 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 247 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614121 Today 0 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
When did this become allowable within the rules of English? I'm seeing it everywhere and it's fucking shocking. When did this change? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's verbal language. it's the same in norwegian.. you can say it, but not write it, and the line between spoken and written words is thinning out... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It happened around the time you became a grumpy old man |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's not allowable or correct but it's the done thing. I do it infrequently when posting here, but I always notice myself doing it. When posting or talking to people informally, on-line, it slips into usage, i think, because the full-stop does a good job of ending a point, and an out-of-place "and" does an even better job of increasing the emphasis on the next point, by isolating it and having that capital A on the "and". But yeah, it's appearing more and more in newspapers and i'm not particularly fond of that. Maybe they should read on the meaning of "and" ;P (Drunken Mastah had asked me to upload that but i'd forgotten to tell him, so, there you are mr. mastah. beware of the conclusion - it's shite. was finished in a 5-minute rush before the centre for language & communication studies closed) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
awesome! reading now! I just started philosophy of language today.. the lecturer is a bit confused and thus confusing to us, but I hope he'll get his act together... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's really not as good as i'd wished it to be but.. i think there was too much wishing and not enough working involved in its production. oh well! :) at least i got something submitted. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I may well be a grumpy old man but it's starting to become as prevalent as the K replacing a C. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
heh, I kind of fell off at boolean algebra, but that's probably just because I have no idea what boolean algebra is... haha |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeahh... that's where it got tough for me. i was meant to write an awful lot on that. the paper i was given, to draw ideas from, was the hoeksma one, and it's a headfuck. you'd find yourself halfway through a sentence without a clue to what he's going on about. i basically summarised the first 2 (of a total of 12) pages of it in my own paper.. shoddy work! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
actually, slightly related, and one of the most annoying errors we have (at least I get annoyed about it) is the å/og (to/and) error.. å is the equivalent of the "to" when in front of a verb: "to jump" ("å hoppe"), and in a sentence, it is to be used in front of the verb when it's the first verb of two in connection. Og (and) is the connective and should be between the two verbs. what one should write to express what one is saying: jeg liker å hoppe og løpe (I like to jump and run (it is quite possible "run" should even have an extra "to" when translated into english, but I'm leaving it out to keep it closer.. also, I may be wrong about that "to" being meant to be there, in which case leaving it out is in fact a good thing) the errors, which are all too common, are most likely due to the two words being so similar in pronounciation. they also become much much more clear and silly when translated to english: jeg liker og hoppe og løpe jeg liker og hoppe å løpe jeg liker å hoppe å løpe (I like and jump and run I like and jump to run I like to jump to run) in fact, the last sentence would even make sense in english, if it was possible and/or necessary to perform jumping to be able to run. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Those are the worst examples ever. Who eats falafel and regrets it? AAAAAAAAAAnd Chris isn't a grumpy old man. Bad grammar makes me want to kill. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's incredible. yeah, ties in exactly with what i wrote about in the middle of that essay... only the distortion of meaning is far more extreme. very interesting. great pity too. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sorry but my methamphetamine addiction example is literally the single best sentence in any academic paper, ever. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's actually always been allowable, it's just that some particularly anal person told everyone you couldn't and then it spread...was reading about it in Bill Bryson's "Mother Tongue"...well worth a read...same as ending sentences with prepositions, splitting infinitives and so on...there's no reason on Earth why any of those three things are "bad" English... And another thing, how long have people been saying "And another thing?" :-) But I don't want to stop giving examples! etc. etc. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
But i want to! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And thats that. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Kids intuitively know how to speak...ever try telling a kid you can't start sentences with and or but? They look at you slightly weirdly... :-) Ah, to be a kid again... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Language has to be publically verified. You can't have a private language, so it can't have been just one person that changed the whole structure of the English language. It would have to have been publically agreed nationwide. As soon as it becomes publically verified, if someone breaks the new rules, it does become bad English because they are not using proper sentences, by definition, because we have made the rules and don't allow them to be anything else |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"and that's that" should come at the end of a sentence. "But I want to!" is a perfectly valid example - only it's a piece of dialogue. So it's all good, even if it was in a book. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I did start reading that book but I got bored. Shame as the others are good. Language does evolve, I admit that but this is something else. As for for the "And another thing" statement. I always thought it was "blah blah blah; and another thing." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
there's a reason for cases of prescriptivism like this though. it's not anal-retentiveness. it's for ease of reading. that's why we have punctuation.. not just to differentiate between the meaning of "its" and "it's", but to help the reader, just like with a comma or full stop. a badly placed "and" does the opposite of this. it impedes the flow of reading - and not just because the reader thinks "oh that's bad English." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And who was the one person who first decided that? ;-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's good, I reckon his worst is Made In America, but that's only relevant to his other classics! :-) And another thing, you can say "and another thing" in reply to someone else's statement to you... :-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
god, i just had a thought - don't, for the love of god, read "the curious incident of the dog in the night time", chris :D about 95% of the sentences in that book begin with "and", but for good reason. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
My grammer is at best,crap. i only take comfort in the fact my penis is rather large. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, you can, but we're talking about written discourse here, not spoken dialogue. it's perfectly acceptable in spoken dialogue. even when it's written. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well obviously there's such a thing as "bad" English, i.e. that which interrupts the flow of a sentence or hinders the meaning, but as far as "oh you can't or shouldn't use those words in that order even though they make perfect sense"...what's the most appropriate phrase? Oh yeah, bollocks to it :-) If it makes sense, it's good English...simple really... :-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The one I enjoyed most was A Walk in the Woods. That was a good read. redrum: Never heard of that book, I'll leave it alone :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Hmmm, your spelling of "grammar" isn't too hot either..tee hee...and yeah you may say that but, no I'm not even gonna get into that(!) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well quite... :-) Wouldn't make much sense to include it in an essay... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah I like that and Down Under best... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Is that the one about the autistic guy? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"oh you can't or shouldn't use those words in that order even though they make perfect sense"...what's the most appropriate phrase? It's called "Prescriptivist Linguistics" and it's paid no attention by serious linguists. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And I've always prided myself on being a serious linguist... ;-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but i dunno its not like such a big deal? and anyway who cares. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, exactly. the writing style is just perfect, in my opinion.. the "and" at the beginning of each sentence produces this really rapid, darting train-of-thought. it gets a bit much after a while, but it's totally necessary and i think it's a really good literary technique. a great book. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What a superb review :| I've not read it, just seen it. Always been interested though, think i'll buy it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Being an English major, I am also sick of this. But it's so easy! :P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
not benign an english major i dont care. but i fucking cunt flaps? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I always notice when I do it, and often when other people do it, but I ceased to care a long time ago. I still get disturbed when people screw up it/it's/your/you're and stuff like that, but I've trained myself to just smirk and move on, rather than imagining myself punching them in the face. That was just immature. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I notice my spelling and grammar mistakes less and less. The internet has eroded my ability to see errors. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I care because you do. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ha! fuck off! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
singular possessive "it" is "it's", isn't it? Or is it just "its". Sometimes I say "its" because I think "it's" might be confused with the contraction "it is". And does the comma come after the """ or before it? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
or is it "its'"? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"the bunny made its/its'/it's way to the bunny hole, where something funny would happen." which "it" is it, I actually have wanted this cleared up for some time |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's = it is "Hi, scup_bucket," said r40f. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
like arf said, and its is comparable to, for example 'his', (not hi's). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
scud_bucket collected his car today. it's just been in the garage getting its new tyres fitted. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
a better example would be "hers", not "her's". "hi's" doesn't make any sense from the get-go, but people do seem tempted to write "her's". |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
