Grammarians's topics - tribe.net

Weigh in... your opinion, that is

feiruz_al-bnefsagia — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:40:52 GMT

Discuss some interesting topics on CreateDebate like these:

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Should_we_all_speak_in_full_and_correct_sentences_on_the_internet

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Should_being_PC_be_more_important_than_having_freedom_of_speech

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Knowledge_-_Can_you_ever__really_know

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Does_the_lack_of_tone_(in_writting)_lead_to_misunderstandings

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

a new grammar related tribe

smoorefu — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 09:42:43 GMT

http://tribes.tribe.net/wordwonks

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

Simplified Spelling?

freckledgirl — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 05:43:56 GMT

What do you all think?

I came across this article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6250184.stm

and this one:
http://www.spellingsociety.org/news/media/spellingbee.php

posted in Grammarians - 6 replies

How does this get punctuated?

MickD — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:17:20 GMT

Someone wrote a post to me which said: Kinda weird, Mick.

So I want to ask the person to repeat themselves with a question like this:

Did you write, "Kinda weird, Mick?"

Which I assume is correct. But does the question-mark, strictly speaking, change the nature of what's in the quotation marks? I mean, obviously, it cannot be: "Kinda weird, Mick."?

posted in Grammarians - 25 replies

Proved vs. Proven

Tiger_Lily — Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:16:40 GMT

Which is it and when?

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

Compliance vs. Compliancy

Lorayne — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 02:58:33 GMT

My professional work in training and documentation often involves translating from "geek speak" to normal American English (if there is such a thing!). I'm hoping this Tribe can help with perplexing issues that come up from time to time - especially in the technical writing arena. I hope that I can also add to some of the topics that others post...

Here's my question for the evening. Is "compliance" or "compliancy" a better lexical choice when describing conformance with a technical standard? For example, "Click the ABC button to verify (compliance or compliancy?) of your file with the XYZ standard."

I usually trust my "ears" in such matters, and they wince at "compliancy." A Google search has revealed that both spellings are used on web pages, but the majority vote is not necessarily "correct" or even representative on the Web.

What do you think? Thanks!

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

Spelling of technical words and jargon

Jonathan — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 19:33:27 GMT

I often have to synchronize the data between two computers.

1. Since synchronize is such a long word, we often shorten it to sync (pronounced "sink").
Does anyone have any thoughts why "synch" would be a contraction than "sync"?

2. Does anyone have any thoughts about how to spell the past-tense of sync [sic], in a way that would imply a pronounciation of "sinked")?
- synced? <--looks like it should be pronounced sinced.
- synched? <--looks like it should be pronounced cinched.
- sync'ed or sync'd?

posted in Grammarians - 5 replies

Whole vs. entire

Jonathan — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 23:02:30 GMT

On the home page we are displaying a single picture of what is, in effect, a satisfied customer, along with the first 50 words or so of that customer's testimonial. Below those words it says "Read the whole story..." If you click on [Read the whole story] , a pop-up box opens and you can see the picture together with the entire story (2-300 words or so).

My question is, would "Read the ENTIRE story..." be better than "Read the WHOLE story"?

posted in Grammarians - 5 replies

new mod?

freckledgirl — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 05:26:38 GMT

Any volunteers? I'd be happy to mod, if you guys don't mind. Anyone else?

posted in Grammarians - 10 replies

Whenever

Actionclaw — Thu, 31 May 2007 18:11:11 GMT

When did so many people begin using the term 'whenever' when the word 'when' seems appropriate? For example, the sentence: "The learner acquires content and develops thinking processes whenever he or she decides that content or process is needed." I feel the sentence should be written, 'when he or she decides'. Does anyone agree?

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

How are you?

MickD — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 01:15:56 GMT

How are you?

When someone asks you this, and you are in reasonably good spirits, do you answer:

1) I am well!
2) I am feeling well!
3) I am good.

Or some other variation. Which one is most correct?

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

Butchered word use

regfoghorn — Tue, 30 May 2006 22:57:44 GMT

Errors in word use that I react strongly to include:

effect / affect

insure / ensure / assure

utilize (in any situation - i HATE that word)

posted in Grammarians - 9 replies

Hilarious advice from the folks at The Chicago Manual of Style

Zero — Mon, 15 Jan 2007 05:46:32 GMT

This wonderful bit is from Harper's Magazine, February 2007.

[Prescriptions] STET OFFENSIVE

From questions posted on the website of The Chicago Manual of Style, answered by the University of Chicago Press manuscript-editing department.

Q: Is there any standard for the usage of emoticons? In particular, is there an accepted practice for the use of emoticons that includes an opening or closing parenthesis as the final token within a set of parentheses? Should I incorporate the emoticon into the closing of the parentheses (giving a dual purpose to the closing parenthesis, such as in this case :-); simply leave the emoticon up against the closing parenthesis, ignoring the bizarre visual effect of the doubled closing parenthesis (as I am doing here, producing a double-chin effect :-)); or avoid the situation by using a different emoticon (some emoticons are similar :-D), placing the emoticon elsewhere, or doing without it (i.e., reword to avoid awkwardness)?

A: Until academic standards decline enough to accommodate the use of emoticons, I’m afraid CMOS is unlikely to treat their styling, since the manual is aimed primarily at scholarly publications. And the problems you’ve posed is in this note give us added incentive to keep our distance.

Q: Is there an acceptable way to form the possessive of words such as Macy’s and Sotheby’s? Sometimes rewording to avoid the possessive results in less felicitous writing.

A. Less felicitous than “Sotheby’s’s”? I don’t think so.

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

2 enter 1 leaves: incompetence or incompetency?!

rudy — Wed, 24 Aug 2005 17:56:45 GMT

hi everyone,

my friend and i have a bet going over whether "incompetence" or "incompetency" is the correct use of the word. i suspect that both are acceptable, depending on the context, but i need to know their relative correctness and/or whether one is used more commonly than the other (correctly or not). the most authoritative reference will decide this wager.

she makes a margarita that is the nectar of the gods, and i make a guacamole fit for one's final meal. who will be serving whom? grammarians, work your magic.

posted in Grammarians - 8 replies

Proper Address

Tiger_Lily — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:45:07 GMT

Ok, folks, please settle this one.

I know that Dr. Sam Wang, PhD, is incorrect b/c it's like saying Dr. Dr.; however, I recently saw something that said:

Mr. Sam Wang, PhD. I hold that this is incorrect for the same reason. I say it should be

Mr. Sam Wang
Sam Wang, PhD
Dr. Sam Wang

Please let me know the correct version. I have looked in my personal grammar/punctuation bible and it's not discussed.

Thanks.

D.

posted in Grammarians - 8 replies

semantics

OtherMichael — Wed, 18 Feb 2004 20:30:20 GMT

from the Atkins foo-fraw on http://boingboing.tribe.net
http://www.tribe.net/tribe/servlet/template/pub%2CViewThread.vm?threadid=9011d4a2-d100-4a6e-a5b3-c2e71414fea4&tribeid=80e04997-fa46-4545-a1cd-e826137ba3c8

Ellen writes (responding to my characterization of cows as vegetarians):
"Cows aren't vegetarians, they are herbivores. They haven't chosen to be grazers, they have evolved to be.

To be a vegetarian, you need to be an omnivore who by choice or circumstance does not eat meat. And a human who does eat meat is not a carnivore, but a practicing omnivore.

Here's puzzle; my dog is allergic to all meat and milk and seafood. Unless he stays on a diet consisting of (expensive!) vegetarian kibble and eggs (fresh from our chickens) he gets the squirts so severely he might as well be a super-soaker.

Is he a vegetarian, or just a sick puppy?"

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

Resource

Tiger_Lily — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:11:13 GMT

This is a lovely site - just happened upon it through the miracle of Lifehacker.com (check that one out, too!).

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

words for correct and incorrect parallel constructions?

mark1000 — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 22:25:07 GMT

There's a construction that goes something like this:

<verb> the <noun>, then the <noun>.

First example: The drummer banged on his drum, then on the door, asking to be let in.
Second example: The spectator marked time, then the margin of his program, while watching the performance.

The first example is OK, because the word "banged" is being used in the same sense in both clauses. The second example is incorrect, because the word "marked" is being used in different senses in both clauses. (I'm talking about normal prose here. Poetic turns of phrase are another discussion altogether.)

So, these two examples have words that describe them. The first is an example of something, and the second is an example of something, but I can't remember the terms, and I can't figure out how to do a meaningful search. And, I can't remember where I saw the explanation. I want to say that the label for the second example starts with "z," but I can't be sure.

Help?

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

That or no That

MickD — Mon, 17 Jul 2006 04:37:26 GMT

Friends and fellow writers,

I'm having a debate about the inclusion of the word "that" as illustrated in the sentences below. My friend contends the word "that" must be present to offset a restrictive clause. I contend there are no restrictive clauses. I also posit the noun clauses in question do not require the "that." Can you help me figure out which one is correct?

This one:
Noting fundamentalism is an expression of deep insecurity and fear, Dr. Chopra asserts world peace will be achieved when enough individuals decide to make peace a part of their spiritual practice.

Or this one:
Noting that fundamentalism is an expression of deep insecurity and fear, Dr. Chopra asserts that world peace will be achieved when enough individuals decide to make peace a part of their spiritual practice.

Or this one:
Noting that fundamentalism is an expression of deep insecurity and fear, Dr. Chopra asserts world peace will be achieved when enough individuals decide to make peace a part of their spiritual practice.

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

Butchered sayings?

Jonathan — Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:41:54 GMT

It annoys me when I hear: "The proof is in the pudding," unless I've just been told about the rum-laced jello...

Less frequently I've heard, "I don't GIVE a tinker's damn," which has two problems, wrong verb and wrong kind of dam.

Does anyone have other examples of sayings which are often mis-used, mis-quoted, or mis-applied?

posted in Grammarians - 53 replies

pres perf vs pres perfect continuous

skinnyvinny — Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:38:54 GMT

okay, how do you teach the difference between the present perfect and the present perfect continuous:

I've worked at BofA 5 for years.
i've been working at BofA for 5 years?

I know in some sense we use the continuous or progressive forms for situations more temporary situations "I've been exercising all morning." but in the above 2 examples, either is a viable response to 'how long have you worked at BofA?" How do you teach the difference? I know the continuous is also to emphasize the action and the pres perf simple to emphasize the result. Thanks.

posted in Grammarians - 4 replies

Friends, Romans, Grammarians, lend me your opinions!

Tiger_Lily — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:38:04 GMT

I have never heard or seen this discussed, but every time I hear someone say "The reason why..." because it always sounds redundant to me. I believe it should be "The reason is..." or "The reason that..." Or you should just say "Why it is done this way is that..."

Let me know. Thanks.

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

"there are a lot" or "there is a lot"

quisquose — Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:59:34 GMT

This morning I suddenly have no idea which of "there are a lot" or "there is a lot" is correct! I think it depends on if the verb is referring to either "a lot" as an object, or to an object following "a lot" (such as "of widgets"), which would then make "a lot" a kind of adjective.

i.e., "There is a lot." But, "There are a lot of widgets."

Of course, part of the confusion may be because it's become common to shorten "there are" to "there's," even when it clearly should be "there ARE." Ugh.

Any thoughts?

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply

Ok, Grammarians, I need you!

Tiger_Lily — Wed, 01 Jun 2005 17:59:46 GMT

Please settle this:

An historical

A historical

I KNOW you guys know how important it is.

Thanks.

Darla

posted in Grammarians - 19 replies

single units in plural situations

akgeek — Mon, 12 Dec 2005 03:07:44 GMT

I have a question for the assembled grammarians. Why are plural quantities labelled with singular units when performing the role of an adjective?

For example, the plural of FOOT is clearly FEET. But a rope that is twenty FEET long is referred to as a twenty FOOT rope. Why?

posted in Grammarians - 8 replies

Butchered foreign phrases?

lildutchgrrl — Thu, 27 Oct 2005 00:50:37 GMT

In the past little while, I have seen "ad hominem" misspelled a number of ways -- "ad homonym" being the most recent. I can't decide whether to laugh uproariously or jump up and down on the misuser's head.

The most horrible butchering of a phrase in a foreign language I've seen was "curriculum vitaes," in a book on finding your dream job online. I'm of the opinion that obviously foreign words (ravioli, hors d'oeuvre, curricula) should be pluralized as they would be in their own language.

Thoughts? Exceptions? Loan words that have become such a part of our language that this may not apply (e.g., datum/data)?

posted in Grammarians - 8 replies

help! "that/which" question

quisquose — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 04:06:25 GMT

Sorry to post twice in a row. With my previous post I was procrastinating from finishing my term paper, but now that I'm actually working on it I've run into a grammar issue and need some help.

I've recently become utterly confused about the "that/which" dilemma. I know, I know, "that" is for restrictive clauses, and "which" is for non-restrictive clauses; but it's never really that simple, is it? The more I've looked into this, the more confused I become on complex sentences. Here's my problem sentence:

"It may in fact be possible to theorize urban land as a kind of 'common pool resource' (CPR) given that it constitutes a system (environmental, economic and social) that directly --and potentially both positively and negatively-- relates to individual and common interests."

It's the second "that" ("...that directly, and potentially") that (!) bothers me. Perhaps because having two "that"s in a row feels odd. I want to change it to "which," but that "that" is restrictive. Ideas?

(For extra credit, you can tell me what you think of using.... oh hell, I don't know what they're technically called. I've heard them called "em-dashes," I first encountered them in Germany where they're called "thought marks" ("Gedankenstriche"). I'm talking about dashes that set off "and potentially...negatively" above. I love 'em, but I've run into people who are horrified by them.)

posted in Grammarians - 4 replies

is it a lost cause?

bsobelman — Tue, 06 Dec 2005 19:48:11 GMT

OK, I've stopped trying to correct my friends who use "I" as a direct object ("Mary bought movie tickets for John and I") since it seems to have become accepted as common usage (at least in spoken language).

But then I started hearing direct object forms used as subjects: "Him and John are going to drive up together." At first I thought it was specific to a certain social group, but now I hear it all over. My sweetie has given me permission to correct him when he does it - never in front of anyone else, of course - but I'm starting to think it's a losing battle given how many other people I hear doing it. I've even seen it written that way.

Is it just me? Should I give up and accept that the language is changing? It's like fingernails on a chalkboard every time I hear it. *sigh*

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply

As an editor, how do you respond to this interview question?

Mary — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 18:29:04 GMT

"What's your biggest weakness?"

In non-editing jobs, I always mentioned that I was very detailed oriented, but that's a good thing in editing.

posted in Grammarians - 4 replies

I love you guys.

MickD — Sun, 09 Oct 2005 18:38:39 GMT

After watching the mess pouring out of the so-called "Word Freaks" tribe, I must thank you all for being here. I have hope I'm among folks who know what an oxymoron really is.

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

Check it

Wed, 10 Aug 2005 17:45:56 GMT

http://www.berkeleycomposer.com/SWKWB.mov

not for work

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

Is "newbie" perjorative?

Jonathan — Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:14:46 GMT

I usually write or say "newcomer" vice "newbie." Newbie, to my ears, sounds pejorative or condescending, rather than just meaning someone who is new to something.

Am I mistaken? Does newbie have such a negative connotation?

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply

Speaking of Prepositions

homongous — Mon, 31 Jan 2005 06:15:30 GMT

I made mention in a separate thread of the validity of the terminal preposition. This doesn't mean I endorse its use in most instances. For the enjoyment of you who have never seen this, here's a famous sentence ending in five prepositions:

"What did you bring that book I don't like to be read to out of up for?"

posted in Grammarians - 7 replies

Favorite Intentional Breaks from Grammar

medicina — Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:19:17 GMT

Be it syntax or semantics, for literary effect, or simply to piss someone off, what do you choosedly abuse?

I am a fan of the occasional tautological statement for poetic flare. Although I admittedly lean away from it since my writing is no longer for an audience that requires x amount of words. Example: abundantly opulent.

Horrid overuse of the ellipsis... tehehe. Why not...?

And as exemplified in the opening statement: incorrect application of suffixes to create a more lyrical flow.

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply

Online sources

mark1000 — Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:35:50 GMT

lola darling, in the Til Death Do thread, provided a quote from Fowler. I got to thinking about grammar references. Anyone have any favorite online places to go for grammar rules and opinions?

I found Fowler online at
http://www.bartleby.com/116/index.html.

This page also seemed to have a good list, but I don't know which ones are better than others:
http://www.kroeker.net/resources/style_guides/grammar_guides.htm

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

Is this correct?

michael — Sun, 27 Mar 2005 07:49:08 GMT

Here's a sentence by Paul Krugman:

Today those differences still exist but are much narrower, in part because of economic growth (which means that more people can afford an adequate diet), but also in large part because of public spending on sanitation, disease control, and health insurance systems that try, however, imperfectly, to provide essential care to everyone.

I'm interested in his use of "however, imperfectly." Should there be a comma in there?

posted in Grammarians - 9 replies

To death do...

Eudaemoniste — Mon, 28 Mar 2005 21:13:23 GMT

I have a question about the marriage vows:

Why is it "till death do us part" and not "Till death do we part," is anybody able to explain that to me?

posted in Grammarians - 19 replies

asides and things

michael — Sun, 27 Mar 2005 08:08:48 GMT

Here's what I might write if I'm being informal:

I was walking down the street and chewing gum at the same time (see, I do challenge myself!) when I hit a signpost.

That's not right. But can you stick a sentence in the middle of another sentence in a grammatically correct way?

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

What's the consensus

Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:01:57 GMT

On pluralizing CD (as in compact discs, but heck, certificate of deposit works too). Likewise FAQ, FTE (full time employees), etc.

Personally it drives me crazy when people use an apostrophe, i.e., CD's. Is it possessive? A contraction? No, say I!

Doth I protest too much?

posted in Grammarians - 10 replies

Punctuation and quotation marks

mark1000 — Thu, 24 Feb 2005 21:24:43 GMT

In another thread, Alex said the following:
"... british style is that the full stop (or other terminal punctuation) goes outside the quotes unless there is full sentence inside."

Why does American style require that the period be inside the quotes, even if the period is not part of the thing I'm quoting? More important, how does one begin a campaign to get this changed? :)

The British style seems to make more sense. The American style causes unnecessary ambiguity.

posted in Grammarians - 6 replies

plural?

Eudaemoniste — Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:36:33 GMT

Question: I'm confused about "group" subjects. Which is correct and why?

The entire staff has come down with a cold.

The entire staff have come down with a cold.

Thanks.

posted in Grammarians - 11 replies

whom?

OtherMichael — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 13:36:09 GMT

http://www.qwantz.com/20050203.html

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply

Everybody post what they think is the most annoying grammar error!

Nobody — Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:10:21 GMT

Everyone? Oh, wait, there are only 2 of us...

Whatever, I'll start. I despise when people confuse the words there, their, and they're. That really, really grates on me.

posted in Grammarians - 36 replies

who/whom

frustratedmynx — Mon, 10 Jan 2005 23:15:16 GMT

i'm at a loss. always getting confused about when/how to use one over the other.

can someone please lay it all down for me? explain it like i was a 6-year-old.

thanks.

posted in Grammarians - 5 replies

Eats, Shoots & Leaves

Thu, 20 May 2004 16:40:25 GMT

Thanks to a spot on Fresh Air - another media appearance which I can't recall - 'Eats, Shoots & Leaves', by Lynne Truss, is making the rounds. I've got a copy on hold with my library.

Does anyone else have a favorite grammar book?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1592400876

From the synopsis:

A panda walked into a cafe. He ordered a sandwich, ate it, then pulled out a gun and shot the waiter. 'Why?' groaned the injured man. The panda shrugged, tossed him a badly punctuated wildlife manual and walked out. And sure enough, when the waiter consulted the book, he found an explanation. 'Panda,' ran the entry for his assailant. 'Large black and white mammal native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves.' We see signs in shops every day for "Banana's" and even "Gateaux's". Competition rules remind us: "The judges decision is final." Now, many punctuation guides already exist explaining the principles of the apostrophe; the comma; the semi-colon. These books do their job but somehow punctuation abuse does not diminish. Why? Because people who can't punctuate don't read those books! Of course they don't! They laugh at books like those! Eats, Shoots and Leaves adopts a more militant approach and attempts to recruit an army of punctuation vigilantes: send letters back with the punctuation corrected. Do not accept sloppy emails. Climb ladders at dead of night with a pot of paint to remove the redundant apostrophe in "Video's sold here".

posted in Grammarians - 10 replies

The

queenofthenightD — Sat, 13 Nov 2004 00:39:04 GMT

When is it OK to use "The" in front of a proper name?
My boss says never. As in you would never say "The Mircosoft" just "Mircosoft."
Would you call this tribe Grammarians or "The Grammarians?"

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

Challenged newspaper employees....

zeela — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:42:59 GMT

woke up this morning to see if there were any garage sales nearby and this is what I found in my newspaper....

HUGH GARAGE SALE
December 9,10,11
...from Sumter County Times
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUGH GARAGE SALE
Friday-Saturday 9am-? Christmas lights, decorations, fishing poles, antiques, tools, clothes, lots misc... 5466 CR326 5 miles from Bushnell W48 at Wahoo Baptist Church
...from Sumter County Times
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUGH YARD SALE 4-FAMILIES
December 3,4,5,6 8am-4pm Sunday Noon-4pm Different items added daily! Furniture, kitchen, linens, knick knacks, books, clothes, etc... Also Die Cast Nascar & Precious Moments Items. 155 Central Ave Webster (Beside City Hall)
...from Sumter County Times
Save ad
Email a Friend
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HUGH YARD SALE
Saturday, Sunday & Monday Nail tech table, hutch, miscellaneous items! 5 miles west on CR 476 Bushnell to CR 629 Follow Signs
...from Sumter County Times

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply

new member

zeela — Thu, 18 Nov 2004 02:26:53 GMT

Im' sceered i mite ofend some body heere wit me por gramar...plaese bee easee on me. I can't believe how many people have problems with 'there/they're/their', or 'to vs. too'. If you speak English and go to school here, you should at least know these simple differences. I'm still learning (I'm from a different country), but it bothers me to see signs such as, 'Horse's for Sale', 'Hay Roll's for Sale'. And, here's a question I received in my email today on an a Pathfinder I have listed for sale, "Q: ware is the truck located and do you have any info on any work done on this truck what i realy need to know is do you think it will make a drive to cincinnati ohio pretty long trip ".

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

word freaks

OtherMichael — Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:13:37 GMT

http://meandmyOED.tribe.net

and that's not a bad thing.

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

Advice from Penny Arcade

OtherMichael — Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:57:22 GMT

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2004-11-03&res=l

somewhat....

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

Daylight Saving Time

OtherMichael — Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:57:26 GMT

http://coolgov.com/index.php?p=62

"Now don’t get me wrong, I’m usually a big fan of Ben Franklin. He invented a lot of amazing stuff…electricity, bifocals, democracy (and he had that really cool talking mouse for a pet). But in 1784, in an essay titled “An Economical Project,” Franklin came up with his worst idea ever…Daylight Saving Time (***that’s right, grammar nerds, it’s saving, not savings, since daylight is singular***). Daylight Saving Time begins for most of the United States at 2 a.m. on the first Sunday of April. Time reverts to standard time at 2 a.m. on the last Sunday of October."

***emphasis added

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

Grey? Gray?

Eudaemoniste — Wed, 20 Oct 2004 22:50:08 GMT

Which is the correct way to express the color? Is it case-specific?

posted in Grammarians - 6 replies

The comma

queenofthenightD — Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:25:44 GMT

I have been noticing that I am comma inept (among other issues.)Could someone please tell me the rules?

posted in Grammarians - 7 replies

I'm new

Indica! — Wed, 22 Sep 2004 18:52:44 GMT

and I'd like to think that I'm a grammar/language snob. I write proficiently and therefore was the designated peer editor while in college. It always amazed me (and still does now that I'm in grad school) how "college level" young ones lacked any sense of the English Language. How did these morons graduate high school?

Things I despise:
- in conversations: "like", "ain't", ebonics, incorrectly pronounced words (i.e. facade = Fah-sade, not fa-kade), passive sentences
- in writing: excessive or non-existent use of commas, run-on sentences, misuse of words like "there, their, they're" etc., passive sentences

posted in Grammarians - 3 replies

double-whatsits

OtherMichael — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:36:56 GMT

Since is isn't quite a double copula, what do you call those things where an adjectived-noun modifies the same noun?

Such as a "descriptive description" ???*

See an example, today, at Mefi: http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/35933

I love this kind of thing, actually. Such as "pile up in a pile" .... which is not the same thing, is it, becuase there it is a verb + nouned-verb, or verb & verbed-noun, or whatever....

*the first person who points out that punctuation belongs inside of the quote marks gets slapped. Screw the MLA. It's the dumbest "rule" I ever heard of. I am _not_ quoting or drawing attention to the punctuation.

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

the mind-bending playfulness of the black vernacular

OtherMichael — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:12:12 GMT

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/30/opinion/30gates.html?hp

Changing Places
By HENRY LOUIS GATES Jr.

Published: September 30, 2004

How do you spell 'rat,' " my father would ask me during a lull in one of his many bid whist card games with his buddies from the paper mill. "R-a-t," I'd respond dutifully, with all of the preschool pride that I could muster. "Not that mousy kind of a rat," he'd say. "I mean like 'rat now.' " His buddies would howl as my perplexity grew.

Advertisement

Like many black people who came of age in the 60's, I've always delighted in the mind-bending playfulness of the black vernacular. And jokes turning on malaprops and double-entendres are among the most vital aspects of black culture. The Kingfish's quip, on "Amos 'n' Andy," that he and Andy should "simonize our watches" is nearly canonical in many black households.

But all of us have our favorites. It's said that Tim Moore, the actor who played Kingfish, once had to appear in court as a defendant. "Yo' honor," he told the judge, "not only does I resents the allegation, but I resents the alligator!"

Still, I have to confess that the use of "ax" for "ask" has always been, for me, the linguistic equivalent of fingernails' scraping down a blackboard. The first time I heard the word "ask" pronounced that way was on a Bill Cosby album in the 60's.

"I'm-o, I'm-o ax you a question," his character stammers, and in my Appalachian hamlet we'd laugh at that, certain that nobody would really be foolish enough to say "ax" for "ask."

Don't get me wrong: it's not as if the black citizens of Piedmont, W.Va., spoke the king's English, but axing was something we did in the woods.

It was when I first visited Bermuda, where just about everyone I met says "ax," that I began to suspect that this usage had deeper origins than I'd known. Sure enough, as William Labov, a linguist at the University of Pennsylvania, explained to me, "aks" is traceable to the Old English "acsian," a nonstandard form of "ascian," the root of "ask."

Professor Labov argues that black Americans have become more monolingual since the 60's - that fewer of them have a mastery of standard English. That's the result of residential segregation, the fact that poor blacks tend to live with poor blacks. But it's also compounded by desegregation, which ended up separating the black poor and the black middle class.

Because of these two factors, there's now a large group of poor black people whose face-to-face conversations are almost entirely with people like themselves. As the cultural critic Greg Tate told me, black people are "segregated, landlocked and institutionalized between prison, the project and public institutions." He added that "there's a certain tribal caste to segregated African-American communities for that reason," and that's reflected in their increased monolingualism.

Writing in The Times 25 years ago, James Baldwin ventured that the black vernacular was one of self-defense. "There was a moment, in time, in this place," he recalled, "when my brother, or my mother, or my father, or my sister, had to convey to me, for example, the danger in which I was standing from the white man standing just behind me, and to convey this with a speed and in a language, that the white man could not possibly understand, and that, indeed, he cannot understand, until today."

Is that still true? The black vernacular seems to be everywhere these days, from Dave Chappelle's show to Boost Mobile's "Where you at?" ad campaign.

"It becomes part of the mainstream in a minute," the poet Amiri Baraka told me, referring to the black vernacular. "We hear the rappers say, 'I'm outta here' - the next thing you know, Clinton's saying. 'I'm outta here.' " And both Senator John Kerry and President Bush are calling out, "Bring it on," like dueling mike-masters at a hip-hop slam.

Talk about changing places. Even as large numbers of black children struggle with standard English, hip-hop has become the recreational lingua franca of white suburban youth. Baldwin's notion of using black English to encode messages seems almost romantic now.

Is it possible, after all these years, that white folk have come to speak "black" far better than blacks speak "white"? Just axing.

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

Un-gerunding

OtherMichael — Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:07:35 GMT

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/lists/10IanCarey.html

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

Punctuation Takes a Vacation

Thu, 24 Jun 2004 21:08:42 GMT

Just read an hilarious book to my son: 'Punctuation Takes a Vacation', by Robin Pulver and Lynn Rowe Reed.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0823416879/

Frustrated at being taken for granted, the punctuation marks of Mr. Wright's class decide to teach the students a lesson, and take a vacation. Each group of marks sends a postcard to the class, written in its own, grammatically correct style. Meanwhile, the class learns a valuable lesson about the power of proper punctuation.

It's much more funny than it sounds.

Who are you to judge me?!

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

Naughty Media! Shame! Shame!

OtherMichael — Fri, 21 May 2004 12:42:33 GMT

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/21/nyregion/21SHOT.html?hp

I always heard the New York City was dangerous--but this is ridiculous!

"Man Is Fatally Shot on Crowded Street by Diamond District"

In case they change ("fix") the headline, I put a snapshot in the library... http://www.tribe.net/tribe/servlet/template/pub%2CViewPhoto.vm/context/tribe?page=1&currentoffset=2&parentid=707ad5b9-03e8-465d-8d39-d64f2ff8d479

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

Starting Up

Thu, 29 Apr 2004 18:44:31 GMT

I have an obsession with superfluous preposisions. They drive me mad.

Starting up. How do you start something "up"? Can you start something "down"? "Starting" pretty much does the job on its own. The same with "opening up", or "heating up" - I guess "up" is a fairly misused preposition.

I suppose this wouldn't bother me so much, except that respectable news agencies are starting to adopt this practice of sloppy grammar. NPR correspondants regularly use poor grammar.

posted in Grammarians - 4 replies

when the rhinoceros brought his friend to tea

holly — Thu, 06 May 2004 16:27:08 GMT

where there two rhinoceri?

posted in Grammarians - 0 replies

It all started when...

Tue, 27 Apr 2004 02:16:00 GMT

When did your love for grammar first blossom?

I didn't get excited about grammar until my first year as an English teacher. Before then, I had trouble seeing the point.

Though I suppose even before I started teaching, I found myself frustrated with the degradation of our language. Perhaps it all started when I first heard someone use the "word", "incentivize".

posted in Grammarians - 7 replies

double copula

OtherMichael — Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:47:48 GMT

http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/15/15-427.html

hrm. I like grammatically-correct repetition. As in Gertrude Stein's comment on her home in Oakland: "There is no there there."

http://www.tenderbuttons.com/gsonline/alice.html

posted in Grammarians - 5 replies

lynch

OtherMichael — Wed, 31 Mar 2004 17:14:05 GMT

beyond the fact that I am disgusted and dismayed and deeply saddened, the BBC story is grammaticaly (?) not on target?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3585765.stm
"Adults and children hacked the bodies to pieces, before lynching two of the charred remains from a bridge spanning the Euphrates River."

Main Entry: lynch
Pronunciation: 'linch
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: lynch law
: to put to death (as by hanging) by mob action without legal sanction

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=lynch&x=0&y=0

you can't kill a dead body, with or without sanction.

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply

Purpose of language

enik — Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:45:50 GMT

Most times I keep my big mouth shut and don't correct someone's poor grammar.

Sometimes, however, I point out an alternate (and correct) way of putting "things." When I do so the person points out that "you knew what I meant," and most times this is true.

So, I ask you this: why should people speak correctly if others understand their meaning?

posted in Grammarians - 2 replies

Plural apostrophe's

OtherMichael — Tue, 17 Feb 2004 19:50:11 GMT

Unfortunately, it seems that it is "okay" to use apostrophes in plural abbreviations, and on a few other occassions.

http://members.aol.com/drcarlperrin/apos.html
"To form the plural of abbreviations or numbers, we can use an apostrophe or not. It is our choice as long as we are consistent within a particular piece of writing."

they give an excellent clarity example:
"To avoid possible confusion, you need an apostrophe with the plural of lower case letters. Otherwise plurals of some letters (a,i, or u, for example) would look like words.

There are too many s's and too many i's in Mississippi.

The plurals of capital letters may be formed with or without apostrophes, but we need an apostrophe if there is a possibility of confusion.

CONFUSING: As on a report card are wonderful.

CLEAR: A's on a report card are wonderful. "

-----

I remember having this arguement with someone (she happened to be a proofreader, and my job depended upon the number of errors I did or didn't make). She picked up a dictionary and pointed to its allowance of the usage. Aaargh.

posted in Grammarians - 5 replies

the split infinitive

OtherMichael — Wed, 18 Feb 2004 04:38:43 GMT

>there are certain cases in which it is acceptable to split an infinitive,

there are quite a few cases where one HAS to split an infinitive.

One should not (and, indeed, cannot) split infinitives in Latin. But splitting infinitives in English is a fine and dande and necessary condition. Unless you were overschooled in classical Latin in the 18th & 19th centuries and somehow think that English grammar should conform to classical "standards."

cf, "particple, dangling"

hullo, Brandon! glad to see you aboard!
------
references:
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~susan/cyc/s/split.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive

posted in Grammarians - 1 reply