Linguistic pedantry

[HighPeakFox]

#prayfor @murphy

[String fellow]

14 hours ago, murphy said:

I don't know whether this one has been covered yet?  A common sight in supermarkets, but shouldn't that read ten items or fewer?  

 

 

Every little helps, according to Tesco. But what exactly are they referring to? Shoplifting? To me, their slogan seems to be grammatically incorrect. And btw, does it really help when they double the price of some groceries for customers without clubcards?

[Phil Bowman]

2 minutes ago, String fellow said:

And btw, does it really help when they double the price of some groceries for customers without clubcards?

Ah, but they don’t say who every little helps.

[murphy]

50 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

It's a good job nobody chose to highlight your use of chomping at the bit in the Maddison thread else you'd be up all week...

I thought I'd got away with that!  I did think about mentioning it in the post above but it was already a little bit on the verbose side.

 

I think perhaps 70% of my posts will have a little blue suffix saying 'edited by murphy'.  If there is a typo or mistake I have to correct it straight away.  Regarding the post that you mentioned, it was quoted before I had a chance to edit it and there it was preserved in aspic for all to see.  Imagine the horror.

 

Anyway, I'm claiming typo.  It was definitely a typo.

 

(it wasn't) 

[HighPeakFox]

To let @murphy off the hook, what is it with beginning a sentence of a response 'agree to disagree'? It makes no sense used in that way.

 

In fact, it's almost like an order - do this or you're being unreasonable. That, or people are just failing to understand what it means. Which is more likely? You be the judge...

[Daggers]

Less/fewer

 

It vexes me daily.

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Daggers said:

Less/fewer

 

It vexes me daily.

 

Me too.

 

But probably fewer than you...

[Phil Bowman]

1 minute ago, Daggers said:

Less/fewer

 

It vexes me daily.

To be honest, I’m more amused by it than vexed.

A fun game: whenever anyone uses either word, correctly or not, correct them by saying the other one.

If you try to enjoy it instead of getting annoyed, you’ll be vexed much fewer, and will have less moments of anger.

[Phil Bowman]

On 17/08/2021 at 12:46, thursday_next said:

The day I actually use the word 'meh' in a sentence will be the day I draw the gun out of my drawer and shoot myself in the head. Apart from today, of course.

I actually don’t mind things like this. If a word finds a place in the language because it has a function/meaning that no other word quite does, that’s all good. Languages are living things after all. But it makes me a bit said when perfectly good words lose perfectly good meanings through ignorance or carelessness and language loses either clarity or beauty as a result.

[murphy]

3 minutes ago, Phil Bowman said:

I actually don’t mind things like this. If a word finds a place in the language because it has a function/meaning that no other word quite does, that’s all good. Languages are living things after all. But it makes me a bit said when perfectly good words lose perfectly good meanings through ignorance or carelessness and language loses either clarity or beauty as a result.

I don't like it.  Aurally it's horrid, but I suppose you're right.  I can't think of another word that does the same job.  I think the French equivalent is 'bof'.  I think I'd rather pinch that.

[Phil Bowman]

1 minute ago, murphy said:

I don't like it.  Aurally it's horrid, but I suppose you're right.  I can't think of another word that does the same job.  I think the French equivalent is 'bof'.  I think I'd rather pinch that.

That would have been much more fun!

But nobody gets to choose; it just happens. Which I think is one of the best things about languages - they’re kind of alive independently of the people wot use them.

[HighPeakFox]

The less/fewer thing gets a pass with me, as my personal arbiter is 'did I know what they meant?' If I did, I decide life is too short.

[Phil Bowman]

2 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

The less/fewer thing gets a pass with me, as my personal arbiter is 'did I know what they meant?' If I did, I decide life is too short.

It’s literally not possible that someone who would start this thread could take this position on less/fewer.

I have a lot less respects for you now, I’m afraid.

[FoxesDeb]

1 minute ago, Phil Bowman said:

It’s literally not possible that someone who would start this thread could take this position on less/fewer.

I have a lot less respects for you now, I’m afraid.

Don't get HPF started on literally, please! 

[HighPeakFox]

7 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Don't get HPF started on literally, please! 

Worry not, Debs, it was patently deliberate  

[Phil Bowman]

5 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Don't get HPF started on literally, please! 

It’s alright, he’ll know what I mean and that’s all that matters, after all.

Mr live-and-let-live when it comes to linguistic pedantry, that’s HPF nowadays…!

[Phil Bowman]

2 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

#prayfor @murphy

I think we need to, judging by this from the secret pleasures thread…

 

Yes, I've developed a soft spot for it.  Some of the acting, particularly from guest actors, is bordering on sabotage but that is part of it's charm.  It rarely strays from an anodyne version of life that appeals to me.  No gritty realism here.  I know it's crap, but I like it nontheless and that's the point of a guilty pleasure I suppose.

[murphy]

6 minutes ago, Phil Bowman said:

I think we need to, judging by this from the secret pleasures thread…

 

Yes, I've developed a soft spot for it.  Some of the acting, particularly from guest actors, is bordering on sabotage but that is part of it's charm.  It rarely strays from an anodyne version of life that appeals to me.  No gritty realism here.  I know it's crap, but I like it nontheless and that's the point of a guilty pleasure I suppose.

Well now I'm just being picked on. 

 

You are all beasts.

[HighPeakFox]

14 minutes ago, Phil Bowman said:

It’s alright, he’ll know what I mean and that’s all that matters, after all.

Mr live-and-let-live when it comes to linguistic pedantry, that’s HPF nowadays…!

Hahaha  Believe me, when it's obvious to me that the writer has absolutely no idea what they are writing, then not so much!

 

Example - one nameless person yesterday said that LCFC winning the title in 2016 was IMPOSSIBLE. How is it possible to misunderstand language so basic?

[Phil Bowman]

2 minutes ago, murphy said:

You are all beasts.

Your literally all beast’s.

 

There. Fixed it for you.

(I hate the ‘fixed it for you’ thing by the way. Not sure why it annoys me as much as it does, but it does.)

[Buce]

1 hour ago, murphy said:

I thought I'd got away with that!  I did think about mentioning it in the post above but it was already a little bit on the verbose side.

 

I think perhaps 70% of my posts will have a little blue suffix saying 'edited by murphy'.  If there is a typo or mistake I have to correct it straight away.  Regarding the post that you mentioned, it was quoted before I had a chance to edit it and there it was preserved in aspic for all to see.  Imagine the horror.

 

Anyway, I'm claiming typo.  It was definitely a typo.

 

(it wasn't) 

 

Tbf, it's a living example of language evolving; there are linguists who will argue that once word usage reaches a critical mass it becomes the accepted norm, so maybe you're just ahead of the times.

 

Depressingly, this means that 'of' will eventually become an acceptable replacement for the abbreviation of have. Shoot me now.

[murphy]

25 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Don't get HPF started on literally, please! 

Allow me.

 

The literally/figuratively thing will have been done to death I'm sure but I have learned to accept it as a means of emphasis.

 

Imagine you have an emphasis dial, a bit like a volume knob.  Now I could say that I was 'bouncing off the walls when we won The FA Cup'.  If I introduced a 'literally' into that sentence it would be incorrect but would have the effect of turning the emphasis dial up.  If I said that I was 'bouncing off the walls when we won The FA Cup, figuratively speaking' that would be correct but have a dampening effect on the emphasis, so I have learned to tolerate it.  

 

 

 

 

[murphy]

42 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

The less/fewer thing gets a pass with me, as my personal arbiter is 'did I know what they meant?' If I did, I decide life is too short.

Pedantry membership revoked.

 

I will need your badge and your gun.

[Phil Bowman]

3 minutes ago, murphy said:

Allow me.

 

The literally/figuratively thing will have been done to death I'm sure but I have learned to accept it as a means of emphasis.

 

Imagine you have an emphasis dial, a bit like a volume knob.  Now I could say that I was 'bouncing off the walls when we won The FA Cup'.  If I introduced a 'literally' into that sentence it would be incorrect but would have the effect of turning the emphasis dial up.  If I said that I was 'bouncing off the walls when we won The FA Cup, figuratively speaking' that would be correct but have a dampening effect on the emphasis, so I have learned to tolerate it.  

 

 

 

 

I know what you mean, and there is an enjoyable irony in literally basically meaning figuratively, but it does mean that literally is literally losing its literal meaning. Which is a bit of a shame.

[thursday_next]

16 hours ago, murphy said:

Portmanteau words are an abomination.

What, all portmanteau words? I don't like phablet, webinar, podcast, netiquette, frenemy and chillax, but it's difficult to know how we'd get on without email, breathalyzer, Bollywood, smog, pixel or malware. Maybe there is a substitute for malware, but it would be twice as long and probably not as effective.

 

I personally don't like spanking when it's used as anything other than spanking. 'Spanking new' is simply beyond the pale for me. I don't know what 'beyond the pale' means, but it's definitely that.