Re: Re: firgures of speech

[Guest guest]

2009/4/19 jonipinkney :

> I love this place! Sometimes in face to face interactions when I talk like

> this I get accused of being " pedantic " , " arrogant " , etc, and I must think

> very hard as I am talking in order to " dumb down " what I am saying.

> SOmetimes when this happens I get stuck so bad I can hardly talk at all! But

> here, I can be what I am, and talk in a way that is most natural to me.

> Thanks, all. -- Joni

>

Yeah, I try very hard not to correct badly used spoken language and

not comment on it as I know people get really upset by it, but ...

argh! Someone who lives in this house uses things like " is " and " are "

interchangeably rather than dependent on one or more than one. I

rarely say anything, but odd times it slips out.

One that reallly gets me, and is used so widely is " try and " instead

of " try to " . Like " I must try and get out more " should read " I must

try to get out more " . It's so acceptable that I see it in books and

newspapers as well as coming across it often in other folks' speech.

Ick!

Ruth

[Guest guest]

Very well put, Joni, thanks. I will save this post. I especially like the

'accept' / 'except' point you're making. It irritates me, too, since I know

the difference even though English is my second language.

D.

Re: firgures of speech

> " The exception that proves the rule " is one of those idioms that have

> become so distorted by mutation and misuse that it means the opposite of

> what it originally meant.

>

> It comes from science in the middle ages. It meant that, when an

> experimenter has hypothesysed a rule, and encounters an exception, the

> experimenter must then examine the hypothesis, revise or clarify it, and

> prove it in a way that accounts for the exception, or if that is not

> possible, discard the hypothesis. A better statement of this concept

> would be " the exception that challenges the rule. "

>

> It does NOT mean, as many people seem to think, that if you can find an

> exception then that somehow validates the rule. For example, in that

> recent fiasco that I got into on the jewelrymakers forum people were

> citing some autistic person they know who doesn't mind the puzzle piece

> emblem or person-first language, and said " that's the exception that

> proves the rule. " Instead, it was the excpetion that -challenged- the

> rule (that we don't like puzzle piece emblem or person first language) and

> gave me an opportunity to clarify the hypothesis, that is, explain the

> difference between community (or population) trends and individual

> variations. But because those people were fixated on what the

> idiom -seemed- to mean, they could not understand my point.

>

> Of course, anyone who is versed in science or mathematics knows that an

> exception does not prove a rule; in fact, in math, if you can find a

> single exception to a hypothesis, then the hypothesis is false! Applied

> and social science is a bit less rigid, relying on statistical trends

> rather than binary true / false. In those, my alternative statement of

> that concept would still be valid; when one encounters an exception, this

> may indicate a need to clarify or revise rather than discard a hypothesis.

>

> Another thing that bugs me is when people write " accept " when they mean

> " except " or vice versa (sp?). Although these two words sound the same in

> most English dialects, they have almost opposite meanings. " Accept " is

> from the Latin acceptare, means to take or receive, often with a

> connotation of approval or favor. " Except " is from the Latin " exceptare "

> which means " to take out. " The root 'cept,' meaning take, is in both

> words, but the prefixes give the two words entirely different meanings.

> When I encounter a misuse of one of these two words in writing, I have to

> stop and figure out what the writer means. This is why it bothers me,

> because to me, it is very important to say what one means, and mean what

> one says.

>

> I love this place! Sometimes in face to face interactions when I talk

> like this I get accused of being " pedantic " , " arrogant " , etc, and I must

> think very hard as I am talking in order to " dumb down " what I am saying.

> SOmetimes when this happens I get stuck so bad I can hardly talk at all!

> But here, I can be what I am, and talk in a way that is most natural to

> me. Thanks, all. -- Joni

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

>

> One that reallly gets me, and is used so widely is " try and " instead

> of " try to " . Like " I must try and get out more " should read " I must

> try to get out more " . It's so acceptable that I see it in books and

> newspapers as well as coming across it often in other folks' speech.

Oh, don't get me started! LOL! I think Americans are murdering the English

language even more than the British. Even reporters and news anchors, who

should know better say things like " ...he should have went... " or " ...she

also made cookies, as well. " Grrrr! It's 'gone' and either 'also' *or* 'as

well', but not both, but it's so pervasive now, that it's a losing battle.

We're outnumbered!

D.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 4/19/2009 4:50:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

watertiger9@... writes:

he should have went... "

How about the ever popular " Should OF went ... " ugh

**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy

steps!

(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220814852x1201410738/aol?redir=http:%2\

F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26

hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3DAprilfooter419NO62)

[Guest guest]

> I love this place! Sometimes in face to face interactions when I

> talk like this I get accused of being " pedantic " , " arrogant " , etc,

> and I must think very hard as I am talking in order to " dumb down "

> what I am saying. SOmetimes when this happens I get stuck so bad I

> can hardly talk at all! But here, I can be what I am, and talk in a

> way that is most natural to me. Thanks, all. -- Joni

I've had to stop commenting about interesting-to-me things in other

posters' writing (e.g., mis-used words, incorrect grammar) in another

autie online group, because some in the group feel criticized by any

comment on their use of language. And they're extremely prickly about

it. :-(

It's one of my favorite topics, but it's effectively banned from that

particular group.

Jane

[Guest guest]

Ruth, Jane, and other grammarians,

Fel free to  correct my English if you like.  I don't mind a bit!  On the other

hand, I love ambiguous sentences, and find the incredibly funny.  They are the

basis of many a great pun!  how many meanings can you find for " Time flies like

an arrow? " , for example?  There are three that are pretty obvious.

________________________________

To: AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse

Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2009 2:15:07 PM

Subject: Re: Re: firgures of speech

2009/4/19 jonipinkney <jonipinkney@ yahoo.com>:

> I love this place! Sometimes in face to face interactions when I talk like

> this I get accused of being " pedantic " , " arrogant " , etc, and I must think

> very hard as I am talking in order to " dumb down " what I am saying.

> SOmetimes when this happens I get stuck so bad I can hardly talk at all! But

> here, I can be what I am, and talk in a way that is most natural to me.

> Thanks, all. -- Joni

>

Yeah, I try very hard not to correct badly used spoken language and

not comment on it as I know people get really upset by it, but ...

argh! Someone who lives in this house uses things like " is " and " are "

interchangeably rather than dependent on one or more than one. I

rarely say anything, but odd times it slips out.

One that reallly gets me, and is used so widely is " try and " instead

of " try to " . Like " I must try and get out more " should read " I must

try to get out more " . It's so acceptable that I see it in books and

newspapers as well as coming across it often in other folks' speech.

Ick!

Ruth

[Guest guest]

>

> In a message dated 4/19/2009 4:50:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

> watertiger9@... writes:

>

> he should have went... "

>

>

> How about the ever popular " Should OF went ... " ugh

I suspect a lot of people don't realize there's a difference. Both, in

colloquial speech, tend to blur into " ve " -- as in " he should've went,

" where " ve " can stand for either " have " or " of. " ;-)

Jane

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

>

> In a message dated 4/19/2009 4:50:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

> watertiger9@... writes:

>

> he should have went... "

>

>

>

>

> How about the ever popular " Should OF went ... " ugh

***OMG! That's in writing, yes! Why do so many people make that mistake?

It's a huge turn-off for me. I tend to call people on that one, too. It irks

me too much to say nothing.

D.

[Guest guest]

To understand how " should of " occurs, recall that its pronunciation is

identical with that of " should've. "

Many people who have spent their whole lives hearing, and saying,

" should've / would've / could've " have simply never learned how to

spell these.

A famous " should of " example inhabits a personal letter in 1809 (as I

recall) by the poet Keats -- you can see this quoted and

discussed in the material on " of " as a homophone for " 've " in

Crystal's THE STORIES OF ENGLISH.

Kate Gladstone

[Guest guest]

Autiste Ruth and all others who object to " try and " --

Please read, think, and comment about the following which explains

when and how " try and " originated:

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-try1.htm

Kate Gladstone

[Guest guest]

Re changes in verb forms, what do you think about the info here?

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2460562

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

> To understand how " should of " occurs, recall that its pronunciation is

> identical with that of " should've. "

> Many people who have spent their whole lives hearing, and saying,

> " should've / would've / could've " have simply never learned how to

> spell these.

>

> A famous " should of " example inhabits a personal letter in 1809 (as I

> recall) by the poet Keats -- you can see this quoted and

> discussed in the material on " of " as a homophone for " 've " in

> Crystal's THE STORIES OF ENGLISH.

This is all well and good, but to me there is no excuse for people today to

confuse the two. That's grade school stuff! Students learn (or should!) that

it is 'should have' or 'should've' some time in the first few years of

school, no? 200 years ago, there may not yet have been a uniform way of

spelling.

D.

[Guest guest]

Me too Jane.

I particularly hate hearing people say

Mischievious.

Of course they pronounce it Mis-cheeve - E- ous!

The word has NO " i " after the " v " ....It is mischief with the F changed to V

and an ous added and hearing people say it wrong by adding the E sound after

Mischiev, really irks me! But I have given up on that peeve too. I mean I

used to correct every and anyone but I have relaxed!

Swift<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/jonathan_swift.html>

- " May you live every day of your life. "

On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Jane Meyerding wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> > I love this place! Sometimes in face to face interactions when I

> > talk like this I get accused of being " pedantic " , " arrogant " , etc,

> > and I must think very hard as I am talking in order to " dumb down "

> > what I am saying. SOmetimes when this happens I get stuck so bad I

> > can hardly talk at all! But here, I can be what I am, and talk in a

> > way that is most natural to me. Thanks, all. -- Joni

>

> I've had to stop commenting about interesting-to-me things in other

> posters' writing (e.g., mis-used words, incorrect grammar) in another

> autie online group, because some in the group feel criticized by any

> comment on their use of language. And they're extremely prickly about

> it. :-(

>

> It's one of my favorite topics, but it's effectively banned from that

> particular group.

>

> Jane

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

2009/4/20 Kate Gladstone :

> Please read, think, and comment about the following which explains

> when and how " try and " originated:

> http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-try1.htm

The arguments go nowhere with me because " try and " just doesn't make

sense the way it is used. " Try to " does make sense, in the general

understanding of those words.

" Try and " means you're going to try, *and* something else. " And "

means " additionally " or " as well as " . So you're going to try, as well

as, well, what?

Blech.

Ruth

[Guest guest]

.....Or the ones I hear constantly:

'where's it at?'

'where is you?'

'gratz' instead of congratulations (in the online game I play, " Perfect

World " )

And other such toothgrindingly bad grammar. I don't pretend that mine is

perfect, despite the fact that my husband is a high school English teacher.

But some things have become popular, and I think they come out of the

ghetto/Black/gangsta cultures in part-some I recongise as being from there.

But some are just pure laziness on the part of the kids who grow up into

adults, still using the same bad grammar/slanguage, even in business. There

once was a time when business required a higher level/degree of

professionalism and decorum, and part of that would have included being able

to use your own language correctly.

Not today. <sigh>

-- Re: Re: firgures of speech

>

> In a message dated 4/19/2009 4:50:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,

> watertiger9@... writes:

>

> he should have went... "

>

>

> How about the ever popular " Should OF went ... " ugh

I suspect a lot of people don't realize there's a difference. Both, in

colloquial speech, tend to blur into " ve " -- as in " he should've went,

" where " ve " can stand for either " have " or " of. " ;-)

Jane

------------------------------------