Grammar Police Question
Jul 8th, 2004, 05:39 AM
#21
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way, you can get Fowler's "The King's English" online too. I provide a reference for the that/which rules:
http://www.bartleby.com/116/205.html
It doesn't seem to me that British and American English differ that much in the usage (regarding the use of "that" for restrictive clauses).
http://www.bartleby.com/116/205.html
It doesn't seem to me that British and American English differ that much in the usage (regarding the use of "that" for restrictive clauses).
Jul 8th, 2004, 05:44 AM
#22
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>....if this were published in an American paper, we would probably have accepted it.<
Well, some might accept it if it were to be published in an American newspaper, or even if it was published in an American newspaper.
Well, some might accept it if it were to be published in an American newspaper, or even if it was published in an American newspaper.
Jul 8th, 2004, 05:52 AM
#24
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>Since I love to think of these forums as 'talks', I vote for 'was' in the original posting.<
"A touch, a definite touch".
However, a keyboard is not an oral medium.
"A touch, a definite touch".
However, a keyboard is not an oral medium.
Jul 8th, 2004, 05:53 AM
#25
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah of course. Unless you were the character from the Janacek opera who's lived out a couple of centuries (see
http://www.music-lovers.co.il/prague...akropulos.html ).
All I meant to argue is that English usage has changed -- what's accepted then may not be accepted now, etc. Of course I was just being argumentative.
http://www.music-lovers.co.il/prague...akropulos.html ).
All I meant to argue is that English usage has changed -- what's accepted then may not be accepted now, etc. Of course I was just being argumentative.
Jul 8th, 2004, 06:25 AM
#27
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,719
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with 111op.
Here's what the people at Oxford Dictionaries have to say on the issue:
"In modern English the subjunctive mood still exists but is regarded in many contexts as optional. Use of the subjunctive tends to convey a more formal tone but there are few people who would regard its absence as actually wrong."
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexper...nctive?view=uk
Here's what the people at Oxford Dictionaries have to say on the issue:
"In modern English the subjunctive mood still exists but is regarded in many contexts as optional. Use of the subjunctive tends to convey a more formal tone but there are few people who would regard its absence as actually wrong."
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexper...nctive?view=uk
Jul 8th, 2004, 06:47 AM
#29
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a(n) MA in English, and am a certified English teacher (PA).
This post has given me a headache.
Thankfully, I have some gin handy.
It is better to be a descriptive grammarian, rather than a precriptive one.
Too many of you genuflect to Bishop Lowth.
This post has given me a headache.
Thankfully, I have some gin handy.
It is better to be a descriptive grammarian, rather than a precriptive one.
Too many of you genuflect to Bishop Lowth.
Jul 8th, 2004, 06:55 AM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
As "mentee" of Chicago Manual editor, I would say that "were" is MORE correct than "was," at least in formal American written English, because the internet is not, in fact, a spoken medium. Put another way, you don't use the indicative with "if." Assuming you know what the indicative is and you care.
As a teacher of newswriting, I also note that the Guardian apparently follows a style that does not capitalize "internet." That would be my choice, but interestingly, the Associated Press style manual requires it to be capitalized (which always bothers me).
And speaking of "whiches": certain purists on "that" vs. "which" would get upset with the phrase "all the mistakes which arise though doing that..." If it's ALL mistakes, then the modifying clause is completely restrictive and the word should be "that." Some manuals (like the AP) would prescribe that "which" only be used in non-restrictive cases and always preceded by a comma.
The that-which mess is a guaranteed brawl among editors, second only to the use of hyphens.
I'm not wedded to any of these things myself.... just sayin'.......
As a teacher of newswriting, I also note that the Guardian apparently follows a style that does not capitalize "internet." That would be my choice, but interestingly, the Associated Press style manual requires it to be capitalized (which always bothers me).
And speaking of "whiches": certain purists on "that" vs. "which" would get upset with the phrase "all the mistakes which arise though doing that..." If it's ALL mistakes, then the modifying clause is completely restrictive and the word should be "that." Some manuals (like the AP) would prescribe that "which" only be used in non-restrictive cases and always preceded by a comma.
The that-which mess is a guaranteed brawl among editors, second only to the use of hyphens.
I'm not wedded to any of these things myself.... just sayin'.......
Jul 8th, 2004, 06:56 AM
#33
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have an MA in English, but I think that I should switch to teach English instead. At least I seem pretty comfortable with all the rules.
(It's definitely an MA -- in fact, I was just looking at that link hanl sent and came across this:
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexper...r/anma?view=uk )
(It's definitely an MA -- in fact, I was just looking at that link hanl sent and came across this:
http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexper...r/anma?view=uk )
Jul 8th, 2004, 07:12 AM
#34
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim Thurber reports that, during his days at the New Yorker, Harold Ross (th editor) hated contradictory phrases, such as 'pretty ugly' and 'a little big'.
Anyone have other phrases such as these?
Anyone have other phrases such as these?
Jul 8th, 2004, 07:18 AM
#36
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
terribly happy
There're so many oxymorons out there.
Check this link, for example:
http://www.oxymorons.com/oxymorons.html
There're so many oxymorons out there.
Check this link, for example:
http://www.oxymorons.com/oxymorons.html
Jul 8th, 2004, 07:31 AM
#39
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, Foodsnob, I actually meant "preScriptive" grammarian (which I misspelled, dropping the "s"
, not "proscriptive" grammarian.
I am actually a good speller, but I am as blind as Helen Keller. My glasses don't help much.
The gin doesn't help either.
I HATE RULES.
It is arguable to use "a" or "an" MA.
I am leaving now because this is making me seasick.
, not "proscriptive" grammarian. I am actually a good speller, but I am as blind as Helen Keller. My glasses don't help much.
The gin doesn't help either.
I HATE RULES.
It is arguable to use "a" or "an" MA.
I am leaving now because this is making me seasick.
Jul 8th, 2004, 07:35 AM
#40
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Thin, you'll have to take it up with the Oxford people then regarding "an MA." (Now, let's not get into whether the period should be in or out of the quotation marks -- I've to look this one up.)
