INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy.

Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

General socialising and light-hearted discussions take place in here.
Message
Author
User avatar
Bellman
Posts: 230
Joined: December 14th, 2007, 4:55 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#301 Postby Bellman » September 21st, 2014, 8:34 am

Latest post of the previous page:

If I hear or read 'iconic' again I think I'll emigrate to a country that doesn't speak English.

User avatar
animist
Posts: 6284
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#302 Postby animist » September 21st, 2014, 10:14 am

Bellman wrote:If I hear or read 'iconic' again I think I'll emigrate to a country that doesn't speak English.
don't go to Greece, then, where the word "icon" originated

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#303 Postby Dave B » September 21st, 2014, 10:19 am

So, Bellman, absolutely! OK, you know, it's like an iconic example of, er, a word that has suffered a great deal of overuse and even, like, you know, um, misuse.

:D
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
animist
Posts: 6284
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#304 Postby animist » September 21st, 2014, 10:34 am

Dave B wrote:So, Bellman, absolutely! OK, you know, it's like an iconic example of, er, a word that has suffered a great deal of overuse and even, like, you know, um, misuse.

:D
funny isn't it, nothing really counts as misuse as words constantly change their meanings with use. An icon was I think (and I have not researched this) a religiously inspired painting or other art work which, back in them Byzantime times, was as controversial as things like Mohammed's depiction or tomb are today. An icon seems to symbolise (and this is why icons were destroyed by iconoclasts as idolatrous), but now we seem to mean by the term of sort of symbol which is not really a symbol but merely suggestive of a particular cultural wave. What does anyone else think "icon" does mean?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#305 Postby Dave B » September 21st, 2014, 11:48 am

I saw a definition of "icon" once that said it was any image or characteristic that immediately identified something. Thus a simplified silhouette of, say, a building immediately invokes another image in the viewer's mind. That invoked image may be the building itself or what it represents. Another example was Micky Mouse's "hat", a black circular sector with two other sectors attached - you need no more to know who it represents.

So an icon has become an abstract reference to something.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 10973
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#306 Postby Nick » November 17th, 2014, 2:31 pm

Those idiots at 38 Degrees are sponsoring a free meeting in Rochester tonight to put questions to the electoral candidates. Ok, fair enough.

They have advertised in the local rage. Nothing wrong with that.

But their strap-line...?

Spoiler:
"Are you fed up of politicians...?"

Didn't they go to school? :sad2:

User avatar
lewist
Posts: 4402
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 8:53 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#307 Postby lewist » November 17th, 2014, 4:53 pm

Nick wrote:Those idiots at 38 Degrees are sponsoring a free meeting in Rochester tonight to put questions to the electoral candidates. Ok, fair enough.

They have advertised in the local rage. Nothing wrong with that.

But their strap-line...?

Spoiler:
"Are you fed up of politicians...?"

Didn't they go to school? :sad2:
I'm sure they did, Nick. However, whereas I agree with you, we probably have to get used to this sort of thing, as it could cause heart problems as we age. A lot of things irk me. The neologism upcoming. What is wrong with the perfectly normal forthcoming? I'm not going to go on. There's a thread for it. :angry:

Edited: Ah... this is the thread. Anyway, enough said.
Carpe diem. Savour every moment.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#308 Postby Dave B » November 18th, 2014, 1:00 pm

forthcoming (adj.) Look up forthcoming at Dictionary.com
"about to happen," 1530s; earlier was Old English forðcuman "to come forth, come to pass;" see forth + come (v.). Meaning "informative, responsive" is from 1835.

upcoming (adj.) Look up upcoming at Dictionary.com
1848, "rising;" 1949, "forthcoming," from up (adv.) + coming (see come (v.)). It was a noun in Middle English, meaning "action of ascending" (mid-14c.), also "attack, onslaught" (c.1300).
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
animist
Posts: 6284
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#309 Postby animist » November 18th, 2014, 2:17 pm

lewist wrote: The neologism upcoming. What is wrong with the perfectly normal forthcoming? I'm not going to go on.
actually, ISTM that we don't use the word "forth" much now ("come forth" sounds very quaint); we talk about events as "coming up" rather than "coming forth", so maybe "upcoming" is not so surprising

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 10973
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#310 Postby Nick » November 18th, 2014, 2:23 pm

animist wrote:
lewist wrote: The neologism upcoming. What is wrong with the perfectly normal forthcoming? I'm not going to go on.
actually, ISTM that we don't use the word "forth" much now ("come forth" sounds very quaint); we talk about events as "coming up" rather than "coming forth", so maybe "upcoming" is not so surprising


The Burning Bush said unto Moses, "Come Forth!", but he came fifth, and got a concellation prize.... :D


(I know, it's old and dreadful. I just couldn't resist.....)

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#311 Postby Dave B » November 18th, 2014, 3:54 pm

This is a bit like, "outwith", that seemed to be a Scottishism until it became politically fashionable. Always remember two versions of a hymn as a kid - one was "without a city wall" and the other "outwith a city wall". Was a bit confused by both of them, so, the city did not have a city wall, so what? "Outwith, wossat then?" (I come from Souf East London didn'I)
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

tom in napa
Posts: 29
Joined: June 20th, 2014, 11:05 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#312 Postby tom in napa » November 18th, 2014, 6:36 pm

From the former colonies across the pond:
Some folks say the irritation exists not in the grammer or in the phrases but in ourselves.
If that be true, then atwot (sic) shall I hurl my irritation?
Atwot else but the proposition that next year's grammar and frases must not differ from last year's? :D

User avatar
getreal
Posts: 4353
Joined: November 20th, 2008, 5:40 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#313 Postby getreal » November 18th, 2014, 9:53 pm

Early doors.


WTF? I loath that expression. It only started being used in the last 20 years and I really really irritates me.


And the west of Scotland usage of "how" instead of "why". Agggggghhhhh!!!!
"It's hard to put a leash on a dog once you've put a crown on his head"-Tyrion Lannister.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#314 Postby Dave B » November 18th, 2014, 10:01 pm

Early doors.
Never heard that one before, pity that I have now! (Shakes head in befuddlement)

But, I do have to wonder, getreal, what you have done to irritate yourself! :wink:
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3227
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#315 Postby Tetenterre » November 18th, 2014, 10:44 pm

Dave B wrote:"without a city wall"
On the outskirts of Canterbury, outside the city wall, is a settlement (former village) that is still called Thanington Without.
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22746
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#316 Postby Alan H » January 13th, 2015, 1:31 pm

Great correction in today's Guardian:

2015-01-13_13h29_43.png
2015-01-13_13h29_43.png (184.44 KiB) Viewed 3282 times
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#317 Postby Dave B » January 13th, 2015, 2:18 pm

Alan H wrote:Great correction in today's Guardian:

2015-01-13_13h29_43.png
The real pedant might say that the comma before "and" in the final sentence is ungrammatical and superfluous.

("Eats, shoots & leaves" by Lynn Truss might be quoted as an authority here! :wink: )
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
animist
Posts: 6284
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 11:36 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#318 Postby animist » January 14th, 2015, 12:37 am

Dave B wrote:he real pedant might say that the comma before "and" in the final sentence is ungrammatical and superfluous.

("Eats, shoots & leaves" by Lynn Truss might be quoted as an authority here! :wink: )
the comma is needed in fact, whereas it is not needed in the shorter conjunction "Eats, shoots & leaves" - the comma in the longer conjunction is needed because these are distinct statements, and especially because the subjects of the last two statements are different

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#319 Postby Dave B » January 14th, 2015, 9:25 am

animist wrote:
Dave B wrote:he real pedant might say that the comma before "and" in the final sentence is ungrammatical and superfluous.

("Eats, shoots & leaves" by Lynn Truss might be quoted as an authority here! :wink: )
the comma is needed in fact, whereas it is not needed in the shorter conjunction "Eats, shoots & leaves" - the comma in the longer conjunction is needed because these are distinct statements, and especially because the subjects of the last two statements are different
Au contraire! If you remove the comma the sentence still says the same thing:

"... they are made of stone and we don't know what they weigh."

Now,

"... they are made of stone, we don't know what they weigh."

does need the comma to separate the two statements.

I like the dash (-) here, serves a comma like purpose in a more informal way:

"... they are made of stone - we don't know what they weigh."

Personally I would have written:

"... they are made of stone - but we don't know what they weigh!"

Emphasis can add to the tongue in cheek jocularity.

And I wasn't using the title of Truss' book as an "authority" but it mentions superfluous commas in there somewhere and, including commas before "and" and "but" - though the latter one is, perhaps, a bit too strict. "And" joins two parts of a sentence, why seek to separate that joining with a comma? I could make a fortune out of the wasted printing ink in all those books that contain superfluous commas (if it could be recovered that is!)

There are times, usually for dramatic effect, that the rules of grammar can be broken quite happily. This ain't one IMHO.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3227
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#320 Postby Tetenterre » January 14th, 2015, 9:59 am

animist wrote:the comma is needed in fact, whereas it is not needed in the shorter conjunction "Eats, shoots & leaves" - the comma in the longer conjunction is needed because these are distinct statements, and especially because the subjects of the last two statements are different


Au contraire! #2

See Section B on p588 of Fowler.
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Grammer and phrases wot is irritating

#321 Postby Dave B » January 14th, 2015, 10:52 am

As usual the matter is not always clear - even in Fowler! My edition says something that makes me think there is a cause for animist's argument but it still feels dodgy to me, I don't think the two parts of the sentence are "separate" enough.

My own practice is to use commas before "and" and "but" v-e-r-y carefully. As my Eng. Lang. instructor said, "If it works without the comma it almost certainly does not need it." I still like the - dash for dramatic pause.
Attachments
fowlers comma 2.JPG
fowlers comma 2.JPG (1.38 MiB) Viewed 5448 times
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015


Return to “Social Club”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest