# Grammar rules to trash



## KenOC

There are lots. "Who" and "whom"? Who(m) cares? The arcane rules add nothing. Dump 'em! "Who" will do in any circumstance.

Others?


----------



## Totenfeier

Which parts of a fine Swiss watch do you trash? Heresy!

Actually, I will be thinking of a few throughout the thread. Here's one that is slowly being strangled to death, at least in my dialect area: the difference between first person singular nominative and objective case pronouns, i.e., "Me and him are going to the movie Saturday night" is replacing "He and I are going..."


----------



## Nate Miller

KenOC said:


> "Who" will do in any circumstance.


I believe it is "Whom will do"


----------



## Nate Miller

and not for nothing, but if we are talking about trashing conventions that allow for the association of meaning, shouldn't this thread be in the atonal music section?


----------



## wkasimer

I like to dangle my participles now and then.


----------



## Guest

Americans have grammar rules?


----------



## T Son of Ander

Who really cares if you end a sentence with a preposition?? I mean really. You know what I'm referring to.


----------



## Guest

Indeed, I do know to that which you refer.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Pass me the _sal volatile_.


----------



## Nate Miller

dogen said:


> Americans have grammar rules?


we have grammar rodeos

my favorite event is participle roping, but the verb wrangling competition last year was pretty good, too


----------



## Guest

Nate Miller said:


> we have grammar rodeos
> 
> my favorite event is participle roping, but the verb wrangling competition last year was pretty good, too


we dunner go in fer yer fancy talk round ere we cosner do it an we wunner do it


----------



## Nate Miller

dogen said:


> we dunner go in fer yer fancy talk round ere we cosner do it an we wunner do it


that's pretty close. I live out in the country in central Pennsylvania, and if you could somehow work in the phrase "English" to describe any outsider, and say that in an Allegheny accent, I think you'd just about have it


----------



## T Son of Ander

Was it Churchill that said, something like, "This is nonsense up with which I will not put!"?


----------



## Kivimees

I don't like to witness English grammar rules being trashed. I invested so much time and energy to learn them - much to the dismay of my Russian teacher! :lol:


----------



## Dr Johnson

I like this quote which (or wot, if you prefer) I just discovered on t'interweb:

"Ill-fitting grammar are [sic] like ill-fitting shoes. You can get used to it for a bit, but then one day your toes fall off and you can't walk to the bathroom." _Jasper Fforde_ (who he?)


----------



## Dr Johnson

T Son of Ander said:


> Was it Churchill that said, something like, "This is nonsense up with which I will not put!"?


"This is the type of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put."

Allegedly.


----------



## Totenfeier

Anyone care to discuss the subjunctive mood?

If I were you, I wouldn't. Would that you did!


----------



## Pat Fairlea

I mourn the impending death of a well-turned adverb. Sports commentators are among the worst offenders: "Bloggs passed it quick to Haydn...". Some shops in these parts display a sign that urges customers to "Shop local". No. That will not do. However, when I take out the ink-marker that I routinely carry for just such occasions and amend the offending notice to read "Shop locally", people get quite upset. Some even tut and deliver a Hard Stare. Standards are slipping.


----------



## Totenfeier

Pat Fairlea said:


> I mourn the impending death of a well-turned adverb. Sports commentators are among the worst offenders: "Bloggs passed it quick to Haydn...". Some shops in these parts display a sign that urges customers to "Shop local". No. That will not do. However, when I take out the ink-marker that I routinely carry for just such occasions and amend the offending notice to read "Shop locally", people get quite upset. Some even tut and deliver a Hard Stare. Standards are slipping.


Oh, yes, indeed. "Live strong" and "drive safe" are other egregious examples.

And speaking of shops, the infamous "12 items or less" line. "Less" is for uncountable quantities or volumes (e.g. sand, water), while the word for individually countable items (bricks, pizzas) is _fewer_. IT'S NOT THAT DIFFICULT TO REMEMBER, NOW IS IT?

In unrelated news, the battle for "enormity" has been lost. It now officially means something like "bigness," not "grave moral turpitude."

Sigh.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Totenfeier said:


> Anyone care to discuss the subjunctive mood?
> 
> If I were you, I wouldn't. *Would that you did!*


I think that, strictly speaking, this is the optative.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Pat Fairlea said:


> I mourn the impending death of a well-turned adverb. Sports commentators are among the worst offenders: "Bloggs passed it quick to Haydn...". Some shops in these parts display a sign that urges customers to "Shop local". No. That will not do. However, when I take out the ink-marker that I routinely carry for just such occasions and amend the offending notice to read "Shop locally", people get quite upset. Some even tut and deliver a Hard Stare. *Standards are slipping.*


The barbarians are no longer at the gates. They're inside and, after a hard morning's trashing, sitting down and eating their packed lunches.


----------



## Totenfeier

Dr Johnson said:


> I think that, strictly speaking, this is the optative.


Oh, well spotted, sir!


----------



## Dr Johnson

It must be the influence of my noble eponym.


----------



## LezLee

I’ve always liked this Clive James poem:

Windows am shutting down, and grammar are
On their last leg. So what am we to do?
A letter of complaint go just so far,
Proving the only one in step are you.

Better, perhaps, to simply let it goes.
A sentence have to be screwed pretty bad
Before they gets to where you doesnt knows
The meaning what it must of meant to had.

The meteor have hit. Extinction spread,
But evolution do not stop for that.
A mutant languages rise from the dead
And all them rules is suddenly old hat.

Too bad for we, us what has had so long
The best seat from the only game in town.
But there it am, and whom can say its wrong?
Those are the break. Windows is shutting down.


----------



## SixFootScowl

T Son of Ander said:


> Who really cares if you end a sentence with a preposition?? I mean really. You know what I'm referring to.


Author Ruth Beechick says,
"Prepositions differed also. In Latin they are prefixes attached to their words. The very word means _pre-position_. We inherit many of those Latin prepositions: _in_dent, _trans_port, _sub_marine. It is impossible to end a sentence with Latin prepositions, and thus arose the myth that we should not do so in English either."


----------



## Nate Miller

Just as a point of order,

Ken originally asked us what grammar rules we wanted to trash, and yet here we are championing grammar rules that we like 

this is exactly the sort of thing that happens when you start trashing rules of grammar... the whole meaning is lost

do you really want to see the conventions of our languages thrown in the dumpster of time along with our hula hoops and VHS tapes? it makes me just want to say the heck with it all and go vote democrat


----------



## Dr Johnson

Nate Miller said:


> it makes me just want to say the heck with it all and go vote democrat


Did they announce an election already?


----------



## Guest

Fritz Kobus said:


> Author Ruth Beechick says,
> "Prepositions differed also. In Latin they are prefixes attached to their words. The very word means _pre-position_. We inherit many of those Latin prepositions: _in_dent, _trans_port, _sub_marine. It is impossible to end a sentence with Latin prepositions, and thus arose the myth that we should not do so in English either."


What have the Romans ever done for us?
.


----------



## Nate Miller

Dr Johnson said:


> Did they announce an election already?


that's really more of a euphemism

its a local phrase around this area that means you are ready to give up on life and just throw yourself at the mercy of the government


----------



## Dr Johnson

Nate Miller said:


> that's really more of a euphemism
> 
> its a local phrase around this area that means you are ready to give up on life and *just throw yourself at the mercy of the government*


A sobering thought wherever one lives.

My phrase was a little bit of a tease. I was playing on the American tendency to use the aorist where we on this side of the Atlantic would more normally say: "Have they (just) announced an election?"


----------



## Nate Miller

Dr Johnson said:


> My phrase was a little bit of a tease. I was playing on the American tendency to use the aorist where we on this side of the Atlantic would more normally say: "Have they (just) announced an election?"


that explains why I didn't get that...I learned English in public school here in the States

...that might just qualify as the "whoosh" of the day :lol:


----------



## Guest

Nate Miller said:


> that explains why I didn't get that...I learned English in public school here in the States


Ah, now we're into meanings, rather than grammar. A _public_ school in England is a _private _school. Got that? :lol:

(and a grammar school is....well...not a school specialising in grammar)


----------



## Dr Johnson

But these are quibbles of vocabulary not grammar.

Not that I'm being pedantic or nuffink.


----------



## Klassik

I'm glad that those of us from the land of Esperanto don't have to deal with this nonsensical minutiae!


----------



## Guest

Dr Johnson said:


> But these are quibbles of vocabulary not grammar.
> 
> Not that I'm being pedantic or nuffink.


I would expect nothing less from such an erudite pedant.


----------



## Guest

Klassik said:


> minutiae!


A fine Latin word, originating in the mid 18th century. :tiphat: :lol:


----------



## Taplow

Trash grammar rules all you like, I just wish Americans could learn to use subjunctive mood correctly instead of replacing it with the conditional perfect. If I were an editor by profession ... oh wait, I am!


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> I'm glad that those of us from the land of *Esperanto* don't have to deal with this nonsensical minutiae!


Jes, via estas facila lingvo por kapti.


----------



## Nate Miller

dogen said:


> A _public_ school in England is a _private _school. Got that? :lol:


hmmm...not sure I do. Its like I recognize all those words, but you put them together and I'm lost

feels like that time I got bucked off that wild adjective at the state grammar rodeo


----------



## Nate Miller

Dr Johnson said:


> Jes, via estas facila lingvo por kapti.


...now you're just showing off!


----------



## Dr Johnson

Nate Miller said:


> ...now you're just showing off...


...the fact that I can type a sentence into Google Translate as well as the next person!


----------



## Dr Johnson

Just to remind us how lucky we are, however much we might moan about English grammar:

In Classical Arabic the cardinal numbers operate like this:

3 to 10 (or 3 through 10 in the US  ) are followed by the nouns they define in the indefinite plural genitive.

11 to 19 are indeclinable (except for 12) and are followed by the nouns they define in the indefinite singular accusative.

By now you have probably lost the will to live and don't want to hear about 20 to 90 etc.


----------



## Klassik

dogen said:


> A fine Latin word, originating in the mid 18th century. :tiphat: :lol:


According to the M-W Dictionary, it originated the same year, 1782, as the word _unpedantic_. _Tam-tam_ and _peashooter_ also originated in 1782. I think those two developments might be related. 



Dr Johnson said:


> Jes, via estas facila lingvo por kapti.


Esperanto ricevas ĉiujn varmajn virinojn. Ok, not really, but my experiences on TC informs me that circumflexes do help! :lol:


----------



## Manxfeeder

"To boldly go where no one has gone before." In one stroke, Star Trek put the split-infinitive rule to a much-needed rest.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> According to the M-W Dictionary, it originated the same year, 1782, as the word _unpedantic_. _Tam-tam_ and _peashooter_ also originated in 1782. I think those two developments might be related.
> 
> *Esperanto ricevas ĉiujn varmajn virinojn.* Ok, not really, but my experiences on TC informs me that circumflexes do help! :lol:


Mi diras! Subskribu min tuj por kurso!


----------



## Nate Miller

Dr Johnson said:


> ...the fact that I can type a sentence into Google Translate as well as the next person!


this is just like the time my mom explained to me the truth about Santa Clause

that's the dependent clause parents use to break the news to their kids about Santa Claus

it was all very disillusioning


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> Mi diras! Subskribu min tuj por kurso!


I once learned some Romanian because of a hot Romanian woman who (whom?) I knew. I didn't even like her!  Sometimes we just need the right motivation to learn a language!


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> I once learned some Romanian because of a hot Romanian woman who (whom?) I knew. I didn't even like her!  Sometimes we just need the right motivation to learn a language!


Was it worth the effort?


----------



## LezLee

Klassik said:


> I'm glad that those of us from the land of Esperanto don't have to deal with this nonsensical minutiae!


'These'. Miinutiae is plural. :lol:


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> Was it worth the effort?


Nein. She may have had the body of Elvira, but she had the personality Vlad the Impaler! 



LezLee said:


> 'These'. Miinutiae is plural. :lol:


I think I'll stick to Esperanto!


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> Nein. She may have had the body of Elvira, but she had the personality of Vlad the Impaler! ( /QUOTE]
> 
> I once learned some phrases in Spanish for the same reason, but to no avail.


----------



## Nate Miller

Dr Johnson said:


> Klassik said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nein. She may have had the body of Elvira, but she had the personality of Vlad the Impaler! ( /QUOTE]
> 
> I once learned some phrases in Spanish for the same reason, but to no avail.
> 
> 
> 
> same here...but with me it was French
> 
> ...and she's still got my wallet!
Click to expand...


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> Klassik said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nein. She may have had the body of Elvira, but she had the personality of Vlad the Impaler! ( /QUOTE]
> 
> I once learned some phrases in Spanish for the same reason, but to no avail.
> 
> 
> 
> The key to impressing women with Spanish is to learn to roll your Rs. You don't even need to know a single word of Spanish if you can show off your tongue rolling skills! :lol:
> 
> I took four years of German in high school. Interestingly enough, knowing German has never impressed a single woman. It did scare a few off though. Maybe it's because of my lederhosen?
Click to expand...


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> Dr Johnson said:
> 
> 
> 
> The key to impressing women with Spanish is to learn to roll your Rs. You don't even need to know a single word of Spanish if you can show off your tongue rolling skills! :lol:
> 
> I took four years of German in high school. Interestingly enough, knowing German has never impressed a single woman. It did scare a few off though. *Maybe it's because of my lederhosen?*
> 
> 
> 
> You should have worn a circumflex.
> 
> The only linguistic flummery that has ever furthered any suit of mine was learning to swear in Serbo-Croat.
> 
> But we must draw a veil over that lest the _sal volatile_ be called for.
Click to expand...


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> You should have worn a circumflex.


It was the circumflex that I was trying to "wear." 



> The only linguistic flummery that has ever furthered any suit of mine was learning to swear in Serbo-Croat.
> 
> But we must draw a veil over that lest the _sal volatile_ be called for.


My father once married a Yugoslavian woman. It seems that was a massive mistake, but I do have a long-lost half brother because of that. He supposedly lives in Poland and is an expert in Esperanto. Seriously. Do you see what happens when you swear in Serbo-Croat? :lol:


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> It was the circumflex that I was trying to "wear."
> 
> My father once married a Yugoslavian woman. It seems that was a massive mistake, but I do have a long-lost half brother because of that. He supposedly lives in Poland and is an expert in Esperanto. Seriously. *Do you see what happens when you swear in Serbo-Croat?* :lol:


It causes you to have a brother in Poland? Is this like the butterfly stamping its foot in the Amazon and the Footsie going into freefall?


----------



## Kivimees

When Mrs Kivimees and I travel abroad we can say anything we want and have little risk of anyone understanding us. It promotes honesty. :lol:


----------



## Dr Johnson

Kivimees said:


> When Mrs Kivimees and I travel abroad we can say anything we want and have little risk of anyone understanding us. It promotes honesty. :lol:


Be careful. I know at least one Estonian living not a million miles from me.

You have been warned.


----------



## Kivimees

Dr Johnson said:


> Be careful. I know at least one Estonian living not a million miles from me.
> 
> You have been warned.


Oh, I know. We run across others in some unlikely places.


----------



## Kivimees

I move to declare this thread officially derailed. 

Will someone second the motion?


----------



## Klassik

Kivimees said:


> When Mrs Kivimees and I travel abroad we can say anything we want and have little risk of anyone understanding us. It promotes honesty. :lol:


I once got high with the Estonian women's ski team.

We shared a gondola lift during my trip to the Klein Matterhorn some years back. At least it wasn't the Dutch ski team. They might have brought their dutch oven into the gondola!


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> I once got high with the Estonian women's ski team.


We are not worthy! We are not worthy!

:tiphat:


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> *It causes you to have a brother in Poland?* Is this like the butterfly stamping its foot in the Amazon and the Footsie going into freefall?


I don't know, but it's not worth the risk! :lol:



Kivimees said:


> I move to declare this thread officially derailed.


A thread about grammar is sure to have a finite lifespan. A thread about long-lost brothers in Poland who speak Esperanto, lederhosen, and the Estonian women's ski team, on the other hand...


----------



## Dr Johnson

To bring it back to grammar:

How do the numerals in Estonian work?


----------



## Kivimees

Dr Johnson said:


> How do the numerals in Estonian work?


If I explained, you would understand immediately why there are only 1.1 million speakers.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Kivimees said:


> If I explained, you would understand immediately why there are only 1.1 million speakers.


'nuff said.

Am I correct in thinking that Estonian still has a "dual"?


----------



## Kivimees

Dr Johnson said:


> Am I correct in thinking that Estonian still has a "dual"?


Please explain.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Kivimees said:


> Please explain.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_(grammatical_number)

Many apologies if I've got this confused with another language.


----------



## Kivimees

Okay, now I understand. No, it doesn't. Estonian has lots of other things to drive you crazy.


----------



## Totenfeier

Dr Johnson said:


> It must be the influence of my noble eponym.


Indeed. Your eponymous avatarial original is a hero of mine.


----------



## LezLee

Does Estonian have anything in common with Latvian? There’s a Latvian poster on the UK forums, lives in Ireland so his accent must be quite interesting. His written English is very good, he’s even good at puns and wordplay. His ‘nom-de-net’ is Post Soviet, really clever!


----------



## Joe B

The writing teacher across the hall from me uses this coffee mug daily:


----------



## Becca

T Son of Ander said:


> Was it Churchill that said, something like, "This is nonsense up with which I will not put!"?


First of all there is no proof that Churchill ever did say or write it, but more to the point, not ending a sentence with a preposition is an example of a groundless rule which has no place in English and yet is constantly repeated. Apparently it comes from some 18th century pedants who tried to make English grammar conform to the rules for Latin, which it doesn't and shouldn't. Another example is split infinitives.


----------



## Becca

Joe B said:


> The writing teacher across the hall from me uses this coffee mug daily:


"A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife annual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says, at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."
― Lynne Truss, Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation


----------



## Kivimees

LezLee said:


> Does Estonian have anything in common with Latvian? There's a Latvian poster on the UK forums, lives in Ireland so his accent must be quite interesting. His written English is very good, he's even good at puns and wordplay. His 'nom-de-net' is Post Soviet, really clever!


Nothing at all - two completely different languages. Latvian is related to Lithuanian, Estonian to Finnish.


----------



## Tristan

To bravely answer the question when it's been derailed so: split as many infinitives as you like. In languages where the infinitive is a single word, no **** you can't split it. The very fact that an English infinitive comprises two words is a luxury that allows one to freely split them as often as one wishes!


----------



## Pat Fairlea

LezLee said:


> 'These'. Miinutiae is plural. :lol:


Yes! 
And that's another thing. 'None' is singular, so 'none is' not 'none are'. 'None' is a contraction of 'not one', so how could it be anything other than singular? 
Split infinitives all you wish, dangle terminal prepositions until they wave in the breeze, I care not. But cherish adverbs and keep 'none' singular.

Thank you. I feel better for that.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith

Dr Johnson said:


> I like this quote which (or wot, if you prefer) I just discovered on t'interweb:
> 
> "Ill-fitting grammar are [sic] like ill-fitting shoes. You can get used to it for a bit, but then one day your toes fall off and you can't walk to the bathroom." _Jasper Fforde_ (who he?)


British writer of post-modern humorous science-fiction/fantasy. Active a decade ago, now sporadic.


----------



## Tristan

Pat Fairlea said:


> Yes!
> And that's another thing. 'None' is singular, so 'none is' not 'none are'. 'None' is a contraction of 'not one', so how could it be anything other than singular?


It's interesting that the word "one" attracts singularity no matter what its context. Here we're saying _not_ one, but because the word is "one", the verb is singular even though we're technically referring to zero. Which means that singularity is not always semantic.

Cf. that "plural", while its conventional definition is "more than one" really just means "not singular". Plural is anything _but_ one, including zero and halves, e.g. "we received 0.5 inches of rain" or "there are no people here".


----------



## Kivimees

We had an interesting debate at work concerning scientific writing. Which is correct:

"Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *were* added..." or
"Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *was* added..."

?


----------



## Nate Miller

Kivimees said:


> We had an interesting debate at work concerning scientific writing. Which is correct:
> 
> "Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *were* added..." or
> "Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *was* added..."
> 
> ?


I would go with "were" because there were 200 of them added

but then I got a "C" in general chemistry so WTF do I know? :lol:


----------



## Tristan

Kivimees said:


> We had an interesting debate at work concerning scientific writing. Which is correct:
> 
> "Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *were* added..." or
> "Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *was* added..."
> 
> ?


I would say "was" here. Although "200 mL" is technically "more than one", the issue is that the "200 mL of solution" essentially functions as a single unit, as a mass noun, and mass nouns take singular agreement.

Cf. "Three minutes isn't a long wait". Even though "minutes" is plural, it takes singular agreement because "three minutes" is functioning as a unit in this sentence.


----------



## Kivimees

Tristan said:


> I would say "was" here. Although "200 mL" is technically "more than one", the issue is that the "200 mL of solution" essentially functions as a single unit, as a mass noun, and mass nouns take singular agreement.


This was the explanation we were given. :tiphat:


----------



## Totenfeier

Becca said:


> "A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.
> 
> "Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes towards the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife annual and tosses it over his shoulder.
> 
> "I'm a panda," he says, at the door. "Look it up."
> 
> The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.
> 
> Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."
> ― Lynne Truss, Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation


My dad had a list of these; two that I remember were:

"Do not break your bread, or roll in your soup."

"Don't use commas, which aren't necessary."


----------



## SixFootScowl

Totenfeier said:


> "Don't use commas, which aren't necessary."


Reminds me of a Strunk and White (The Elements of Style) lesson to go on a which hunt to fix any which that should be a that. Their example included something like this:

1. The lawnmower, which is broken, is in the garage.

2. The lawnmower that is broken is in the garage.

The difference is that #2 implies there is more than one lawnmower on the premises.

Another example of a grammatically correct sentence that I saw somewhere else involved two teachers reviewing a pupil's paper. The one said to the other "that that that that that boy used was incorrect."


----------



## Orpheus

^ That that that that teacher used last baffled me. What's a that boy supposed to be?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Orpheus said:


> ^ That that that that teacher used last baffled me. What's a that boy supposed to be?


The boy that "that" referred to would have had to have been the topic of discussion. Then the other teacher could respond that some other boy didn't use that that that that boy used.


----------



## Larkenfield

-----------------


----------



## Guest

Becca said:


> First of all there is no proof that Churchill ever did say or write it, but more to the point, not ending a sentence with a preposition is an example of a groundless rule which has no place in English and yet is constantly repeated. Apparently it comes from some 18th century pedants who tried to make English grammar conform to the rules for Latin, which it doesn't and shouldn't. Another example is split infinitives.


Grammar and style - two different beasts, oft confused. I like to use "split infinitives" because it annoys the pedants, but to routinely deploy them is unwise: it is more important that writing uses the right words (and punctuation) in the right order to make the intended meaning clear. All other rules should be subordinate.


----------



## Totenfeier

Fritz Kobus said:


> The boy that "that" referred to would have had to have been the topic of discussion. Then the other teacher could respond that some other boy didn't use that that that that boy used.


There's another one _that_ has been on the net for some time:

James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher. Eleven "had"s.

Punctuate, if you dare! (All it takes is three sets of quotation marks, two commas, and one semicolon - in the proper places, of course!) (And no peeking!)


----------



## SixFootScowl

Totenfeier said:


> There's another one _that_ has been on the net for some time:
> 
> James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher. Eleven "had"s.
> 
> Punctuate, if you dare! (All it takes is three sets of quotation marks, two commas, and one semicolon - in the proper places, of course!) (And no peeking!)


My head is swimming. Punctuating that one could be harder than a killer Sudoku puzzle.

Meanwhile: Of all the saws I ever saw saw I never saw a saw that saws as this saw saws.


----------



## TxllxT

What language has the most complicated/difficult grammar rules?

To my knowledge it is the Czech language: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_declension

7 cases singular, 7 cases plural, masculine animate, masculine inanimate,...it's a horrorhouse of grammar rules!

And once you've got somehow used to this official language in its hypercorrect dress-up, you learn that there also happens to exist Czech slang, that everybody speaks among friends & family. With its own 'done's & 'not done's.


----------



## Tristan

Sanskrit has 8 cases in singular, dual, and plural, as well as 10 verb conjugations and all kinds of crazy sandhi rules. 

Just starting to learn it and it's driving me nuts.  Latin is a piece of cake compared to Sanskrit!


----------



## TxllxT

Tristan said:


> Sanskrit has 8 cases in singular, dual, and plural, as well as 10 verb conjugations and all kinds of crazy sandhi rules.
> 
> Just starting to learn it and it's driving me nuts.  Latin is a piece of cake compared to Sanskrit!


Slavonic verb conjugations are a jungle labyrinth to get lost in. Add to that the slang possibility of inserting German phrases into Czech: that's really nasty dark humour. The Czech used to live for centuries in a two language (+Yiddish) surroundings, where the bosses were German bullies. The way how they opposed to that in their own Czech is quite cleverish: the German words shift in meaning and become very suitable for swearing. Franz Kafka loved Czech.


----------



## Guest

They are called grammar RULES for a reason. Break them and it's a slippery slope to idiocy.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Q: What do you say when you are comforting a grammar nazi? A: There, Their, They're 

Q: What's another name for Santa's elves? A: Subordinate Clauses. 

Q: How does an English teacher punish a valley girl? A: Assign a 10-15 page research paper on the bastardization of the word "like"

Strewth
Fair suck of the sav, way to me gramma for me


----------



## Klassik

I have a feeling that a debate over the Oxford comma will be even more contentious than a Wagner or atonal music thread. I can just feel the infraction points emanating from such a useless debate. 

So, having said that, yay or nay on the Oxford comma?


----------



## KenOC

I like this example of omitting the comma. A book dedication:

"To my parents, Ayn Rand and God."

And a newspaper story about Merle Haggard:

"Among those interviewed were his two ex-wives, Kris Kristofferson and Robert Duvall."

Punctuate safe out there!


----------



## Guest

Klassik said:


> I have a feeling that a debate over the Oxford comma will be even more contentious than a Wagner or atonal music thread. I can just feel the infraction points emanating from such a useless debate.
> 
> So, having said that, yay or nay on the Oxford comma?


Yay in the strongest possible way.


----------



## Guest

Klassik said:


> I have a feeling that a debate over the Oxford comma will be even more contentious than a Wagner or atonal music thread. I can just feel the infraction points emanating from such a useless debate.
> 
> So, having said that, yay or nay on the Oxford comma?


Yes. Though why it should be given special prominence among commas I don't know.

As for the reference to Oxford, we were never taught that in school. So when Vampire Weekend sang "Who gives a **** about an Oxford comma?" I naturally assumed it was an invention!


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> I have a feeling that a debate over the Oxford comma will be even more contentious than a Wagner or atonal music thread. I can just feel the infraction points emanating from such a useless debate.
> 
> So, having said that, yay or nay on the Oxford comma?


Fowler says yay (more likely Fowler would say "yea" :devil to it.

That's good enough for me.


----------



## TxllxT

Never ever thought, that Wagner, and all the fuzz that accompanies Wagner, would be able to get ramshackled in a discussion, a debate or nagging over the Oxford comma! Richard Wagner quote: I believe in God, Mozart, and Beethoven. However in German he says: _Ich glaube an Gott, Mozart und Beethoven_. So in German it is still possible to understand Wagner's God as possessing two faces...


----------



## Pat Fairlea

Klassik said:


> I have a feeling that a debate over the Oxford comma will be even more contentious than a Wagner or atonal music thread. I can just feel the infraction points emanating from such a useless debate.
> 
> So, having said that, yay or nay on the Oxford comma?


ON the matter of Oxford commas (about which, my dears, I don't give a damn), it is not a question of yay or nay.
It is 'One should' or 'One should not', surely?


----------



## Guest

I've never heard of the Oxford comma, but having enlightened myself I can most definitely say that it is an abomination. A comma before "and" ???! (Unless I've used it). If a sentence is ambiguous without it, then rephrase it! There'll be talk of votes for women next. Or female bus drivers. I need to go and lie down...


----------



## Guest

What about the Cambridge colon?


----------



## Guest

dogen said:


> What about the Cambridge colon?


Sounds too much like the Human Centipede and should be avoided at all costs.


----------



## Guest

dogen said:


> I've never heard of the Oxford comma, but having enlightened myself I can most definitely say that it is an abomination. A comma before "and" ???! (Unless I've used it). If a sentence is ambiguous without it, then rephrase it! There'll be talk of votes for women next. Or female bus drivers. I need to go and lie down...


Of course, a parenthetical phrase not within a sentence is also abhorrent.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Recently a student had the gall to criticise my definition of oxidation number, as "the number of electrons per atom an element has lost complete or partial control of", because I ended with a preposition. Simple solution, I just added "innit?" to the end.

I will confess to having never heard of the Cambridge colon, but no doubt it would benefit from some proper irrigation.


----------



## Potiphera

If anyone says, 'I would of'. instead of , 'I would have'. They should be banned from the forum! 

:lol:


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> I like this example of omitting the comma. A book dedication:
> 
> "To my parents, Ayn Rand and God."
> 
> And a newspaper story about Merle Haggard:
> 
> "Among those interviewed were his two ex-wives, Kris Kristofferson and Robert Duvall."
> 
> Punctuate safe out there!


I am all for the Oxford comma. I have had too many instances where leaving it out has tripped me up (as Ken so deftly shows) in reading something. I know it is redundant, but redundancy is good if it adds clarity. And for consistency's sake, use it always.


----------



## Guest

MacLeod said:


> Sounds too much like the Human Centipede and should be avoided at all costs.


Is that up for any Oscars?


----------



## Larkenfield

Potiphera said:


> If anyone says, 'I would of'. instead of , 'I would have'. They should be banned from the forum!
> 
> :lol:


I woulda thought that was self-evident.


----------



## Guest




----------



## Dr Johnson

dogen said:


> Is that up for any Oscars?


It's certainly not up for any Michelin stars.


----------



## Guest

Potiphera said:


> If anyone says, 'I would of'. instead of , 'I would have'. They should be banned from the forum!
> 
> :lol:


I would have course not commit such an error.


----------



## KenOC

dogen said:


> What about the Cambridge colon?


​
Or the Helsingborg hyphen?


----------



## TxllxT

Well, just a question: how many '.....' are normal? Three? Do any rules exist with regard to ... ?


----------



## Dim7

Kontrapunctus said:


> They are called grammar RULES for a reason. Break them and it's a slippery slope to idiocy.


Yeah but how do we determine what the rules even are? Who gets to decide?


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> There are lots. "Who" and "whom"? Who(m) cares? The arcane rules add nothing. Dump 'em! "Who" will do in any circumstance.
> 
> Others?


"Ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee". Yep, throw away that Hemingway rubbish.


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> Or the Helsingborg hyphen?


It's been replaced by the Saxe-Coburg semi colon.


----------



## Guest

MacLeod said:


> It's been replaced by the Saxe-Coburg semi colon.


Not to be confused with the large intestine colon. Is that something similar to performing a colonoscopy? Replacement of colons, that is.


----------



## Guest

Christabel said:


> Not to be confused with the large intestine colon. Is that something similar to performing a colonoscopy? Replacement of colons, that is.


That's problematic - a semi-colonoscopy would sound like it's half in, half out. Urgh!


----------



## Guest

What about the Elizabethan Enema? Or is this the wrong thread for that?


----------



## SixFootScowl

Dim7 said:


> Yeah but how do we determine what the rules even are? Who gets to decide?


If I were King of the World.... :lol:


----------



## Larkenfield

Pat Fairlea said:


> Yes!
> And that's another thing. 'None' is singular, so 'none is' not 'none are'. 'None' is a contraction of 'not one', so how could it be anything other than singular?


I believe the dictionary explaination has merit:

"None" can be a singular pronoun if it's referring to "not one" or "no part," but it also can be plural when referring to "not any." Examples: None of the apple was eaten. Apple is a singular item, so you'd use the singular verb "was." Plural use: None of the ballplayers were on the team bus after the game. Of the boys, none were there. In other words, "none" cannot be used as singular by rote.


----------



## Larkenfield

Kivimees said:


> We had an interesting debate at work concerning scientific writing. Which is correct:
> 
> "Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *were* added..." or
> "Afterwards, 200 ml of solution *was* added..."
> 
> ?


I'd say there's a slightly different emphasis in each sentence with its choice of a singular or plural verb. The first example with a plural verb subtly emphasizes the *volume*: _200 ml_. The second example with a singular verb subtly emphasizes *what* was used:_ the solution_-equivalent formally to "Afterwards, a solution of 200 ml *was* used."


----------



## Larkenfield

dogen said:


> I've never heard of the Oxford comma, but having enlightened myself I can most definitely say that it is an abomination. A comma before "and" ???! (Unless I've used it). If a sentence is ambiguous without it, then rephrase it! There'll be talk of votes for women next. Or female bus drivers. I need to go and lie down...


I've seen lists enumerated with or without a comma before 'and'. Even if the list is clear, sometimes the final comma is legitimately added for its *rhythm* and to establish more of an *equal emphasis*: "He existed as man, friend, and companion." Leave out the last comma and the sentence has a noticeably different *cadence*.

Rules develop down through the centuries from widespread use related primarily to convenience and clarity of language. But I've never seen one rule that hasn't been legitimately broken depending on its context. Would Huck Finn have used formal English and grammar? So there's formal and informal use in which the rules of grammar and language cannot be blindly applied.

In music, one of the formal rules of harmonic modulations is that parallel or consecutive 5ths should never be used in voice leading. But when Debussy came along he made them work and showed that they have their place within the right setting or context.

I believe that rules of grammar were first made to be learned for clarity of expression and then made to be _consciously_ broken as the occasion demands. But to break them out of carelessness or lack of knowledge can spoil the mood or clarity of one's communications and give the impression of illiteracy.
.


----------



## Tristan

Dim7 said:


> Yeah but how do we determine what the rules even are? Who gets to decide?


"Grammatical rules" (read: grammatical conventions) are only descriptions of the current standard anyhow. Many change with time. Some are less likely to change*, of course, but others have changed and will change again in the future.

*English speakers can agree that a sentence like "I the store to went" is fundamentally ungrammatical (it corresponds to the word order of a Japanese sentence, actually). This sentence subverts the very foundation of English syntax, whereas splitting an infinitive or saying "we was" does not (as much as it may make us cringe).


----------



## Guest

Larkenfield said:


> it also can be plural when referring to "not any." Examples: None of the apple was eaten. Apple is a singular item, so you'd use the singular verb "was." Plural use: None of the ballplayers were on the team bus after the game. Of the boys, none were there. In other words, "none" cannot be used as singular by rote.


Except your plural example doesn't work. It should still be "none was" (as in, "not one was on the bus")


----------



## Totenfeier

Hi; late to the party, but I will fight to the death for the Oxford comma - mud, blood, and sword!


----------



## CnC Bartok

No no no no, Lark! Amount and Volume are emphatically not the same thing!!!!!

Please write this out 200 times.


----------



## Larkenfield

Robert Pickett said:


> No no no no, Lark! Amount and Volume are emphatically not the same thing!!!!!
> 
> Please write that is out 200 times.


Hi Robert. Correction made. I appreciate your "volume" of concern!


----------



## Klassik

Pat Fairlea said:


> ON the matter of Oxford commas (about which, my dears, I don't give a damn), it is not a question of yay or nay.
> It is 'One should' or 'One should not', surely?


Speaking like that around these parts (Texas) will get one's colon kicked so hard that they think they're having a period! 

What's the story with the word _data_? As far as I know, it's the plural of _datum_, but I usually see it being treated as a singular noun. In fact, it looks strange seeing it be used as a plural in the rare times where that is the case.


----------



## LezLee

‘Data’ (pronounced ‘Darta’) was always plural when I was at school in the ‘50s, probably because we learnt Latin. I think it’s become singular since it passed into general use in computer-speak.
What really drives me mad is the almost universal use of ‘media’ as singular. Aarrrgghh!


----------



## Larkenfield

LezLee said:


> 'Data' (pronounced 'Darta') was always plural when I was at school in the '50s, probably because we learnt Latin. I think it's become singular since it passed into general use in computer-speak.
> What really drives me mad is the almost universal use of 'media' as singular. Aarrrgghh!


 You're so right. Media is supposed to be the plural of medium. But now the media is the message rather than the medium!


----------



## Klassik

LezLee said:


> 'Data' (pronounced 'Darta')


That must be a Scottish thing! I can't say that I've ever heard anyone pronounce _data_ that way here in the US. Well, maybe if they're as drunk as a Scotsman...


----------



## Pat Fairlea

Larkenfield said:


> I believe the dictionary explaination has merit:
> 
> "None" can be a singular pronoun if it's referring to "not one" or "no part," but it also can be plural when referring to "not any." Examples: None of the apple was eaten. Apple is a singular item, so you'd use the singular verb "was." Plural use: None of the ballplayers were on the team bus after the game. Of the boys, none were there. In other words, "none" cannot be used as singular by rote.


No, I'm not buying that. "None of the ballplayers...." is saying, in expansion, "Not a single one of the ballplayers...", so it's still singular.


----------



## Pat Fairlea

LezLee said:


> 'Data' (pronounced 'Darta') was always plural when I was at school in the '50s, probably because we learnt Latin. I think it's become singular since it passed into general use in computer-speak.
> What really drives me mad is the almost universal use of 'media' as singular. Aarrrgghh!


Data are plural.
Media are plural.
None is singular.
I need a drink.


----------



## Taplow

TxllxT said:


> Well, just a question: how many '.....' are normal? Three? Do any rules exist with regard to ... ?


The symbol is called "ellipsis" and it is always three periods. A Reading from the Book of Punctuation, Chapter 4, Verses 16 to 20:

Then did he raise on high the Holy Ellipsis of Antioch, saying, "Bless this, O Lord, that with it thou mayst blow thine unwanted text to tiny bits, in thy mercy." And the people did rejoice and did feast upon the lambs and toads and tree-sloths and fruit-bats and orangutans and breakfast cereals ... Now did the Lord say, "First thou typest the Holy Dots. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Holy Ellipsis in the direction of thine unwanted text, which, being naughty in thy sight, shall snuff it."


----------



## Totenfeier

Larkenfield said:


> You're so right. Media is supposed to be the plural of medium. But now the media is the message rather than the medium!


This is only a problem if you're thinking of "media" as a general replacement for "the press," at least in my opinion. Time was when newspapers were the source of news (duh). The came radio, newsreel, and television, and of course the number of outlets that can be designated as news "media" has exploded of late, for well or ill. This is why, for example, schools don't have libraries anymore - they have _media centers_. Books (or let's say "print," generally) are not the only available "media" of information.

I agree that "media" now more or less means "broadcast news," and I agree that that is a usage we could probably do better without.


----------



## geralmar

For decades I was adamant that revolts were "quashed" and bugs were "squashed". Only recently I learned that "quash" and "squash" are interchangeable except when talking about the vegetable.

Incidentally, I wish there was a rule about "biweekly," "bimonthly," and "biannually". I received a subscription form for a magazine published bimonthly without any indication whether that meant two issues a month or one issue every two months. Twenty-four issues versus six issues is a significant difference.

Rather more serious I always thought "inflammable" meant it wouldn't burn, since "inoperable" meant it wouldn't operate.

Totally off topic, when a kid I had to puzzle out the meaning when my grandmother's calendar advised, "Always be a wreckless driver".


----------



## Guest

An annual comes out every year (publications).

An annual only comes out once (plants).


----------



## LezLee

Klassik said:


> That must be a Scottish thing! I can't say that I've ever heard anyone pronounce _data_ that way here in the US. Well, maybe if they're as drunk as a Scotsman...


No I never hear it these days and I'm not advocating returning to it! It's just that once you've been taught Latin it's hard to change.
Btw, I'm neither male nor Scottish! Born and brought up in Liverpool, worked there and for many years in Sheffield. Moved permanently to Scotland in 2008.


----------



## TxllxT

Taplow said:


> The symbol is called "ellipsis" and it is always three periods. A Reading from the Book of Punctuation, Chapter 4, Verses 16 to 20:
> 
> Then did he raise on high the Holy Ellipsis of Antioch, saying, "Bless this, O Lord, that with it thou mayst blow thine unwanted text to tiny bits, in thy mercy." And the people did rejoice and did feast upon the lambs and toads and tree-sloths and fruit-bats and orangutans and breakfast cereals ... Now did the Lord say, "First thou typest the Holy Dots. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Holy Ellipsis in the direction of thine unwanted text, which, being naughty in thy sight, shall snuff it."


Seems as if I hear the voice of Rowan Atkinson here!

However holy the quote, does the King James translation actually feature any ellipsis? What is the oldest text that shows an ellipsis?


----------



## CnC Bartok

Ellipsis is the shape of the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, I believe?


----------



## Taplow

TxllxT said:


> What is the oldest text that shows an ellipsis?


1588, according to the Wikipedia article.


----------



## Tristan

geralmar said:


> Rather more serious I always thought "inflammable" meant it wouldn't burn, since "inoperable" meant it wouldn't operate.


There's a joke about that on The Simpsons with Dr. Nick Riviera after his clinic burns down: "inflammable means flammable? What a country!"

That one being the result of the prefix "in-" in Latin meaning both "in/on" and "not" (the former with verbs and the latter with adjectives). The problem is that the adjective "inflammable" derives from the verb "inflammare" (to set on fire).


----------



## TxllxT

Interjections, is there anything grammatically ruled with regard to interjections? Or are they typical trash?


----------



## Pat Fairlea

TxllxT said:


> Interjections, is there anything grammatically ruled with regard to interjections? Or are they typical trash?


I hate interjections.
And anything else to do with needles.


----------



## bharbeke

Since I'm out of school, I just have to make sure my writing is professional and clear. If I do not know which word to choose or how to correctly punctuate my sentence, I will try to express myself in different words that have no ambiguity. My brother-in-law does the same thing with regard to spelling.


----------



## Guest

Pat Fairlea said:


> I hate interjections.
> And anything else to do with needles.


Go stand outside. And STOP smirking!


----------



## Guest

bharbeke said:


> *to correctly punctuate*


 !!!


----------



## bharbeke

MacLeod said:


> !!!


I split infinitives all the time. If it's good enough for Star Trek, it's good enough for me. I've heard enough sources say it is allowable that I will not worry about it unless I have to comply with a specific style.


----------



## KenOC

Related topic: Read an interesting article this morning about silent letters, which can be almost any letter and appear in strange places. Example words were island, grudge, pneumonia, wrestle, scissors, build, marijuana, and laissez-faire.

The article claims that there is only one letter in English that is never silent, and further is always pronounced in the same way. Any guesses? Answer shortly.


----------



## Dr Johnson

My guess is "v".

My "guess" was helped enormously by typing "only letter in English never silent" into a search engine.


----------



## KenOC

Dr Johnson said:


> My guess is "v".


Wow! I was truly impressed until I saw your invisible added words. Your answer, of course, is correct. Unsurprisingly.

The cash prize will not be awarded.


----------



## LezLee

KenOC said:


> Related topic: Read an interesting article this morning about silent letters, which can be almost any letter and appear in strange places. Example words were island, grudge, pneumonia, wrestle, scissors, build, marijuana, and laissez-faire.
> 
> The article claims that there is only one letter in English that is never silent, and further is always pronounced in the same way. Any guesses? Answer shortly.


If you're going to include 'laissez-faire' you'll need to include a high proportion of the French language!


----------



## LezLee

KenOC said:


> Wow! I was truly impressed until I saw your invisible added words. Your answer, of course, is correct. Unsurprisingly.


I can't think of a word where 'x' is silent (?)


----------



## CnC Bartok

Lez, i know a bloke down the pub who'll charge you a very reasonable £1000 to silence your "X"!


----------



## KenOC

LezLee said:


> If you're going to include 'laissez-faire' you'll need to include a high proportion of the French language!


The source article calls "marijuana" and "laissez-faire" words that we have adopted from foreign languages but that are now (evidently) considered valid English words.

About the letter "X" I have no idea. Here's the source article.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...-silent/ar-BBIuLME?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp


----------



## Dr Johnson

I wonder if Bordeaux (in the sense of wine from that area) is, by now, considered (through common usage) a sort of English?

Je pense que nous devrions être dit.

Then there is our very own jim prideaux.


----------



## bharbeke

There are two ways to say "x" in a word (think xylyphone and box), so it doesn't need to be silent to fail the test.


----------



## KenOC

The actual test is only the first part, the second is just another notable attribute in the case of "v". So we do need a silent "x".

Looks like "Bordeaux" is always capitalized, even when simply referring to a type of wine. Is "Kobe" considered an English word since it's used to refer to a type of beef? Not at all sure, but Lez should know!​


----------



## Dr Johnson

It is indeed a phonetic minefield.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/01/13/t-is-silent/


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> I wonder if Bordeaux (in the sense of wine from that area) is, by now, considered (through common usage) a sort of English?
> 
> Je pense que nous devrions être dit.
> 
> Then there is our very own jim prideaux.


What about a fine American skin care product, Boudreaux's Butt Paste? It supposedly helps jock itch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudreaux%27s_Butt_Paste


----------



## Dr Johnson

Can Jock not itch without help?


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Canna he Just, if he takes the high road or the low road?


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> Can Jock not itch without help?


Jock can itch without help, but Jock prefers help!


----------



## Tristan

What's an example of a silent "f" in English? Maybe it's obvious, but my mind's a blank right now.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Follow by a silent "u", nah never heard of that


----------



## LezLee

Tristan said:


> What's an example of a silent "f" in English? Maybe it's obvious, but my mind's a blank right now.


I can't think of a silent 'f', but it's not always pronounced the same way, as in this sentence when it has become 'ov'.


----------



## KenOC

Tristan said:


> What's an example of a silent "f" in English? Maybe it's obvious, but my mind's a blank right now.


Halfpenny is an example of a silent "f". That silent "x" is probably faux-pas or just faux, now considered borrowed but legit English words. But in addition to the original "v", I can find no examples for "j" or "q".


----------



## TxllxT

Tristan said:


> What's an example of a silent "f" in English? Maybe it's obvious, but my mind's a blank right now.


Just fell silent when I read in the urban dictionary about ' ff. '


----------



## SixFootScowl

Many fail to keep the t silent in the word often.


----------



## KenOC

Fritz Kobus said:


> Many fail to keep the t silent in the word often.


'Tis effin' true that offen is oft said often.


----------



## SixFootScowl

KenOC said:


> 'Tis efffin' true that offen is oft said often.


and I think they do it to sound educated! :lol:


----------



## Guest

I think you'll find that 'often' can be pronounced either way - with silent or without silent 't'. I say it without...but then, I'm super well-educated. :lol:


----------



## Klassik

Let's see if the not-so-friendly alphabet _Z_ can start a raging dumpster fire of a debate that leads to many infraction points being handed out by the moderators.  Should _Z_ be pronounced like "zee" or like "zed?"

I'm going with "zee." In all fairness to the English, Americans butcher the pronunciation of _solder_. I will admit to that! :lol:


----------



## Dr Johnson

Tristan said:


> What's an example of a silent "f" in English? Maybe it's obvious, but my mind's a blank right now.


http://www.talkclassical.com/53630-grammar-rules-trash-11.html#post1389017


----------



## Guest

Klassik said:


> Let's see if the not-so-friendly alphabet _Z_ can start a raging dumpster fire of a debate that leads to many infraction points being handed out by the moderators.  Should _Z_ be pronounced like "zee" or like "zed?"
> 
> I'm going with "zee." In all fairness to the English, Americans butcher the pronunciation of _solder_. I will admit to that! :lol:


I am clear (as Theresa May is so very found of saying) that the British-English pronounciation (the one I've followed since I first learned to talk) is 'zed'. I don't have the right to assert what the rule is in the US, but I gather it is 'zee'. (I wonder if some bright spark, when inventing the Br-Eng alphabet, insisted on 'zed' to distinguish it from 'cee'?)

If you live in the US or the UK, you have a choice to make - speak like the natives, or hold on to your birthright!


----------



## Klassik

MacLeod said:


> If you live in the US or the UK, you have a choice to make - speak like the natives, or hold on to your birthright!


A person in the UK might know what a person is referring to if they say _zee_, but I doubt many Americans would know that _zed_ is referring to the letter Z. They'd probably tell Mr./Ms. Zed to speak English! :lol:


----------



## Dr Johnson

The first time I saw a ZZ Top album I assumed they were called Zed Zed Top.


----------



## Guest

Klassik said:


> A person in the UK might know what a person is referring to if they say _zee_,


There might be some confusion if you were in Zummerzet, moind.


----------



## Dr Johnson

MacLeod said:


> There might be some* confusion* if you were in Zummerzet, moind.


That be because of all thik zider they der drink.


----------



## KenOC

MacLeod said:


> If you live in the US or the UK, you have a choice to make - speak like the natives, or hold on to your birthright!


I willingly grant those speakers of "the queen's English", a minority dialect, the right to cleave to their quaint pronunciations for however long that may be practical.


----------



## Guest

KenOC said:


> I willingly grant those speakers of "the queen's English", a minority dialect, the right to cleave to their quaint pronunciations for however long that may be practical.


Why thank you, Ken! I was of course pointing out that langauge is what people speak "round our way" - and not "what others tell me I must speak." If I lived in the US, I expect I would adopt many of the mutant terms of the b*****d offspring of the Queen's English.


----------



## LezLee

Klassik said:


> What about a fine American skin care product, Boudreaux's Butt Paste? It supposedly helps jock itch.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudreaux%27s_Butt_Paste


Surely Jock can itch without help?

Which leads me to the annoyance of people saying wool can be itchy. No it can't, it can irritate and make the person feel itchy.


----------



## Klassik

According to Wikipedia, some English speakers (for example, some speakers of Hong Kong English) pronounce _Z_ as _izzard_.  Perhaps I should buy a Nissan 370Z and ask the chicks if they want to see my izzard!


----------



## Pat Fairlea

dogen said:


> Go stand outside. And STOP smirking!


I don't smirk. It's a filthy habit.


----------



## Totenfeier

Dr Johnson said:


> That be because of all thik zider they der drink.


From Robert MacNeil's 1980s documentary _The Story of English_, an interview in a pub with some jolly, colorful locals:

"Zider drinkin' will kill yeh, mind yeh. Killed my fahther, zider drinkin' did. Took 86 years to do it, though."


----------



## LezLee

Klassik said:


> According to Wikipedia, some English speakers (for example, some speakers of Hong Kong English) pronounce _Z_ as _izzard_.  Perhaps I should buy a Nissan 370Z and ask the chicks if they want to see my izzard!


We have a cross-dressing comedian called Eddie Izzard. I've not seen him perform but he's a well-liked all-round good guy.


----------



## jegreenwood

Klassik said:


> I have a feeling that a debate over the Oxford comma will be even more contentious than a Wagner or atonal music thread. I can just feel the infraction points emanating from such a useless debate.
> 
> So, having said that, yay or nay on the Oxford comma?


It cost one company $5,000,000.

"Ending a case that electrified punctuation pedants, grammar goons and comma connoisseurs, Oakhurst Dairy settled an overtime dispute with its drivers that hinged entirely on the lack of an Oxford comma in state law.

The dairy company in Portland, Me., agreed to pay $5 million to the drivers, according to court documents filed on Thursday.

. . .

The case began in 2014, when three truck drivers sued the dairy for what they said was four years' worth of overtime pay they had been denied. Maine law requires time-and-a-half pay for each hour worked after 40 hours, but it carved out exemptions for:

The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of:

(1) Agricultural produce;

(2) Meat and fish products; and

(3) Perishable foods.

What followed the last comma in the first sentence was the crux of the matter: "packing for shipment or distribution of." The court ruled that it was not clear whether the law exempted the distribution of the three categories that followed, or if it exempted packing for the shipment or distribution of them."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/oxford-comma-maine.html


----------



## SixFootScowl

More on commas. I always write four-digit numbers without a comma, even if in the same sentence as a longer number that does have a comma. For example, 

"He has 1337 buffalo nickels in his collection of 11,469 nickels."

Just a personal thing I guess, but I find the comma awkward in a four-digit number and nobody puts it in the year so why put it in any four-digit number?


----------



## Klassik

Fritz Kobus said:


> More on commas. I always write four-digit numbers without a comma, even if in the same sentence as a longer number that does have a comma. For example,
> 
> "He has 1337 buffalo nickels in his collection of 11,469 nickels."
> 
> Just a personal thing I guess, but I find the comma awkward in a four-digit number and nobody puts it in the year so why put it in any four-digit number?


Decimal and thousands separators are hardly uniform internationally. The chart below shows how differently _1,234,567.89_ would be represented in other countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_separator#Examples_of_use

Date and time are hardly uniform either with other countries putting the day or year before the month. I'm not sure if the thousands separator is used anywhere for years.


----------



## Dr Johnson

Klassik said:


> According to Wikipedia, some English speakers (for example, some speakers of Hong Kong English) pronounce _Z_ as _izzard_.  Perhaps I should buy a Nissan 370Z and ask the chicks if they want to see my izzard!


So for them it is Izzard Izzard Top?


----------



## Klassik

Dr Johnson said:


> So for them it is Izzard Izzard Top?


Maybe ZZ Top's song _Lizard Life_ is actually _Izzard Life_?


----------



## Guest

Klassik said:


> Let's see if the not-so-friendly alphabet _Z_ can start a raging dumpster fire of a debate that leads to many infraction points being handed out by the moderators.  Should _Z_ be pronounced like "zee" or like "zed?"
> 
> I'm going with "zee." In all fairness to the English, Americans butcher the pronunciation of _solder_. I will admit to that! :lol:


I used to think that Americans were prounouncing aluminium incorrectly. But then in all fairness to them, they're bound to as they're spelling it incorrectly.


----------



## Guest

LezLee said:


> We have a cross-dressing comedian called Eddie Izzard. I've not seen him perform but he's a well-liked all-round good guy.


He recently stood to become a member of the Labour Party NEC.

(This isn't political, it's just a fact :tiphat: )


----------



## Klassik

dogen said:


> I used to think that Americans were prounouncing aluminium incorrectly. But then in all fairness to them, they're bound to as they're spelling it incorrectly.


Yeah, well, at least we don't put rubbers on pencils. We have better uses for rubbers! :devil: Also, our cars don't have bonnets and boots. Then again, our cars do have gas!


----------



## Totenfeier

dogen said:


> I used to think that Americans were prounouncing aluminium incorrectly. But then in all fairness to them, they're bound to as they're spelling it incorrectly.


In my neck of the American woods, the material is usually pronounced "loomnum," so, problem solved for y'all.


----------

