Comments for Pain in the English https://painintheenglish.com Forum for the gray areas of the English language Wed, 20 Sep 2017 08:58:38 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on I don’t think... by donal Godfrey https://painintheenglish.com/case/286/#comment-27428 donal Godfrey Tue, 19 Sep 2017 22:00:30 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/286/#comment-27428 I don't think implies or directly translates to "I do not think" when actually I do think, but "I think you did not" a more positive direct statement or translation. Or "I don't think" so is "I think not" because you do THINK "no".

]]>
Comment on “Liquid water”? by quincy https://painintheenglish.com/case/4981/#comment-27427 quincy Sun, 17 Sep 2017 13:58:21 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4981/#comment-27427 In my geography homework they ask if snow and ice are examples of liquid water but i can't find it in the book and i can't find a good awnser online can you help me?

]]>
Comment on “This is she” vs. “This is her” by Jay Kasey https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27426 Jay Kasey Sun, 17 Sep 2017 03:10:21 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27426 What about the following situation? Would it be the same "equivalence"?
"Was Helen the murderer?"
"It was she?" or "It was her"?

]]>
Comment on “This is she” vs. “This is her” by Tdream https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27425 Tdream Thu, 14 Sep 2017 01:50:33 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27425 I was taught in school, "This is she." One way to completely dodge the issue would be the following scenario:
Hello, may I speak to Jane Doe?
Yes, This is Mrs. Doe (or Jane).

]]>
Comment on “This is she” vs. “This is her” by Tdream https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27424 Tdream Thu, 14 Sep 2017 01:50:08 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27424 I was taught in school, "This is she." One way to completely dodge the issue would be the following scenario:
Hello, may I speak to Jane Doe?
Yes, This is Mrs. Doe (or Jane).

]]>
Comment on Exact same by greg the egg https://painintheenglish.com/case/1006/#comment-27423 greg the egg Wed, 13 Sep 2017 20:27:51 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/1006/#comment-27423 LIfe keeps changing all the time so why wouldn't language and the way it's used and accepted?

]]>
Comment on Resume, resumé, or résumé? by Verso Folio https://painintheenglish.com/case/193/#comment-27422 Verso Folio Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:23:31 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/193/#comment-27422 For those who prefer a little ostentatiousness, an easy way to type "résumé" (with the accents) is to misspell it as "resum." When you right click on the misspelled version, one of the replacement options is "résumé." As to whether you SHOULD use the accents, I'll leave that to my fiancée.

]]>
Comment on Sleep / Asleep by justin1 https://painintheenglish.com/case/3883/#comment-27421 justin1 Tue, 12 Sep 2017 11:36:00 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/3883/#comment-27421 I live in the midwest (NE) and I hear it all the time, mostly from ignorant or lesser educated people, usually by choice. I had a roommate who use to get called late at night and he'd answer like "What do you want?, I'm sleep". I thought I misheard him the first time or 2 but every time the word came up it was used in that manner... as if he was assuming the process himself, no longer being the person he was and transcending as the very form of inactive consciousness.

I mean, the first time I heard it, I had to put the fork down because I was eat, my thoughts were run so fast. It literally made my stomach turn that I ran to the bathroom, and there I was sh*t so bad, prob due to the verbal diarrhea I was hear.

]]>
Comment on “reach out” by ruth https://painintheenglish.com/case/5118/#comment-27420 ruth Mon, 11 Sep 2017 17:44:20 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5118/#comment-27420 Now, in 2017, 'reach out' has become an adjective "reach out efforts" if not a noun. What's wrong with 'outreach'?

]]>
Comment on When did contacting someone become reaching out? by peter2 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5299/#comment-27419 peter2 Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:49:52 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5299/#comment-27419 In plain English: "we want to appear as if we are better than you and could possibly help you with something but probably won't". It's an attempt at a corporate kiss-off and an attempt to feel more attractive than you and/or your organisation, and is common with arrogant small-time tech companies.

]]>
Comment on cannot vs. can not by Thomas Goodell https://painintheenglish.com/case/4513/#comment-27418 Thomas Goodell Wed, 6 Sep 2017 17:40:58 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4513/#comment-27418 I remember asking a girl if she would go to a movie with me. First she said, "I can go."

But then she said, "Or, I can (and a long Silence was filled with her most captivating face and body movements) not go."

]]>
Comment on What is the word for intentionally incorrect spelling? by Kevin Pomaville https://painintheenglish.com/case/644/#comment-27417 Kevin Pomaville Mon, 4 Sep 2017 14:24:03 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/644/#comment-27417 Malapropism

]]>
Comment on On Tomorrow by Dre https://painintheenglish.com/case/3919/#comment-27416 Dre Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:58:44 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/3919/#comment-27416 I moved to Houston, TX and I have heard it many times, but only in the African American community.

]]>
Comment on mines by Michael6230 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4326/#comment-27415 Michael6230 Sat, 2 Sep 2017 03:08:44 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4326/#comment-27415 There is a difference between dialect and improper English grammar. Proper grammar is learned in school.

]]>
Comment on couple vs couple of by brenda1 https://painintheenglish.com/case/267/#comment-27414 brenda1 Fri, 1 Sep 2017 22:23:53 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/267/#comment-27414 I love grammar! The article "a" points to a singular noun. Whenever we use "a couple," whatever comes after it must be plural. Doesn't that mean that the singular noun must be "couple"? Couple can't truly function as an adjective if it is the singular noun for the article.

]]>
Comment on Pronouncing “str” like “shtr” as in “shtrong” “shtrange” by spockers https://painintheenglish.com/case/5231/#comment-27413 spockers Thu, 31 Aug 2017 07:04:42 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5231/#comment-27413 @Anne S. This is not Bush's fault. ;)

]]>
Comment on Pronouncing “str” like “shtr” as in “shtrong” “shtrange” by renee Paul https://painintheenglish.com/case/5231/#comment-27412 renee Paul Tue, 29 Aug 2017 17:07:52 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5231/#comment-27412 I have noticed the shtrong,etc. pronunciation for a while now and wondered if it was a physical difference in the tongue causing it. A new ad on TV features a black man saying "shprite" instead of Sprite.

]]>
Comment on “all but” - I hate that expression! by Mip-mip https://painintheenglish.com/case/258/#comment-27409 Mip-mip Sun, 27 Aug 2017 10:42:26 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/258/#comment-27409 The fact that this thread started in 2004 and it now is 2017 implies that this is a problematic expression. After reading some of the comments, I see three possible meanings "all but" can have, on top of the two standard ones.

Using a boxing metaphor "all but lost" could mean:

1. "All except": He has taken and given a lot of hits, fought hard, but not lost. => He hasn't lost.

2. "Nearly": He has taken a lot of hits, is fatigued, not quite lost, but is at the brink of losing. All possible negative things that could have happened have, except losing. => He is close to losing.

3. "Not at all": He has taken and given a lot of hits, is fatigued, but he surely hasn't lost. => He's not close to losing or is winning.

The third sense is not in dictionaries, but that's how I understand it in some contexts. "-That guy is such a loser. -He's all but a loser." => He could be a horrible person, a retard, etc., but he surely isn't a loser.

Technically, the listed senses might be the same, but the emphasis is different. What's the status of the boxing match? Is it (1) unclear, (2) moving towards a loss, or (3) definitely not moving towards a loss/moving towards a win?

I may not be entirely accurate in how interpret where the emphasis is, but my point is that the emphasis is different between the three sense.

]]>
Comment on What is the word for intentionally incorrect spelling? by denise1 https://painintheenglish.com/case/644/#comment-27408 denise1 Sun, 27 Aug 2017 03:03:38 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/644/#comment-27408 Satirical spelling

]]>
Comment on troops vs soldiers by Cal https://painintheenglish.com/case/1088/#comment-27407 Cal Sat, 26 Aug 2017 03:05:26 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/1088/#comment-27407 They're not synonymous. A troop is a company of armor, cavalry or recon platoons or detachments; its plural is troops. Troops, a collective noun, are also members of an armed/fighting force. Via reverse etymological derivation, as a root of troops, troop has also come to mean one member of such a military unit. Soldier has many connotations/denotations. US marines were once "sea soldiers;" Salvation Army members were called soldiers; enforcers (e.g., onorata societa) have been called "foot soldiers." Foot soldiers for Rome were called in Latin "infantry," as they were so close to the emperor as to be considered his children. German WWII paratroopers, Fallschirmtruppen, in the strictest sense weren't soldiers, because they were part of the Luftwaffe (air force): but, of course, they were troops. Imho, Lou K., Mil/intel historian, MS, Wayne State U.

]]>
Comment on “she” vs “her” by Emilymac https://painintheenglish.com/case/4377/#comment-27406 Emilymac Thu, 17 Aug 2017 02:20:44 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4377/#comment-27406 Well if you remove "and I" it should make a proper sentence. So if you remove "and I" from "her and I went" it says her went. Which doesn't make sense, but she went does.

]]>
Comment on couple vs couple of by SaraSpeaksSuccinctly https://painintheenglish.com/case/267/#comment-27405 SaraSpeaksSuccinctly Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:51:44 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/267/#comment-27405 This discussion is irksome. First of all, why is it that we have become so apathetic to maintaining a standard? If we allow some things to slip by as "an evolving language," how do we decide which things to allow? This usage, "couple times," or "couple different," is a slippery little slope. I think allowing students, in particular, to use this...colloquialism/slang when writing formal papers is a massive mistake. Keeping it simple and devoid of existential discussion, it is a matter of simple mechanics. "Couple," according to Merriam Webster, is NOT an adjective, nor adverb nor a word of any other sort than this: it is a NOUN. Therefore, using it without "of," is, plainly, incorrect. For the sake of consistency, if you are a teacher, please do not let this "little thing" slip by. That is all.

]]>
Comment on Fora vs Forums by jan1 https://painintheenglish.com/case/627/#comment-27403 jan1 Tue, 15 Aug 2017 20:16:09 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/627/#comment-27403 Hi can someone please translate this for me

When the well is dry, we know the worth of water.

]]>
Comment on “Anglish” by Ariadne https://painintheenglish.com/case/4392/#comment-27402 Ariadne Tue, 15 Aug 2017 19:45:35 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4392/#comment-27402 The comment begins with the urge to “fuck French, fuck Latin, fuck Greek”. I thought this was an academic debate about whether or not to reduce the amount of foreign words in the English language, not an opportunity to insult other people and their languages. If this particular commentator feels like “fucking” a language, he can always “fuck” his own.

]]>
Comment on Computer mouses or computer mice? by RoseHarmer https://painintheenglish.com/case/534/#comment-27401 RoseHarmer Mon, 14 Aug 2017 19:57:18 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/534/#comment-27401 Hey just a heads up, I am totally not trolling you. Looks like you have a typo on the word equipment in this article. and you also have an ad about proofreading. I'd hate for you to lose business because of the typo.

]]>
Comment on As wet as ? by dababyking quincy(the rapper) https://painintheenglish.com/case/596/#comment-27400 dababyking quincy(the rapper) Mon, 14 Aug 2017 16:35:21 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/596/#comment-27400 as wet as water

]]>
Comment on “if he were alive, he would be” vs. “would have been” by Percy https://painintheenglish.com/case/5771/#comment-27399 Percy Fri, 11 Aug 2017 19:36:48 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5771/#comment-27399 If he were alive, he would be 60 today.

If he had been alive, he would have been 60 yesterday.

But it's hard to see what the difference in meaning is.

]]>
Comment on Past tense of “text” by kay joseph https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27398 kay joseph Wed, 9 Aug 2017 09:04:47 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27398 When one says, "I text John the other day," it sounds ridiculous!!! There are all kinds of words that serve as nouns and verbs. For example, take the word permit: "The permit was signed by the official." Here we have the word used as a noun. As a verb, we add th suffix "ed" to it like so: "The teacher permitted the student to use the restroom." Why is there even a discussion on this issue?!

]]>
Comment on Past tense of “text” by kay joseph https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27397 kay joseph Wed, 9 Aug 2017 09:00:08 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27397 aided, braided, crated, decided, faked, gated, hiked, jeered, kicked, licked, mated, noted, prattled, quibbled, rested, stated, tested, urinated, voted, waited, AND TEXTED!!!!!

]]>
Comment on Past tense of “text” by kay joseph https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27396 kay joseph Wed, 9 Aug 2017 08:57:50 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27396 decided, raided, braided, caged, flogged, graded, hiked, jailed, kicked, loaned, mailed, nailed, prattled, rested, tested, voted, waded...AND TEXTED!!!

]]>
Comment on Use of article (a/the) when there are multiple modifiers by Giorgi https://painintheenglish.com/case/4778/#comment-27395 Giorgi Tue, 8 Aug 2017 09:40:50 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4778/#comment-27395 Hi,
I am not an expert in these matters, so it is just my opinion that your statement as is is correct, and do not need change.

]]>
Comment on Use of article (a/the) when there are multiple modifiers by Tyra https://painintheenglish.com/case/4778/#comment-27394 Tyra Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:09:25 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4778/#comment-27394 Hello Giorgi,
Can you please tell me, how can I correct this sentence, " we took a tent, a cooler and a sleeping bag". In my view, "a" is not required. What will you suggest?

]]>
Comment on What exactly is “width” in geometry? by Jorge Millan O https://painintheenglish.com/case/5834/#comment-27393 Jorge Millan O Fri, 4 Aug 2017 18:42:10 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5834/#comment-27393 As with many words, the meaning of "width" depends on the context. I would say your answer is given by the Oxford's definition. If you notice, two different definitions are given, the first assuming the object is upright and with width meaning the side-to-side distance. The other definition is orientation independent, and in my opinion better because of it, and it simply states that for a 2 or 3 dimensional rectangular (-prism), he width is the shortest dimension's distance. This is a common challenge when you use words that have a colloquial meaning and a technical meaning. Other examples are the word acceleration, in physics slowing down means you are accelerating, in fact, your speed may not change at all yet you may still have an acceleration; in a colloquial environment, acceleration is associated with increasing one's speed only. A person's weight prompts different answers from different people, in general you'd expect an answer in pounds or kilograms, a physicist would probably say, "assuming it's on Earth, the weight is", followed by a number of Newtons.

The way I address it with my own children is to explain to them the more nuanced definition, trying not to openly undermine the teacher but rather expanding on what they were taught on the first place, when it is possible. My approach has always been explain to them as if they were scientists, and build up your answers until they seem to have enough or are not engaged. Discussions about the color of the sky, or the meaning of pi, with 4 year old children can be wonderful experiences for you and for them and allows them to question what they learn at school and expand on it.

]]>
Comment on “I’ve got” vs. “I have” by Seamus https://painintheenglish.com/case/4549/#comment-27392 Seamus Thu, 3 Aug 2017 09:11:12 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4549/#comment-27392 I haven't got a clue!
I got my first real six string, bought is at the five'n'dime, etc

]]>
Comment on “that” referring to a preceding phrase by Spencer Miller https://painintheenglish.com/case/5846/#comment-27391 Spencer Miller Tue, 1 Aug 2017 14:17:42 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5846/#comment-27391 The response displayed on your homepage reads, "That said, the questions are good ones; it is just depends on what type of document is being written."
Please proofread and then correct as follows, "That said, the questions are good ones; it just depends on what type of document is being written."

]]>
Comment on “Anglish” by Rev Robert West https://painintheenglish.com/case/4392/#comment-27390 Rev Robert West Mon, 31 Jul 2017 21:49:19 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4392/#comment-27390 There is something to be said for using, or reviving, the native English word, as over against the loan word, in current speech; because the native word is often, I think, clearer. Of course one can take it too far and end up speaking a badly crafted form of 'Old English' which would sound rather ridiculous. Better to learn Old English and speak it properly.

]]>
Comment on When did contacting someone become reaching out? by Norma Chase https://painintheenglish.com/case/5299/#comment-27389 Norma Chase Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:16:39 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5299/#comment-27389 There are two legitimate uses of the phrase: offering help, and asking for help. I cringe when I see newscasters use it to mean "We went to the house and pounded on the door but nobody answered."

]]>
Comment on Pronouncing “str” like “shtr” as in “shtrong” “shtrange” by Fred Irritated https://painintheenglish.com/case/5231/#comment-27388 Fred Irritated Mon, 31 Jul 2017 11:51:57 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5231/#comment-27388 Laurie Johnson with NPR radio in the Houston area is the worst for this. She just loves to talk about how much "CONSCHTRUCTION" that local "INDUSCHTRY" is doing and how we should all read the "INSCHTRUCTIONS" and understand the "SCHTRUCTURE" of the new health care bill. Please. If you're going to work in radio, learn how to speak properly.

]]>
Comment on impression vs. impersonation by beverly https://painintheenglish.com/case/955/#comment-27386 beverly Sat, 29 Jul 2017 21:56:21 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/955/#comment-27386 I am a Judy Garland impressionist. I chose the word "impressionist" over "impersonator" when I first started doing this. To me, there is a big difference. This may be my own interpretation, but to me it makes total sense. To me, to give an impression is like an impressionist painting. An impressionistic painting gives you the idea of what it is you're seeing. It is not exactly like the subject matter. If you look at a Matisse, you will see slightly blurry watercolors that give you the impression of a landscape, a countryside or an ocean view etc. It is more figurative than literal. I see impersonation as much more literalist. My job as a Judy impressionist is to give the idea of Judy, an impression of Judy, but not an exact "copy." If the voice is slightly different if the movements are slightly different, that is an impression. And impersonator is more literal, attempting to recreate the exact movements and body language as well as the specific vocal qualities and sounds. That is my take, and it fits perfectly for what I do.

]]>
Comment on impression vs. impersonation by beverly https://painintheenglish.com/case/955/#comment-27385 beverly Sat, 29 Jul 2017 21:52:27 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/955/#comment-27385 I am a Judy Garland impressionist. I chose the word "impressionist" over "impersonator" when I first started doing this. To me, there is a big difference. This may be my own interpretation, but to me it makes total sense. To me, to give an impression, is like an impressionist painting. And impressionistic painting gives you the idea of what it is you're looking at. It is not exactly like the subject matter. If you look at Matisse, you will see slightly blurry watercolors that give you the impression of a landscape, a countryside or an ocean view etc. It is more figurative than literal. I see impersonation as much more literalist. My job as a duty impressionist is to give the idea of Judy, and impression of Judy but not an exact mimic. If the voice is slightly different if the movements are slightly different, that is an impression. And impersonator is more literal, attempting to recreate the exact movements and body language as well as the actual, specific vocal qualities. That is my take, and it fits perfectly for what I do.

]]>
Comment on couple vs couple of by Jonathan Finch https://painintheenglish.com/case/267/#comment-27384 Jonathan Finch Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:20:01 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/267/#comment-27384 “A couple of things” is incorrect.

Besides it being incorrect,
the word "of" adds nothing to the meaning of the phrase,
"a couple things."

]]>
Comment on “This is she” vs. “This is her” by LEW https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27383 LEW Wed, 26 Jul 2017 03:22:57 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27383 As a full stack developer who speaks/writes several coding languages with direct consequences for syntactical errors, I will say that I appreciate the more liberal view of how to apply rules to human language. Also, somehow, I got here after being curious about hypercorrective phonetic overcompensation vs overregularization. (What a mouth full.)

If we approach this philosophically, the rules of language are helpful for standardizing communication in order to create clarity and reduce mistakes. When they are overly formal or held too tightly, they seem to do the opposite. While I will certainly concede that, "this is she," is correct based on the consensus of today's experts I would simply like to point back to the valid arguments of context describing English as a largely Germanic language greatly impacted by the French and Victorian English and thus take a slightly more fatalistic perspective. If the exact evil powers of colonial imperialism which conquered the west didn't envelop and permeate so much of modern academia, the technically right mode could very easily be, "this is her." The language is a mishmash, mutt of a thing anyway.

Please ask yourself why the rules "need" to be upheld. Are they moving us towards a beautifully absolute linguistic truth? I think not. They have been forged and derived, refined and convoluted by a lot of people with a lot of opinions and experiences over a lot of time. When viewed with actual humility and a little bit of perspective, these debates are interesting, but their importance is a bit over-inflated. It really is lovely how language evolves with us as a dynamic aspect of animal interaction.

Besides considering all the chance that went into the correct rules, might you also ask yourself how so much pedantry drives socioeconomic polarization and then reassess how the rules are impacting clear, error free communication as well as the oppression of entire communities of human beings. If the dominant results are derision and confusion instead of clarity, maybe further revision is in order. Are your lingual loyalties based in the fear of societal decline or simple change. Are you afraid of not being able to distinguish yourself socially or economically by the content of your character and quality of your thoughts? Essentially you're ferociously defending a system that was created by other imperfect humans. Have some flexibility and please refrain from the slippery slope arguments about complete deconstruction. That is the most absurd bit I I read in this long list of comments. I dislike the word "conversate" as much as the next girl, but the fundamentals of language suggest that if enough people use a word or phrase, it will become part of vernacular and then proper diction. It will creep up on some scholar and start popping into peer reviewed articles and everyone will stop caring and it will be normalized...

By the way, for bruschetta, how many of you say brew-shedda and how many of you say brew-skate-ah? The second one is correct...at least according to formal Italian. I can't tell you how many intelligent people I meet who just don't know what they don't know.

In the end, if you're too attached to your high horse, do some reading about the theory of multiple intelligences and expand your understanding of the human experience in order to breed empathy and better guide your heart in these situations. Being ruled by your ego, insecurity, fear, and even sense of tradition makes you sound far more infantile than any simple colloquial telephonic reception.

Be well,
Eliza

]]>
Comment on “This is she” vs. “This is her” by LEW https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27382 LEW Wed, 26 Jul 2017 03:21:47 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/811/#comment-27382 As a full stack developer who speaks/writes several coding languages with direct consequences for syntactical errors, I will say that I appreciate the more liberal view of how to apply rules to human language. Also, somehow, I got here after being curious about hypercorrective phonetic overcompensation vs overregularization. (What a mouth full.)

If we approach this philosophically, the rules of language are helpful for standardizing communication in order to create clarity and reduce mistakes. When they are overly formal or held too tightly, they seem to do the opposite. While I will certainly concede that, "this is she," is correct based on the consensus of today's experts I would simply like to point back to the valid arguments of context describing English as a largely Germanic language greatly impacted by the French and Victorian English and thus take a slightly more fatalistic perspective. If the exact evil powers of colonial imperialism which conquered the west didn't envelop and permeate so much of modern academia, the technically right mode could very easily be, "this is her." The language is a mishmash, mutt of a thing anyway.

Please ask yourself why the rules "need" to be upheld. Are they moving us towards a beautifully absolute linguistic truth? I think not. They have been forged and derived, refined and convoluted by a lot of people with a lot of opinions and experiences over a lot of time. When viewed with actual humility and a little bit of perspective, these debates are interesting, but their importance is a bit over-inflated. It really is lovely how language evolves with us as a dynamic aspect of animal interaction.

Besides considering all the chance that went into the correct rules, might you also ask yourself how so much pedantry drives socioeconomic polarization and then reassess how the rules are impacting clear, error free communication as well as the oppression of entire communities of human beings. If the dominant results are derision and confusion instead of clarity, maybe further revision is in order. Are your lingual loyalties based in the fear of societal decline or simple change. Are you afraid of not being able to distinguish yourself socially or economically by the content of your character and quality of your thoughts? Essentially you're ferociously defending a system that was created by other imperfect humans. Have some flexibility and please refrain from the slippery slope arguments about complete deconstruction. That is the most absurd bit I I read in this long list of comments. I dislike the word "conversate" as much as the next girl, but the fundamentals of language suggest that if enough people use a word or phrase, it will become part of vernacular and then proper diction. It will creep up on some scholar and start popping into peer reviewed articles and everyone will stop caring and it will be normalized...

By the way, for bruschetta, how many of you say brew-shedda and how many of you say brew-skate-ah? The second one is correct...at least according to formal Italian. I can't tell you how many intelligent people I meet who just don't know what they don't know.

In the end, if you're too attached to your high horse, do some reading about the theory of multiple intelligences and expand your understanding of the human experience in order to breed empathy and better guide your heart in these situations. Being ruled by your ego, insecurity, fear, and even sense of tradition makes you sound far more infantile than any simple colloquial telephonic reception.

Be well,
Eliza

]]>
Comment on Computer mouses or computer mice? by SteeeveTheSteve https://painintheenglish.com/case/534/#comment-27381 SteeeveTheSteve Fri, 21 Jul 2017 22:33:24 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/534/#comment-27381 We use the plural of the animal from which they were named. Mice is no less awkward than calling it a mouse in the first place.

]]>
Comment on equivalency by jayles https://painintheenglish.com/case/5870/#comment-27380 jayles Fri, 21 Jul 2017 17:27:48 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5870/#comment-27380 http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=equivalence%2Cequivalency&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=17&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2Cequivalence%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bequivalence%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BEquivalence%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BEQUIVALENCE%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Cequivalency%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bequivalency%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BEquivalency%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BEQUIVALENCY%3B%2Cc0

Even in American books, equivalence is far more common.

]]>
Comment on equivalency by K. Satyanarayana Rao https://painintheenglish.com/case/5870/#comment-27378 K. Satyanarayana Rao Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:20:21 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/5870/#comment-27378 I think 'equivalency' is mostly used in America. Even the ngram view of 'equivalence' and 'equivalency' makes it clear that the use of the former is widely prevalent. There is no specific reason to add 'equivalency' to the existing 'equivalence'.

]]>
Comment on Proper use of st, nd, rd, and th — ordinal indicators by Grimalkin https://painintheenglish.com/case/4636/#comment-27377 Grimalkin Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:09:42 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/4636/#comment-27377 February 10-16, 2014

or . . .

. . . from the 10th to the 16th of February, 2014.

We may SAY ordinals, but we do not WRITE them.

]]>
Comment on Past tense of “text” by Monocle https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27376 Monocle Thu, 20 Jul 2017 13:22:36 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27376 Just say 'texd' sounds like text but when written denotes past tense.

]]>
Comment on Past tense of “text” by HuertaVivian8 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27375 HuertaVivian8 Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:48:18 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27375 Past tense should remain the same as present tense. "Text" is much more smooth since the "t" sound at the end can have a "d" sound...almost redundant to add another.

I text you today. I text you yesterday.

]]>
Comment on Past tense of “text” by HuertaVivian8 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27374 HuertaVivian8 Wed, 19 Jul 2017 17:41:49 +0000 https://painintheenglish.com/case/474/#comment-27374 Text past tense stays the same. He text mr today. He text me yesterday.

]]>