Cato's Grammar Grumble

[Karl Henning]

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?  ), 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.

[Cato]

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?  ), 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.

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?   

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? 

[Karl Henning]

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!

[Karl Henning]

I don't care for that application of chewability, no.

[Cato]

I don't care for that application of chewability, no.

I found this in a pharmacological journal on-line:

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.

[Karl Henning]

I accept chewability as a property of the chewed, but not of the chewer  0:)

[Ken B]

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

[Cato]

From a theater review in today's (Aug. 10, 2018) Wall Street Journal:

...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!

[Karl Henning]

Between you and I . . . .











   0:)

[Cato]

Between you and I . . . .











   0:)

Oh, don't get me started!!!   

[Karl Henning]

(* chortle *)

[ritter]

Oh, the Oxford comma, that peculiarity of  English syntax....

Remember this eyesore?

[MN Dave]

Lots of writers I know LOVE the Oxford comma.

[Ken B]

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 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.

[Cato]

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 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. 

I will agree to disagree with the esteemed Oxford   0:)  English   0:)   Dictionary!       I have great experience in being a minority of one.      Using "between" when three people are listed just strikes me as odd.

[Karl Henning]

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 N^os. 1, 2, 3, & 4?  To my eye it looketh unnecessitated.

[Ken B]

But . . . does it make sense in Brahms Symphonies N^os. 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. 

[Karl Henning]

I suppose it is inevitable that we piss some people off, and the fact that we enjoy doing so is a bonus . . . .

[Cato]

But . . . does it make sense in Brahms Symphonies N^os. 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!   

[Cato]

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:)