Pain in the English offers proofreading services for short-form writing such as press releases, job applications, or marketing copy. 24 hour turnaround. Learn More
Joined: June 15, 2009
(email not validated)
Comments posted: 6
Votes received: 14
Bill's first instinct:I was taught that pluralizing all forms of nouns is the same. In this context, the correct form is Grizzlies.
This is another issue though that has changed since I was little. People now want to say Grizzlys, which to me is incorrect. It seems that the rule for families -- ie, we went out with the Marleys last weekend-- is something people want to put into situations of teams and etc. I'm against it but it seems to be up for grabs.
June 15, 2009, 10:56pm
I mean bye. Bye now.
June 15, 2009, 10:51pm
One more. I did a search on lineal vs linear and they are both accepted usage. However, last week was the first time I had heard the former in my life. OK, by now.
I apologize for the bad usage in that email.I didn't edit before I sent send.That is Karma for grammar meanies.
June 15, 2009, 10:48pm
Wow, I love this forum. I agree that 'damages' is incorrect in the context you cite.I tutor English and have come across this kind of problem many times. It is like the "troop" issue I just came across on this site- people don't any longer seem to understand certain usages anymore, which is troubling to me since I have understood most usage issue by instinct, an instinct developed by rabid reading. I am then left to doing research to justify my reactions to various usages.This problem you mention echoes for me the irritation I feel every time I hear the infamous Sotomayor quote about a "a Latina women with her rich experiences..." um, in this context, it should be experience. A sum total of events in this larger context is her life experience, not her life "experiences." I have the urge to go nuts now that I have found this site, so I I have to say that a advertisement for "lineal feet" (of tile or carpet or something, I can't remember) instead of "linear feet." Generally when I mentioned issues like this bother me, I am treated as an insane person who wishes to oppress others, even in English circles. It's nice that you bring up usage issues in a nice way... I personally will not change established usages for fairly new changes in the language when I tutor, so I am a "meanie", and any website I had on these issues would open me up for English Nazi charges, and I would soon be run from the country.Nice site.
June 15, 2009, 10:47pm
Although I came across this conversation much later than posted, this issue has been bothering me for years, and I have even been lectured by people that "troop" is and always has been the name for an individual soldier. People are clearly not grammatically trained enough to understand singular and plural forms. It's not the first time and I'm sure won't be the last that I will be lectured by people who are barely literate about "the correct form." The real issue seems to me to be the kind of corporate speak that organizations develop over time as a kind of substitute for real English, I suspect for reasons other than grammatical incompetence-- reasons like wanting to make official communications less formal, wanting to have a group inspeak that outsiders cannot totally decipher, and frankly the lack of demands on anyone who speaks in public or communicates to the public to make sense. People for some reason accept euphemisms as more "friendly" than real English, even when, as in this case, it totally obscures the facts being presented to a person who understands basic grammar. Like others, on hearing this word used in the singular, I always wondered if 10 troops were dead, how many men were in each troop. Luckily I am no longer plagued with that problem, as others who don't understand English grammar have corrected my uneducated guesses. Hooray for egalitarianism!
June 15, 2009, 10:37pm
©2016 CYCLE Interactive, LLC.All Rights Reserved.