Hilton slogan: Travel should take you places - idiom ?
hhg...@gmail.com
I came across this slogan by Hilton Hotels: "Travel should take you
places"
1. Is it American slang only ?
2. Does it have a special meaning other than the literal one ?
Pat Durkin
<hhg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:31c2d993-a178-4eb3...@v3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Not nearly as special as the possible interpretation of "Travel broadens
one".
But, why do you ask if your sentence is American slang? There isn't
anything unusual about its construction or word choice, as far as I can
see. It is a stupidity, of course, but marketing statements usually are
inane.
"Travel is a state of mind." But, of course, a person can get into a
state of mind without the cost and bother of actually taking a trip. No
travel agency or transportation company would use that, would they?
hhg...@gmail.com
> But, why do you ask if your sentence is American slang? There isn't
> anything unusual about its construction or word choice, as far as I can
> see. It is a stupidity, of course, but marketing statements usually are
> inane.
Obviously, because I am not a native speaker of English so I never
know for sure whether there is a hidden meaning or at least I have a
much lower chance than a native speaker.
Alec McKenzie
> <hhg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:31c2d993-a178-4eb3...@v3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> > I came across this slogan by Hilton Hotels: "Travel should take you
> > places"
> But, why do you ask if your sentence is American slang? There isn't
> anything unusual about its construction or word choice, as far as I can
> see.
Not all that unusual, perhaps, but quite definitely ungrammatical!
--
Alec McKenzie
usenet@<surname>.me.uk
R H Draney
>> places"
>>
>> 1. Is it American slang only ?
>> 2. Does it have a special meaning other than the literal one ?
>
>Not nearly as special as the possible interpretation of "Travel broadens
>one".
>
>But, why do you ask if your sentence is American slang? There isn't
>anything unusual about its construction or word choice, as far as I can
>see. It is a stupidity, of course, but marketing statements usually are
>inane.
>
>"Travel is a state of mind." But, of course, a person can get into a
>state of mind without the cost and bother of actually taking a trip. No
>travel agency or transportation company would use that, would they?
It's not as good, to my thinking, as "Travel moves you" or even "Travel
transports you"...the Hilton version seems to be nibbling at the heels of this
idea but as hhgygy (?) has found, it's too easy not only to miss the additional
meaning but to be uncertain that a second meaning is even intended....r
--
What good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone?
Skitt
> "Pat Durkin" wrote:
>>> I came across this slogan by Hilton Hotels: "Travel should take you
>>> places"
>
>> But, why do you ask if your sentence is American slang? There isn't
>> anything unusual about its construction or word choice, as far as I
>> can see.
>
> Not all that unusual, perhaps, but quite definitely ungrammatical!
What's ungrammatical about it?
--
Skitt (AmE)
Pat Durkin
"R H Draney" <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:fq1q8...@drn.newsguy.com...
> Pat Durkin filted:
>>
>>
>><hhg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:31c2d993-a178-4eb3...@v3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> I came across this slogan by Hilton Hotels: "Travel should take you
>>> places"
>>>
>>> 1. Is it American slang only ?
>>> 2. Does it have a special meaning other than the literal one ?
>>
>>Not nearly as special as the possible interpretation of "Travel
>>broadens
>>one".
>>
>>But, why do you ask if your sentence is American slang? There isn't
>>anything unusual about its construction or word choice, as far as I
>>can
>>see. It is a stupidity, of course, but marketing statements usually
>>are
>>inane.
>>
>
> "Travel
> transports you"...the Hilton version seems to be nibbling at the heels
> of this
> idea but as hhgygy (?) has found, it's too easy not only to miss the
> additional
> meaning but to be uncertain that a second meaning is even
> intended....r
OK. But "Travel _should_ take you places" sets you up to feel cheated,
doesn't it, if you end up in a nowhere zone. And if you don't come off
a trip having been unchanged and unmoved, what then? Is it your fault
or Hilton's or the travel agent's? Can you get your money back?
PHTE
It is a stupidity, of course, but marketing statements usually are
> inane.
Right. If only marketing statements were ane. <g>
(We need more positive forms of adjectives usually used in the
negative.)
Peter
Oleg Lego
In what way?
--
WCdnE
Paul Wolff
I believe the gentleman refers to the preposition before 'places'.
--
Paul
R H Draney
>>>news:31c2d993-a178-4eb3...@v3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>> I came across this slogan by Hilton Hotels: "Travel should take you
>>>> places"
>>
>> "Travel
>> transports you"...the Hilton version seems to be nibbling at the heels
>> of this
>> idea but as hhgygy (?) has found, it's too easy not only to miss the
>> additional
>> meaning but to be uncertain that a second meaning is even
>> intended....r
>
>OK. But "Travel _should_ take you places" sets you up to feel cheated,
>doesn't it, if you end up in a nowhere zone. And if you don't come off
>a trip having been unchanged and unmoved, what then? Is it your fault
>or Hilton's or the travel agent's? Can you get your money back?
Good point, and a more appropriate parallel would have been "Travel should move
you"...that's the other implication of the way Hilton said it; "travel *should*
take you places, so if it doesn't, it's because you stayed at some inferior
hotel instead of ours"....r
Alec McKenzie
In a sentence of the form "Travel should take you xxx", the 'xxx'
part is an adverb or an adverbial phrase, modifying the verb 'take'.
In the example above it is neither: it is a noun.
Grammatical (adverb or adverbial phrase):
"Travel should take you quickly"
"Travel should take you by surprise"
"Travel should take you to foreign parts"
Ungrammatical (noun):
"Travel should take you holiday"
"Travel should take you trains"
"Travel should take you places"
--
Skitt
Ah, but "he will go places" or "it will take you places" are idiomatic
expressions, and that makes them quite valid grammatically. Usually,
though, to "go places" is taken to mean to "be on the way to success",
still, theres no question of the expression's grammaticality.
--
Skitt (AmE)
Pat Durkin
"PHTE" <ar_...@ids.net> wrote in message
news:1aa69035-ea0e-4584...@z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
I like "ruth", myself.
I never thought of "inane" as being "not ane", but as being "in the same
class as an ass". But, in Dictionary.com I see that, it apparently
means "emptiness"-- inanity from L. inanitatem "emptiness," from inanis
"empty, void, worthless, useless."
That still leaves room for a negative "in-", but it could also still be
"into", as "inflammable".. and I don't think we need to get back into
that discussion.
inane--silly, foolish, empty. (in air, airy? vacuous? into air?)
R H Draney
>
>I never thought of "inane" as being "not ane", but as being "in the same
>class as an ass". But, in Dictionary.com I see that, it apparently
>means "emptiness"-- inanity from L. inanitatem "emptiness," from inanis
>"empty, void, worthless, useless."
>
>That still leaves room for a negative "in-", but it could also still be
>"into", as "inflammable".. and I don't think we need to get back into
>that discussion.
Agreed...let's try to keep things sidious....r
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
For instance:
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/stage/comedy/article3404249.ece
or http://tinyurl.com/2lrwps
From The Sunday Times
February 24, 2008
Why Paul Sinha is going places
Dr Paul Sinha is going places as a stand-up – soon he'll
have to tell his patients
Approaching Paul Sinha involves a complex obstacle course of
labels and definitions. He is the world's only gay Bengali
GP turned stand-up comedian. Yet he defies any of the
clichés that mix of labels may have created in your mind.
For one thing, he's about as camp as a tax return. A Channel
4 commissioning editor flatly refused to believe he was gay,
which presumably cost him an otherwise guaranteed
Friday-night slot. He is, not to put too fine a point on it,
short of a rippling six-pack. He's also a huge football fan,
which isolates him somewhat from the gay community: "Most
gay men I know think Man City is some kind of sex resort."
....
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Pat Durkin
> Pat Durkin filted:
>>
>>I never thought of "inane" as being "not ane", but as being "in the
>>same
>>class as an ass". But, in Dictionary.com I see that, it apparently
>>means "emptiness"-- inanity from L. inanitatem "emptiness," from
>>inanis
>>"empty, void, worthless, useless."
>>
>>That still leaves room for a negative "in-", but it could also still
>>be
>>"into", as "inflammable".. and I don't think we need to get back into
>>that discussion.
>
> Agreed...let's try to keep things sidious....r
Indeed.
Pat the Vidious.
>
Robert Bannister
> Ah, but "he will go places" or "it will take you places" are idiomatic
> expressions, and that makes them quite valid grammatically. Usually,
> though, to "go places" is taken to mean to "be on the way to success",
> still, theres no question of the expression's grammaticality.
Which is precisely why the OP asked about slang. Where the exact line
comes between slang and idiom is another question entirely.
--
Rob Bannister
Evan Kirshenbaum
It wouldn't have occurred to me to consider "take you places" or "go
places" to be idiomatic--it's that well established--but I guess
you're right. Looking at Google Books, I first see "take X places"
in the beginning of the twentieth century:
Hearing me give Francis [his black servant] orders to take us
places, she told me that I should not go till after next week.
Henry Beeching, _Provincial Letters_, 1906
I like Mr. Dick best. He's always taking us places and things.
Clyde Fitch, _Her Own Way_, 1907
with the hits becoming more frequent around 1911. There's also a
somewhat earlier use, put into the mouth of someone with a thick
German accent:
"V-h-y! You haf fun _mit_ him. He take you places: _zum_ park, in
the-ar-tre, and by and by you marry _und_ haf home."
Lillian Pettengill, _Toilers of the Home_, 1903
which might either be another example of an American expression or
might indicate the origin.
"Go places" shows up a decade or so earlier:
But you did, did you not? You kept asking him here and there, and
making me go places with him I didn't want to.
Margaret Briscoe, _Links in a Chain_, 1893
The OED lists "go places" under "go" and only cites it to 1925, noting
it as "originally US". They don't have a "places" sense under "take"
at all.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The reason that we don't have
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |"bear-proof" garbage cans in the
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |park is that there is a significant
|overlap in intelligence between the
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |smartest bears and the dumbest
(650)857-7572 |humans.
| Yosemite Park Ranger
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
Alec McKenzie
> Ah, but "he will go places" or "it will take you places" are idiomatic
> expressions, and that makes them quite valid grammatically. Usually,
> though, to "go places" is taken to mean to "be on the way to success",
> still, theres no question of the expression's grammaticality.
That makes them quite valid grammatically? I am surprised you should
think so. There are many idiomatic expressions which by no stretch
of the imagination could be considered so.
Example:
"we was up the pub"
Quite valid grammatically? Hardly.
Alec McKenzie
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:13:38 -0800, "Skitt"
> <ski...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >Ah, but "he will go places" or "it will take you places" are idiomatic
> >expressions, and that makes them quite valid grammatically. Usually,
> >though, to "go places" is taken to mean to "be on the way to success",
> >still, theres no question of the expression's grammaticality.
>
> For instance:
> http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/stage/comedy
> /article3404249.ece
> or http://tinyurl.com/2lrwps
>
> From The Sunday Times
> February 24, 2008
> Why Paul Sinha is going places
>
> Dr Paul Sinha is going places as a stand-up – soon he'll
> have to tell his patients
"I saw it in the Sunday Times, so it must be grammatically correct"?
Peter Moylan
The meaning is not obvious, but I take it to mean "If you travel, be
careful not to do things that make you feel as if you have never left
home." Or, more briefly, avoid places like Hilton Hotels.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
It was an example of the use of an idiomatic expression.
Although an idiom may lack internal gramatical correctness,
there can be grammatical correctness in the manner in which it,
as a unit, is used in a sentence.
Evan Kirshenbaum
> It wouldn't have occurred to me to consider "take you places" or "go
> places" to be idiomatic--it's that well established--but I guess
> you're right. Looking at Google Books, I first see "take X places"
> in the beginning of the twentieth century:
>
> Hearing me give Francis [his black servant] orders to take us
> places, she told me that I should not go till after next week.
>
> Henry Beeching, _Provincial Letters_, 1906
[snip]
>
> "Go places" shows up a decade or so earlier:
>
> But you did, did you not? You kept asking him here and there, and
> making me go places with him I didn't want to.
>
> Margaret Briscoe, _Links in a Chain_, 1893
Further,
"There! Now you see why I object to your work. Any man, any fool,
can order you about and send you places, while I have no word to
say."
Alice MacGowan, _The Last Word_, 1902
I have asked him to drive me places.
Collinson v. Cutter, Iowa Supreme Court, 1919
"Fly X places" shows up in 1983, "carry X places" in 1992. It's
starting to look as though "places" is just an adverb.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Your claim might have more
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |credibility if you hadn't mispelled
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |"inteligent"
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Skitt
> "Skitt" wrote:
>> Ah, but "he will go places" or "it will take you places" are
>> idiomatic expressions, and that makes them quite valid
>> grammatically. Usually, though, to "go places" is taken to mean to
>> "be on the way to success", still, theres no question of the
>> expression's grammaticality.
>
> That makes them quite valid grammatically? I am surprised you should
> think so. There are many idiomatic expressions which by no stretch
> of the imagination could be considered so.
>
> Example:
>
> "we was up the pub"
>
> Quite valid grammatically? Hardly.
Well, I think we have hit upon one of the things I have difficulty
understanding. What does a claimed (by some) lack of grammaticality have to
do with the language as it is used by educated native English speakers and
writers.
"Go places", while marked as being informal only in some dictionaries, is
very much a part of such usage. I don't see any merit in claims that the
expression is ungrammatical.
As for "we was up the pub", the "we was" is ungrammatical, and the "up the
pub" is a non-standard BrE expression. Quite a different kettle of fish.
--
Skitt (AmE) (also an Alec)
Alec McKenzie
Surely one cannot deny that "we was up the pub" is idiomatic?
So if it is accepted as such, and the "we was" is ungrammatical, how
can that fit in with the notion of "... are idiomatic expressions,
and that makes them quite valid grammatically"?
Nick
>
> Surely one cannot deny that "we was up the pub" is idiomatic?
>
> So if it is accepted as such, and the "we was" is ungrammatical, how
> can that fit in with the notion of "... are idiomatic expressions,
> and that makes them quite valid grammatically"?
It doesn't sound very idiomatic to me. I'm sure I've never used it,
and I'm not even sure I've heard it.
And that's my last post for tonight. I'm off down the pub.
Skitt
Oh, it is surely unidiomatic in these parts -- my neck of the USA.
> So if it is accepted as such,
... which it isn't ...
> and the "we was" is ungrammatical, how
> can that fit in with the notion of "... are idiomatic expressions,
> and that makes them quite valid grammatically"?
... then that part of your sentence does not apply.
--
Skitt (AmE)
different strokes for different folks
Richard Bollard
wrote:
>Pat Durkin filted:
>>
>>
>><hhg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:31c2d993-a178-4eb3...@v3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> I came across this slogan by Hilton Hotels: "Travel should take you
>>> places"
>>>
>>> 1. Is it American slang only ?
>>> 2. Does it have a special meaning other than the literal one ?
>>
>>Not nearly as special as the possible interpretation of "Travel broadens
>>one".
>>
>>But, why do you ask if your sentence is American slang? There isn't
>>anything unusual about its construction or word choice, as far as I can
>>see. It is a stupidity, of course, but marketing statements usually are
>>inane.
>>
>>"Travel is a state of mind." But, of course, a person can get into a
>>state of mind without the cost and bother of actually taking a trip. No
>>travel agency or transportation company would use that, would they?
>
>It's not as good, to my thinking, as "Travel moves you" or even "Travel
>transports you"...
Travels _sends_ you?
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia
To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.
R H Draney
>>transports you"...
>
>Travels _sends_ you?
Honest it do....r
Amethyst Deceiver
> Richard Bollard filted:
> >
> >On 26 Feb 2008 11:45:17 -0800, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>It's not as good, to my thinking, as "Travel moves you" or even "Travel
> >>transports you"...
> >
> >Travels _sends_ you?
>
> Honest it do....r
Bah.
--
Linz
Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford
My accent may vary
Django Cat
>
> Ungrammatical (noun):
>
> "Travel should take you holiday"
> "Travel should take you trains"
> "Travel should take you places"
Travel should take you home?
DC
--
Alec McKenzie
Quite grammatical, because 'home' here is an adverb, while
'holiday', 'trains' and 'places' are not adverbs.
--
Alec McKenzie
alecusenet@<surname>.me.uk
Django Cat
> > Travel should take you home?
>
> Quite grammatical, because 'home' here is an adverb, while
> 'holiday', 'trains' and 'places' are not adverbs.
As in 'how did you travel?'
'Home'.
In fact OED is going to bear you out on this:
"home, adv.
1. a. To one's home, house, or abode; to one's dwelling-place, own
district, or country.
b. To the home- or mother-country from a colony or foreign
possession.
c. To the place of final rest, to the 'long home'; to the grave; to
'the place appointed for all living'. to go home: to die (common
dialectally).
d. With ellipsis of go, drive, esp. in home, James (and don't spare
the horses)!
2. a. It sometimes expresses the result of motion (which is not
expressed by the verb). = Come home, arrived at home, at home after
absence.
b. transf. Safely or successfully at the end of (usually something
arduous). Esp. in phr. home and dry.
Baker also records home and dried (on the pig's back) from Australia.
3. Technical. a. Naut. Towards or into the ship. Hence, of an
anchor, away from its hold, so as to drag: cf. ANCHOR n. 6e.
b. In games, sport, etc.: To the 'home' or goal; arrived at the
'home': see HOME n. 9. Also in sense shown in 4.
4. a. Of physical actions: To the point or mark aimed at; to its
ultimate position, as far as it will go; so as to reach, touch, or
penetrate effectually; into or in close contact; closely, directly.
b. Naut. Full in (from the sea), full to the shore.
5. fig. a. To the very heart or root of a matter; into."
Personally, I'd rather live in a noun than an adverb, but there ya go.
How do you stand on 'buses take you places'?
DC
Django Cat
> On 27/02/08 03:02, hhg...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I came across this slogan by Hilton Hotels: "Travel should take you
> > places"
> >
> > 1. Is it American slang only ? 2. Does it have a special meaning
> > other than the literal one ?
>
> The meaning is not obvious, but I take it to mean "If you travel, be
> careful not to do things that make you feel as if you have never left
> home." Or, more briefly, avoid places like Hilton Hotels.
Can I do my 'Paris Hilton has a new boyfriend called Dudley Travelodge'
joke again now, please?
DC
--
Alec McKenzie
> How do you stand on 'buses take you places'?
Just as insecurely as on 'travel should take you places'.
Alec McKenzie
> In article <alecusenet-65A06...@news.aaisp.net.uk>,
> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > "Django Cat" <nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > How do you stand on 'buses take you places'?
> >
> > Just as insecurely as on 'travel should take you places'.
>
> Travel should take you places you wouldn't normally go?
Sigh. 'Travel should take you places' is as much a solecism as
'travel should take you buses'.
Django Cat
> > > "Django Cat" <nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > How do you stand on 'buses take you places'?
> > >
> > > Just as insecurely as on 'travel should take you places'.
> >
> > Travel should take you places you wouldn't normally go?
>
> Sigh. 'Travel should take you places' is as much a solecism as
> 'travel should take you buses'.
Do you object to 'our company is going places'?
DC
--
Robin Bignall
Travel broadens you. Hamburgers and Coca Cola broaden you more
cheaply.
--
Robin Bignall (BrE)
Herts, England
Robert Bannister
>
> Do you object to 'our company is going places'?
Yes. On the grounds that is typical, meaningless business-speak.
--
Rob Bannister
Peter Moylan
> Django Cat wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Do you object to 'our company is going places'?
>
> Yes. On the grounds that is typical, meaningless business-speak.
>
LFS
> Django Cat wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Do you object to 'our company is going places'?
>
> Yes. On the grounds that is typical, meaningless business-speak.
>
But not if the company's operations are essentially mobile: the only
illustration that comes to mind this morning is the fleet of kebab and
hot dog vans that operate hereabouts but there must be many more.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
Peter Moylan
(Sorry. Very obscure reference to a song about a Melbourne ice-cream
vendor who was done for noise pollution. Must have been in the late
1960s, because the quoted line is about sending Mr Whippy to Vietnam. At
least the STS will be confined to perhaps one or two people here.)
Donna Richoux
> Sigh. 'Travel should take you places' is as much a solecism as
> 'travel should take you buses'.
Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown or
controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a prepositional
phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to me, but I guess
now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe even Western
American.
I could see where a breezy "Now we're goin' places," with the
metaphorical sense of "making progress, getting somewhere, now we're
cookin'" might be pondal, but what surprises me is trying to find the
more ordinary "going to various places, going anywhere" meaning. I
thought I could turn up historical examples but my first attempts have
come up short.
What about other verbs, putting, bringing, taking...? Googling the Web:
8,730 English pages for "putting things in their place" [a proverb]
78 English pages for "putting things in places"
45 English pages for "putting things in their places"
12 English pages for "putting things places"
Similar results for "put". The last category:
She likes to put things places and we seem to find
them after the fact.
I hate it when I put things places that are logical .
.. I never think to look in those places ...
Germans cannot simply put things places; it must be
specified whether you stood it upright, laid it down,
hung it up, stabbed it with a stick, whatever.
...little children love to put things places they should
not
I find this usage normal enough, but you may declare that you find it
barbaric and impossible if you wish. It's like that one about doing
something on Monday or Monday.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
Alec McKenzie
> Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown or
> controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a prepositional
> phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to me, but I guess
> now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe even Western
> American.
Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make it one.
At the same moment that "places" becomes an adverb, "travel should
take you places" becomes grammatically correct, but not before.
Donna Richoux
Well, the way I see it, grammatical nomenclature is just for the
convenience of discussion. It is not what determines whether or not a
usage is correct. I don't really care whether the "places" in "going
plances" can truly be called an adverb by anyone on the planet. I've
seen people here disagree over whether "blue" in "The dress is blue" is
an adjective -- but that doesn't prevent anyone from correctly saying
"The dress is blue." So what is more interesting to me is that "going
places" only appears to be correct in some parts of the English-speaking
world -- not yours.
What part of the world are you in, anyway? I assume the name Alec
Mackenzie is not one of these misleadng pseudonyms adopted in China or
India, but the days in which I could take for granted that you are in
Scotland are gone.
Evan Kirshenbaum
> tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
>
>> Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown
>> or controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a
>> prepositional phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to
>> me, but I guess now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe
>> even Western American.
>
> Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
> not an adverb.
That's pretty simple, I'll grant, but it doesn't have a whole lot of
evidence to back it up.
> Using it as if it were an adverb does not make it one.
So what does? Serious question. I gave published example of "places"
being used as an adverb back to 1893 and with several verbs ("go",
"take", "send", "drive", "fly", and "carry"). I can add "haul",
"drag", "accompany", "walk", "bike", "ride", "crawl", "sail", and
"take the bus".
> At the same moment that "places" becomes an adverb, "travel should
> take you places" becomes grammatically correct, but not before.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Whatever it is that the government
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |does, sensible Americans would prefer
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |that the government do it to somebody
|else.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | P.J. O'Rourke
(650)857-7572
Alec McKenzie
> Well, the way I see it, grammatical nomenclature is just for the
> convenience of discussion. It is not what determines whether or not a
> usage is correct.
How would you determine whether or not a usage is correct? I would
not say "if it is used it must be correct", though I have come
across that point of view.
> What part of the world are you in, anyway? I assume the name Alec
> Mackenzie is not one of these misleadng pseudonyms adopted in China or
> India, but the days in which I could take for granted that you are in
> Scotland are gone.
I thought my email address gave that away, just as I would assume
you are in Holland, but I know such indications are not certain. No,
it's not a pseudonym, but Scotland is two generations back.
Originally Argentina, now Eastern England.
Django Cat
> > > Do you object to 'our company is going places'?
> >
> > Yes. On the grounds that is typical, meaningless business-speak.
> >
>
> But not if the company's operations are essentially mobile: the only
> illustration that comes to mind this morning is the fleet of kebab
> and hot dog vans that operate hereabouts but there must be many more.
I'm still baffled by 'Bluebird make easy going' (previously discussed
at http://tinyurl.com/2p2lqb )
Laura, have you seen those ‘Leggett Logistics’ trucks? Shirley, an ad
man’s dream and a missed marketing opportunity. Just think of the
potential slogans:
‘Give us your business and we Leggett’;
‘Watch us Leggett up the motorway’.
I suppose I’ve been spending more time than I would have wanted to on
the M6 lately…
DC
--
Django Cat
> tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
>
> > Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown
> > or controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a
> > prepositional phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to
> > me, but I guess now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe
> > even Western American.
>
> Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
> not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make it one.
Why not? And are you going to circulate this information around
everybody on Planet Earth who thinks that 'going places' is a perfectly
unexceptional piece of language and ask them to stop using it?
DC
--
Alec McKenzie
> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> writes:
> > Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
> > not an adverb.
> That's pretty simple, I'll grant, but it doesn't have a whole lot of
> evidence to back it up.
I'm wondering what you would accept as being a whole lot of evidence.
I have just consulted three printed dictionaries and seven on-line
dictionaries. Every single one states that 'place' is a noun, or a
verb, but nothing else.
Alec McKenzie
> Alec McKenzie wrote:
>
> > tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
> >
> > > Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown
> > > or controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a
> > > prepositional phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to
> > > me, but I guess now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe
> > > even Western American.
> >
> > Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
> > not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make it one.
> Why not?
Why should it?
> And are you going to circulate this information around
> everybody on Planet Earth who thinks that 'going places' is a perfectly
> unexceptional piece of language and ask them to stop using it?
Of course not. Why would I want to stop them? They are welcome to
demonstrate their ignorance of English grammar as much as they wish.
R H Draney
>
>Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
>>
>> > Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown or
>> > controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a prepositional
>> > phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to me, but I guess
>> > now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe even Western
>> > American.
>>
>> Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
>> not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make it one.
>>
>> At the same moment that "places" becomes an adverb, "travel should
>> take you places" becomes grammatically correct, but not before.
And until that happens, am I correct in assuming you'd have no problem with
"Travel should take you to places."?
>Well, the way I see it, grammatical nomenclature is just for the
>convenience of discussion. It is not what determines whether or not a
>usage is correct. I don't really care whether the "places" in "going
>plances" can truly be called an adverb by anyone on the planet. I've
>seen people here disagree over whether "blue" in "The dress is blue" is
>an adjective -- but that doesn't prevent anyone from correctly saying
>"The dress is blue." So what is more interesting to me is that "going
>places" only appears to be correct in some parts of the English-speaking
>world -- not yours.
To make the analogy closer, is "blue" an adverb in the sentence "Geoffrey
painted the wall blue."?
Okay, maybe that's one of those "seem" verbs that takes a complement instead of
an object...is the same true of "Geoffrey wanted the wall blue."?
Skitt
> Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>> Alec McKenzie writes:
>>> Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
>>> not an adverb.
>
>> That's pretty simple, I'll grant, but it doesn't have a whole lot of
>> evidence to back it up.
>
> I'm wondering what you would accept as being a whole lot of evidence.
>
> I have just consulted three printed dictionaries and seven on-line
> dictionaries. Every single one states that 'place' is a noun, or a
> verb, but nothing else.
I posted this before. From M-W Online:
- go places : to be on the way to success
From AHD4 (under "idioms" at *go*):
go places Informal To be on the way to success: a young executive who is
clearly going places.
What labels you want to put there is up to you.
--
Skitt (AmE)
Alec McKenzie
> Donna Richoux filted:
> >
> >Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
> >>
> >> > Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown or
> >> > controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a prepositional
> >> > phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to me, but I guess
> >> > now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe even Western
> >> > American.
> >>
> >> Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it is
> >> not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make it one.
> >>
> >> At the same moment that "places" becomes an adverb, "travel should
> >> take you places" becomes grammatically correct, but not before.
>
> And until that happens, am I correct in assuming you'd have no problem with
> "Travel should take you to places."?
I don't really 'have a problem' with either form. I see them both as
examples of unfortunate ways to abuse the English language. Your
alternative does avoid being ungrammatical as well, but that is no
excuse.
Evan Kirshenbaum
I'm not sure what I would consider evidence, either. You've claimed
the animal doesn't exist, I've produced photos of several, and you've
countered by saying that you can't find it in any guidebooks.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Pious Jews have a category of
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |questions that can harmlessly be
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |allowed to go without an answer
|until the Messiah comes. I suspect
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |that this is one of them.
(650)857-7572 | Joseph C. Fineman
Evan Kirshenbaum
> "Django Cat" <nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Alec McKenzie wrote:
>>
>> > tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
>> >
>> > > Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything
>> > > unknown or controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not
>> > > in a prepositional phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial
>> > > English to me, but I guess now it's modern American (i.e. 20th
>> > > century). Maybe even Western American.
>> >
>> > Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it
>> > is not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make
>> > it one.
>
>> Why not?
>
> Why should it?
Because being used as a part of speech by native speakers is
essentially what makes a word an instance of that part of speech.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Code should be designed to make it
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |easy to get it right, not to work
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |if you get it right.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Alec McKenzie
> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> writes:
>
> > Evan Kirshenbaum <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> writes:
> >
> >> > Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it
> >> > is not an adverb.
> >
> >> That's pretty simple, I'll grant, but it doesn't have a whole lot
> >> of evidence to back it up.
> >
> > I'm wondering what you would accept as being a whole lot of
> > evidence.
> >
> > I have just consulted three printed dictionaries and seven on-line
> > dictionaries. Every single one states that 'place' is a noun, or a
> > verb, but nothing else.
>
> I'm not sure what I would consider evidence, either. You've claimed
> the animal doesn't exist, I've produced photos of several, and you've
> countered by saying that you can't find it in any guidebooks.
You seem to imply that by finding examples of the mis-use of a word
you have proved the dictionaries to be wrong. You are welcome to
think that, but I cannot agree.
Alec McKenzie
> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> writes:
>
> > "Django Cat" <nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Alec McKenzie wrote:
> >>
> >> > tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything
> >> > > unknown or controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not
> >> > > in a prepositional phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial
> >> > > English to me, but I guess now it's modern American (i.e. 20th
> >> > > century). Maybe even Western American.
> >> >
> >> > Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it
> >> > is not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make
> >> > it one.
> >
> >> Why not?
> >
> > Why should it?
>
> Because being used as a part of speech by native speakers is
> essentially what makes a word an instance of that part of speech.
By that reasoning any error in the use of a word is a logical
impossibility.
Mike Lyle
No, it isn't like that. I'll agree with you that "go places" and
derivative expressions are not formal English, and that "places" is
therefore not an adverb in formal style. But it is a fact that "to go
places" is an ordinary idiom in informal style: we could, if we wanted
to, try to worry out whether "places" was an adverb or a colloquially
elliptical noun expression, but do we really want to?
--
Mike.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Evan Kirshenbaum
You seem to imply that by failing to list something dictionaries are
making a statement. Did you find one that said "not an adverb"?
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Pardon him, Theodotus. He is a
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |barbarian and thinks that the
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |customs of his tribe and island are
|the laws of nature.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |
(650)857-7572 | George Bernard Shaw
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
<nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
>LFS wrote:
>
>> > > Do you object to 'our company is going places'?
>> >
>> > Yes. On the grounds that is typical, meaningless business-speak.
>> >
>>
>> But not if the company's operations are essentially mobile: the only
>> illustration that comes to mind this morning is the fleet of kebab
>> and hot dog vans that operate hereabouts but there must be many more.
>
>
>I'm still baffled by 'Bluebird make easy going' (previously discussed
>at http://tinyurl.com/2p2lqb )
>
>Laura, have you seen those ‘Leggett Logistics’ trucks? Shirley, an ad
>man’s dream and a missed marketing opportunity. Just think of the
>potential slogans:
>
>‘Give us your business and we Leggett’;
>‘Watch us Leggett up the motorway’.
>
It is possible that Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Leggett has/have heard more
than enough such witticisms to last several lifetimes.
>I suppose I’ve been spending more time than I would have wanted to on
>the M6 lately…
>
>DC
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Evan Kirshenbaum <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>
>> Because being used as a part of speech by native speakers is
>> essentially what makes a word an instance of that part of speech.
>
> By that reasoning any error in the use of a word is a logical
> impossibility.
Of course not. There are real speech errors, when the process gets
screwed up and the speaker says something other than what they intend
to say. Other than that, if they say what their internal grammar
causes them to want to say, it's not an error. It may be an
ideosyncracy, in which case the speaker will find that listeners
stumble over it, but once you get a community of speakers who use a
construct and understand it as intended when others use it, it's
pretty much just grammatical in that dialect.
Of course, you can be factually mistaken in the use of a word or you
can choose the wrong word to use. But in this case, if an "adverb" is
defined as a word used in a particular way, then it would seem to be
an appropriate word to use to describe this use of "places".
I suspect that adverbial use of "places" is somewhat related to
adverbial use of "every place", which goes back even earlier, e.g.:
"And if I had, Turner would have been after me, dogging me every
place I went..."
Harriet Martin, _Canvassing_ 1835
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |I value writers such as Fiske.
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |They serve as valuable object
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |lessons by showing that the most
|punctilious compliance with the
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |rules of usage has so little to do
(650)857-7572 |with either writing or thinking
|well.
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ | --Richard Hershberger
Django Cat
> > Laura, have you seen those ‘Leggett Logistics’ trucks? Shirley, an
> > ad man’s dream and a missed marketing opportunity. Just think of
> > the potential slogans:
> >
> > ‘Give us your business and we Leggett’;
> > ‘Watch us Leggett up the motorway’.
> >
> It is possible that Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Leggett has/have heard more
> than enough such witticisms to last several lifetimes.
Nobody asked them to start a trucking company, though. They could have
been florists, and no one would have been any the wiser. Or
undertakers, preventing anyone from taking the mick out of their names
on grounds of taste.
DC
--
Django Cat
> > Put simply, the word "places" could be a noun (or a verb), but it
is
> > not an adverb. Using it as if it were an adverb does not make it
one.
> > Why not?
>
> Why should it?
Well, we could go on like that for a while, I suppose. Language
evolves. 'Hoover' was once only a noun.
>
> > And are you going to circulate this information around
> > everybody on Planet Earth who thinks that 'going places' is a
> > perfectly unexceptional piece of language and ask them to stop
> > using it?
>
> Of course not. Why would I want to stop them? They are welcome to
> demonstrate their ignorance of English grammar as much as they wish.
So what you're saying is 'going home' is OK, because 'home' is allowed
to be an adverb - well, OK, the OED gives adverbial uses of 'home'.
But 'going places' is *not* OK because 'places' isn't allowed to be an
adverb?
Who's making that decision?
How do you stand on 'bananas', as in 'going bananas'?
DC
--
Django Cat
No!
--
Skitt
COED has:
- PHRASES *go places* informal 1 travel. 2 be increasingly successful.
--
Skitt (AmE)
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> writes:
>
>> Evan Kirshenbaum <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> writes:
>>>
>>> > I have just consulted three printed dictionaries and seven
>>> > on-line dictionaries. Every single one states that 'place' is a
>>> > noun, or a verb, but nothing else.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what I would consider evidence, either. You've
>>> claimed the animal doesn't exist, I've produced photos of several,
>>> and you've countered by saying that you can't find it in any
>>> guidebooks.
>>
>> You seem to imply that by finding examples of the mis-use of a word
>> you have proved the dictionaries to be wrong. You are welcome to
>> think that, but I cannot agree.
>
> You seem to imply that by failing to list something dictionaries are
> making a statement. Did you find one that said "not an adverb"?
Checking Merriam-Webster's _Dictionary of English Usage_, I see that
they note that people have been noticing and objecting to "places"
used adverbially since at least 1906. Their conclusion:
These uses are solidly established in American English. There
never has been a reason to avoid them in general writing.
They also note similar objections to "anyplace", "noplace",
"everyplace", and "someplace".
They also point out that "way", as in "I do it that way" or "We'll go
that way" is similarly a noun which is acting as though it were an
adverb...in a sense not sanctioned by MWCD11, although Google books
shows it back to the late sixteenth century. They mention a 1926
objection to it.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Sometimes I think the surest sign
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |that intelligent life exists
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |elsewhere in the universe is that
|none of it has tried to contact us.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | Calvin
(650)857-7572
Robert Bannister
> Robert Bannister wrote:
>
>> Django Cat wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Do you object to 'our company is going places'?
>>
>>
>> Yes. On the grounds that is typical, meaningless business-speak.
>>
>
> But not if the company's operations are essentially mobile: the only
> illustration that comes to mind this morning is the fleet of kebab and
> hot dog vans that operate hereabouts but there must be many more.
>
I would have guessed they were in a class with couriers, ie not so much
going places as going fast and dangerously.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>Sigh. 'Travel should take you places' is as much a solecism as
>>'travel should take you buses'.
>
>
> Until this discussion, I never realized there was anything unknown or
> controversial about "places" used as an adverb, not in a prepositional
> phrase. It seems quite ordinary colloquial English to me, but I guess
> now it's modern American (i.e. 20th century). Maybe even Western
> American.
>
> I could see where a breezy "Now we're goin' places," with the
> metaphorical sense of "making progress, getting somewhere, now we're
> cookin'" might be pondal, but what surprises me is trying to find the
> more ordinary "going to various places, going anywhere" meaning. I
> thought I could turn up historical examples but my first attempts have
> come up short.
>
> What about other verbs, putting, bringing, taking...? Googling the Web:
>
> 8,730 English pages for "putting things in their place" [a proverb]
> 78 English pages for "putting things in places"
> 45 English pages for "putting things in their places"
> 12 English pages for "putting things places"
>
> Similar results for "put". The last category:
>
> She likes to put things places and we seem to find
> them after the fact.
>
> I hate it when I put things places that are logical .
> .. I never think to look in those places ...
>
> Germans cannot simply put things places; it must be
> specified whether you stood it upright, laid it down,
> hung it up, stabbed it with a stick, whatever.
>
> ...little children love to put things places they should
> not
>
> I find this usage normal enough, but you may declare that you find it
> barbaric and impossible if you wish. It's like that one about doing
> something on Monday or Monday.
>
That "putting places" is far more barbaric than "Monday". I don't think
of "going places" as a barbarism, but if I (horror) use it myself, I
would use it as a conscious imitation of American or business language.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
>
> And until that happens, am I correct in assuming you'd have no problem with
> "Travel should take you to places."?
That seems to lose the point of the pun.
>
> To make the analogy closer, is "blue" an adverb in the sentence "Geoffrey
> painted the wall blue."?
>
> Okay, maybe that's one of those "seem" verbs that takes a complement instead of
> an object...is the same true of "Geoffrey wanted the wall blue."?
What about "Geoffrey felt blue"?
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> Because being used as a part of speech by native speakers is
> essentially what makes a word an instance of that part of speech.
>
I read part of a speech by David Crystal in which he says the number of
English speakers in places like India and China now outnumber Americans
and may soon start to influence the language as much as AmE is doing at
present. I believe he also said something like "numbers do matter",
which is what I think you are implying above, since I don't believe you
are claiming that every idiom used in every tiny English dialect is "an
instance" that ought to be included in dictionaries.
--
Rob Bannister
LFS
No, I haven't. Perhaps they don't travel on the M40 which is where I
spend much of my travelling time.
Every lorry these days seems to have "logistics" on it. I deeply
offended a colleague who was teaching a course in logistics as part of
our retail management degree by suggesting it was what used to be called
transport.
And many of the lorries seem to come form Eastern Europe. It's been
quite a while since I've noticed any Norbert Verybloodyteeth.
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
LFS
> Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote:
>
>>> Laura, have you seen those ‘Leggett Logistics’ trucks? Shirley, an
>>> ad man’s dream and a missed marketing opportunity. Just think of
>>> the potential slogans:
>>>
>>> ‘Give us your business and we Leggett’;
>>> ‘Watch us Leggett up the motorway’.
>>>
>> It is possible that Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Leggett has/have heard more
>> than enough such witticisms to last several lifetimes.
>
> Nobody asked them to start a trucking company, though.
The theory of nominative determinism suggests that this is inevitable,
just as my former dentist was Mr Pick. And his father was a dentist, too.
They could have
> been florists, and no one would have been any the wiser. Or
> undertakers, preventing anyone from taking the mick out of their names
> on grounds of taste.
--
Donna Richoux
> tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
>
> > Well, the way I see it, grammatical nomenclature is just for the
> > convenience of discussion. It is not what determines whether or not a
> > usage is correct.
>
> How would you determine whether or not a usage is correct?
If I had a simple answer for that, I would be world famous. Honored
throughout the millennia, even -- "She was able to explain once and for
all the difference between right and wrong!"
It's a complex business, depending on where one is and what one is
trying to do. There are things you and your neighbors say in Eastern
England that I would never dream of uttering, but I would not say it is
wrong for you to do so.
Mostly, I am kept busy enough trying to figure out what people mean, and
whether what they mean is true, and whether they're joking, stuff like
that. Ranking how "correct" they are on some imaginary scale is not that
important to me.
But if a student of language asks me, "Can I say this?" with enough
context to make sense, I will give my opinion. And if someone says
"Travel should take you buses" then even lil ol' me notices something is
out of whack.
>I would
> not say "if it is used it must be correct", though I have come
> across that point of view.
I agree -- to say that everything that exists is good is too Zen for me.
Yet our subconscious language ability allows us to pass rapid judgements
-- "yes, that sounds OK," "No, that sounds weird" -- in that strange way
that comes awfully close to "native speakers speak correctly." With some
typos and tangled tongues.
Evan had some useful tips, like looking to see if what was said or
written matches the intention of the speaker or writer.
--
Best wishes -- Donna Richoux
An American living in the Netherlands
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
>
>
>> Because being used as a part of speech by native speakers is
>> essentially what makes a word an instance of that part of speech.
>>
>
> I read part of a speech by David Crystal in which he says the number
> of English speakers in places like India and China now outnumber
> Americans and may soon start to influence the language as much as
> AmE is doing at present. I believe he also said something like
> "numbers do matter", which is what I think you are implying above,
Not really. If it's used intentionally (other than as a joke) and
understood as intended (especially if it doesn't rise to the
listener's attention), it's clearly grammatical in the grammar of the
dialect being used. It doesn't matter how large or small the group
is.
> since I don't believe you are claiming that every idiom used in
> every tiny English dialect is "an instance" that ought to be
> included in dictionaries.
I didn't claim "ought to be included in dictionaries", although given
that the main job of a dictionary is looking things up, if it makes it
into print, *especially* if it isn't common, somebody is likely to
turn to the dictionary to find out what it means.
I don't really agree with this one being an "idiom", though. "Go
places" in the sense of "succeed" is an idiom, but "places" is used
adverbially with pretty much every verb of human motion I could think
of. And it seems related to "someplace", "anyplace", and
"everyplace", which MWCD11 does list as adverbs, dating to about the
same time "places" begins showing up.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |If we have to re-invent the wheel,
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |can we at least make it round this
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |time?
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
Django Cat
> No, I haven't. Perhaps they don't travel on the M40 which is where I
> spend much of my travelling time.
>
> Every lorry these days seems to have "logistics" on it. I deeply
> offended a colleague who was teaching a course in logistics as part
> of our retail management degree by suggesting it was what used to be
> called transport.
S****** runs a Masters in Logistics. Very popular with punters from
the PRC. Gord knows what they find to write about.
>
> And many of the lorries seem to come form Eastern Europe. It's been
> quite a while since I've noticed any Norbert Verybloodyteeth.
I like to think of them as Norbert Bendyteeth.
DC
--
Django Cat
> > > > Laura, have you seen those ‘Leggett Logistics’ trucks?
> > > > Shirley, an ad man’s dream and a missed marketing opportunity.
> > > > Just think of the potential slogans:
> > > >
> > > > ‘Give us your business and we Leggett’;
> > > > ‘Watch us Leggett up the motorway’.
> > > >
> > > It is possible that Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Leggett has/have heard more
> > > than enough such witticisms to last several lifetimes.
> >
> > Nobody asked them to start a trucking company, though.
>
>
> The theory of nominative determinism suggests that this is
> inevitable, just as my former dentist was Mr Pick. And his father was
> a dentist, too.
When I need the electrics on my guitars servicing I take them to a Mr
Pickup, and very good he is, too.
DC
--
Django Cat
> >
> > So what you're saying is 'going home' is OK, because 'home' is
> > allowed to be an adverb - well, OK, the OED gives adverbial uses of
> > 'home'.
> >
> > But 'going places' is not OK because 'places' isn't allowed to be an
> > adverb?
>
> COED has:
> - PHRASES *go places* informal 1 travel. 2 be increasingly successful.
Now that's weird, 'cos I looked for 'go places' in the full OED and it
wasn't there. That's the second time recently we've seen more detail
in COED than the actual beast itself.
DC
--
Skitt
Look under "place". That's where it is in (online) COED.
--
Skitt (AmE)
R H Draney
>
>Well, we could go on like that for a while, I suppose. Language
>evolves. 'Hoover' was once only a noun.
Meaning: "one who hooves".
Can I get a show of hands, please?...who objects to "Finishing this project
might take years."?
....r
--
What good is being an executive if you never get to execute anyone?
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
He wouldn't be Billy or Simon Pickup would he?
Peter Moylan
> In article <OukAj.5868$%N1....@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
> "Django Cat" <nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
>> When I need the electrics on my guitars servicing I take them to a Mr
>> Pickup, and very good he is, too.
>
> had a music teacher named Mr Singer and a woodshop teacher named Mr
> Carpenter.
>
My children's school had a woodwork teacher named Mr Cook, and a cookery
teacher named Mrs Wood.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
R H Draney
>
>On 08/03/08 18:10, Lewis wrote:
>> In article <OukAj.5868$%N1....@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
>> "Django Cat" <nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> When I need the electrics on my guitars servicing I take them to a Mr
>>> Pickup, and very good he is, too.
>>
>> had a music teacher named Mr Singer and a woodshop teacher named Mr
>> Carpenter.
>>
>My children's school had a woodwork teacher named Mr Cook, and a cookery
>teacher named Mrs Wood.
I once had a car stereo installed by two guys named Chad and Jeremy....r
Django Cat
> >> > > > Laura, have you seen those ‘Leggett Logistics’ trucks?
> >> > > > Shirley, an ad man’s dream and a missed marketing
> opportunity. >> > > > Just think of the potential slogans:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > ‘Give us your business and we Leggett’;
> >> > > > ‘Watch us Leggett up the motorway’.
> >> > > >
> >> > > It is possible that Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Leggett has/have heard more
> >> > > than enough such witticisms to last several lifetimes.
> >> >
> >> > Nobody asked them to start a trucking company, though.
> >>
> >>
> >> The theory of nominative determinism suggests that this is
> >> inevitable, just as my former dentist was Mr Pick. And his father
> was >> a dentist, too.
> >
> > When I need the electrics on my guitars servicing I take them to a
> > Mr Pickup, and very good he is, too.
>
> He wouldn't be Billy or Simon Pickup would he?
No, he's Richard.
DC
--
Django Cat
Or 'Snow White felt Grumpy'?
DC
--
Django Cat
> From: tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux)
> Subject: Re: Hilton slogan: Travel should take you places - idiom ?
> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 23:49:03 +0100
> Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
>
> Alec McKenzie <alecu...@my-surname.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > tr...@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux) wrote:
> >
> > > Well, the way I see it, grammatical nomenclature is just for the
> > > convenience of discussion. It is not what determines whether or
> > > not a usage is correct.
> >
> > How would you determine whether or not a usage is correct?
>
> If I had a simple answer for that, I would be world famous. Honored
> throughout the millennia, even -- "She was able to explain once and
> for all the difference between right and wrong!"
>
> It's a complex business, depending on where one is and what one is
> trying to do. There are things you and your neighbors say in Eastern
> England that I would never dream of uttering,
"Goddamn, you play a mean banjo".
DC
--
Django Cat
> > Now that's weird, 'cos I looked for 'go places' in the full OED and
> > it wasn't there. That's the second time recently we've seen more
> > detail in COED than the actual beast itself.
>
> Look under "place". That's where it is in (online) COED.
I did (in OED).
DC
--
Nick Spalding
on Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:24:00 +0000:
They even seem to be much less common in their home ground than they were
twenty years ago.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
Peter Moylan
> Peter Moylan filted:
>> On 08/03/08 18:10, Lewis wrote:
>>> In article <OukAj.5868$%N1....@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
>>> "Django Cat" <nota...@address.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> When I need the electrics on my guitars servicing I take them to a Mr
>>>> Pickup, and very good he is, too.
>>> had a music teacher named Mr Singer and a woodshop teacher named Mr
>>> Carpenter.
>>>
>> My children's school had a woodwork teacher named Mr Cook, and a cookery
>> teacher named Mrs Wood.
>
> I once had a car stereo installed by two guys named Chad and Jeremy....r
>
Abbot and Costello. A few years ago there was a serious possibility that
they would become parliamentary leader and deputy leader. I'm still
sorry that it didn't happen.
Peter Moylan
Isabelle Cecchini
it's to be found at number 31.e.
e. to go places: to go to various places; to travel; spec. (fig.) to
be successful, to 'make the grade'; to make progress. colloq. (orig. U.S.).
Here are the quotations:
1925 S. Lewis M. Arrowsmith xx. 232 The habit of social ease, of
dressing, of going places without nervous anticipation.
1932 Lit. Digest 30 Jan. 36/2 All Russians love to 'go places'.
1933 A. Waugh Wheels within Wheels xi. 222 You want to be able to go
places and do things. Ibid. vii. 137 He hasn't been places yet.
1934 M. Weseen Dict. Amer. Slang x. 142 Go places, to be successful; to
get ahead.
1944 L. A. G. Strong Director 254 They were jealous because she'd made
the grade.+ She was going places.
1947 N. Cardus Autobiogr. 250 This for me, is to live and to 'go places'.
1958 'A. Gilbert' Death against Clock 85 We're going places right away.
--
Isabelle Cecchini
Django Cat
> > > Look under "place". That's where it is in (online) COED.
> >
> > I did (in OED).
> >
> > DC
> >
> Have you looked under "go" (in OED)? In my at-home electronic
> version, it's to be found at number 31.e.
>
> e. to go places: to go to various places; to travel; spec. (fig.)
> to be successful, to 'make the grade'; to make progress. colloq.
> (orig. U.S.).
>
> Here are the quotations:
>
>
> 1925 S. Lewis M. Arrowsmith xx. 232 The habit of social ease, of
> dressing, of going places without nervous anticipation.
>
> 1932 Lit. Digest 30 Jan. 36/2 All Russians love to 'go places'.
>
> 1933 A. Waugh Wheels within Wheels xi. 222 You want to be able to go
> places and do things. Ibid. vii. 137 He hasn't been places yet.
>
> 1934 M. Weseen Dict. Amer. Slang x. 142 Go places, to be successful;
> to get ahead.
>
> 1944 L. A. G. Strong Director 254 They were jealous because she'd
> made the grade.+ She was going places.
>
> 1947 N. Cardus Autobiogr. 250 This for me, is to live and to 'go
> places'.
>
> 1958 'A. Gilbert' Death against Clock 85 We're going places right
> away.
Ah. No, I hadn't. Nice one, Isabelle.
DC
--
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
I had a good friend with the surname Pickup. This was in
Manchester. He was from Shaw, Oldham, Lancs.
He told me that the Pickups originated a few generations back in
Belgium or thereabouts. They were textile workers who moved to
work in the textile industry of Lancashire.
He understood that the trade of the immigrants was "picot" and
that "pickup" was how it was pronouced when they arrived in
England. I haven't investigated this suggestion.
OED:
picot
Needlework (chiefly Lacemaking).
Any of a series of small loops of twisted thread, usually
larger than purls, forming an ornamental edging to lace,
ribbon, or braid; such loops collectively; a ribbon or
edging made up of such loops. Also (Embroidery): a raised
knot similarly formed, representing a leaf, petal, etc.
Django Cat
> "I saw it in the Sunday Times, so it must be grammatically correct"?
--
Django Cat
> > For instance:
> > http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/st
> > age/comedy /article3404249.ece
> > or http://tinyurl.com/2lrwps
> >
> > From The Sunday Times
> > February 24, 2008
> > Why Paul Sinha is going places
> >
> > Dr Paul Sinha is going places as a stand-up soon he'll
> > have to tell his patients
>
> "I saw it in the Sunday Times, so it must be grammatically correct"?
"I didn't see it in the dictionary, so it can't be grammatically
correct"?
--
Django Cat
> >> >
> >> > When I need the electrics on my guitars servicing I take them to
> a >> > Mr Pickup, and very good he is, too.
> >>
> >> He wouldn't be Billy or Simon Pickup would he?
> >
> > No, he's Richard.
> >
> I had a good friend with the surname Pickup. This was in
> Manchester. He was from Shaw, Oldham, Lancs.
That's about ten miles from here, good chance it's a local name. Lots
of Wrigleys in Oldham - apparently the chewing gum magnate came from
there. And it is, of course, home of the tubular bandage -
http://tinyurl.com/2gstrh .
DC
--