An actress I know told me the answer is that actors are serious ones, like for example those who play great Shakespearean leading roles, actresses are for light comedy and other more frivolous work. She says she is an actor but her husband says her greatest role was when she was a bunny in the Playboy Club in London. That is his opinion, and he gets hell from her when he mentions it.

We are then confused by such roles as Mrs Brown's Boys on British television, where it turns out the actress playing the title role is a man. Does that then make him an actor, and is his role serious? I would let the thespian in question tell us what he or she wants to be called and go along with it.

Oh please!! (exasperated tone). You do not need a Ph.D. or any teaching, just learning. By the age of 11 my generation knew that all it takes is a look in a dictionary: it says résumé in mine, and that's that. That's a French dictionary, of course.

If you want to do without the accents, do without both. You cannot do one without the other, as the old song goes. It's all or nothin'.

Keep it comin'.

Well, Saeed, that was a most eloquent and valuable contribution to the discussion. This is what you say where you come from, then. Here in Thailand we bow deeply, the deeper the more respectfully, with hands together, fingers pointing upwards, saying slowly and deliberately "Sawasdee kap" (not pronouncing the middle s and for women not pronouncing the final p). Back in Scotland I remember one greeting is "hey, you, pal, (or Jimmie) who're you looking at?" preparatory to limbering up for a spot of head-butting. But I am sure your greeting is the most honest of all, communicating your opinion of your interlocutor without deceit or camouflage. I may use it myself some day, somewhere. Thank you.

Actually not back from travels as I am in northern Laos in a beautiful place called Vang Vieng where one chills and floats on the river and frets about nothing at all except erroneous English. No Schadenfreude here because everyone is nice and would not think of such a thing. I recommend a trip here to any stressed persons.

MOUSE given it's name? Oh dear, you let yourself down there. Shame! Of course the plural is mice, just as it's name should be its name.

Thanks for those typing tips, W.Will. My keyboard, sadly, does not feature these things.

Now, you say I am judgmental, which I take as a complement, as it means having the ability to make discerning judgments, and to be making them. That is what my dictionary says. I got the vibe in my latter years as a teacher that someone was teaching the pupils in their "PSE" lessons, whatever they were, that it was a bad thing. I suspected them of suffering from the delusion that political correctness is not a joke, and filling the children's minds with nonsense, and that it was something to do with that. I never actually looked the word up until now, and am pleased to be vindicated. What on earth is supposed to be wrong with making judgments? That is what this whole Pain in the English thing is about, surely?

"It's me/you who is wrong". It's (me/you who is )wrong. ...me who am ... ... you who are ... Subordinate relative clause misidentified, badly. "It's I (who am wrong), It's you (who are wrong), It's he (who is wrong).

Is it so hard to get English grammar right if you have been taught it? The tragedy is that it has not been taught in the UK for a generation, because the teachers got it in their heads that somehow it is elitist to teach the pupils anything. Something to do with being lefties, they say. Not really the teachers but those who teach the teachers and tell them what to do but not why.

I'm off on holiday now for a few months so nothing more from me for a long while, mercifully.

This is an expression used to pad out the otherwise empty expression of a vacuous thought. It reminds me of a brilliant exchange on BBC television a few days ago. Someone had been invited onto a news programme as a person who might know a thing or two about the subject under discussion.

TV man: "What do you have to say about all this (already being discussed subject)?
Guest (slowly gathering thoughts together): "Well, do you want to know what I think?"
TV man: "Well, that's what you're here for, isn't it?"

"Can I just say? - do you want to know what I think?"

As a teacher for me a treasured moment was 20 years ago when one rather pedantic pupil said one of these cliches, and another more sparky one leapt in with "No! You can't!"

Sorry I can't do the acute accent on cliches. Don't know what tits to press.

Oh no! Horrors! Did I write "It is me who ..." ? Too many beers. It is of course "It is I who am ..."

It (Subject) is (verb) I (complement, same case as subject, so "I" unless disjunctive "me" as in French "C'est moi"). "Who" introduces relative clause, antecedent "I" refers to 'me' so 'who' is singular, 'who' is the subject of its clause, and singular, and takes its number and gender from its antecedent, so is singular; so "who is .." can be the next bit. "It is I who is wrong." Something indeed sounds wrong.

'I'm the person who is responsible' is a cop-out.

I still like "It is I who am wrong." The subordinate clause verb then takes its person and number from the relative pronoun. I am uncertain if it is correct, however, as until this occasion I have never had occasion to use the expression.

"...pronounced diferrently than the spelling indicates..." - oh dear.

...pronounced differently from how the spelling indicates...

...pronounced other than how the spelling may suggest, given that English spelling does not really indicate a word's pronunciation.

The acute accents don't really matter, by comparison with the horror of "diferrently than" but they should be there. I agree with Brain on this one.

I quote you: "I realize I have tread ...". In England we say "I have trodden ..". Otherwise fairly lucid, thank you.