gareth19 (imported) wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2010 9:00 pm Of split infinitives, Fowler, Modern English Usage, Oxford University Press, p. 579-80, says: "The English-speaking world may be divided into 1) those who neither know nor care what a split infinitive is 2) those who do not know, but care very much, 3 those who know and condemn, 4) those who know and approve, and 5) those who know and distinguish. Those who neither know nor care are the vast majority and are a happy folk, to be envied by most of the minority classes ..."

Fowler also observes that the prohibition against ending sentences in prepositions is a superstition.

It would have to be a very corrupt manuscript indeed for an illiterate scribe to so mutilate De exsecando testes puerorum ut angeli cantent. Imagine getting the subjunctive right but putting a gerund in the plural as if it were a gerundive even though it is the object of a preposition! If the scribe took such liberties with the title, what must the contents be like?

1) re Fowler: might be worth quoting W.S.Churchill's note on a Civil Service memo "This is the kind of English , up with which I will not put". Cf. the apocryphal story of the Nanny who asked her young charge "What did you choose that book to be read to out of for?"

2) Have you read "Uncle Jack" - so littered with incorrect apostrophes?

3) The wholly spoof MS: I seem to recall a syntactical point called "Gerundive Attraction" - but I may be wrong, because my days of composing Latin prose (verse too) are in the remote past. I will put up my hand for getting the verb Seco in the wrong conjugation.

gareth19 (imported) wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2010 9:00 pm It would have to be a very corrupt manuscript indeed for an illiterate scribe to so mutilate De exsecando testes puerorum ut angeli cantent. Imagine getting the subjunctive right but putting a gerund in the plural as if it were a gerundive even though it is the object of a preposition! If the scribe took such liberties with the title, what must the contents be like?

Gareth,

Not sure; it's all Greek to me...

-YPA

YourPhriendlyAuthor (imported) wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2010 7:48 am Gareth,

Not sure; it's all Greek to me...

-YPA

H'm! Puerum Sporum exsectis testibus &c (Well, if I didn't include something about castrating boys, I guess the administrators would disallow the post).

To resume. There are sufficient authorities shown on the Internet to prove that the construction "Legatos miserunt ad pacem petendam" i.e. preposition + noun + gerundive in agreement - is syntactically correct. It is an exact parallel to my "De testibus exsecandis".

It may help if I do an old fashioned "construe" exercise: De = Concerning; Testibus = the testicles; Puerorum = of boys; Exsecandis = being cut out; Quo stands for Ut and introduces a final clause = So that; Cantent = they may sing; Ut = Sicut = Like or As;

Angeli = angels.

Am unsure what the objection was in the first place. I don't see anything in the authorities I've been brushing up on, to say that gerundive attraction doesn't apply where a preposition introduces the phrase.

Finally I'm sure this is all very boring for Members that don't understand - and don't wish to understand, the finer points of Latin prose composition.

Gareth, what are you like on "Balliol Rhymes?"

C van D:-

Si quid dictum est per jocum,

Non aequum est id te serio praevortier!

PUEROS,

whose pseudonym is actually not meant to be a Latin word.

I want to slap my forehead when I read "might of," "should of," "would of" or "could of." If you read the comments on a You Tube video, for instance, you will see these errors often.

What about the word "often?" I learned to pronounce it "oFFen," but today I hear only "ofTen." Not a writing error, just makes me feel old. Modern dictionaries approve both pronunciations. Maybe I should "sofTen" my expectations.

The correct use of pronouns is a lost art. "Me and her's going shopping."

Only the high priests of grammar retain the arcane use of adverbs. The suffix "ly" rarely appears today. "He's a real strict parent." He surely is "real," but is he "really strict?"

"How are you feeling?" "I'm good." You may or may not be "good," but are you "well?"

I wish I would of not written this post. Me and you's getting real depressed, huh?

madnomadtoo (imported) wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:49 am What about the word "often?" I learned to pronounce it "oFFen," but today I hear only "ofTen." Not a writing error, just makes me feel old. Modern dictionaries approve both pronunciations. Maybe I should "sofTen" my expectations.

Your post shows one thing: It's hard to write about pronounciation, especially if readers aren't native speakers.

Hamburger (imported) wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2017 1:24 pm Your post shows one thing: It's hard to write about pronounciation, especially if readers aren't native speakers.

Pronunciation is nearly impossible to show unambiguously in English writing, because English orthography is just close enough to phonetic to mislead one into thinking it makes sense. There are seven different ways to pronounce "ough," for example (through, thorough, though, tough, etc.) Many who post here, and probably more who read here, are not native English speakers, so I'm inclined to cut them some slack. I know my Spanish no es bueno.

Madnomadtoo mentioned "could of," "should of," etc. That's another case where English orthography is just close enough to phonetic to mislead. It's perfectly correct to say, "could've" and "should've," which are pronounced essentially identically to "could of" and "should of."

Sandi

I wouldn't call it a fetish but, I too have to get mad when people refuse to acknowledge that two is in fact the loneliest number not the number one.

You left out:

who's = who is

whose = possessive of who

Examples:

Who's coming to dinner? (as in who is coming to dinner)

Whose chair will that be at dinner? (as who will occupy that chair at dinner )

One more:

Without getting too deep in the wood here. In English adjectives come before the noun (most of the time).

Example: I went for a ride in the hunk's red car (red is the adjective and car the noun - rather basic)

Now for the my hot button.

The adjective sometimes (note the sometimes comes after the noun in English)

Often, as a predicative:

Example: That dog looks mean (mean = the adjective and dog = the noun) note that the noun came first.

Still not to my hot button.

Sometimes in English the Noun just comes first (accept it as fact it does)

Examples: Attorney General, President Elect

So, now we've gotten to the my point. When you make them plural the noun is plural.

Example of plurals: Past Presidents Elect have stayed at Blair House. (note the noun "President" gets the "s" to make it plural not the adjective)

OK, now if someone can just tell me in a way I can understand why potato does not end in an "e" and yet, potatoes does have an "e". I'll be at peace at last. Who am I kidding.

By the way, I am not going to proof read this post because it would make me a crazy person. So, if you find an error you get 500 points nad win the game.

Some (or even most) of the "errors" mentioned here are not so much errors as they are regional variations or dialects and therefore valid in their own right. --FLO--

....

TopManFL (imported) wrote: Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:05 pm By the way, I am not going to proof read this post because it would make me a crazy person. So, if you find an error you get 500 points nad win the game.

"Nad win the game??" Do I win?

I seem to recall a U.S. Vice President (Dan Quayle) who put egg on his face by telling a kid (with cameras rolling) that "potato" does have an "e" on the end. Of course, he was a politician, so you can't expect much.

Sandi