|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Pedantic Follies
|
Loquacious beachcomber
Shipmate
# 8783
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pia:
Morlader's not the only one who should have paid more attention in English, KLB. It looks as if the majority of people on this thread were somewhat remiss during those lessons.
(And there's another deliberate mistake in my previous post that hasn't been picked up yet.)
If you plan to surround "ellipsis" with quotaton marks, do so; not with a ' prior to the word and a " following the word.
--------------------
TODAY'S SPECIAL - AND SO ARE YOU (Sign on beachfront fish & chips shop)
Posts: 5954 | From: Southeast of Wawa, between the beach and the hiking trail.. | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
There is no "i" in "team," but apparently you believe that there is no "i" in "quotation," either. I beg to disagree. However, I am pleased that you have had the grace not to spilt your infinitive. There is hope for you yet.
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Nor is there any excuse for terminating your inverted commas after the comma following "team", neither.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
The comma (or other punctuation mark) inside the inverted commas is a pond difference, KLB. It looks horribly wrong, I know, but my enforced aquaintance with the Chicago Manual of Style convinces me that on this point a denizen of Delaware would not be in error.
You were, therefore, crying over spilt milk, on this occasion. Unlike Hedgehog's reference to the previous poster's infinitive, which was un-split.
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Perhaps you mean your acquaintance with that manual of style, Pia.
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
This raises the question of whether both Cara and Pia are going to overlook Karl's principle error of adding an extraneous "neither."
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
I admire your principled stance against grammatical and typographical errors of all kinds, my prickly fiend. I felt it was only fair, therefore, to let you have the honour of pointing out Karl's principal mistake.
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jonah the Whale
Ship's pet cetacean
# 1244
|
Posted
Well I suppose one wouldn't exactly go as far as calling hedgehog cuddly, but to suggest he (she?) is a fiend goes a little beyond the pail. And to suggest that he is your fiend implies a level of posessiveness that is quite extraordinary, it seems to me.
Posts: 2799 | From: Nether Regions | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jonah the Whale:
Well I suppose one wouldn't exactly go as far as calling hedgehog cuddly, but to suggest he (she?) is a fiend goes a little beyond the pail. And to suggest that he is your fiend implies a level of posessiveness that is quite extraordinary, it seems to me.
There are shades of meaning of "my" that do not necessarily encompass possession, Jonah. Use of the term does not infer that the user thinks they own the item or person in question.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jonah the Whale:
Well I suppose one wouldn't exactly go as far as calling hedgehog cuddly, but to suggest he (she?) is a fiend goes a little beyond the pail. And to suggest that he is your fiend implies a level of posessiveness that is quite extraordinary, it seems to me.
And this kind of mistake, when not made intentionally, is really beyond the pale.
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
While Karl may have inferred that I was claiming possession, I certainly did not intend to imply any such thing.
Must get on with some work now, but I'll be back momentarily.
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pia:
While Karl may have inferred that I was claiming possession, I certainly did not intend to imply any such thing.
Must get on with some work now, but I'll be back momentarily.
In which case it's a shame you'll only be here for a few seconds, unless of course your American.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Pia:
While Karl may have inferred that I was claiming possession, I certainly did not intend to imply any such thing.
Must get on with some work now, but I'll be back momentarily.
In which case it's a shame you'll only be here for a few seconds, unless of course your American.
Who'se American would that be?
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Anyone who want's one. Whose standard language should we use, that's the question.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
Noone would "want's" one, Karl, if I may apostrophize for a moment. In terms of standard language, I am pleased so many people wish to learn me the Queen's English.
[Edit to correct unintentional error!]
[ 21. November 2012, 15:14: Message edited by: Hedgehog ]
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Well if it's standard English you want, I'm sure someone'll teach you it, although around here we still attach both meanings to "learn": as did the Anglo-Saxons.
[ 21. November 2012, 15:18: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Hmmm, Karl. Is your intentional error to put the colon outside the inverted commas? But as discussed, that's not an error in the US. Or is it the colon itself? Not exactly an error, I don't think? Though I myself think a semi-colon would be better there.
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morlader
Shipmate
# 16040
|
Posted
Yes, a semi-colon would be better, or even a comma. A colon should be reserved for contrasting clauses, or for introducing a list.
Cara - "I myself" should be avoided when, as here, "I" would suffice.
--------------------
.. to utmost west.
Posts: 858 | From: Not England | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
Ah, Morlader... I think you are confusing opposition (or contrast) with apposition.
(A word of friendly advise to anyone tempted to resort to the wisdom of the internet to check the use of this particular punctuation mark. It is probably best not to google 'colon' while eating.)
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morlader
Shipmate
# 16040
|
Posted
I disagree. Appositional noun clauses, like this one, are clauses which:
emphasise
embellish
exemplify or
explain
a noun or noun clause. The appropriate punctuation is a pair of commas, as above. The sentence is complete without said appositional noun clause.
from Oxford English dictionary.
quote:
Do not confuse advise with advice. Advise is a verb meaning 'suggest that someone should do something' (
I advised him to leave
), whereas advice is a noun that means 'suggestions about what someone should do' (
your doctor can give you advice on diet
).
Yes, I endorse the warning about goggling 'colon' - I know all too well the medical colon. ![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif) Well, mine anyway.
[ 23. November 2012, 13:32: Message edited by: Morlader ]
--------------------
.. to utmost west.
Posts: 858 | From: Not England | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
When I investigate colons of any kind, I may wear spectacles and I could use a magnifying glass, a microscope or an internet search engine, but not the devices worn by vintage motorcyclists and pilots.
[ 23. November 2012, 13:39: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Well, I'm stumped, unless your "error" is that the motorcyclists and pilots should not be described as "vintage," its just their vehicles that are vintage.
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
Me too, Cara. The sentence could also have been punctuated differently, but I'm struggling to actually see anything I'd call a mistake.
I am also unsure (because of the lack of a 'location' for you) whether your comma inside quotation marks is a deliberate mistake or a legitimate US usage...
NB: This post contains a deliberate mistake (lest anyone think - horror! - that I might have done it inadvertently!).
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
I hope Sioni will elucidate, Pia.
Meanwhile, the comma inside the quotation marks wasn't intended as a deliberate mistake! I am English but lived in the US for years. Am now back in Yurp and trying to return to British usage, but ocasionally I forget which is which!!
However, there is also a deliberate mistake in that same post which you haven't mentioned.
Alas, I cannot detect the deliberate mistake in your own post, unless it's perhaps that "location" should have had double inverted commas rather than single.
Or that you should have said "made it inadvertently" rather than "done it" because one "makes" rather than "does" a mistake...
I had to laugh at your NB, in which you worry lest anyone think you'd made a mistake by mistake...I can relate, because I did just that in an earlier post, and it was kindly viewed as deliberate.....darned if I'm going to 'fess up!
So, by the same token, there's a new deliberate error in this post...but we're going to have to stop saying this, it could become a habit in this game!
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
Just to clear off some of the debris:
quote:
Originally posted by Cara:
its just their vehicles that are vintage.
This should be "it's." (And, yes, I am putting the period inside the marks--it's an American thing.)
quote:
Originally posted by Pia:
but I'm struggling to actually see anything I'd call a mistake.
And you are not struggling to split the infinitive. I blame Star Trek..."to boldly go" indeed!
quote:
Originally posted by Cara:
it was kindly viewed as deliberate.....darned if I'm going to 'fess up!
There are to many dots in your ellipsis, which isn't a true ellipsis in any event because nothing is actually being omitted (except, arguably, a period).
Sioni has me puzzled as well. I might argue that the comma prior to "but" is not necessary--but that may well be another Pond Difference thing.
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
There are too many dots in Cara's ellipsis, but not enough o's in your to.
I am going to have to reign in my enthusiasm for this game for the night now, and go and get my poor abandoned children into bed. I'm hopelessly easily distracted!
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
[clarifying tangent with no intentional errors]
Oops! I thought that "could" was wrong and that "might" should have been used, as it follows "may". Then again, I might be wrong!
[/clarifying tangent with no intentional errors]
I would like to apologise for any inconvenience that may cause.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Indeed, Hedgehog, you caught my "its" and Pia's split infinitive, which I missed completely.
Alas, in my more recent post, the four-dot ellipsis was a real, not deliberate error. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
But there was a unnoticed deliberate mistake in that post too!
Pia should of course learn to rein in her enthusiasm....
Sioni, thanks for the clarification. That "error" was far too subtle for me--I think it would depend a lot on context and meaning for it to be a real mistake.
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Wouldn't one dash be adequate there?
I have no truck with the idea that "split infinitives" are wrong; fact is that what is frequently referred to as "the infinitive" in English is two words, and there's no earthy reason why an adverb shouldn't appear between them - especially since the alternatives are so often unnatural, strongly indicating that the so-called "error" is nothing of the kind.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Wouldn't one dash be adequate there?
I have no truck with the idea that "split infinitives" are wrong; fact is that what is frequently referred to as "the infinitive" in English is two words, and there's no earthy reason why an adverb shouldn't appear between them - especially since the alternatives are so often unnatural, strongly indicating that the so-called "error" is nothing of the kind.
I find the idea of "earthy" reasons amusing but among earthly ones that of making translation difficult is persuasive.
I also prefer as to since.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
jacobsen
seeker
# 14998
|
Posted
Surely you meant amongst? Otherwise I can find no flaw in your arument.
--------------------
But God, holding a candle, looks for all who wander, all who search. - Shifra Alon
Beauty fades, dumb is forever-Judge Judy
The man who made time, made plenty.
Posts: 8040 | From: Ębleskiver country | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morlader
Shipmate
# 16040
|
Posted
I think "amongst" is an affectation and that "among", which it seems occurred earlier, is to be preferred.
I also don't like non-temporal "since"; with SS, I would always use "as", or perhaps "because".
Of course, "argument" needs a "g".
[ 26. November 2012, 07:36: Message edited by: Morlader ]
--------------------
.. to utmost west.
Posts: 858 | From: Not England | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Since ("He said it again! He said it again!") usage is the only guide to language, I'm going to defend both non-temporal "since" and split infinitives. The translation argument is totally spurious; it's no harder to translate "To boldly go" in to another language with single word infinitives than it is to translate "I boldly go" into a language such as Latin where "I go" would normally be a single word as well.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Nobody has yet mentioned an intentional spelling mistake in my post of November 25 at 19:06.
In my post later the same day, 22:16, the double dash was not an intentional mistake, but an example of my perenial failure to work out how to do a single dash.
But there was a deliberate punctuation error, also as yet unspotted, in the same post.
I agree with Karl that the split infinitive can be fine, when well used, but not that "usage is the only guide to language."
If it were so, we pedants might as well lay down our blue pencils.
The dreadful misuse of lie/lay in common parlance is enough to contradict Karl's argument.
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Missing comma after deliberate.
If common usage is not the guide to language, what is? Some arbitrary set of rules? Why are they correct and not what people who actually speak the language say? We have to accept that lie and lay are becoming synonyms, each spreading into the other's semantic space.
Change and innovation is the very nature of language. When pedants' blue pencils are used to "correct" perfectly normal usages towards an artificial standard, then their pencils do no-one any good.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Yep, missing comma.
Well, let's not argue.
I know language does and must change, by it's very nature. Sometimes the changes are just a bit too fast!
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Oh dear, an aberrant apostrophe. The possessive "its" does not have one and I would prefer "quickly" to "fast".
I wonder what Karl would prefer as his epitaph:- "He died bravely" or "He bravely died".
[ 26. November 2012, 19:31: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
Karl, I would agree that change and innovation are part of the very nature of language. And, as Cara states, language does and must change by its very nature. The debate, however, must be over when something has reached the point of general acceptence. I agree, Karl, that lie and lay are in the process of becoming synonyms--but not so much because it is agreed that they mean the same thing, but rather because too many people forget the distinction. I know one is active and one passive, but I tend to forget which is which. Rather like Winnie-the-Pooh, who knew that one paw was his right and one the left and, if he knew what one of them was, he could figure out the other--but he could never remember how to start.
That being said, there is value in upholding standards, too. For example, despite its prevalence these days, I will always flinch when somebody writes "loose" when "lose" is meant. There is common and then there is just plain wrong.
Incidentally, I was consoled, Karl, when you wrote "no-one." Earlier, I had intentionally used "noone" fully expecting somebody to call it out as an error. But no one did. Or nobody did. Whatever.
[ETA cross post! I knew I was babbling on too much!]
[ 26. November 2012, 19:32: Message edited by: Hedgehog ]
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
Incidentally, I was consoled, Karl, when you wrote "no-one." Earlier, I had intentionally used "noone" fully expecting somebody to call it out as an error. But no one did. Or nobody did. Whatever.
[Pop music tangent]
When Herman's Hermits first toured the United States their frontman, Peter Noone, was greeted at JFK by a PA announcement of "Paging Mister No One. Paging Mister No One".
They weren't that bad. Not quite.
[/Pop music tangent]
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966
|
Posted
Yes, Hedgehog, "there is common and then there is just plain wrong"! I like this!
And certainly as far as I'm concerned, many contemporary solesicms have by no means reached a point of acceptance.
Very funny about no-one, "noone", and Sioni's story re Mr Noone!!
For this kind of reason I usually use "nobody".
--------------------
Pondering.
Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morlader
Shipmate
# 16040
|
Posted
Re 'lie' and 'lay':
I might say "I can lay eggs" but I lie.
On the general point about language change, while I agree languages change, I suggest that languages also deteriorate. Confusing tenses - e.g. reports in the present tense of historical happenings ("Then Queen Victoria dies ...") - confusing similar sounding words because users can't be bothered to differentiate - e.g. lie and lay - and similar adoption of 'popular' idioms all contributes to language decay.
Language conveys meaning, or should. This means adapting one's outpourings to one's intended audience/readers. If your language conveys that you're careless with words and constructions then you are responsible for the consequences, however correct you may be grammatically.
Here endeth the lesson ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
.. to utmost west.
Posts: 858 | From: Not England | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
Cara, some solecisms may have reached the point of acceptance, but the breakdown of grammatical propriety has not yet reached the stage where the alternate spelling solesicm is acceptable.
I'm missing the deliberate error in Morlader's last post, although his use of dashes and parentheseses is a bit all over the place.
On the split infinitive, I agree that it's hardly the most heinous grammatical crime. I would try to avoid it where possible (it would have been easy, in my sentence, to have put the 'actually' somewhere else, and I would have done if not playing the game), but I wouldn't judge someone harshly if they did split the odd infinitive.
Come to think of it, I don't really judge people on their grammar, spelling, and punctuation at all. I just whince inwardly.
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morlader
Shipmate
# 16040
|
Posted
Pia
It doesn't make me wince when I see spelling mistakes, as I would be in permanent wincing mode! I have learned to (almost) ignore these infelicities. Can one wince inwardly?
As several have noted, the alleged rule against splitting infinitives is an invention of over-zealous and under-researched English teachers. But one does need to carefully consider one's readers lest one be thought illiterate by those readers.
I think my use of dashes and parenthises is entirely consistent and logical, though possibly confusing. My deliberate error in that post was to follow a plural subject (all) with a singular verb.
[ 28. November 2012, 09:41: Message edited by: Morlader ]
--------------------
.. to utmost west.
Posts: 858 | From: Not England | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
There is no language decay. Distinctions are lost because they are not useful; people do not distinguish between "lie" and "lay" because they find context carries all the distinction required. Were there sufficient cause for ambiguity the distinction would be maintained. Language - real language, that which is actually spoken, is economic. Much the same can also be said of the Shibboleth regarding "less" and "fewer" - somehow we manage with only "more" for the antithesis of both without apparent problems; hence people also manage with "less" for both senses. Ditto "who" and "whom"; one does not find those who decry this particular simplification object to the non-use of "ye", or indeed the "shocking" loss of distinctions between singular and plural since the loss of "thou/thee".
The historic present is a very poor attempt at an example of tense confusion. I'm surprised anyone would attempt to put that forward.
Similarly, the context dictates which side of a verb an adverb belongs.
That aside; I do not know about your use of parenthises, and I'm willing to pass on your use of parentheses.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
jacobsen
seeker
# 14998
|
Posted
KLB; semicolons are not always necessary; as you can see. Just over-egging the omelette a trifle!
As regards few and less, the misuse of "less" really grates on me, as it probably does on anyone of my age who was taught grammar by a steely-eyed and elderly nun who entered religion before WW1.
And who thought knickers were immodest, never mind what they clothed.
I did proof read, but thought of something to add. thanks anyway.
[ 28. November 2012, 12:35: Message edited by: jacobsen ]
--------------------
But God, holding a candle, looks for all who wander, all who search. - Shifra Alon
Beauty fades, dumb is forever-Judge Judy
The man who made time, made plenty.
Posts: 8040 | From: Ębleskiver country | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Semicolons or not, that wasn't the deliberate error. But, I enjoyed your mixed metaphor.
[ 28. November 2012, 12:39: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morlader
Shipmate
# 16040
|
Posted
KLB
"Language - real language, that which is actually spoken, is economic". There is something amiss with the punctuation here, because the '-' is an opening parenthesis in effect, but there is no matching closing '-'.
More fundamentally, I can't discern the meaning of 'is economic'. If you meant 'is economical' I would say "tell that to politicians and preachers". ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif) If you really meant 'is economic' not everyone talks about pounds/dollars/ deficts/profits etc. all the time.
Languages do decay. I am a Cornish language bard and I know that the revived Cornish language is necessarily based on the grammar, syntax and, mainly, vocabulary of the language as written in extant texts before decay set in with loss of tenses and constructions in Late Cornish and 'polution' by English words. Late Cornish speakers have to learn in English because Late Cornish, due to decay, is incapable.
I shall not rebut your 'who'/'fewer'/'thou' diatribe, though I do not accept it.
Have a nice day.
ETA: Perhaps you would like to give us a better example of tense confusion?
[ 28. November 2012, 13:54: Message edited by: Morlader ]
--------------------
.. to utmost west.
Posts: 858 | From: Not England | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pia
Shipmate
# 17277
|
Posted
'Thee' and 'thou' are still in full use around these parts, though I imagine they're not long for this twenty-first century world.
These parts are not my parts, though. As a proud Cornishwoman, albeit in up-country exile, I was interested in Morlader's comments about pollution and decay in Cornish.
[ 28. November 2012, 15:01: Message edited by: Pia ]
Posts: 151 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Comparing the death-throes of a language in terminal decline, quite possibly no longer the first language of anyone and certainly not still the language of a literary tradition, with ebb and flow within English is inappropriate, and Morlader knows it. Pollution is not decay; English was massively "polluted" by French after 1066, and Old Norse in the centuries before it, but somehow remains a perfectly good language. However, I am well aware that two revived Cornish speakers will have at least three virulently and violently disagreeing opinions, so perhaps I should suggest Morlader shut him/herself up in a room with a couple of opinion pieces on the SWF and then await news that they've beaten themselves up
Nor is dialectal survival of thee and thou relevant; the vast majority of English speakers get on perfectly well without them, despite the fact that the language mavens' fellow travellers of 500 years ago doubtless complained of ambiguity and language decay.
La plus qui'l change
[ 28. November 2012, 15:14: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jonah the Whale
Ship's pet cetacean
# 1244
|
Posted
Actually I find it debatable that "you" is always clearly either singular or plural from the conext. It has happened ocasionally that I, or someone else, has asked, "Do you mean you plural, or you singular?". In fact it seems to me that English is evolving back again (revolving?) under the pressure. Depending on which part of the world you are in you will often hear people say things like "y'all", "youse", "you guys". These are effectively becoming second person plural pronouns. It would be fascinating to cryogenically freeze myself for a couple of hundred years and see which way the language developes.
And congratulations to Pia on making shipmate status! Woohoo! You'd still be an apprentice this time next year if it weren't for this thread.
Karl, stick to English. Plus, where it is used as a noun, is masculine. In this context it is used without the article, and you've put the apostrophe in th wrong place in qu'il, which is the wrong word in any case, assuming you meant plus ēa change.
Posts: 2799 | From: Nether Regions | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
