Cato's Grammar Grumble

[karlhenning]

Or, when they say "many people" where they mean "I."

[Lethevich]

Wikipedia editors have become notorious for their increasingly artful way of concealing non-neutral POV viewpoints - "some argue" being a top choice.

[karlhenning]

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.

[MN Dave]

I hate when politicians say, "The American people want this." or "The American people want that."

Blah.

[karlhenning]

What won't surprise you is, that was exactly the pet phrase ("the People") with which the Bolsheviks were barnstorming in the 1920s.

[Chosen Barley]

Or, when they say "many people" where they mean "I."

Yup!  Actually, that is what I wanted to say in the first place!

[Cato]

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!   

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."   

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!   

Such maleficent and malevolent evil-deed-doers always perpetrate crimes in the following way: "And he did it on purpose     for no reason!!!    

The horror!  The horror!

Talk about rhetorical devices!   0:)

[karlhenning]

I have a friend who hates it when someone is asking advice for himself, but attributes it to some "friend" of his . . . .

[DavidRoss]

I am hearing - from kids especially, but also now from adults - the phrase "it happened on accident."   

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." 

[Cato]

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!   

[Joe Barron]

Aye--I think first of nominative & dative rather than subjective & objective.

Subjective?

[Chosen Barley]

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.   

[karlhenning]

Here's a great oops in the back cover blurb of a jazz reissue:

. . . established that the twains of jazz improv and rockish rhythms had indeed met.

[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.   

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! 

[karlhenning]

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 ; )

[karlhenning]

Reminds me of one of (many, many) well-loved recurring phrases in Wodehouse: He does not understand the nice distinction between meum and tuum.

[karlhenning]

I mean, it's a different distinction . . . I've just got Wodehouse on my mind (a wonderful condition).

[Verena]

And speaking of "on purpose"...

I am hearing - from kids especially, but also now from adults - the phrase "it happened on accident."   

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".

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.

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. 
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. 


 

[Cato]

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."

      0:)

[DavidRoss]

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."

      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.