nihonium, Moscovium, Tennessine and Oganesson.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 18, 2022, 06:21:12 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on June 18, 2022, 06:14:58 AM
A few years ago, for the sake of filling in the gaps in the periodic table, the as yet undiscovered chemical elements up to 118 were given temporary names such as Ununtrium (113), Ununpentium (115), Ununseptium (117) and Ununoctium (118). These are now known as Nihonium, Moscovium, Tennessine and Oganesson.

At a semi-wild guess, I wonder if Tennessine is associated with the Oak Ridge labs....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on June 18, 2022, 06:40:56 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on June 18, 2022, 06:14:58 AM
A few years ago, for the sake of filling in the gaps in the periodic table, the as yet undiscovered chemical elements up to 118 were given temporary names such as Ununtrium (113), Ununpentium (115), Ununseptium (117) and Ununoctium (118). These are now known as Nihonium, Moscovium, Tennessine and Oganesson.

That's where David Cameron must have taken the inspiration for his Unobtainium from...  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on June 18, 2022, 06:46:41 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 18, 2022, 06:21:12 AM
At a semi-wild guess, I wonder if Tennessine is associated with the Oak Ridge labs....

Yes, didn't know you were into nuclear physics Karl. ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 18, 2022, 06:54:06 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on June 18, 2022, 06:46:41 AM
Yes, didn't know you were into nuclear physics Karl. ;)

No, but a previous girlfriend hailed from Oak Ridge. She was nuclear by association :)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on June 18, 2022, 06:58:20 AM
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on June 18, 2022, 06:54:06 AM
No, but a previous girlfriend hailed from Oak Ridge. She was nuclear by association :)

I presume you two had some hot fusions...  ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on June 28, 2022, 12:19:18 PM
A good article, but the headline manages to mis-parse Henry V.

Cassidy Hutchinson Held Their Manhoods Cheap
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: coffee on July 05, 2022, 08:40:40 AM
Quote from: JBS on June 17, 2022, 02:16:30 PM
Although in this case the un is part of "under", so one under-stands something.
It might help to point to the German verb meaning "understand" is verstehen, while the verb meaning "stand" is stehen.

This does raise the question why we don't refer to lack of understanding as overstanding. Such are the quirks of English.

A language with very derstandable rules, perhaps.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 15, 2022, 05:21:30 AM
From an article about a Broadway brouhaha:

"... We found the few good things people had said, stood by her, and kept going. The critics were not wrong, but we tried to major on (her) sweetness and innocence..."

??? ??? ??? "to major on"

In a university or college you can major in a subject.  Obviously that is a completely different context.

And so, what is wrong with "we tried to focus on (or upon)..." ?

Broadway slang of some sort?  If so, it fails our tests of wit and nuance!   0:)   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 15, 2022, 05:34:41 AM
Woof!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on August 05, 2022, 05:03:59 AM
On the BBC News website today:

"Four Vietnamese men missing after mill fire named"

Not really a subject for jokes, I appreciate, but I do wonder what they named it.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on August 05, 2022, 06:33:21 AM
(* chortle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 21, 2023, 05:02:31 PM
Life has prevented me from placing even some of the Grammar Gremlins from the past months.


Here is an interesting one from a frozen-yogurt emporium's bulletin board: a poster from a local university.


"REGISTER FOR THIS SUMMER'S

WOMEN'S SOCCER ID CAMP"  ???  ???  ???

AND PREPARE TO COMPETE ON THE COLLEGE LEVEL!"

So, I am sure you are wondering what a "women's soccer id* camp" could be!

My first guess: a camp where you need to find your inner soccer-monster to become a winner.  :D

Mrs. Cato thought the "ID" was perhaps for "identify," which still is something of a stretch.  The camp, she thought, would "identify" you as a future college soccer player...or not!

I liked my explanation better!  8)


*
It is perhaps not well known that Sigmund Freud never used the Latin words id, ego, and superego in his theory of the mind, but used German, i.e Das Es, Das Ich, and Das Ueber-Ich.

His English translator decided to use Latin for the concepts, which meant losing something rather subtle.

In German, "the child" is das Kind, and therefore the gender, because the word for "the" is "das," is neither male nor female, but neuter.  Since the gender of the word is neuter, the child's pronoun is "Es."

In German, this links the concept of the child's inchoate personality directly to Freud's idea of Das Es, since all Germans as children were referred to as "Es."  z.B. "Das Kind ist so lieb.  Es ist auch niedlich!"  (The child is so dear.  It is also cute!")

(I have read debates where Germans question whether to use natural gender, when referring to the child, i.e. if the child is a boy, you would have "Das Kind...Er..."  (He) or "Das Kind...Sie..." (She).)

Purists wanted Das Kind - Es.









Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on March 21, 2023, 06:24:50 PM
Speaking of gremlins...have any struck this thread? I'm fairly certain members have posted here since August 5 of last year.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on March 21, 2023, 06:28:48 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2023, 05:02:31 PMLife has prevented me from placing even some of the Grammar Gremlins from the past months.


Here is an interesting one from a frozen-yogurt emporium's bulletin board: a poster from a local university.


"REGISTER FOR THIS SUMMER'S

WOMEN'S SOCCER ID CAMP"  ???  ???  ???

AND PREPARE TO COMPETE ON THE COLLEGE LEVEL!"

So, I am sure you are wondering what a "women's soccer id* camp" could be!

My first guess: a camp where you need to find your inner soccer-monster to become a winner.  :D

Mrs. Cato thought the "ID" was perhaps for "identify," which still is something of a stretch.  The camp, she thought, would "identify" you as a future college soccer player...or not!

I liked my explanation better!  8)


*
It is perhaps not well known that Sigmund Freud never used the Latin words id, ego, and superego in his theory of the mind, but used German, i.e Das Es, Das Ich, and Das Ueber-Ich.

His English translator decided to use Latin for the concepts, which meant losing something rather subtle.

In German, "the child" is das Kind, and therefore the gender, because the word for "the" is "das," is neither male nor female, but neuter.  Since the gender of the word is neuter, the child's pronoun is "Es."

In German, this links the concept of the child's inchoate personality directly to Freud's idea of Das Es, since all Germans as children were referred to as "Es."  z.B. "Das Kind ist so lieb.  Es ist auch niedlich!"  (The child is so dear.  It is also cute!")

(I have read debates where Germans question whether to use natural gender, when referring to the child, i.e. if the child is a boy, you would have "Das Kind...Er..."  (He) or "Das Kind...Sie..." (She).)

Purists wanted Das Kind - Es.

Muss es sein? Es muss sein
Takes on a whole meaning.

As for Soccer ID--perhaps an abbreviation for Intramural Division or something similar is meant?


Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on March 22, 2023, 01:24:50 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2023, 05:02:31 PMLife has prevented me from placing even some of the Grammar Gremlins from the past months.


Here is an interesting one from a frozen-yogurt emporium's bulletin board: a poster from a local university.


"REGISTER FOR THIS SUMMER'S

WOMEN'S SOCCER ID CAMP"  ???  ???  ???

AND PREPARE TO COMPETE ON THE COLLEGE LEVEL!"

So, I am sure you are wondering what a "women's soccer id* camp" could be!

My first guess: a camp where you need to find your inner soccer-monster to become a winner.  :D

Mrs. Cato thought the "ID" was perhaps for "identify," which still is something of a stretch.  The camp, she thought, would "identify" you as a future college soccer player...or not!

I liked my explanation better!  8)

A little googling revealed that soccer ID camps are actually common. So common, in fact, that most sites didn't bother to explain what ID stands for. I finally found this:

QuoteID stands for Identification in soccer and is used in the context of a soccer ID camp. Soccer ID camps are used by colleges to identify the best young soccer players and recruit them to their college soccer teams.

So Mrs. Cato pretty much had it right, but I also prefer yours.

https://yoursoccerhome.com/soccer-abbreviations-what-do-they-all-mean/
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on March 22, 2023, 01:52:31 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2023, 05:02:31 PMLife has prevented me from placing even some of the Grammar Gremlins from the past months.


Here is an interesting one from a frozen-yogurt emporium's bulletin board: a poster from a local university.


"REGISTER FOR THIS SUMMER'S

WOMEN'S SOCCER ID CAMP"  ???  ???  ???

AND PREPARE TO COMPETE ON THE COLLEGE LEVEL!"

So, I am sure you are wondering what a "women's soccer id* camp" could be!

My first guess: a camp where you need to find your inner soccer-monster to become a winner.  :D

Mrs. Cato thought the "ID" was perhaps for "identify," which still is something of a stretch.  The camp, she thought, would "identify" you as a future college soccer player...or not!

I liked my explanation better!  8)


*
It is perhaps not well known that Sigmund Freud never used the Latin words id, ego, and superego in his theory of the mind, but used German, i.e Das Es, Das Ich, and Das Ueber-Ich.

His English translator decided to use Latin for the concepts, which meant losing something rather subtle.

In German, "the child" is das Kind, and therefore the gender, because the word for "the" is "das," is neither male nor female, but neuter.  Since the gender of the word is neuter, the child's pronoun is "Es."

In German, this links the concept of the child's inchoate personality directly to Freud's idea of Das Es, since all Germans as children were referred to as "Es."  z.B. "Das Kind ist so lieb.  Es ist auch niedlich!"  (The child is so dear.  It is also cute!")

(I have read debates where Germans question whether to use natural gender, when referring to the child, i.e. if the child is a boy, you would have "Das Kind...Er..."  (He) or "Das Kind...Sie..." (She).)

Purists wanted Das Kind - Es.

Hi Cato,

I found this (which should help solve the ID mystery):  https://www.ncsasports.org/mens-soccer/camps#what-are-id-camps

And your partner was correct!  :)

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 22, 2023, 02:52:13 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2023, 05:02:31 PMIt is perhaps not well known that Sigmund Freud never used the Latin words id, ego, and superego in his theory of the mind, but used German, i.e Das Es, Das Ich, and Das Ueber-Ich.

His English translator decided to use Latin for the concepts, which meant losing something rather subtle.

In German, "the child" is das Kind, and therefore the gender, because the word for "the" is "das," is neither male nor female, but neuter.  Since the gender of the word is neuter, the child's pronoun is "Es."

In German, this links the concept of the child's inchoate personality directly to Freud's idea of Das Es, since all Germans as children were referred to as "Es."  z.B. "Das Kind ist so lieb.  Es ist auch niedlich!"  (The child is so dear.  It is also cute!")

(I have read debates where Germans question whether to use natural gender, when referring to the child, i.e. if the child is a boy, you would have "Das Kind...Er..."  (He) or "Das Kind...Sie..." (She).)

Purists wanted Das Kind - Es.

All this reminds me of an old joke that was widely circulated immediately after 1944, when the Russians occupied Romania. replacing Germans. The Red Army soldiers were particularly fond of "collecting" (read, stealing) wristwatches and it was not uncommon to see them wearing three of four on each wrist. They roamed about the streets of Bucharest shouting "Davai tchas!" (Give me the watch!) to anyone who was not precautious enough as not to wear it in plain daylight. The great Romanian actor and comedian Constantin Tănase improvised a couplet on the subject:

    Rău era cu "Der, Die, Das"
    Da-i mai rău cu "davai ceas".
    De la Nistru pân' la Don,
    Davai ceas, davai palton,
    Davai ceas, davai moșie,
    Harașo tovărășie!



Ehglish translation:
   
  It was bad with "Der, Die, Das"
    But it's worse with "davai tchas".
    From the Dniester to the Don
    Davai watch, coat and long-johns,
    You can forego your ownership,
    Horosho comradeship!


(Horosho in Russian means good)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_T%C4%83nase (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_T%C4%83nase)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 22, 2023, 09:28:21 AM
Quote from: JBS on March 21, 2023, 06:28:48 PMMuss es sein? Es muss sein

Takes on a whole meaning.

As for Soccer ID--perhaps an abbreviation for Intramural Division or something similar is meant?




Thanks for the comment!  The lack of punctuation for abbreviations is spreading, and as a result, of course, also spreading is incoherence.


Quote from: Wendell_E on March 22, 2023, 01:24:50 AMSo Mrs. Cato pretty much had it right, but I also prefer yours.



Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on March 22, 2023, 01:52:31 AMHi Cato,

I found this (which should help solve the ID mystery):  https://www.ncsasports.org/mens-soccer/camps#what-are-id-camps

And your partner was correct!  :)

PD

Thanks again for all the comments!

I find it disturbing that colleges are trying to recruit and "identify" girls from 15 to 17 years of age for their teams.  But such is the sports mania of our endarkened era!

When my wife was teaching at a Catholic grade school 10 years ago in a small Ohio town, parents were pulling their boys out of the school as early as the 5th Grade...

..."to get them into the baseball clique at the public school."  (Yes, that is an actual quote from a parent!)

Why?  Because a graduate of the high-school program had made it to the Detroit Tigers a year or two before!

And if the boy had any brothers or sisters in the Catholic school, they were often pulled out as well, since it was just easier to make one trip to one school.

As a result the school eventually had to close down its Grades 5-8 and try to make it as a Kindergarten-Grade 4 operation.

Now, ask me whether the public school could compete in any way academically with the Catholic school!

A local philosopher, 80 years old at the time, Don the Barber, scowling at the entire situation, opined: "This town has gone nuts on sports!" 

Sports were obviously much more important than the classroom learning!

Now, has anybody from that public high school in the last 10 years made it into major-league or even minor-league baseball?

 ;)   It is to laugh!

Quote from: Florestan on March 22, 2023, 02:52:13 AMAll this reminds me of an old joke that was widely circulated immediately after 1944, when the Russians occupied Romania. replacing Germans. The Red Army soldiers were particularly fond of "collecting" (read, stealing) wristwatches and it was not uncommon to see them wearing three of four on each wrist. They roamed about the streets of Bucharest shouting "Davai tchas!" (Give me the watch!) to anyone who was not precautious enough as not to wear it in plain daylight. The great Romanian actor and comedian Constantin Tănase improvised a couplet on the subject:

    Rău era cu "Der, Die, Das"
    Da-i mai rău cu "davai ceas".
    De la Nistru pân' la Don,
    Davai ceas, davai palton,
    Davai ceas, davai moșie,
    Harașo tovărășie!



Ehglish translation:
   
  It was bad with "Der, Die, Das"
    But it's worse with "davai tchas".
    From the Dniester to the Don
    Davai watch, coat and long-johns,
    You can forego your ownership,
    Horosho comradeship!


(Horosho in Russian means good)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_T%C4%83nase (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_T%C4%83nase)


Thanks, Florestan, for a really interesting story! 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on March 25, 2023, 10:34:59 AM
Whatever happened to "An"?  No, not a lady called Anne who has chosen to abbreviate further an already short name, but the humble English indefinite article in the form used before a vowel.  I noticed some time ago, both on the BBC and among politicians, that "a" (as in the other form of the indefinite article) was increasingly being pronounced "eh" (to rhyme with "day") rather than the neutral "ə" sound.  "This government will make it eh priority to improve the living standards of eh large number of people", or whatever.  So far so good(ish); pronunciations change, I accept that.  Rather more annoying (to me) is the way that the "eh" pronunciation is replacing "an" - so you frequently hear "This policy will make eh immense contribution to the well-being of eh even larger majority of people".  I also hear it from US broadcasters and politicians, but I noticed it here first, so suspect it's an affectation that we've managed to infect you Americans with.  Sorry.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on March 25, 2023, 10:55:05 AM
Quote from: DaveF on March 25, 2023, 10:34:59 AMeh immense

Yes, this strikes me as completely un-English pronunciation. Isn't the whole point of "an" to avoid two vowels colliding?

It's the same in French. Marlborough s'en va-t-en guerre is correct and ear-pleasing. Marlborough s'en va en guerre is incorrect and ear-scratching.

Fortunately, Romanian is exempt of such occurences.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 25, 2023, 01:00:02 PM
Quote from: DaveF on March 25, 2023, 10:34:59 AMWhatever happened to "An"?  No, not a lady called Anne who has chosen to abbreviate further an already short name, but the humble English indefinite article in the form used before a vowel.  I noticed some time ago, both on the BBC and among politicians, that "a" (as in the other form of the indefinite article) was increasingly being pronounced "eh" (to rhyme with "day") rather than the neutral "ə" sound.  "This government will make it eh priority to improve the living standards of eh large number of people", or whatever.  So far so good(ish); pronunciations change, I accept that.  Rather more annoying (to me) is the way that the "eh" pronunciation is replacing "an" - so you frequently hear "This policy will make eh immense contribution to the well-being of eh even larger majority of people".  I also hear it from US broadcasters and politicians, but I noticed it here first, so suspect it's an affectation that we've managed to infect you Americans with.  Sorry.



YES!!!

That problem has been on my list of grumbles for some time!!!

It has become a cancer: and it is not just replacing "an" but also the regular "a." 

"That is AY (as in "day") very good car!"

NOOO! 

But the problem goes back decades, because I recall my grade-school teachers, mostly Sisters of the Precious Blood, telling us that the only time to pronounce "a" as "AY" was to refer to it as a letter of the alphabet.

Otherwise, "a" had the "uh" sound.

Needless to say, the most grievous offenders in my experience are schlemiels, who are trying to make you think they are important, intelligent, or both, when in fact they are just schlemiels!   ;)

One hears it, of course, on television and radio much too often and, of course, from politicians.

THANK YOU for grumbling about it: I am quite properly appalled to read that England has also been infected.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DaveF on March 25, 2023, 01:25:34 PM
Quote from: Cato on March 25, 2023, 01:00:02 PM... my grade-school teachers, mostly Sisters of the Precious Blood, telling us that the only time to pronounce "a" as "AY" was to refer to it as a letter of the alphabet.

I am quite properly appalled to read that England has also been infected.


Excellent - top marks to Thee Sisters of Thee Precious Blood [runs for cover...]

And I'm happy to blame the English - over the border here in Wales we talk proper, like, innit?
(In Welsh, in fact, where there's no indefinite article, the definite article is 'y', pronounced "ə" or "uh".  So far no Welsh-speaking politician has started pronouncing it "eee" - but give them time...)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on March 25, 2023, 01:50:45 PM
Quote from: DaveF on March 25, 2023, 01:25:34 PMExcellent - top marks to Thee Sisters of Thee Precious Blood [runs for cover...]


;D  ;D  ;D  Aye, now there is another grumble!  ;)

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on April 26, 2023, 12:53:59 PM
The printed English is quite painful.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on April 26, 2023, 02:17:05 PM
Quote from: Karl Henning on April 26, 2023, 12:53:59 PMThe printed English is quite painful.


You no need maintenance? ;D

I recently bought a stand for my ps5.  The box had printed on it "p5" instead of ps5. ::)   
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 13, 2023, 04:49:17 AM
Quote from: Karl Henning on April 26, 2023, 12:53:59 PMThe printed English is quite painful.



Whom does one blame for such monstrosities?  Did the "translator" not pay attention in English class?  Was the translator's teacher incompetent?  Or both?

I suspect that, in certain countries, errors in their knowledge of English have been passed down from one generation of teachers to the next.  Thus we have seen for decades examples of such near gibberish on products - and assembly instructions!!!  ???  - from those countries.

And I have met enough incompetent teachers in America - both in English and Foreign Languages Departments - to know that this is quite possible!

I have met teachers who were supposedly passing on their knowledge of German or Latin who would not have been able to survive a test on the Second-Year Level.  I have met teachers of German who could not really speak the language much at all.  One NEVER spoke the language in simple conversations to her students!

Then there was the English teacher, who looked at me as if I had just dropped down from Mars, when I asked her how she taught the Subjunctive Mood to her students! 

"Uh, what's that?"

I (being polite): "The Subjunctive Mood, perhaps you were taught to use the term 'Conditional Mood' or 'If-Then Conditions'?"

No, she had no idea what any of that meant!  Future-More-Vivid, Future-Less-Vivid, Might vs. May, no idea!

Once, at a conference, my concern about such teachers was brushed away as irrelevant by a professor of English: "Nobody needs to know that stuff, and the kids can't understand it anyway."  :o

I: "Well, I understood it at the same age, and I make sure that my students in German or Latin or Ancient Greek understand it."

He: "You're fooling yourself if you think they understand it.  They're just pretending to get it."

I: "Not according to their examinations and homework."

He: (spurning expression, turns to speak to someone else)

Sic transit gloria academiae!
   ::)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 13, 2023, 05:13:28 AM
Speaking of Latin, recently a physician, around 60-something I reckon, wrote me a receipt for my son. You will buy the drug at a specific pharmacy, he told me, I wrote here S. V. meaning that it is my wish that you do so. Sic volo, I replied and made him startle în great surprise. He was really astonished that I knew Latin.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 13, 2023, 05:42:08 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 13, 2023, 05:13:28 AMSpeaking of Latin, recently a physician, around 60-something I reckon, wrote me a receipt for my son. You will buy the drug at a specific pharmacy, he told me, I wrote here S. V. meaning that it is my wish that you do so. Sic volo, I replied and made him startle în great surprise. He was really astonished that I knew Latin.


Optime!  (https://static.vecteezy.com/system/resources/previews/002/475/925/large_2x/angel-emoji-face-classic-flat-style-icon-free-vector.jpg)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Mandryka on May 13, 2023, 06:33:47 AM
Quote from: DavidW on April 26, 2023, 02:17:05 PMYou no need maintenance? ;D


I think you no need maintenance is perfectly correct in Jamaican. Here

https://opengrammar.github.io/jam/#_pronouns
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 14, 2023, 10:47:02 AM
Today's word is "P E D O M E T E R"!  :D

So, I went to a large sporting goods store, part of a national chain, because I wanted to buy a pedometer for my wife.

I had searched the place a year ago for a pedometer, but was not satisfied with what they had.  So, when I entered the place, which is about the size of a few baseball stadiums, I headed for the area where I had seen the pedometers last year.

Of course, they were nowhere in sight!  Things had been rearranged!  So, using basic logic, I headed for "Running Gear" which offered all kinds of clothes for running and jogging or ambling.  Were any pedometers there?

No, of course not!  So, again using basic logic, I then headed for the Shoe Department to find a pedometer. 

Were any pedometers there?  No!  Why would you classify a pedometer with foot products?  That's just crazy!!!  :o

So, after walking around aimlessly and finding no pedometers, I happened upon a 20-something employee, a young lady, who was also walking around aimlessly.

I: "Do you know where your store hides its pedometers?"

She: (Very confused look) "Uhhh..."

I: "A pedometer measures one's paces."

She: (Unsure) "You mean one of those thingys that count steps?"

I: "Yes, they are called p e d o m e t e r s..." and inside my head I am yelling "and NOT 'one of those thingys that count steps'!!!"  :D


To her credit, she took me directly to the area where the pedometers were.  Only one kind was offered, but it seemed to be of better quality than the ones offered last year.

Now, you are probably wondering: "Which department had the pedometers?"

I am not making this up! 

She had guided me to...The Bicycle Department!!!

Now, given that such stores are designed and organized by their High Commands somewhere in a skyscraper far, far away, and not by local managers or local personnel, it would seem that, because bicycles have...p e d als...yes, somebody in that faraway skyscraper thought that p e d ometers must go with bicycles!    :o    ???    ;D

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on May 14, 2023, 03:21:54 PM
Quote from: Cato on May 14, 2023, 10:47:02 AMToday's word is "P E D O M E T E R"!  :D

So, I went to a large sporting goods store, part of a national chain, because I wanted to buy a pedometer for my wife.

I had searched the place a year ago for a pedometer, but was not satisfied with what they had.  So, when I entered the place, which is about the size of a few baseball stadiums, I headed for the area where I had seen the pedometers last year.

Of course, they were nowhere in sight!  Things had been rearranged!  So, using basic logic, I headed for "Running Gear" which offered all kinds of clothes for running and jogging or ambling.  Were any pedometers there?

No, of course not!  So, again using basic logic, I then headed for the Shoe Department to find a pedometer. 

Were any pedometers there?  No!  Why would you classify a pedometer with foot products?  That's just crazy!!!  :o

So, after walking around aimlessly and finding no pedometers, I happened upon a 20-something employee, a young lady, who was also walking around aimlessly.

I: "Do you know where your store hides its pedometers?"

She: (Very confused look) "Uhhh..."

I: "A pedometer measures one's paces."

She: (Unsure) "You mean one of those thingys that count steps?"

I: "Yes, they are called p e d o m e t e r s..." and inside my head I am yelling "and NOT 'one of those thingys that count steps'!!!"  :D


To her credit, she took me directly to the area where the pedometers were.  Only one kind was offered, but it seemed to be of better quality than the ones offered last year.

Now, you are probably wondering: "Which department had the pedometers?"

I am not making this up! 

She had guided me to...The Bicycle Department!!!

Now, given that such stores are designed and organized by their High Commands somewhere in a skyscraper far, far away, and not by local managers or local personnel, it would seem that, because bicycles have...p e d als...yes, somebody in that faraway skyscraper thought that p e d ometers must go with bicycles!    :o    ???    ;D

Oh, nooooo!  ??? I know that there are devices which track ones cycling speed and mileage (a combo speedometer and odometer).  It would make sense to have that in the bicycle department; however having a pedometer in that department makes absolutely no sense.

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on May 14, 2023, 03:32:08 PM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on May 14, 2023, 03:21:54 PMOh, nooooo!  ??? I know that there are devices which track ones cycling speed and mileage (a combo speedometer and odometer).  It would make sense to have that in the bicycle department; however having a pedometer in that department makes absolutely no sense.
I guess, on a positive note, they didn't have them in Patio Accessories ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on May 14, 2023, 06:09:39 PM
Maybe they want to confuse Qanon people who think pedometers will track or link to pedophiles.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on May 14, 2023, 07:29:54 PM
Quote from: Karl Henning on May 14, 2023, 03:32:08 PMI guess, on a positive note, they didn't have them in Patio Accessories ....
Steps from the kitchen to the grill outside and back and repeat?  :)

And no ill thoughts from me here as I love grilled and smoked food!  Just trying to be "cute". 

For what it's worth, I do have an app on my phone which can tell me how far it is that I've walked (though I do need to refresh myself on how it works).

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on May 15, 2023, 04:51:55 AM
Quote from: JBS on May 14, 2023, 06:09:39 PMMaybe they want to confuse Qanon people who think pedometers will track or link to pedophiles.

Oh I thought pedometers were meant for measuring how many children you have?  Really convenient before you leave Disneyland!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 15, 2023, 05:44:38 AM
Quote from: DavidW on May 15, 2023, 04:51:55 AMOh I thought pedometers were meant for measuring how many children you have?  Really convenient before you leave Disneyland!


One of my great-uncles had about 10 kids: during the Depression in the early 1930's, he had packed everyone into a truck with an open bed and set out for a job in California.

Somewhere in the southwestern desert (Arizona, New Mexico, western Texas), he stopped for gas at a "Last Chance in a Hundred Miles for Gas" station, where everybody got out to eat and stretch and visit the restrooms.

You guessed it: about 50 miles down the road, one of the older kids yells: "We forgot Billy!"

Yes, Billy was still in the restroom when they were pulling out for the open road!   ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wanderer on May 15, 2023, 06:27:55 AM
Quote from: DavidW on May 15, 2023, 04:51:55 AMOh I thought pedometers were meant for measuring how many children you have?  Really convenient before you leave Disneyland!
😁

That would be a paedometer!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wanderer on May 15, 2023, 06:29:38 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 15, 2023, 05:44:38 AMOne of my great-uncles had about 10 kids: during the Depression in the early 1930's, he had packed everyone into a truck with an open bed and set out for a job in California.

Somewhere in the southwestern desert (Arizona, New Mexico, western Texas), he stopped for gas at a "Last Chance in a Hundred Miles for Gas" station, where everybody got out to eat and stretch and visit the restrooms.

You guessed it: about 50 miles down the road, one of the older kids yells: "We forgot Billy!"

Yes, Billy was still in the restroom when they were pulling out for the open road!  ;D

Billy: Oh no, not again!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 15, 2023, 07:09:13 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 14, 2023, 10:47:02 AMone of those thingys that count steps

Libera per vacuum posui vestigia princeps, non aliena meo pressi pede. ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on May 15, 2023, 07:36:12 AM
Quote from: Florestan on May 15, 2023, 07:09:13 AMLibera per vacuum posui vestigia princeps, non aliena meo pressi pede. ;D


Optime!

I am impressed that you recalled this line of Horace!  The letter begins about poetry written by "drinkers of water."

Horace seems not to be a fan, or simply indicates that wine traditionally gets the Muses going!   ;)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on May 15, 2023, 08:01:25 AM
Quote from: Cato on May 15, 2023, 07:36:12 AMOptime!

I am impressed that you recalled this line of Horace!

I was reminded of it very recently while reading the first letter of Carpani's Le Haydine.

QuoteThe letter begins about poetry written by "drinkers of water."

Nulla placere diu nec vivere carmina possunt quae scribuntur aquae potoribus.

I have known this since childhood, it was my father's favorite Latin quotation.  ;)

QuoteHorace seems not to be a fan, or simply indicates that wine traditionally gets the Muses going!  ;)

CF. Baudelaire, some 1,700 years later: If wine were to disappear from human production, I believe it would cause an absence, a failure in health and intellect, a void much more terrifying than all the recesses and the deviations for which wine is regarded as responsible.  :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 05, 2023, 10:34:43 AM
Not a grumble, a straight-up question: what is the "mood" (it would be a mood, rather than tense, right?) of the verb in God save the King...?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 06, 2023, 08:17:46 AM
Quote from: Karl Henning on July 05, 2023, 10:34:43 AMNot a grumble, a straight-up question: what is the "mood" (it would be a mood, rather than tense, right?) of the verb in God save the King...?


It would be considered Imperative Mood, which means a command, and it might seem odd to give God a command, but it is meant to show urgency.  Prayers contain many such polite commands: Ora pro nobis (Pray for us) is in the Imperative Mood.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 06, 2023, 08:51:17 AM
Quote from: Cato on July 06, 2023, 08:17:46 AMIt would be considered Imperative Mood, which means a command, and it might seem odd to give God a command, but it is meant to show urgency.  Prayers contain many such polite commands: Ora pro nobis (Pray for us) is in the Imperative Mood.
That's what I was thinking. (Pats himself on the back.)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 06, 2023, 09:24:14 AM
Quote from: Karl Henning on July 06, 2023, 08:51:17 AMThat's what I was thinking. (Pats himself on the back.)


Well sure!  You were right!

Soooooo many items in recent weeks, but very little time to address them.

One grumble is a "golden oldie," as the radio announcers would say, viz. "between" vs. "among."

I have been reading a history of the days of Attila the Hun, and the author, a reputable historian, cannot bring himself to use "among," when 3 or more things or persons are involved.

e.g. "The army was divided between these three generals...

I just find that so clunky and grating!

Speaking of grammatical moods, the continual misuse of "would/would have" in Subjunctive Mood, Contrary-to-Fact Conditions was on display via local television in a report about an accident, where a driver, on a clear sunny day, drove directly into the end of a guardrail, which split his vehicle in half, right down the middle, missing the driver and his front-seat passenger.

But there was another error in the sentence, an error heard too often these days!

Reporter: "We don't know why the car went off to the left. 

If the driver would've drove to the right, he would've missed the guardrail."

NO!  $:)  "If the driver had driven..."

My work is never did, I mean done!   8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 06, 2023, 11:45:20 AM
Had the driver driven...  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 06, 2023, 11:54:46 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 06, 2023, 11:45:20 AMHad the driver driven...  ;D
That, too.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 06, 2023, 12:40:34 PM
I know that finding malapropisms in products shipped from the non-English-speaking world is next door to shooting fish in a barrel, but the two distinct misspellings of magnificence really tickled me.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 06, 2023, 12:42:56 PM
Quote from: Karl Henning on July 06, 2023, 12:40:34 PMI know that finding malapropisms in products shipped from the non-English-speaking world is next door to shooting fish in a barrel, but the two distinct misspellings of magnificence really tickled me.

Magnicent find, Karl.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on July 11, 2023, 12:56:17 PM
So...

Mrs. Cato was typing the following sentence for one of her volunteer projects:

"Sean has been alert and active during my visits."  (Sean is a baby.)

Microsoft underlined "alert" as being an error.   ???

"What's wrong with that?" she asked me.

"Nothing.  Possibly the machine is interpreting 'alert' as a verb, maybe?"

So, after clicking on the Grammar Icon, the answer was:

"Sean has been alert, and active."

No!  Absolutely not!  No comma is necessary!

This is not the first time such errors have occurred with "Grammar Check" or "Spell Check."

We see the problem with Artificial Intelligence: what if Artificial Intelligence is in reality...just dumb?  😇

I am reminded of G.I.G.O., an abbreviation from the early days of computers.  It is a comment on programming.

"Garbage In, Garbage Out."   8) 
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on July 12, 2023, 12:19:04 AM
Quote from: Karl Henning on July 06, 2023, 12:40:34 PMI know that finding malapropisms in products shipped from the non-English-speaking world is next door to shooting fish in a barrel, but the two distinct misspellings of magnificence really tickled me.
A bootleg copy?

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 12, 2023, 05:51:48 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on July 12, 2023, 12:19:04 AMA bootleg copy?

PD
Well, I got it from Amazon. Do they traffic in bootlegs, do we suppose?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on July 12, 2023, 06:58:00 AM
Quote from: Karl Henning on July 12, 2023, 05:51:48 AMWell, I got it from Amazon. Do they traffic in bootlegs, do we suppose?
I have no idea--who was the seller?  Amazon themselves?  I was just joking thinking that you had found a photo of that movie.  It did look like there were words in a foreign language at the bottom of the cover.  No idea which language it is.  Perhaps Chinese?  Which is why I thought that it might be a bootleg from somewhere overseas...that and the two misspellings.

Or perhaps just bad and lazy quality control by the art department (or those in charge)?

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 12, 2023, 07:55:07 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on July 12, 2023, 06:58:00 AMI have no idea--who was the seller?  Amazon themselves?  I was just joking thinking that you had found a photo of that movie.  It did look like there were words in a foreign language at the bottom of the cover.  No idea which language it is.  Perhaps Chinese?  Which is why I thought that it might be a bootleg from somewhere overseas...that and the two misspellings.

Or perhaps just bad and lazy quality control by the art department (or those in charge)?

PD
Seemed to be direct from Amazon. Korean, I think. Your eye is correct, in descrying potential bootleg tipoffs.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 16, 2023, 12:47:22 PM
Lousy English in memes is also shooting fish in a barrel, but I cannot help sharing: You're a 80's rock star and your names is ....
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on July 27, 2023, 10:11:55 AM
As suggested by our DavidW:

Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on July 27, 2023, 08:29:31 AMWhen trying to find out a bit more about the two sisters and the son who had passed away in Colorado, I stumbled across this sweet story:

'The genesis of this year's Cat Fest is a typo.

Former co-founder and co-owner of the Denver County Fair Dana Cain was doing an interview in 2015 in which she mentioned the "kitchen pavilion" as a fair event. The reporter accidentally printed "kitten pavilion," and Cain had no choice but to locate some cats.

"They printed we had a kitten pavilion," Cain said. "So I said 'OK well, we have to do it!'"

More here:

https://gazette.com/arts-entertainment/cat-fest-shangri-la-for-all-things-feline/article_9df8e3ca-2672-11ee-81fa-ebd9484db2ef.html

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 28, 2023, 10:05:02 AM
Started reading this:

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71ZDqL8OeRL.jpg)

(actually, the original French version). Before beginning it, I told myself that a tetralogy purporting to portray Mozart as the reincarnation of Osiris (sic!) is bound to contain factual errors in the same way Dan Brown's sensationalist novels do. And lo and behold!, in chapter Two of Jacq's book we read that Leopold Mozart vacillated, for his newly born son's name, between "the Latin Theophilus and the German Gottlieb". Now, of course Theophilus is Greek, not Latin, albeit with the termination latinized from -os to -us; the correct Latin is, well... Amadeus.

This promises to be a long but entertaining read.  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on July 28, 2023, 10:50:26 AM
Quote from: Florestan on July 28, 2023, 10:05:02 AMStarted reading this:

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71ZDqL8OeRL.jpg)

(actually, the original French version). Before beginning it, I told myself that a tetralogy purporting to portray Mozart as the reincarnation of Osiris (sic!) is bound to contain factual errors in the same way Dan Brown's sensationalist novels do. And lo and behold!, in chapter Two of Jacq's book we read that Leopold Mozart vacillated, for his newly born son's name, between "the Latin Theophilus and the German Gottlieb". Now, of course Theophilus is Greek, not Latin, albeit with the termination latinized from -os to -us; the correct Latin is, well... Amadeus.

This promises to be a long but entertaining read.  ;D
So long as you're having fun!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on July 28, 2023, 10:59:55 AM
Quote from: Karl Henning on July 28, 2023, 10:50:26 AMSo long as you're having fun! ;D

Well, in 1756 an Egyptian monk by the name of Thamos, Count of Thebes is sent by his superior, abbot Hermes of the Saint-Mercury monastery, to the Northern lands (read Vienna) to search for, look after, and guide, the Great Magician who will be born there as Osiris reincarnated. As it turns out, that newborn is Mozart. Ain't it fun?  ;D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Wendell_E on August 20, 2023, 04:02:42 AM
Not really grammar, just let's-stick-in-any-old-word-that's close-to-what-we-actually-mean, from a bill I received from my dentist's office yesterday"

QuoteYour account is past due and is now occurring interest

I only had the work done on July 11, a little over a month ago. They usually charge me my part at the time of service, but this was the first time they'd contacted by about my whopping $25.00 balance. But using "occurring" instead of "accruing" was what irritated me most.  ;D

I know it's just a computer-generated form, but I wrote them with my payment and told them they might want to use a better one.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: JBS on August 20, 2023, 06:11:23 AM
I just learned from CNN that space vehicles (in this case, a Russian mission to the moon) don't crash on landing.

They collide with the surface.

Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: AnotherSpin on September 05, 2023, 02:13:15 PM
Quote from: JBS on August 20, 2023, 06:11:23 AMI just learned from CNN that space vehicles (in this case, a Russian mission to the moon) don't crash on landing.

They collide with the surface.



Typical Russophobia.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on September 05, 2023, 02:49:33 PM
Quote from: Florestan on July 28, 2023, 10:05:02 AMStarted reading this:

(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71ZDqL8OeRL.jpg)

 Two of Jacq's book we read that Leopold Mozart vacillated, for his newly born son's name, between "the Latin Theophilus and the German Gottlieb". Now, of course Theophilus is Greek, not Latin, albeit with the termination latinized from -os to -us; the correct Latin is, well... Amadeus.

This promises to be a long but entertaining read.
  ;D



I am reminded of later Christian names in Latin, e.g. Deusdedit (God gave (Life to me), Adeodatus (Given by God), and )my favorite) Quodvultdeus (Whatever God wants, or possibly Because God wants (it)...or both!  In later Latin, the former is more likely the intention.)

I have no more time right now, but bad grammar/stupid phrasing/very bad spelling right now can be found too often!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on September 07, 2023, 06:54:14 AM
We all make the odd slip-up, but I cannot help but feel that the BBC should do better, this is a header:

When did What was Michael Praetorius become an organist?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on December 26, 2023, 07:06:55 PM
Neuroscientist beg people play [name of game.]
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 30, 2023, 01:36:49 PM
Oh my!   A few minutes to recall so many terrible things seen and heard in the past months!  😇

One of my favorites was at one of America's surviving department stores in North Carolina, in which store a door had the following sign:

Keep this Area Clare!  ;D

Given the mangled pronunciation sometimes found south of the Ohio River, one can somewhat understand the mistake.  😇


I was tempted to add a comma after the word "area."   8)


Found in a fast-food restaurant's rest room for Men, again in a state south of the Ohio River, although grammar is not necessarily the issue:


NOTICE!  When you "P," please do so in the toilet water, rather than on the seat, the floor, the walls, or any other place.  We want to keep this room clean."


One would like to read "into" and "onto," but obviously another matter dominates here!   :o  8)


A local politician looking for re-election spoke on television about why people should vote for him: sadly, his twisted tongue and general gobbledygook did not prevent him from winning.

e.g. "We gotta get the generations to sit so, you know, they gotta have sit together and so, you know, we gotta get to everybody, to sit and come some ideas that are gotta be our future here."

Later we heard things e.g. "shoulda went" and "I seen" and "got brung up."


Oh well, maybe he can speak well enough to have the streets fixed!   ;)


 



Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Bachtoven on December 30, 2023, 01:57:00 PM
Until fairly recently, bananas were "25 cents the each" at Target. They finally dropped "the" from their sign.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 30, 2023, 02:22:37 PM
Quote from: Bachtoven on December 30, 2023, 01:57:00 PMUntil fairly recently, bananas were "25 cents the each" at Target. They finally dropped "the" from their sign.


Terrible price, terrible English!  😇
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Bachtoven on December 30, 2023, 04:26:53 PM
Quote from: Cato on December 30, 2023, 02:22:37 PMTerrible price, terrible English!  😇
Really? That's the lowest price in my town! In fact, they have probably gone up a bit since it's been at least a year since they changed the sign!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:14:00 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on July 27, 2023, 10:11:55 AMAs suggested by our DavidW:

@Cato,

I liked her can-do attitude.  ;D

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 31, 2023, 10:34:02 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on July 27, 2023, 08:29:31 AMWhen trying to find out a bit more about the two sisters and the son who had passed away in Colorado, I stumbled across this sweet story:

'The genesis of this year's Cat Fest is a typo.

Former co-founder and co-owner of the Denver County Fair Dana Cain was doing an interview in 2015 in which she mentioned the "kitchen pavilion" as a fair event. The reporter accidentally printed "kitten pavilion," and Cain had no choice but to locate some cats.

"They printed we had a kitten pavilion," Cain said. "So I said 'OK well, we have to do it!'"

More here:

https://gazette.com/arts-entertainment/cat-fest-shangri-la-for-all-things-feline/article_9df8e3ca-2672-11ee-81fa-ebd9484db2ef.html

PD



Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:14:00 AM@Cato,

I liked her can-do attitude.  ;D

PD


Yes, I think that would be termed "cattitude"!   :o    8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:42:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 31, 2023, 10:34:02 AMYes, I think that would be termed "cattitude"!   :o    8)
:laugh:  The ancient Egyptian gods were smiling upon her; she helped to get cats adopted!

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:47:56 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 30, 2023, 01:36:49 PMOh my!   A few minutes to recall so many terrible things seen and heard in the past months!  😇

One of my favorites was at one of America's surviving department stores in North Carolina, in which store a door had the following sign:

Keep this Area Clare!  ;D

Dang!  Looks like I won't be able to shop there--since I'm not Clare.  :(

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 31, 2023, 10:52:29 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:47:56 AMDang!  Looks like I won't be able to shop there--since I'm not Clare.  :(

PD



To be Clare, or not to be Clare!  How would we clarify this problem?   :laugh:
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:55:36 AM
Quote from: Cato on December 31, 2023, 10:52:29 AMTo be Clare, or not to be Clare!  How would we clarify this problem?   :laugh:
Oh, boo!  ;)

PD

p.s. ...Use clarified butter in the recipe's solution?
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Cato on December 31, 2023, 10:59:27 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:55:36 AMOh, boo!  ;)

PD

p.s. ...Use clarified butter in the recipe's solution?


8)  Dude!  8)  You are in the club!  :D

From a Mahler website  today: translation courtesy of some robot, as you will see!

" An immense Abbado conducts the Berliner Philharmoniker in a magnificent performance of the Symphony no. 1 at Mahler (1991)."


The recommendation offers a picture of Claudio, who shows no sign of an "immense" weight gain!  :laugh:

And I do not think there can be a performance "at" a person, so... 


Probably the translation should be "The great Abbado...of Mahler."

"Artificial Intelligence" in this case needs to go back to school!  $:)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Florestan on December 31, 2023, 11:36:05 AM
Quote from: Pohjolas Daughter on December 31, 2023, 10:47:56 AMKeep this Area Clare!

They probably meant "Keep this Area, Clare!" --- ie, an injunction to Clare, whoever that babe might be, to not leave that area...

It's amazing what a huge difference a comma can make; refer to the famous oracle "you will go you will come back no death in war" offered to an ancient Greek general going to war. What do you think, did he die in the war or not? :D
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on January 06, 2024, 12:58:43 PM
At last! More fun in Lent!

Download a free and fun Lenten devotional for families!
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 13, 2024, 04:43:46 PM
Not a serious Grumble. None of us catches all the typos all the time. And this looks  like an "auto-correct" artifact which didn't get caught (and again, no grave fault) ... the title of the second of these episodes is, of course, The Universe of Battle.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 16, 2024, 07:24:10 AM
You're welcome.
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: steve ridgway on February 16, 2024, 08:51:36 PM
Quote from: Karl Henning on February 16, 2024, 07:24:10 AMYou're welcome.

The apparent misspelling can be deliberate in this sort of experimental music, it shows a rejection of bourgeois convention. I like the way the CD sleeve shows the graphic score indicating the ways in which the kettle should be moved with respect to the microphones so as to change the balance of the connected ring modulators, filters etc. This is not music to be whislted in the street. 8)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 17, 2024, 05:53:11 AM
Quote from: steve ridgway on February 16, 2024, 08:51:36 PMThe apparent misspelling can be deliberate in this sort of experimental music, it shows a rejection of bourgeois convention. I like the way the CD sleeve shows the graphic score indicating the ways in which the kettle should be moved with respect to the microphones so as to change the balance of the connected ring modulators, filters etc. This is not music to be whislted in the street. 8)

(* chortsle *)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: LKB on February 17, 2024, 07:02:29 AM
Quote from: Cato on March 21, 2023, 05:02:31 PMLife has prevented me from placing even some of the Grammar Gremlins from the past months.


Here is an interesting one from a frozen-yogurt emporium's bulletin board: a poster from a local university.


"REGISTER FOR THIS SUMMER'S

WOMEN'S SOCCER ID CAMP"  ???  ???  ???

AND PREPARE TO COMPETE ON THE COLLEGE LEVEL!"

So, I am sure you are wondering what a "women's soccer id* camp" could be!

My first guess: a camp where you need to find your inner soccer-monster to become a winner.  :D

Mrs. Cato thought the "ID" was perhaps for "identify," which still is something of a stretch.  The camp, she thought, would "identify" you as a future college soccer player...or not!

I liked my explanation better!  8)


*
It is perhaps not well known that Sigmund Freud never used the Latin words id, ego, and superego in his theory of the mind, but used German, i.e Das Es, Das Ich, and Das Ueber-Ich.

His English translator decided to use Latin for the concepts, which meant losing something rather subtle.

In German, "the child" is das Kind, and therefore the gender, because the word for "the" is "das," is neither male nor female, but neuter.  Since the gender of the word is neuter, the child's pronoun is "Es."

In German, this links the concept of the child's inchoate personality directly to Freud's idea of Das Es, since all Germans as children were referred to as "Es."  z.B. "Das Kind ist so lieb.  Es ist auch niedlich!"  (The child is so dear.  It is also cute!")

(I have read debates where Germans question whether to use natural gender, when referring to the child, i.e. if the child is a boy, you would have "Das Kind...Er..."  (He) or "Das Kind...Sie..." (She).)

Purists wanted Das Kind - Es.

My Id would be happy to camp. A very small tent and a little wine would suffice...
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on February 27, 2024, 10:01:49 AM
Disclaimer on a YouTube vid:

Important note: This video features 20th century music that might be unplesant to some, and lead to dangerous, toxic arguments. Proceed with caution
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Pohjolas Daughter on February 27, 2024, 10:16:13 AM
Quote from: Karl Henning on February 27, 2024, 10:01:49 AMDisclaimer on a YouTube vid:

Important note: This video features 20th century music that might be unplesant to some, and lead to dangerous, toxic arguments. Proceed with caution
:laugh:

PD
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: DavidW on February 27, 2024, 10:30:09 AM
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Foddstuffmagazine.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F07%2FDont-fight-the-monkey.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=ceb40543d184e351d9a8c2fa5538b53cba796c0c7c551b6b0cb78060ad359cb7&ipo=images)
Title: Re: Cato's Grammar Grumble
Post by: Karl Henning on March 16, 2024, 11:48:52 AM
Seen on Threads:

"Update your lesson plans, we have a new perfect example for Oxford commas.

The highlights of his waning administration include encounters with Rudy Giuliani, a health-care disaster and a dildo collector."