# Discussing grammar with my friend and me [not I]



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

It's not likely we'll ever be able to change any of the bad habits that have taken root, blossomed and are now casting their vile seeds everywhere, including in mass media where one would rightly expect to see correct grammar, pronunciation and spelling. Even teachers are ignorant in this area. My dear neighbor is a retired school teacher. An example of something she might say would be "George went to town with Jean and I". That affects me like [or should it be as?] fingernails on a blackboard!


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

amazingrace said:


> That affects me like [or should it be as?] fingernails on a blackboard!


_Like_ would be correct in this sentence because there is no verb after _like_, therefore it is acting as a preposition, which is correct usage. However, if you had said "That affects me _as if _someone was scraping fingernails on a blackboard" then _as if_ would be correct. This rule really counts more in formal writing. For a message board, no one is going to call you out on _like_ vs. _as_. At least they shouldn't.

BTW, props for using affects correctly. That's one that bothers me.


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

tylerm713 said:


> ...BTW, props for using affects correctly. That's one that bothers me.


The effect of the misuse of "affect" affects me in ways that I'm hesitant to describe because of the adverse effect it might have on the one who misuses "affect", or for that matter, "effect"! /img/vbsmilies/smilies/crazy.gif


----------



## chrislehrer (Oct 9, 2008)

tylerm713 said:


> _Like_ would be correct in this sentence because there is no verb after _like_, therefore it is acting as a preposition, which is correct usage. However, if you had said "That affects me _as if _someone was scraping fingernails on a blackboard" then _as if_ would be correct. This rule really counts more in formal writing. For a message board, no one is going to call you out on _like_ vs. _as_. At least they shouldn't.
> 
> BTW, props for using affects correctly. That's one that bothers me.


If I were marking your paper, I would give you a very slight ding here.

That affects me _like_ someone scraping fingernails on a blackboard [implied: would affect me].

That affects me _as if_ someone *were* scraping fingernails on a blackboard.

The latter example requires the subjunctive mood. Really, both of the sentences require it, but in the first case the verb of the dependent clause is implied anyway --- *would* affect me.

On the words "affect" and "effect," I'm entirely in agreement with all of you.

Don't get me started about "it's", nor about "their" as a singular, neuter, possessive pronoun (e.g., every student should do *their* own homework).


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

ChrisLehrer said:


> If I were marking your paper, I would give you a very slight ding here.
> 
> That affects me _like_ someone scraping fingernails on a blackboard [implied: would affect me].
> 
> ...


Yeah, your right about subjunctive.

My last sentence contains perhaps my biggest pet peeve in grammar. Your, you are. Come on people.


----------



## boar_d_laze (Feb 13, 2008)

You're also correct that the plural possessive, "their," was inappropriate for a single actor.  Indeed, every student should do its own homework.

BDL


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

The problem with using "their" as singular is understandable, though.

Most people instinctively shy away from using "it" when referring to people. Once upon a time we merely used "he, his, etc." In other words, the masculine form held in both the male and general cases.

Nowadays, of course, such usage is politically incorrect. Among other things this has led to confusion, ambiguity, and awkwardness of sentance structure as people struggle to find the right form.

Personally, I find your general solution (i.e., using the female form in the general case) repugnant. All it does is reverse a cultural bias, without actually solving the problem.


----------



## gobblygook (Aug 26, 2010)

When so many people can't determine the difference between "lose" and "loose", or the difference between "to", "two", and "too", I give up on everything else.


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

A panda eats, shoots and leaves.

_This is a great thread to have made a typo in_.


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

_BTW, props for using affects correctly._

Grammer aside, I just can't keep up with today's abbreviations and meanings.

This one has been turning up a lot, later. Please: What is, or are, props in this usage?


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

KYHeirloomer said:


> _BTW, props for using affects correctly._
> 
> Grammer aside, I just can't keep up with today's abbreviations and meanings.
> 
> This one has been turning up a lot, later. Please: What is, or are, props in this usage?


Yes, inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

Other irritations:

1. Saying rout, when meaning route.

"What route [root] did the general take to rout [rowt] the enemy?"

2. Data is not datta.


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

amazingrace said:


> Other irritations:
> ...
> 2. Data is not datta.


And "data" is plural, not singular, that is "datum" (and THAT is why my Mother insisted I take Latin in high school!) /img/vbsmilies/smilies/crazy.gif


----------



## ishbel (Jan 5, 2007)

Don't know whether it's just Scotland - but the inability to spell definitely correctly. I even HEAR it spoken as DEFINATELY! n And lots of my students use that spelling in written work.


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

PeteMcCracken said:


> And "data" is plural, not singular, that is "datum" (and THAT is why my Mother insisted I take Latin in high school!) /img/vbsmilies/smilies/crazy.gif


This is correct. However, in modern usage, I think it is often acceptable to use some singular Latin nouns with an "s" at the end. For example, the correct way to refer to more than one stadium would be a group of "stadia". However, most people accept the usage of "stadiums" as well.

I really hate when people say "I could care less" or "I can't stress the importance of..." Both of these are counter intuitive, and anytime I hear someone say one of these phrases, I want to punch them.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

Ishbel said:


> Don't know whether it's just Scotland - but the inability to spell definitely correctly. I even HEAR it spoken as DEFINATELY! n And lots of my students use that spelling in written work.


OOPS! I'm guilty of this. Even though I know the difference, that pesky A sneaks in there. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/blushing.gif


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

This one has popped up recently, and it's very irritating to me:

"Suddenly the light bulb went _OFF_ in my head, and I had a great idea". Who started that? When I get a great idea, a light bulb goes _*ON! *_


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

Maybe a bomb went off?


----------



## chefross (May 5, 2010)

My experiences as a manager had to deal with applications. I would always take the bad spellers and place them in a separate stack first, then read the ones with better grammar.

When I found that ALL the applications had grammatical/spelling errors, I had to go back and try another idea to separate the good from the bad.

With spell check and online dictionaries there is no excuse for bad grammar.

Another word that gets me is:

"irregardless."........

...or when people say..." On Saturday *we's *going to the city to see a movie.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

"My sister and I's dog ran away".    We know that's wrong,  but what is correct? 

1."My sister and my's dog ran away" ... not

2, "My sister and my dog ran away" ... looks like the sister ran away also

3. "Our dog ran away" ... I like this only for it's simple correctness,  but it fails to define who "our" might be.

4. share your own version


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

How about "Our dog, my sisters' and mine, ran away"?

or

"My sister's and my dog ran away"? (Oops, that sounds like two dogs ran away)


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

I believe you have it right Pete, in option 2. I haven't looked it up to see if it's correct, but that appears to be the right way to say it. Just an awkward sentence all around.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

Mangy cur...I should have closed the gate. Then we wouldn't have this problem. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/lookaround.gif


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

We're going a little astray, when we look at the spoken word instead of the written word. Nobody speaks grammatically correct. Nor should they. Fully correct grammer is reserved for formal occasions, not day to day speech.

The real problem is the education system. Those who attended parochial school, or who otherwise studied Latin, tend to be more grammatically correct than those who attended public school.

Quick test for public school attendees only: Did you ever really learn to parse a sentance---or even know what that means?

_Another word that gets me is:_

_"irregardless."........_

Doesn't that just set your teeth on edge!

Another one:

Flamable----inflamable---nonflamable. Which one means the s-it won't burn?


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

_I would always take the bad spellers........_

Just out of curiosity, Chefross, what does spelling and grammer have to do with a person's ability to cook? I never thought of them as requisites to work BOH.

Or are we talking about a different job classification?


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

_With spell check and online dictionaries there is no excuse for bad grammar._

You'd think so. But most people do not.

Saw a study, a few years back, on email habits. When it came to spelling and grammer checkers, turns out that editors and English teachers were the least likely to use them in their personal messaging.

And before anyone jumps on it, I'm fully aware that electronic communication is the only place where "message" is a verb.


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

KYHeirloomer said:


> Quick test for public school attendees only: Did you ever really learn to parse a sentance---or even know what that means?


I'm a proud graduate of a public high school (in Louisiana, no less). Stereotypes would say I'm terrible with grammar. While I'm nowhere near a linguistic expert, I think my abilities are on par with most other equally educated individuals. To your question: yes. I can still remember breaking down sentences and drawing diagrams to identify parts of speech, determine the correct usage of modifiers, etc. However, I think the education I received was far better than what some receive in public schools.

However, if we want to get into the "plight of the education system" debate, I believe we first have to turn to the parents before looking at the schools themselves. Even in the schools that I went to -- which I feel are well above average, particularly for the deep south -- there were plenty of students that simply didn't learn some fundamentals of English, mathematics, etc. So what is the difference between one of those other students and myself? All I can deduce is the level of parenting and motivation. Both of my parents have baccalaureate degrees, and one parent has a master's degree in special education. Needless to say, my parents understand the value of a good education, and therefore pushed me to learn all that I could in school. Expectations were high, and so were the consequences for bad grades. If we really want to fix the education system in the United States, we have to start with the parents of the children that are attending public schools.

I shall step down from my soap box now...


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

Di-A-Gram!In my short experience (graduated HS in 1960 and took Latin), most HS and even college students have little, if any, grasp as to the meaning of the word as relates to the study of English.And I take umbrage at the "verbalization" of nouns, especially certain "titles", such as "cheffing"! WTHDTM?


----------



## chefross (May 5, 2010)

KYHeirloomer said:


> _I would always take the bad spellers........_
> 
> Just out of curiosity, Chefross, what does spelling and grammer have to do with a person's ability to cook? I never thought of them as requisites to work BOH.
> 
> Or are we talking about a different job classification?


I have my standards and quirks just like everybody else I guess. If I was hiring for a dishwasher, I don't think it's a problem, but if I were hiring for a cook, who has to read recipes, calculate quantities, take an inventory and create reports, then I feel these things are important.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

KYHeirloomer said:


> Fully correct grammer is reserved for formal occasions, not day to day speech.


 I disagree completely with this statement. I went to an ordinary public school, but at a time when correctness was valued. Grammar is a social skill. Proper usage is always appropriate. In addition, it's quite easy to allow bad habits to creep in and become established if one is not careful.


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

So you're saying you never use slang, or colloquial, or idiomatic expressions? Never verbally end a sentance with a preposition? Never start a sentence with a dependent clause? Or answer one with a fragment? I reckon regionalisms are banned from your vocabulary as well?

_ I disagree completely with this statement._

Which, of course, is fully your right. But can you parse that sentence? My suggestion was that if you went to public school you probably can't. And, implied in that: if you can't parse it then you don't truly understand sentence structure. And if you don't understand structure, then you can't understand grammer and usage---no matter how hard you try.

Don't worry about it if you can't. I can't either. But I've successfully earned a living for more than 50 years by stringing words together, and judging the way others do so, by using the bane of English teachers: It just sounds right.


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

KYHeirloomer said:


> So you're saying you never use slang, or colloquial, or idiomatic expressions? Never verbally end a sentance with a preposition? Never start a sentence with a dependent clause? Or answer one with a fragment? I reckon regionalisms are banned from your vocabulary as well?


I think I'm guilty of all of those faults. It's tough to get the North Louisiana slang out sometimes. "Ain't" will never leave my spoken vocabulary. I end sentences with prepositions all the time. Everyone else does too. If you say you don't, you're lying.


----------



## petemccracken (Sep 18, 2008)

Oh dear, are you saying that a preposition is the wrong thing to end a sentence with? /img/vbsmilies/smilies/laser.gif


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

Not me, Pete. The strict grammarians.

Ending a sentence with a preposition is something I'm often guilty of.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

KYHeirloomer said:


> So you're saying you never use slang, or colloquial, or idiomatic expressions? Never verbally end a sentance with a preposition? Never start a sentence with a dependent clause? Or answer one with a fragment? I reckon regionalisms are banned from your vocabulary as well?
> 
> I'm not saying any of those things. I certainly do break the rules, most often in favor of convenience. However, I thought I made the point quite clear that correctness is not reserved for formal occasions. Correctness is appropriate at any time, in any place that one chooses to be correct, if that is the standard one has set for oneself.
> 
> ...


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

Regarding grammar, I'm probably more picky than the average person. The goal of verbal communication is to say or write something so that the recipient(s) understands what you mean, as precisely as possible. Right? If I have to figure out what someone means because they didn't express it well, they could use some improvement, imo. On the other hand, if what they say or write wasn't strictly correct, but I understood it very well, I say they have communicated well with me. If it's in a formal context, such as on a resume or in formal public speech, I say it (grammar) matters a lot.

Then there's taking writing to an art form, which some here do imo. I include KYH, Chris Lehrer and others in that (not that my opinion matters, jes sayin ...)


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

_completely=adjective_

Completely modifies how you disagree. Therefore, in this case, completely would be an adverb, no?


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

_not that my opinion matters, jes sayin ...)_

Of course your opinion matters, OY. Whatever gave you the idea that it wouldn't?

In this context, however, the opinion that matters most is that of an editor with a checkbook. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/peace.gif


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

_Proper usage is always appropriate. _

Yes it is. But you may not be using that phrase correctly.

In verbal communication, "proper usage" is defined as _the way the educated members of a community talk. _Putting aside any argument over how to define "educated," the key word there is "community." Thus, a New Yorker and somebody from Alabama might not understand each other, even though they are both speaking properly.

Or, to put a point on it, when one of my neighbors with a masters degree says, "I don't care to...." when he means the exact opposite, that is proper usage in this community, even though it would be ambiguous, at best, outside of Kentucky.

_I'm not saying any of those things. I certainly do break the rules, most often in favor of convenience. _

You're just proving my point---that people do not speak the way they write, and that the spoken word is more casual, and less constrained by formal rules. I would actually expand that to include writing on boards such as this, where few people actually pay attention to proper grammer, sentence structure, etc. In short, they write on message boards the way they talk. But I'd betcha the same person who comes across as semi-literate on a forum pays a lot more attention to those details when writing a report for work, or doing a homework assignment.

Thomas Jefferson was one of the worst public speakers in history because of that. He was such a perfectionist that he would be mentally editing and revising what he just said, which would cause him to stumble on the next statement, etc. But, when you can write the way he did, who cares how you talked. Compare, for instance:

"You been screwin' with us, and we ain't gonna take it no more," with the American Declaration of Independence. At base they both say exactly the same thing. But I'll take Jefferson's version. And, just to put a point on the written/verbal thing, I have no doubt that Sam Adams, when rabble rousing out in the streets, used some version of the first sentance.


----------



## fridaybaker (Oct 7, 2009)

As essentially a newbie here on this site, I'm absolutely fascinated that I've stumbled across a conversation between chefs and assorted foodies on points of grammar. Although highly entertaining (just the thought of it!) I'm quite heartened that there are people around, aside from erudite itellectuals hiding out in the Academy, to whom such things matter. Although I do consider myself a victim (sic) of public schools, the fault of my finding myself at a very late age in life, practically illiterate, is certainly my own fault as well. However, I am making a concerted effort to educate myself, daunting and frustrating as it seems sometimes. (When in the heck does one use the pesky "that" as in "He told me he went to the store" vs. "He told me THAT he went to the store"?? I find often I don't even know how to look these silly things up!

All that aside, my pet peeve is the politicization of language. No wonder some of us don't know what's correct!  We either have to call people "its" or have our verbs and pronouns disagree, so as not to offend women. Or, perhaps, enlightened men. Even worse, in my opinion, is that somehow the grammatical term "gender" came to be used exclusively for the "correct-for-thousands-of-years" word  -sex. Now that, to me, is like nails on a chalkboard (...would be!)  All this use of politically correct vocabulary and grammar is causing us to bend into grammatical contortions at best; at worst, IMO, it takes all of the "colour" out of life. Okay, off the soap box and back to the food forums.......


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

Sounds to me like you're doing a pretty good job, FB.

FWIW, modern style is to eshew the use of "that" in that sort of usage. Most of the time, if you leave it out, nobody, even the strictest of grammarians, will notice.


----------



## boar_d_laze (Feb 13, 2008)

Until reading the above, I was confused and thought the rule was, "Never end a sentence with a proposition." Consequently I avoided writing to or speaking with women who might tempt me. 

Armed with new knowledge regarding sentence termination, I will never again allow a verb to dangle.  And as to prepositional endings, which hell shall we consign them to?  Hopefully, people will learn to write and speak better. 

BDL


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

boar_d_laze said:


> Until reading the above, I was confused and thought the rule was, "Never end a sentence with a proposition." Consequently I avoided writing to or speaking with women who might tempt me.
> 
> Armed with new knowledge regarding sentence termination, I will never again allow a verb to dangle. And as to prepositional endings, which hell shall we consign them to? Hopefully, people will learn to write and speak better.
> 
> BDL


/img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif/img/vbsmilies/smilies/lol.gif You're another artist!


----------



## dc sunshine (Feb 26, 2007)

Ahhh this thread has given me many laughs. In my household, my daughter is the grammar deputy, our boarder is the grammar sheriff, but I am the grammar witch.

Ever heard of the Oxford comma? I've just used one above /img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif,


----------



## gypsy2727 (Mar 9, 2010)

Einstein could not spell

I wonder if his advisors minded the spelling and grammatical errors in his documents?

Here's something Einstein and his advisors would have appreciated....."s" be used instead of the soft"c".The hard "c" be replaces with"k".The troublesome"ph" be replaced with "f".No silent "e"s.Replace "th"by "z" and "w"by"v". The troublesome"ou" replaced by the simple"o" and "u" replacing "a"

Und efter ,ve vil be speking German like zey vunted in ze forst plas!

Cheers to the Geniuses who installed Spell and Grammer check! /img/vbsmilies/smilies/thumb.gif

Gypsy


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

Deutsche ist ein kinderspiel.


----------



## the-boy-nurse (Aug 9, 2010)

As one who often bridges the gap between Latin formality and plain English, I am struck by KYH's comparison of Jefferson and Adams. (I believe plain English is a sub-dialect of English, widely spoken by the indigenous, formerly immigrant peoples of North America). What's Ironic is that in medicine we can make up words and as long as the roots are Latin, nobody questions their validity. I wonder if the overuse of complex language by experts in a field is an attempt to insulate ones profession from infiltration by the lay person. As cool as it is to chart "the Pt offers subjective c/o puritus, with noted urticaria to posterior trunk." when I call the physician to ask for benadryl I say, "I gave You're post op in 15 morphine like you ordered and he got a a rash and is itching like a banshee." (Do Banshee's itch.) This is a mostly conscious effort on my part to cut through the BS. What's funny is that when speaking with teenagers I specifically focus on maintaining proper grammar in a vain attempt to minimize the use of the word "like" anytime someone paraphrases. Maybe I'm just a non-conformist.

Dark confessions, when a patient tells me they are nauseous I always chuckle to myself.

  Has anyone noticed that since the rise of texting, punctuation has become inter-changeable? I'm tired of commas and periods let's go with a semi colon here, or maybe  dash, a dash would be cool, no no an ellipses...


----------



## gypsy2727 (Mar 9, 2010)

tylerm713 said:


> Deutsche ist ein kinderspiel.


LOL......be that as it may the double letters take up alot of space and we could take the c right off our keyboard...just one less letter! What about the word Fotograf ...again shortened by 20%!

Besides being one of the world leaders in recycling,reducing waste ,conserving water (cause they have to) amazing cuisine and wine...I think we need to rethink the English language

Deutsche is looking very attractive......It vud kler up ulut uf kunfusun


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

Unfortunately, Gypsy, as everyone who has tried it has found out, the one thing you cannot preach in this country is spelling reform. That's why none of the synthetic languages ever caught on very widely.

Or, as GBS was credited with saying:

"What do you call people who speak Ido?

Idiots"

And if you ever need to highlight just how bad English is, in that regard, let me put it to you straight: English has eight ways of spelling the sound "a," two of which appear in this sentence.


----------



## boar_d_laze (Feb 13, 2008)

English is a pastiche of many languages.  Both the grammar and spelling reflect that.  "Photograph" is spelled the way it is, not so much as a simple phoneme, but also as a memorialization that its root derivation is Greek and both the prefix and suffix roots contained the letter "phi."  

As a side note, a great deal of medical terminology stems from Greek rather than Latin; although Latin's dominance is a common misconception.  I recall a story about Rene Laennec's friends trying to help him name the stethoscope by mixing Latin and Greek and how irritated he became.  Our modern failures to differentiate follow a long tradition of (pervasive) medical ignorance.    

English grammar rules are even more complicated than those governing spelling as they attempt to cobble three major language groups -- Celtic, Germanic/Scandinavian, and Latinate -- together.  Although more complicated, English is very much like Latin in one way:  To speak properly is to speak elegantly.

Amo, amas, amat,

BDL


----------



## gypsy2727 (Mar 9, 2010)

Oh what fun it is to ride on a one horse open sleigh!

(meaning I'm usually the lone wolf on these conversations......lol)

KY and BDL ....did you happen to get the joking sarcasm behind my threads? You two Americans should be ashamed of yourself....not lightening up on a subject so close to home for both of you.

Meaning ( no offence intended) America is the country most criticized for the misuse of the spoken word.  I believe you call it English....but in what State?

Lighten up boys.....yes BDL, I have worked for one of the catering giants in Canada and he is as Greek as they come and YES all words are Greek and derived from Greek according to him....lol.....and BTW I did take Latin in school....My brother in law is Greek and lectures me everytime I see him on  all words derived from the  Greek language....hahahaha

Peace

Gypsy

edited for grammatical errors


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

I don't think many people realize how many similarities there are with English and German. Sentence structure is much more similar than with English/Latin. Many words are either the same or cognitives.


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

_KY and BDL ....did you happen to get the joking sarcasm behind my threads_?

Apparently not. Perhaps you're not as obvious as you think you are.


----------



## dc sunshine (Feb 26, 2007)

Gotta just love mobile/cell phone texting abbreviations as a way to destroy a language.  Probably not only in English I'm guessing.

As in:

BTW = by the way

FYI = for your information

BFFL =  best friend for life

WTF = (well I think we can all guess that one correctly)

C U L8R = see you later

....etc etc ad nauseum infinitum.

Plus all the "smilies"

XD = laughing happy face

DX = angry sad frustrated face

:$ = (well I'm not really sure on this one)

=> = stupidly happy

=< = really sad

Oh yes, I have 3 teenagers in the house, BTW.


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

German has three genders: masculine, feminine and neuter. Goetterverdammerung. If you want to put a noun in a sentence, you have to know which of the three genders it's in before you can say anything.

One way I wish we had learned more from German is how they are allowed to make one very long word from a few just long ones. "Hottentotentantenattentat" is a for-fun word, but follows the rules. Strassenkreuzung is a commonly-used word, from what I learned. Strumpf, pronounced "shtroompf" is one of my favorites for its sound. I like the way German sounds, and it's more consistent than either English or American.


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

DC Sunshine said:


> Gotta just love mobile/cell phone texting abbreviations as a way to destroy a language. Probably not only in English I'm guessing.
> 
> As in:
> 
> ...


That's a whole other language,imo

btw, I use it in chat /img/vbsmilies/smilies//smile.gif

May I say I know another language, aside from American LOL


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

I like how logical German is. "Schrank" means cabinet or somewhere you store things. "Kleider" means clothes. Therefore, a closet is a "kleiderschrank". My favorite, however, is the German word for a refrigerator: "kühlschrank". "Kühl" means - wait for it - cool. Love it.

However, perhaps the most interesting German word, particularly for foodies, is "Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz", which refers to the laws that dictate how beef is packed. 

I also like that, similarly to Spanish, how a word looks is how it's pronounced. There are no surprises. Just a few rules, then you can pronounce anything, including the monster above.


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

tylerm713 said:


> I also like that, similarly to Spanish, how a word looks is how it's pronounced. There are no surprises. Just a few rules, then you can pronounce anything, including the monster above.


Like Hindi, an almost perfectly phonetic language ... it's pronounced how it's spelled, and it's spelled how it's pronounced. That makes things a lot easier! By the way, I've read that Arabic is the closest to being a perfectly phonetic language. fwiw lol


----------



## catering101 (Jun 27, 2010)

amazingrace said:


> "My sister and I's dog ran away". We know that's wrong, but what is correct?
> 
> 1."My sister and my's dog ran away" ... not
> 
> ...


"The dog that my sister and I own ran away." That's a better version that I can think of. /img/vbsmilies/smilies//smile.gif


----------



## boar_d_laze (Feb 13, 2008)

You'd say, "My sister's dog."  You'd say, "My dog."  Put them together and you have the correct form, "My sister's and my dog ran away" -- a perfectly proper presentation. 

What's the cause of the confusion?  Is it the the repetition of the word "my?" 

If so, look at it this way.  "My" is the proper first person possessive pronoun as subject to the participle (in other words it's the possesive form of "I," while "mine" is the possessive form of "me").  The first "my" possesses "sister," and the second posesses "dog."  Since the phrase "My sister's dog" does not convey joint ownership, while using the second "my" does even though the word repeats it is not redundant, since each refers to a different possession.

If you each had a dog which ran away, or the two of you shared ownership of two or more dogs which ran away, you could say "Both my sister's and my dogs ran away."  But because that's ambiguous you might want to clarify.  

On a related subject, I think it's fair to say something like "Modern Spanish is closer to classic Latin than Italian or French," but it's a lot harder to peg English and a near relationship to another language -- or even language group -- over another.  Modern English and German syntax and grammar are quite different with parts of speech appearing in completely different order.  The Romans and the Normans gave as much to English as the Angles, Jutes, Danes and Saxons.  German and English grammars are no more similar than English grammar and the Romance grammars. 

One last thing:  "Discussing grammar with my friend and me," is not a well constructed phrase.  "Me" is redundant as it is implied.  The proper construction is, "Discussing grammar with my friend."  If you needed to Moreover, if it weren't redundant, "I" would be proper and not "me," because "friend and I" were subjects of the verb "discussing," even though they appeared after it.  Like it or not, subjects sometimes appearing after the participle is one of English's cuter tricks.

BDL


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

Both of my sisters and both of my dogs ran away. What do I do now?


----------



## iplaywithfire (Jul 5, 2010)

Quote:


KYHeirloomer said:


> _BTW, props for using affects correctly._
> 
> Grammer aside, I just can't keep up with today's abbreviations and meanings.
> 
> This one has been turning up a lot, later. Please: What is, or are, props in this usage?


I don't really feel as though I should be posting in this thread, even though I do think grammar is important. I struggle with sentence structure and punctuation incessantly, and I am sure that I use commas way too frequently, but I can't seem to avoid it [chagrin]

Anyway, I didn't see a response to this question, and I think I know, but I am not absolutely certain that I haven't always put more meaning into it than there really is. As I have always understood it, the use of "props" in this fashion is a slang expansion on the connotations of the original meaning. Like the original meaning of the word, it still means 'material things', and one could go so far as to include the connotation of 'for theatrical purposes', but the 'theatrical purposes' part of the meaning is understood as to apply to all material things by its more generalized usage. So it trivializes the importance of materialism as a lifestyle philosophy by referring to all things of material value as mere theatrical devices, but it also acknowledges the significance of the gratification and reward system by being used in a positive sense. The slang word has taken on even more meaning by becoming more generalized, simply being used to denote a positive recognition. Now one can simply toss some respect at someone and acknowledge them by saying: "Props." It is no longer necessary to actually give someone any 'thing' other than the word as a proper reward that has intrinsic value.

Or, I could be way off-base, and it's just a shortened version of the word "proper" morphed into a noun. In which case, I would not have properly understood the meaning, and I'd get no props.


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

In that sentence, if anything were needed after .....with my friend (and, you're correct, there isn't) I would have said "myself," rather than either of the others. Some possibilities for tha phrase:

Discussing grammer with my friend......

My friend and I were discussing grammer, and.....

Me and my friend were discussing grammer, and....

But the fact is, friends don't let friends discuss grammer. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/thumb.gif


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

boar_d_laze said:


> Modern English and German syntax and grammar are quite different with parts of speech appearing in completely different order.


While there are some noticeable differences, I'm not sure I would say that German and English syntax is _completely_ different. They are certainly more similar than English and French.


----------



## kyheirloomer (Feb 1, 2007)

And, in fact, English is classified as a teutonic language, not a Latin one.

However, the language the is most similar to English syntax is Swedish. That's why many Swedes were able to learn it quickly when it became an official second language: They just read the subheads while watching TV, and had no problems with syntax. None of that pen of my aunt crap that gives us trouble with, say, French.

On the other hand, if you think you're good with languages, try learning Hungarian as an adult.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

KYHeirloomer said:


> In that sentence, if anything were needed after .....with my friend (and, you're correct, there isn't) I would have said "myself," rather than either of the others. Some possibilities for tha phrase:


As the object pronoun, "me" was used correctly in this sentence. The simple way to know when "myself" is incorrect is to divide the sentence in to two separate phrases. You would say "discussing grammar with my friend". You would not say "discussing grammar with myself" [unless you were talking to yourself].

"Myself" is a reflexive pronoun. It's correct usage would be to _refer back to the subject_. For instance: "I treated myself to dinner out" , or "I cannot imagine myself wearing that dress"

Furthermore, while many times "Discussing grammar with my friends" might be sufficient, it is not always. In the thread title, my intention [which I failed to make clear] was to indicate that _others_ besides my friend and me might be included in the discussion. The greater point which seems to have been missed by most, is that it is not correct to use the pronoun "I" in that sentence.


----------



## amazingrace (Jul 28, 2006)

KYHeirloomer said:


> Me and my friend were discussing grammer, and....


 YIKES! do you really think this is correct?

To test this one also, divide the sentence into two separate ones and see how they fly on their own.

"My friend was discussing grammar". is correct. " Me was discussing grammar" ... no so good.


----------



## oregonyeti (Jun 16, 2007)

I was educated here:



I'm the guy who's pointing the paint gun at the other guy. He was calling me names.


----------



## boar_d_laze (Feb 13, 2008)

"I and my friend were discussing grammar" is correct but inelegant.  Referring to oneself first is not gracious, but it does not break any strict rule of grammar like those concerning agreement of number, voice subject/object and so on.  In the example, "I" is a subject of the participle, "discussing."  "Me," is an objective form and consequently incorrect in any order, unless the participle takes it as an object.

Which authority classifies modern English as a Teutonic language?  Old English, yes.   But that was awhile ago and much the language has changed.  Or, at the end with the verb our sentences are ordered? 

BDL


----------



## tylerm713 (Aug 6, 2010)

boar_d_laze said:


> Which authority classifies modern English as a Teutonic language? Old English, yes. But that was awhile ago and much the language has changed. Or, at the end with the verb our sentences are ordered?


English is a Germanic (or Teutonic if you want to sound archaic) language. Simply because modern vocabulary and word structure has evolved doesn't mean that the language is no longer Germanic. As far as your example, that's not the word order that would be used in German anyway.


----------

