Inspired by Berlin

Berlin posted a reply in Paul McGee's thread about English phrase usage.

Set my mind atwitter so here I go with a rant.

:ranton:there has been a creeping invasion of the language by wrongly used phrases,
poor grammar and plain ignorance. While we all make typos and some slips of the tongue,
much of what is heard is just inexcusable!!!:~
A prime example is "from between to":fit::fit:. The phrases that should be used are
" between x and y'' or "from x to y". I have even herd theses mix ups on the ABC of
all places!!

Take the use of "seen" and "saw".
"I seen" just sends me into a frenzy. It should be "I saw". Seen needs the help of an
auxiliary such as had, has, have or was.

"You" is both singular and plural. You two, you three, you lot - NOT youse. There is no such word.
When waiters ask "Are youse alright?" I now reply by saying "Yes, wes are fine."

Past tenses also get a hiding " I rung him last night" NO! "I rang him last night."

"They fleed the scene" @$%# NO! " They fled the scene." Award winning journalist Lisa Wilkinson
made this blunder at least twice during one show I was Watching!!!!

I could go on .... but:rantoff:

Best one I ever heard was during a photo shoot many years ago: I made some comment about a particular aspect of the pic that could have been improved and the chap that was my assistant for the day quipped:
"You should have tooken it over there".

Cracked me up.

Arthur, we must have been taught English by the same type of teacher. Without really trying I was always in a slightly higher grade of class for the English subject at school. Apparently when I was in Kindergarten loooonnnnnggggg time ago I would pronounce "feathers" as "fevvers". Miss Rose soon changed me to the right pronunciation and now I get annoyed when I hear "fevvers" in stead of "feathers". As I said I have no memory of her training me but my sisters do remember.

Another thing on this Forum that get my blood pressure up is the use/misuse of the word "than"/"then"
Eg "I like this better than the other one" This is the correct use!
NOT
"I like this better then the other one" This is incorrect
It seems that a lot of people have completely forgotten that there are two words that look so similar but are used differently.

Well thats off my chest.....When its all said and done I DO like to read alot of what people put on here no matter how it is written. The content is the treasure not not so much the description

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chambezio

"I like this better then the other one" This is incorrect

---

Not if you're a Kiwi. :D

Agreed Chambezio!! I love the forums and I was not in any way
trying to be critical of the members because, as you say, the content
is the treasure.I work on the theory that some people, like myself,
have had better chances in life than others.

It irks me no end, however, when those who really should
know better- and wish to pontificate - show such ignorance of the language.

my favourite

their, there and they're

and

specific v pacific

Quote:

---

"You" is both singular and plural. You two, you three, you lot - NOT youse. There is no such word.
When waiters ask "Are youse alright?" I now reply by saying "Yes, wes are fine."

---

My late mother in law did that, and was usually met with a blank stare.

I share your concern. One of my pet hates is the "greengrocers' apostrophe", that is, an apostrophe used in a plural instead of in the possessive case. Yesterday, I pointed out their incorrect use of the apostrophe to two of my students. Today's assignment had the same error.
Another pet hate is the use of "loose" when the writer means "lose".

Arthur

I am with you on this and I used to get really worked up over the misuse of the language, but I try to be less judgemental than in previous times, but not always successfully.

I may have mentioned before elsewhere on the Forums that language is dynamic and continually evolving. In fact in English it is the pedantic nature combined with misuse that allows our literature to be so rich. I'm reluctant to condemn anybody's use of the language as it offers so much licence to have some fun :) .

Regards
Paul

English is my second (actually sixth) language, when I came here I could only say "This is a yellow cop and this is a blue cop", I could not hear the difference in cop and cup which made it very difficult when I was learning shorthand a few years later.
My English was learnt/learned by listening to people not by formal teaching so yes,my conversational mastering of the English language is rather good , however the finer nuances of the language eludes me.

Back to subject :)
After 40+ years here, I still find it difficult to understand the logic in "much less" and 100+ percent.
Much means more and less means less so how can the 2 be combined?
As percent meant part(s) per hundred is 125 percent then a negative or a positive number or is it just nonsense?

Another phrase that gets to me is "to tell you the truth" or "to be honest".
Does that mean the person is usually in the habit of lying or being dishonest?

Then kil-o-metre. You don't say kil-o-watt or kil-o-gram so why kill poor old ometre,he doesn't deserve that, he is quite innocent :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexS

My late mother in law did that, and was usually met with a blank stare.

I share your concern. One of my pet hates is the "greengrocers' apostrophe", that is, an apostrophe used in a plural instead of in the possessive case. Yesterday, I pointed out their incorrect use of the apostrophe to two of my students. Today's assignment had the same error.
Another pet hate is the use of "loose" when the writer means "lose".

---

Was going to do an absolute tirade about apostrophes but decided against it!!

My wife, Ana, who is fluent in three languages (English being her third ) and reasonably adept in a couple of others, goes off her face when
she sees incorrect apostrophe usage. Makes you wonder, does it not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAISAY

Much means more and less means less so how can the 2 be combined? "Much" actually means large so those expressions mean "a large amount less or more", more or less. :D
As percent meant part(s) per hundred is 125 percent then a negative or a positive number or is it just nonsense?

---

It is indeed nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAISAY

Another phrase that gets to me is "to tell you the truth" or "to be honest".
Does that mean the person is usually in the habit of lying or being dishonest?

---

Quite possibly, esp. if it comes from the lips of a politician.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SAISAY

Then kil-o-metre. You don't say kil-o-watt or kil-o-gram so why kill poor old ometre,he doesn't deserve that, he is quite innocent :)

---

Yes, one of my pet hates is the mispronunciation of kilometres. So often people say ki-lom-etres when it's actually kilo-metres.

kilograms: kilo-grams (and you never hear anyone say ki-log-rams)
kilowatts: kilo-watts
kilometres: kilo-metres

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artme

My wife, Ana, who is fluent in three languages (English being her third ) and reasonably adept in a couple of others, goes off her face when she sees incorrect apostrophe usage. Makes you wonder, does it not?

---

It does however English (written) is a very difficult to learn, even if English is your native tongue.

But, to jump on the bandwagon, spelling words phonetically drives me spare.

Portuguese, Ana's first language, is a very phonetic language so spelling in Portuguese is
fairly simple once you learn the symbol/sound combinations.

As for apostrophes, well the English system leaves a lot to be desired.

Funny thing about spelling in English. We have about 57 standard English sounds but something
like 350+ ways to spell those sounds. Given that it is no wonder that some find spelling difficult.
Of course the language is like that to some extent because it is a shameless raider of other
languages.

As an ex teacher spelling could be a bugbear but I always found bad handwriting to be more
frustrating!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artme

Funny thing about spelling in English. We have about 57 standard English sounds but something
like 350+ ways to spell those sounds. Given that it is no wonder that some find spelling difficult.

---

Now you're really pressing my buttons Art.

As far as I can see, English is THE language for subtle differences and nuances (because of that raiding I suppose). However, the cost of that is that's it's probably the most difficult language of its type to learn.

Imagine an ESL person trying to wrap their (there? they're?) heads around the syllable "ough". As I recall, there are at least five different pronunciations of the same cluster of letters:

1. Through, as in threw or thru.
2. Rough, as in ruff
3. Thorough, as in thurra, although many say it closer to thurro (USA)
4. Indeed, although as in all-tho
5. Bough, as in bow down

6. Lough as in loch