Thanks, maggiemay. It was good fun, but I found it annoying that homonyms are not recognised, e.g. I put serial, but cereal was required; prey was not accepted for pray. Also, if your hearing is not as sharp as it used to be, you don't always cathc the "ed" on the end!

CISD

there for they're
your for you're
complement for compliment
knew for new ?



oh dear oh dear

I hope none of those were by me... Apologies if they were!

no, I don't think so Miss R

no, I have just checked again on that point.. not you at all.

Despite all my years in the chemical industry, I always have to think twice when I write ALCOHOL. I always want to put an H after the C ! Even when I'm not under the affluence of incahol.

Another word people make a mess of is BUOYANT, its ofter written BOUYANT

I presume you meant "none of these was by me"!

I don't usually actually post on these forums but I have to add something here.
I share the enthusiasm with written grammar, spelling etc (In a formal context, on a casual forum as long as it makes sense it doesn't bother me).
However I think we have to see the difference between written and spoken language. It is, perhaps, acceptable to scrutinise somebody's written mistakes, however, in my opinion, spoken language is much more flexible.
For example:

This is obviously used in a casual context in order to soften the slight rudeness of the statement. "Pass us a biscuit please" makes it less formal, more casual and therefore less imposing. I don't know about anyone else, but I would much rather that than "Pass me a biscuit please" as, to me, this seems too much of a blunt demand. If somebody is adamant about sticking to "Pass me" they would most likely change it to "Could you please pass me a biscuit?" (to which some pedants may say "no" just to make themselves look clever), as this makes a demand seem more optional.
They are merely just ways of reducing rudeness in a casual context, I don't see anything wrong with that. You may notice that many 'mistakes' in conversation are infact just ways of being polite ("are you ok there?" is another one), many of them are also in question form as it's pychologically less imposing as sub-consciously gives you an option.
Sorry about the little rant.

[quote name='tuba_george' date='Oct 29 2008, 08:07 PM' post='755089']

[quote name='fsharpminor' post='741434' date='Sep 12 2008, 01:29 PM']
Another one common in Yorkshire is ''Pass us a biscuit please' instead of 'Pass me'
[/quote]
This is obviously used in a casual context in order to soften the slight rudeness of the statement.

But it isn't rude - not even slightly, particularly if one says please. On the other hand the use of the wrong pronoun is not casual speech but rather slovenly speech.

"none of" can be followed by either "was" or "were."

I'm afraid I have to agree with George here. I think "Pass me a biscuit, please" does sound quite brusque and I would certainly soften it with "Could you..." as he suggests.

The example from Yorkshire is obviously incorrect, strictly speakng, but I don't think it's slovenly any more than it would be slovenly in Scotland to say "aye" instead of yes, or "wee" instead of little - it's more a regional variation (although I realise it's not a direct parallel).

On similar lines, there's an interesting one where people in England would say something like "I'm very naughty eating this cream cake, aren't I ?" but in Scotland you might hear "I'm very naughty... amn't I ?". The former sounds 'right' because we're used to hearing it, but it's really incorrect whereas the opposite is the case with the Scottish example (sounds wrong but is grammatically correct).

What's this? Czerny not wanting to sound brusque??? I've heard it all now!

Whereas if you were holding the biscuits I'd rather just be downright rude. Or perhaps even a little catty.

Tehehe! Very cryptic - or should that be crytic?

At least I can tell the difference between a dead cat and a human being!

Oh get stuffed! (In the manner of a dead cat.)

But thanks for your earlier condolences, nevertheless! I'm still chuckling!

Well yes it's all personal preference and very much depends on the context.

I think we can agree that most people would change it to "could you...?".

This is logic - not grammar. It is not a question of may or might. The whole thought process is muddled.

Dead man WAS alive (before he died). A dead man IS dead. A live man is alive. A man in transition from living to dying is in transition. What the writer is questioning here is the precise time of death. And not very skillfully.

Yet we still get the point!

I'd use "would you pass me a biscuit please" or "will you ......." rather than "could you...."



I thought "none" is a shortened version of "not one" in which case it's singular, surely, and should be followed "is"? I wish I still had the old fashioned grammar book I had as a child so I could check.

Perhaps, but not in this context. According to my trusty copy of "Usage and Abusage" where none = not one (as in the example above), it has to be singular.

However, rather to my surprise it does suggest that "the plural is not regarded as a solecism" but is "merely an infelicity". I therefore humbly beg Miss Ross's pardon for treating as a solecism somethng that is merely an infelicity!

Moving on the plurals. Why do many shopkeepers etc almost say 'That's three pound fifty please', instead of 'three pounds' ?

Also another thought- Do you say 'I'm just popping down to Tesco' or 'I'm just popping down to Tesco's '
In this case I don't think it matters, as the store is called Tesco, but also belongs to Tesco Ltd, hence 'Tesco's '

Surely not a matter of personal preference? Not if we accept grammar rules, which for correctness should take precedence over personal choice. Otherwise we could all make up the rules as we go along

"pass us a biscuit" smacks rather of something much more formal - the Royal 'we'.
I suppose it COULD mean 'us', but that would be rather mean (depending on how many made up the 'us') to share just ONE biscuit.
Should it not then be "pass us some biscuits"?



apologies for the poor 'quoting'

If I'm not quite sure if I've got the quotes bit right I use the Preview Post feature, and then fiddle with it until the post looks like it should do. Afraid you've managed to attribute the "personal preference" quote to me

my apologies jm-h.
I hope this puts it right now ...



Surely not a matter of personal preference? Not if we accept grammar rules, which for correctness should take precedence over personal choice. Otherwise we could all make up the rules as we go along.

"pass us a biscuit" smacks rather of something much more formal - the Royal 'we'.
I suppose it COULD mean 'us', but that would be rather mean (depending on how many made up the 'us') to share just ONE biscuit.
Should it not then be "pass us some biscuits"?

Well this, in effect, is what happens in speech (but not to that extent). We make up our own rules in speech before they are eventually accepted as 'proper'. For example various slang words were spoken first before being put in the dictionary, and words/phrases such as 'can not' and 'do not' and in fact many words in our vocabulary are derivatives of many abbreviations that were (I think) originally created to make it less tedious to say.

Otherwise language would never change. It obviously does as language has changed a lot in the past 50 years let alone several hundred.



I've always thought it was just a casual/humourous way of saying 'me'.

'us', is a 'wessie' dialect expression. (West Riding of Yorkshire, especially the Sheffield/Barnsley area). It is used both singular and plural. e.g. "Is us tea ready", usually asked by the 'head of the house' meaning is his/her tea ready, but can also include the whole family.

I do accept that the spoken language is a much more 'flexible' form of a language than the written. But that doesn't make it 'correct', except in conversation. I think maybe part of the change that happens when language is spoken is because the speaker does not always have a sufficient amount of time to think through ideas to be expressed, to construct good grammatical and syntactical phrases and sentences ['good' in this case meaning 'according to the 'rules' of the language'] and then to utter them before his interlocutor has become bored and left!!
But a good orator is able to think, construct and speak coherently and fluently, and convey the meaning required in a very fine form of the language. Michael Foot, Enoch Powell and Quintin Hogg are examples that come to mind.


'us' for 'me' may be 'humorous' or it may be as kerioboe mentions 'slovenly speech' - careless, perhaps, or because the grammar has been inadequately taught or learnt.

"None" can be interpreted as "not one" or "not any". Even in Miss Ross's sentence it could be interpreted as "not any" and therefore followed by a plural verb. It is a common misconception to believe that it must always be followed by a singular verb.


"Three pound fifty" should be written with dashes "three-pound-fifty" and in this case doesn't have a plural because it is a compound adjective and adjectives are never plural in English.

Does not 'any' mean 'any one' of some or several ....? Or a portion of something?
Would it not be singular?

It depends:
"None of my friends have come" = plural (countable noun)
"None of the rubbish has been collected" = singular (uncountable noun)
This is one of the grammar points I am absolutely certain of since it regularly crops up when teaching English as a foreign language.

As I am too lazy to type out a paragraph from one of my grammar books I looked for something on the internet to copy and found the following:

"Apparently, the SAT testing service considers none as a singular word only. However, according to Merriam Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, "Clearly none has been both singular and plural since Old English and still is. The notion that it is singular only is a myth of unknown origin that appears to have arisen in the 19th century. If in context it seems like a singular to you, use a singular verb; if it seems like a plural, use a plural verb. Both are acceptable beyond serious criticism" (p. 664)."

Hmm, must a widely-used dialect be only either slovenly or humorous? Isn't a function of dialect to articulate 'tribal' allegiance? Using language that the 'educated elite' prescribe to be 'correct' would distance them from their 'tribe'.

Mind you, it can have unintended humorous consequences...

A farmer for whom I used to work, when he moved into his farm in 1953, was very grateful to have a kind neighbour offer, for the day of moving, that "us'll be over to help", thinking that this meant the whole family. Unfortunately, the 'us' was just one person, to the surprise of the farmer.

Or perhaps enable them to change tribes if they so wished?

it's interesting.
What is the meaning of that part of the sentence "None of my friends. . . " ?
Does it mean 'not one ...' isn't 'one' singular? Can 'one' take a plural verb?

If you say 'no friends' then presumably you would require a plural verb... but 'no one have come..' does that seem right?
Would you say 'one of my friends have a red car' ?

the implication now is that 'one' is singular AND plural.
Or does 'none' mean a negative 'all of'?

Out of interest, is there an equivalent in French grammar? Personne ne sont venus personne n'est venu
ok - it is a different language but sometimes parallels help to see the reasoning.

As I said earlier, "none" does not always mean "not one." It is not a contracted form of "not one" but comes from an old English word ("nan", I think). It is therefore not always helpful to replace it by "not one" (and actually you couldn't do it with my second sentence since you can't say "one rubbish".


Of course both your examples here require a singular verb but, in my opinion, they merely emphasise the fact that "none" is not a grammatical equivalent of "not one."


This is not the implication. "One" is singular, "none" can be singular or plural because it is NOT a contraction of "not one" but a word in its own right.


There is no equivalent in French. "Personne" is the translation of "nobody" (or "no one") which would always have a singular verb in English. (Although it does have a plural if you add a tag: eg. "nobody has come, have they?", but this is another topic).

In case you think I'm being influenced by French, English is my mother tongue and most of the grammar books I have at home are aimed at native English speakers, not foreigners learning the language. If you have access to a large Oxford English Dictionary, you will find a paragraph on "none" and which form of the verb to use.

you sound slightly offended as if you feel I am attacking you in some way.
Please don't think that... I am seriously interested in language and how it works ... I love English and I love the French language too.

thank you for your comments

Me too. It's always fascinating when you thought you knew something and then found that actually you didn't.

So - thanks to Kerioboe for her explanation and even more apologies to Miss Ross, whose original "none were" wasn't even an infelicity.

The question for me is, will I start to use none with a plural or not? Probably not, partly because of habit and partly because I suspect that there will be other people who will assume it's wrong!

Yes, Berkshire mum, I found that incredibly frustrating too - there is no way of knowing which one they intend, and it's almost as though they were thinking ' well if they get this far we'll get them somehow! '

It was nearly always the reason I fouled up on the 'bee' section.

Me too.

Perhaps a sentence including the word would help improve the game

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7705922.stm

Latin phrases are now banned in some places.

Does anyone seriously think people are confusing the abbreviation e.g. with an oval shaped thing that comes out of a hen
is sold in boxes in supermarkets?

Anyone else noticed that when you add a name to your Buddies List it says "Members name" with no apostrophe?