GRAMMAR FIENDS

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (131 of them)

View Previous Page...

tell mrs fiendish :(

― grimly fiendish (simon), Saturday, 2 December 2006 21:22 (seventeen years ago) link

Fair dos. Fair does? (ha!)

The COD has it as either dos or - haha - do's.

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Saturday, 2 December 2006 21:25 (seventeen years ago) link

Really? OMG!

― ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Saturday, 2 December 2006 21:26 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.bbcprograms.com/pbs/catalog/drwho/images/john_pertwee.jpg

― remy bean (bean), Saturday, 2 December 2006 21:26 (seventeen years ago) link

It's appropriate that you posted that - very lovely - picture. The reason I asked the question was that I am working on a book about Jon Pertwee and his family. (Pertwee changed the spelling presumably to avoid threads like this.)

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Saturday, 2 December 2006 22:49 (seventeen years ago) link

At a Belle and Sebastian concert, the ratio of striped sweaters to non-striped sweaters is generally set at one sweater Pertwee individual.

― remy bean (bean), Saturday, 2 December 2006 23:42 (seventeen years ago) link

I fall into the one pertuis/two pertuis camp, but would write la famille Pertuis to avoid confusion.

― Madchen (Madchen), Sunday, 3 December 2006 12:32 (seventeen years ago) link

i would love pertuix to be the answer. it's obviously pertuises though :(

i went to school with a girl whose surname was proudfoot. i can't remember whether it was her or someone else who insisted that the plural was proudfeet, but...whoever it was should have been right.

― lexpretend (lexpretend), Sunday, 3 December 2006 13:09 (seventeen years ago) link

Ugh, can someone help me with this?

How can I fix:

"My students seemed to be more impressed by my car, which my family and I were standing in front of in the photo."

The comma doesn't work there, I know, but then it doesn't work without it either. I could fix the whole thing by replacing "My car" with "the car", but then that wouldn't indicate that it was my own vehicle.

― Zachary Scott (Zachary S), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:07 (seventeen years ago) link

Hmm. I just changed it to:

"My studnets seemed to be much more captivated by the object that my family and I were standing in front of: my car."

Sigh.

― Zachary Scott (Zachary S), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:11 (seventeen years ago) link

Studnets=students.

Although studnet should probably be a word meaning someone who always catches "hot studs".

― Zachary Scott (Zachary S), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:12 (seventeen years ago) link

The comma doesn't work there

why not?

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:28 (seventeen years ago) link

other than maybe changing it to "... my car, in front of which ... were standing", i wouldn't fuck with that sentence at all. what do you feel is the problem with it?

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Yeah, the original sounds fine to me -- only questionable part is "in front of in the photo," which is technically correct but a little awkward with all those prepositions.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:33 (seventeen years ago) link

The second one is better and more direct. There is nothing much wrong, technically, with the first one, other than that it is boring and squanders the joke.

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:42 (seventeen years ago) link

the "joke"? right, i'm really missing something here.

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 01:56 (seventeen years ago) link

The joke: they are more interested in the car than us hoho.

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Monday, 4 December 2006 02:25 (seventeen years ago) link

By second one you mean "My students seemed to be much more captivated by the object that my family and I were standing by: my car." ? I ended up going for that one. There is no "joke" to it, but I do like how it (hopefully) keeps the reader's interest all the way through the sentence.

This is for a letter of intention for grad school, by the way. I'm trying to connect a story about my student's interest in my car while I was teaching in China to a broader point about future geopolitical conflict between China and the US.

― Zachary Scott (Zachary S), Monday, 4 December 2006 02:37 (seventeen years ago) link

Yes, that one. The other one was boring. The second one's structured as a joke even though it's not (even supposed to be) funny.

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Monday, 4 December 2006 02:45 (seventeen years ago) link

It would produce a wry smile, I think.

― Madchen (Madchen), Monday, 4 December 2006 11:22 (seventeen years ago) link

if you'd been half as interested in that car as your students were you might not be in hospital now

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 11:28 (seventeen years ago) link

ah, right, i see. yes, in that case the second one is better. although "object" is a bit unusual, no?. "my students seemed more interested in what my family and i were standing by: my car"?

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 12:11 (seventeen years ago) link

why WERE they so interested in that car?

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 12:15 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't think they were necessarily that interested. It was just that the family were so boring.

― Alba (Alba), Monday, 4 December 2006 12:42 (seventeen years ago) link

The plural of Pertuis is not Pertuises, because that would totally confuse people as to how it was pronounced. You wouldn't say "the Descarteses" would you?

― G. Samsa (G. Samsa), Monday, 4 December 2006 12:51 (seventeen years ago) link

no. i refer you to everything i said upthread about pronunciation and orthography, and then to the gesture i'm making with my extended middle finger, which sadly you can't see. but i'm sure you get the message :)

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 13:18 (seventeen years ago) link

I do hope so :)

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 4 December 2006 13:22 (seventeen years ago) link

[cutting, aggressive remark] ;)

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 13:31 (seventeen years ago) link

I'm now quite sure why you'd have the "e" at all if you're not bothered about misdirecting pronunciation. Let's go pertuiss!

― Alba (Alba), Monday, 4 December 2006 13:41 (seventeen years ago) link

Raised middle fingers notwithstanding, I stick by what I say. Grimly, you make no logical sense. If it's true that the relationship between orthography and pronunciation isn't absolute, then it's also true that the relationship is by no means arbitrary, and that changed pronunciation over the centuries has often led to changed spellings. Spelling conventions in English are often messy and sometimes contradictory, but that are still there. One of them is that in plurals of words that end in an 's', we add an 'e' between the two ss, to ensure pronuciation of both. That's clearly redundant in this case, since the first 's' isn't pronounced. The most elegant solution, and one used for all other French-derived words ending in a silent 's' (chassis etc.), is for the plural to be unchanged.

― G. Samsa (G. Samsa), Monday, 4 December 2006 13:50 (seventeen years ago) link

What's more, if you put
plurals "silent s"
into Google, you'll come up with several hits confirming my position, and none confirming yours. For example from sparknotes.com:

Silent S
If a word ends in an unpronounced s, make it plural by ignoring it—don’t add an s, an apostrophe, or anything else.

― G. Samsa (G. Samsa), Monday, 4 December 2006 13:52 (seventeen years ago) link

New idea: les Pertuis.

― Alba (Alba), Monday, 4 December 2006 13:58 (seventeen years ago) link

Les Pertuises indicates that it's only the laydeez in da house.

― Madchen (Madchen), Monday, 4 December 2006 15:01 (seventeen years ago) link

But if that comes at the beginning of the sentence, how do you distinguish the Pertuis family from Les Pertuis, the string-vested, absinthe-drinking, jug-band aficionado?

xpost indeed

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 15:24 (seventeen years ago) link

like i keep saying: "pertuis" is a non-lexical item. it is ridiculous to attempt to apply rules of grammar to it. all we need here is a quick and simple way for eyeball kicks to show that it's in the plural form. -es is the only logical solution. pronunciation doesn't matter.

into Google, you'll come up with several hits confirming my position, and none confirming yours

OH NOES THE MIGHT OF THE INTERNET IS AGAINST ME. I MUST VOTE FOR DAVID CAMERON/SAY "SHOULD OF" INSTEAD OF "SHOULD HAVE"/SPEND ALL DAY LOOKING AT BRITNEY'S VAGINA.

we need a new version of godwin's law: "when someone says 'ah, but google says this', the entire internet should be deleted." or similar.

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 16:13 (seventeen years ago) link

oh well :)

― RJG (RJG), Monday, 4 December 2006 16:16 (seventeen years ago) link

The answer, as I realised by the fourth post, is 'Pertuis'. The question is now closed except to jokes.

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Monday, 4 December 2006 16:18 (seventeen years ago) link

dude: it's your book (is it a book? i can't remember, and i'm fucked if i'm reading this bloody thread again) and it's your call. until your editor gets involved, heheheh.

hey! i've just remembered. i have mod powers in the sandbox. don't make me lock this thread, people. just don't.

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 17:22 (seventeen years ago) link

grimly, Madchen's point is another tough one for your approach. "es" adds a decidedly feminine twist to an already French name, and those who know French will certainly think you are just talking about the Pertuis babes. Since you recognize that names must be taken on a case-by-case basis, I hope you'll finally lay aside this silly grandstanding and come to your senses.

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 4 December 2006 17:34 (seventeen years ago) link

Silly old Grimly.

― Madchen (Madchen), Monday, 4 December 2006 17:42 (seventeen years ago) link

tell you what: next time i meet a pertuis, or even a gang of pertuises, they're getting a pummelling.

― grimly fiendish (simon), Monday, 4 December 2006 22:01 (seventeen years ago) link

It's not nice to hit girls.

― Madchen (Madchen), Monday, 4 December 2006 22:25 (seventeen years ago) link

That's a common misconception.

― Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 00:16 (seventeen years ago) link

how do you know he meant 'hit'?

― Louis Jagger (Scourage), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 00:23 (seventeen years ago) link

GRIMLY VS THE PERTUISES

http://sparky.thehold.net/pix/061205pertuises.jpg

(note mädchen, in the yellow dress, looking disapproving)

― grimly fiendish (simon), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 00:28 (seventeen years ago) link

I don't care about these Petruis(es), but:

"My students seemed to be much more captivated by the object that my family and I were standing by: my car."

That sentence is awkward as hell and I'd never write it. There are many better ways to say that. "Nothing seemed to captivate my students as much as the car we were standing in front of" or "The car we were standing in front of was more captivating to my students" or the first version you posted, or probably best of all, an entirely different construction. But that one above, no way.

― steve schneeberg (steve go1dberg), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 00:51 (seventeen years ago) link

i think context is all here. i'd have agreed with you, steve, until i realised the point ZS was trying to make.

― grimly fiendish (simon), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 00:52 (seventeen years ago) link

Eh, I still think it's a cringe-inducing sentence regardless of context. Like I said, I think the best way to write it would be something completely different rather than just a "remix" of the sentence, but I'd have to see the whole paragraph in order to come up with something better.

But come on, that sounds like choice D on some standardized test, the one that they throw in there just to give you something that's easy to eliminate and that you can't imagine anyone would ever really pick.

― steve schneeberg (steve go1dberg), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 01:07 (seventeen years ago) link

That sentence is awkward as hell and I'd never write it.

Hey, Steve, how would you rewrite this sentence: "I'm a fanny"?

― Eyeball Kicks (Eyeball Kicks), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 01:23 (seventeen years ago) link

I'd probably rewrite it as: "Kiss my ass"

― steve schneeberg (steve go1dberg), Tuesday, 5 December 2006 01:29 (seventeen years ago) link

Skipping 31 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

"express permission"

express [adj.]
1 a : directly, firmly, and explicitly stated b : EXACT, PRECISE
2 a : designed for or adapted to its purpose b : of a particular sort : SPECIFIC

― Joe Isuzu's Petals (Rock Hardy), Friday, 29 December 2006 15:49 (seventeen years ago) link

Ta. I don't really know why I didn't look in a dictionary. One meaning of express is "definitely stated, not implied". End.

― Alba (Alba), Friday, 29 December 2006 15:51 (seventeen years ago) link

I would think it was "express permission" but I have no real idea why other than that it's the way I pronounce it if saying it (which isn't often), and I tend to be of the opinion that I am right about these things.

Please note that I'm in the "another think coming" camp, and invented the word Pertuix, so am possibly not to be trusted.

(xpost, or perhaps I am!)

― ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Friday, 29 December 2006 15:51 (seventeen years ago) link

I thought "another think coming" turned out to be right.

― Not For Use as Infant Nog (A-Ron Hubbard), Friday, 29 December 2006 15:57 (seventeen years ago) link

I think there was some controversy and the consensus was that both were acceptable (except that I disagree with consensus because "another thing coming" is completely fucking wrong and lots of people getting something wrong all the time doesn't make it right by default)

― ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Friday, 29 December 2006 15:59 (seventeen years ago) link

Even if "another think coming" is technically right, it's really wrong.

― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 29 December 2006 16:02 (seventeen years ago) link

LET'S NOT, OKAY!?

― Joe Isuzu's Petals (Rock Hardy), Friday, 29 December 2006 16:03 (seventeen years ago) link

OH GOD, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

(xpost, heh)

― grimly fiendish (simon), Friday, 29 December 2006 16:04 (seventeen years ago) link

"Another thought coming" would be right but doesn't convey the angry-mumness of "another think coming." Tetchy verbal anger = grammar out the window.

― suzy artskooldisko (suzy artskooldisko), Friday, 29 December 2006 16:12 (seventeen years ago) link

I WILL LOCK THIS FUCKER. I MEAN IT.

― grimly fiendish (simon), Friday, 29 December 2006 17:50 (seventeen years ago) link

Roffle. (Maybe I would like to be an ILE mod, now that I think of it.)

― Joe Isuzu's Petals (Rock Hardy), Friday, 29 December 2006 18:10 (seventeen years ago) link

t/s: specifically vs. pacifically

― Comrades, meet Tildo Durd (Scourage), Friday, 29 December 2006 18:26 (seventeen years ago) link

My bugbear = formerly vs formally

― ailsa_xx (ailsa_xx), Friday, 29 December 2006 18:27 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.google.fr/search?hl=fr&q=%22express+written+consent+of+Major+League+Baseball

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Friday, 29 December 2006 18:29 (seventeen years ago) link

A cricketing one: how can you describe a batsman playing carefully as a batsman playing 'circumspectly', as many commentators do? If he were playing circumspectly, he'd be looking all around as the ball was delivered, not watching it, getting out, and therefore not playing 'carefully' in the slightest. GRR!!!

― Comrades, meet Tildo Durd (Scourage), Friday, 29 December 2006 18:30 (seventeen years ago) link

Circumspect: attentive to the consequences of one's behavior.

― ledge (ledge), Saturday, 30 December 2006 11:56 (seventeen years ago) link

This I know because the Bible tells me so!

― ledge (ledge), Saturday, 30 December 2006 11:58 (seventeen years ago) link

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.