10 questions on grammar

[Sailfish]

REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744

[excerpt quote=\"
Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
school children.
\" /]

Honestly, some of these a tough!

--
Sailfish - Netscape Champion
Mozilla Contributor Member - www.mozilla.org/credits/
Netscape/Mozilla Tips: http://www.ufaq.org/ , http://ilias.ca/
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://www.projectit.com/

[Daniel]

Sailfish wrote:
> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
> school children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!

I scored a 6 out of 10, so I agree with you, Sailfish!!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130502201647
or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:21.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130403022815

[Ed]

On 5/15/2013 4:50 AM Sailfish submitted the following:

> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary school
> children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>

English was my worst subject in school, yet I managed to get 7 out of 10 correct.

--
Ed

[Ralph Fox]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 01:50:40 -0700, Sailfish wrote:

> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
> school children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!

I think they stretch things too far when they assert there is one and only
one right answer.


Q.1 - Two right answers -- either #3 or #4 could be correct.
If the garden is shared by two neighbours then #4 would be correct.

Q.9 - No right answers -- all three are grammatically correct.
"I was sat in the chair" means someone else put the person there.
Like "I was stood up" vs "I was standing up", or like
"I was volunteered" vs "I was volunteering".


--
Kind regards
Ralph

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/15/2013 3:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
> school children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>

Well, I got nine of ten correct. 5 years of teaching 5th and 6th grade
probably helped brush the 60 years of rust off. The one I missed was
the one about the sibling, which isn't really grammar, but logic.

[Ron Hunter]

NO, that would be 'I was set in the chair'. The 'was sat', along with
common usage (British) of 'was stood' for 'was standing', or 'was sat'
for 'was sitting', are simply wrong.

[Rav]

On 5/15/2013 4:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
> school children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>

7/10. Yes, tough!

[Was Greywolf]

On 5/15/2013 4:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:

> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
> school children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!

8/10. Of the "incorrect", one was carelessness on my part, the other was
usage difference. (See Ralph Fox's comment, too).

Fact is, these are all usage questions, not grammar questions. Every one
of the "wrong" examples is OK in one or more dialects of English. Eg,
the which/that distinction used here is ignored in many dialects, and
irrelevant in those that don't use "that" as a conjunctive pronoun.
Also, the examples of incorrect comma/apostrophe usage are meaningless
in spoken language.

And that's the problem with English "grammar" lessons as taught in
primary schools. They are dishonestly labelled, they are linguistically
indefensible, and worst of all they are confusing because they fail to
distinguish between usage/grammar and spoken/written.


--
Best,
Wolf K.

[Jay Garcia]

On 15.05.2013 03:50, Sailfish wrote:

--- Original Message ---

> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
> school children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>

There are many that are completely wrong according to long standing
rules of grammar according to my daughter - College English Professor.
Must be UK'centric going by outdated Oxford nonsense.

--
Jay Garcia - www.ufaq.org - Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
Mozilla Contribute Coordinator Team - www.mozilla.org/contribute/
Mozilla Mozillian Member - www.mozillians.org

[Jay Garcia]

On 15.05.2013 05:50, Ralph Fox wrote:

--- Original Message ---

#1 is one of the few that is actually correct usage of "whose" and
"neighbor's". The one with Hilary is a bit too presumptive and the one
sith the semi-colon is flat dead wrong. I quit after #5 .. getting a bit
much.

--
Jay Garcia - www.ufaq.org - Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
Mozilla Contribute Coordinator Team - www.mozilla.org/contribute/
Mozilla Mozillian Member - www.mozillians.org

[Jay Garcia]

On 15.05.2013 06:39, Ron Hunter wrote:

--- Original Message ---

Yah, Hilary is the first one of the bunch that was wayyy off base.

--
Jay Garcia - www.ufaq.org - Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
Mozilla Contribute Coordinator Team - www.mozilla.org/contribute/
Mozilla Mozillian Member - www.mozillians.org

[Jay Garcia]

On 15.05.2013 09:03, Was Greywolf wrote:

--- Original Message ---

I only made one error in grammar and as soon as I done it I seen it. :-)

--
Jay Garcia - www.ufaq.org - Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
Mozilla Contribute Coordinator Team - www.mozilla.org/contribute/
Mozilla Mozillian Member - www.mozillians.org

[WaltS]

On 05/15/2013 04:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>
> [excerpt quote=\"
> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
> school children.
> \" /]
>
> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>

7 out of 10 here.

--
openSUSE 12.3 (64-bit) KDE 4.10.2
Thunderbird Daily 24.0a1

[Ron Hunter]

They don't teach dialects, they teach standard, formal, written, English.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/15/2013 9:41 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 15.05.2013 03:50, Sailfish wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>> school children.
>> \" /]
>>
>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>
>
> There are many that are completely wrong according to long standing
> rules of grammar according to my daughter - College English Professor.
> Must be UK'centric going by outdated Oxford nonsense.
>

A couple are UK centric, but most are just common misuse of the
language. I saw none that they said are incorrect that would be
considered correct in any school I have taught in. The spelling of
'neighbour' is an example of UK centrism.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/15/2013 9:45 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 15.05.2013 06:39, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 5/15/2013 3:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>> school children.
>>> \" /]
>>>
>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>>
>> Well, I got nine of ten correct. 5 years of teaching 5th and 6th grade
>> probably helped brush the 60 years of rust off. The one I missed was
>> the one about the sibling, which isn't really grammar, but logic.
>>
>
> Yah, Hilary is the first one of the bunch that was wayyy off base.
>

Asking one to conclude a person's gender based on nothing more
informative than a comma is a bit far-fetched, in my opinion. Given
that commas are most often used incorrectly, and some are 'optional',
concluding anything based on them is pretty risky.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/15/2013 9:46 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 15.05.2013 09:03, Was Greywolf wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 5/15/2013 4:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>> school children.
>>> \" /]
>>>
>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>
>> 8/10. Of the "incorrect", one was carelessness on my part, the other was
>> usage difference. (See Ralph Fox's comment, too).
>>
>> Fact is, these are all usage questions, not grammar questions. Every one
>> of the "wrong" examples is OK in one or more dialects of English. Eg,
>> the which/that distinction used here is ignored in many dialects, and
>> irrelevant in those that don't use "that" as a conjunctive pronoun.
>> Also, the examples of incorrect comma/apostrophe usage are meaningless
>> in spoken language.
>>
>> And that's the problem with English "grammar" lessons as taught in
>> primary schools. They are dishonestly labelled, they are linguistically
>> indefensible, and worst of all they are confusing because they fail to
>> distinguish between usage/grammar and spoken/written.
>>
>>
>
> I only made one error in grammar and as soon as I done it I seen it. :-)
>
>

Sounds like my brother. He always said that he used to have the fault
of being a bit conceited, but he had overcome that and was now perfect.

[Jay Garcia]

Spoken and written communication are vastly different. Such as, write
this correctly as spoken "There are three (too,two,to)'s in the English
language". Easy to say but how do you write that correctly? :o)

[Rav]

On 5/15/2013 11:36 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 15.05.2013 10:20, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 5/15/2013 9:41 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> On 15.05.2013 03:50, Sailfish wrote:
>>>
>>> --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>>
>>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>>> school children.
>>>> \" /]
>>>>
>>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>>>
>>>
>>> There are many that are completely wrong according to long standing
>>> rules of grammar according to my daughter - College English Professor.
>>> Must be UK'centric going by outdated Oxford nonsense.
>>>
>> A couple are UK centric, but most are just common misuse of the
>> language. I saw none that they said are incorrect that would be
>> considered correct in any school I have taught in. The spelling of
>> 'neighbour' is an example of UK centrism.
>>
>
> Spoken and written communication are vastly different. Such as, write
> this correctly as spoken "There are three (too,two,to)'s in the English
> language". Easy to say but how do you write that correctly? :o)
>

I understand what you're saying, but sometimes one does have to write
something differently than one would say it. How about:

"Three heterographs in the English language are the words too, two and to."

[Was Greywolf]

Whose?

--
Best,
Wolf K.

[Was Greywolf]

;-)
That's written English. In speech, they're homophones.

--
Best,
Wolf K.

[Sailfish]

My bloviated meandering follows what Was Greywolf graced us with on
5/15/2013 7:03 AM:

I got 5/10 but in my defense, I gave up taking it seriously when they
threw in Gerund ... WTF!

[Sailfish]

My bloviated meandering follows what Jay Garcia graced us with on
5/15/2013 7:41 AM:

> On 15.05.2013 03:50, Sailfish wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>> school children.
>> \" /]
>>
>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>
>
> There are many that are completely wrong according to long standing
> rules of grammar according to my daughter - College English Professor.
> Must be UK'centric going by outdated Oxford nonsense.
>

They acknowledged that up front with the disclaimer, I think:

"Of course, there are no official rules for English. Everything that
follows is debatable.""

--
Sailfish - Netscape Champion

Mozilla Contributor Member - www.mozilla.org/credits/

[Sailfish]

My bloviated meandering follows what Was Greywolf graced us with on
5/15/2013 10:46 AM:

REF:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Homograph_homophone_venn_diagram.svg/500px-Homograph_homophone_venn_diagram.svg.png

--
Sailfish - Netscape Champion

Mozilla Contributor Member - www.mozilla.org/credits/

[»Q«]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:44:26 -0500
Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:

> The one with Hilary is a bit too presumptive and the one sith the
> semi-colon is flat dead wrong.

The one with the semicolon is right. Did you think one of the
incorrect answers was correct?

[clay]

Jay Garcia wrote:
> ...

>>
>
> Spoken and written communication are vastly different. Such as, write
> this correctly as spoken "There are three (too,two,to)'s in the English
> language". Easy to say but how do you write that correctly? :o)
>

That
What do I win?

[Jay Garcia]

You got some of the point but the sentence I provided has been the
center of controversey for years.

[Jay Garcia]

On 15.05.2013 14:31, »Q« wrote:

--- Original Message ---

I thought the entire thing was a joke not to be taken seriously. I hate
semicolons in sentences and therefore quite prejudiced as to useage.

[Jay Garcia]

On 15.05.2013 14:35, clay wrote:

--- Original Message ---

Yes, you win. Now what?

[Was Greywolf]

A teddy bear with a red bow tie.

--
Best,
Wolf K.

[»Q«]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 15:30:07 -0500
Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:

> On 15.05.2013 14:31, »Q« wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:44:26 -0500
> > Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The one with Hilary is a bit too presumptive and the one sith the
> >> semi-colon is flat dead wrong.
> >
> > The one with the semicolon is right. Did you think one of the
> > incorrect answers was correct?
>
> I thought the entire thing was a joke not to be taken seriously. I
> hate semicolons in sentences and therefore quite prejudiced as to
> useage.

It's just another quiz to drive page views; I didn't take it
seriously, either.

[F1...@nospampobox.com]

On 5/15/2013 7:45 AM On a whim, Jay Garcia pounded out on the keyboard

> On 15.05.2013 06:39, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 5/15/2013 3:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>> school children.
>>> \" /]
>>>
>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>>
>> Well, I got nine of ten correct. 5 years of teaching 5th and 6th grade
>> probably helped brush the 60 years of rust off. The one I missed was
>> the one about the sibling, which isn't really grammar, but logic.
>>
>
> Yah, Hilary is the first one of the bunch that was wayyy off base.
>

It basically came down to the name for me. Their explanation was off IMO.



--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

[Jay Garcia]

On 15.05.2013 17:06, F1...@NOSPAMpobox.com wrote:

--- Original Message ---

> On 5/15/2013 7:45 AM On a whim, Jay Garcia pounded out on the keyboard
>
>> On 15.05.2013 06:39, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>
>> --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> On 5/15/2013 3:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
>>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>>
>>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>>> school children.
>>>> \" /]
>>>>
>>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>>>
>>> Well, I got nine of ten correct. 5 years of teaching 5th and 6th grade
>>> probably helped brush the 60 years of rust off. The one I missed was
>>> the one about the sibling, which isn't really grammar, but logic.
>>>
>>
>> Yah, Hilary is the first one of the bunch that was wayyy off base.
>>
>
> It basically came down to the name for me. Their explanation was off IMO.
>
>
>

Clinton or Sir Edmund ?? :-)

[Was Greywolf]

On 5/15/2013 6:49 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 15.05.2013 17:06, F1...@NOSPAMpobox.com wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 5/15/2013 7:45 AM On a whim, Jay Garcia pounded out on the keyboard
>>
>>> On 15.05.2013 06:39, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>
>>> --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>> On 5/15/2013 3:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
>>>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>>>
>>>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>>>> school children.
>>>>> \" /]
>>>>>
>>>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>>>>
>>>> Well, I got nine of ten correct. 5 years of teaching 5th and 6th grade
>>>> probably helped brush the 60 years of rust off. The one I missed was
>>>> the one about the sibling, which isn't really grammar, but logic.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yah, Hilary is the first one of the bunch that was wayyy off base.
>>>
>>
>> It basically came down to the name for me. Their explanation was off IMO.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Clinton or Sir Edmund ?? :-)

One of my colleagues and friends, the drafting teacher. He died lat year.

It was common enough as a male name in the UK up into the 50s at least
that you couldn't infer gender from it. Others are/were Leslie,
Beverley. I've also noticed that the Frances (female) and Francis (male)
distinction isn't observed much any more.

--
Best,
Wolf K.

[Daniel]

Was Greywolf wrote:
> On 5/15/2013 6:49 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:

<Snip>

>> Clinton or Sir Edmund ?? :-)
>
>
> One of my colleagues and friends, the drafting teacher. He died lat year.
>
> It was common enough as a male name in the UK up into the 50s at least
> that you couldn't infer gender from it. Others are/were Leslie,
> Beverley. I've also noticed that the Frances (female) and Francis (male)
> distinction isn't observed much any more.

For me, it was a British SitCom from five to ten years ago. Set in a
Hospital ward, mainly about the Sister and Nurse's Aide, then they added
a Director of Nursing or some such. His name was Hilary!!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130502201647
or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:21.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130403022815

[Daniel]

Ron Hunter wrote:

<Snip>

> Sounds like my brother. He always said that he used to have the fault
> of being a bit conceited, but he had overcome that and was now perfect.

Fond memories, Ron, I used (or should that be "used to use"??) that line
about twenty years ago!!

Memory failing now, so not perfect!

[Daniel]

Not mine!! ;-p

[Daniel]

On the flip side, you have "wind" and "wind"! As in "The wind is getting
up, so you'd better wind in the sails a bit!".

You might understand what's written, but need to hear it spoken to tell
the difference.

[Ron Hunter]

The one for the country in question. Fortunately the need to
communicate between countries keeps any one country from departing too
far from the overall standard.

[Ron Hunter]

Yes, and then there are homograms (homographs), which are words spelled
the same put pronounced differently, depending on context, such as 'read
and read' 'lead and lead'..Not a bit of confusion when spoken, but
pretty difficult to decipher when written.

[Ron Hunter]

That one is a bit on the technical end. Most people hear the word in
school, and forget about it. Grin.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/15/2013 12:50 PM, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Jay Garcia graced us with on
> 5/15/2013 7:41 AM:
>> On 15.05.2013 03:50, Sailfish wrote:
>>
>> --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>> school children.
>>> \" /]
>>>
>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>>
>>
>> There are many that are completely wrong according to long standing
>> rules of grammar according to my daughter - College English Professor.
>> Must be UK'centric going by outdated Oxford nonsense.
>>
> They acknowledged that up front with the disclaimer, I think:
>
> "Of course, there are no official rules for English. Everything that
> follows is debatable.""
>

What bothers me is that all languages in current use change, constantly.
It causes me a bit of discomfort when something I learned in school
changes in ways I find to the detriment of the language. The long-term
changes always tend to simplify the language, and its forms. It seems
that such things as 'their, there, and "they're"' are becoming reduced
to one interchangeable form, as are similar words. I find this very
annoying because those words are quite different in use. While most
people wouldn't find it difficult to describe the difference between
'two' and 'to', they might have a bit of problem with 'too' and 'to'.
Also the pronoun 'me' is slowly disappearing from the language, in
preference to using 'I' as an object form. That one really gets me.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/15/2013 3:30 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 15.05.2013 14:31, »Q« wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:44:26 -0500
>> Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The one with Hilary is a bit too presumptive and the one sith the
>>> semi-colon is flat dead wrong.
>>
>> The one with the semicolon is right. Did you think one of the
>> incorrect answers was correct?
>>
>
> I thought the entire thing was a joke not to be taken seriously. I hate
> semicolons in sentences and therefore quite prejudiced as to useage.
>

And to spelling? (useage/usage).
Grin.
Someone should write a dissertation on online spelling and grammar usage....

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/15/2013 3:30 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 15.05.2013 14:35, clay wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Spoken and written communication are vastly different. Such as, write
>>> this correctly as spoken "There are three (too,two,to)'s in the English
>>> language". Easy to say but how do you write that correctly? :o)
>>>
>>
>> That
>> What do I win?
>
> Yes, you win. Now what?
>

Hey! I'm the one who got 9 of 10 right. I win.

[Ron Hunter]

Or in the South, "Billy" and "Billie"? It seems androgynous spelling is
following androgynous dressing, and marriage laws. Glad I won't be
around to see the final changes when textbooks begin to adopt these new
forms.

[Daniel]

Someone from where, Ron?? UK or USA?? French?? German?? Etc.??

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/16/2013 2:22 AM, Daniel wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> <Snip>
>> Sounds like my brother. He always said that he used to have the fault
>> of being a bit conceited, but he had overcome that and was now perfect.
>
> Fond memories, Ron, I used (or should that be "used to use"??) that line
> about twenty years ago!!
>
> Memory failing now, so not perfect!
>

He passed away a couple of years ago from Parkinson's and a massive
heart attack.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/16/2013 4:13 AM, Daniel wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> On 5/15/2013 3:30 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> On 15.05.2013 14:31, »Q« wrote:
>>>
>>> --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:44:26 -0500
>>>> Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The one with Hilary is a bit too presumptive and the one sith the
>>>>> semi-colon is flat dead wrong.
>>>>
>>>> The one with the semicolon is right. Did you think one of the
>>>> incorrect answers was correct?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought the entire thing was a joke not to be taken seriously. I hate
>>> semicolons in sentences and therefore quite prejudiced as to useage.
>>>
>> And to spelling? (useage/usage).
>> Grin.
>> Someone should write a dissertation on online spelling and grammar
>> usage....
>
> Someone from where, Ron?? UK or USA?? French?? German?? Etc.??
>

Well, it doesn't matter where, just as long as the subject is English,
otherwise I won't be able to read it. Grin.

[Martin Edwards]

On 15/05/2013 12:42, Ron Hunter wrote:
> On 5/15/2013 5:50 AM, Ralph Fox wrote:

>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 01:50:40 -0700, Sailfish wrote:
>>
>>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>>
>>> [excerpt quote=\"
>>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>>> school children.
>>> \" /]
>>>
>>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>>
>>

>> I think they stretch things too far when they assert there is one and
>> only
>> one right answer.
>>
>>
>> Q.1 - Two right answers -- either #3 or #4 could be correct.
>> If the garden is shared by two neighbours then #4 would be
>> correct.
>>
>> Q.9 - No right answers -- all three are grammatically correct.
>> "I was sat in the chair" means someone else put the person there.
>> Like "I was stood up" vs "I was standing up", or like
>> "I was volunteered" vs "I was volunteering".
>>
>>
> NO, that would be 'I was set in the chair'. The 'was sat', along with
> common usage (British) of 'was stood' for 'was standing', or 'was sat'
> for 'was sitting', are simply wrong.
>
Not in every conceivable case. "Was stood" could mean someone stood you
there.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman

[Martin Edwards]

On 15/05/2013 15:03, Was Greywolf wrote:

> On 5/15/2013 4:50 AM, Sailfish wrote:
>> REF: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22512744
>>
>> [excerpt quote=\"
>> Grammar is in the headlines with the arrival of a new test for primary
>> school children.
>> \" /]
>>
>> Honestly, some of these a tough!
>

> 8/10. Of the "incorrect", one was carelessness on my part, the other was
> usage difference. (See Ralph Fox's comment, too).
>
> Fact is, these are all usage questions, not grammar questions. Every one
> of the "wrong" examples is OK in one or more dialects of English. Eg,
> the which/that distinction used here is ignored in many dialects, and
> irrelevant in those that don't use "that" as a conjunctive pronoun.
> Also, the examples of incorrect comma/apostrophe usage are meaningless
> in spoken language.
>
> And that's the problem with English "grammar" lessons as taught in
> primary schools. They are dishonestly labelled, they are linguistically
> indefensible, and worst of all they are confusing because they fail to
> distinguish between usage/grammar and spoken/written.
>
>

When I was in a highly selective secondary school they tried to make me
talk posh. I exaggerated my accent just to annoy them.

[Was Greywolf]

On 5/16/2013 3:30 AM, Daniel wrote:
[...]

> On the flip side, you have "wind" and "wind"! As in "The wind is getting
> up, so you'd better wind in the sails a bit!".
>
> You might understand what's written, but need to hear it spoken to tell
> the difference.

Homographs.

"Homonym" includes homophone and homograph.


--
Best,
Wolf K.

[Was Greywolf]

On 5/16/2013 4:59 AM, Ron Hunter wrote:
[...]

> Yes, and then there are homograms (homographs), which are words spelled
> the same put pronounced differently, depending on context, such as 'read
> and read' 'lead and lead'..Not a bit of confusion when spoken, but
> pretty difficult to decipher when written.

...which is why phonics instruction is necessary but insufficient.

--
Best,
Wolf K.

[Jay Garcia]

Aha, it was intentional. Useage and usage are pronounced the same, yes?

[Jay Garcia]

The good witch of the East was played by Billie Burke. I was always
under the impression that Billy is male and Billie is female. Jay is
male and Jaye is female and on and on ...

[Jay Garcia]

On 16.05.2013 04:15, Ron Hunter wrote:

--- Original Message ---

In reality, there is no such thing as a "massive" heart attack. Same for
a stroke. The definitive factor is the one that causes death and the one
that doesn't. Ok, so here we go again ... :-)

[Jay Garcia]

On 16.05.2013 07:45, Was Greywolf wrote:

--- Original Message ---

What about hominy .. Oh wait ... that's a sort of grit! :-)

[Ron Hunter]

I come across it in fanfiction where is it used as in "Harry was stood
by the side of her bed." I doubt anyone put him there. Grin.

[Ron Hunter]

I don't speak as I write, but rather as is appropriate to the time and
place. It's like not wearing a suit to the beach, or a swimsuit to work
at the bank.

[Ron Hunter]

Phonics is faulty because English words are NOT pronounced as they are
spelled. Some of the place names in England would confound any phonetic
pronunciation attempts, completely. Then there are rather simple words
like 'bederbied' that frustrate phonetic pronunciation. Worse, many, if
not most, English speakers are terribly sloppy about how the pronounce
words. When I speak, there is a definite difference between the words
'their', 'there', and 'they're'. Most people make no distinction.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/16/2013 8:04 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 16.05.2013 04:09, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 5/15/2013 3:30 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> On 15.05.2013 14:31, »Q« wrote:
>>>
>>> --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:44:26 -0500
>>>> Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The one with Hilary is a bit too presumptive and the one sith the
>>>>> semi-colon is flat dead wrong.
>>>>
>>>> The one with the semicolon is right. Did you think one of the
>>>> incorrect answers was correct?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought the entire thing was a joke not to be taken seriously. I hate
>>> semicolons in sentences and therefore quite prejudiced as to useage.
>>>
>> And to spelling? (useage/usage).
>> Grin.
>> Someone should write a dissertation on online spelling and grammar
>> usage....
>>
>
> Aha, it was intentional. Useage and usage are pronounced the same, yes?
>
>

"Useage" is not a good word, according to my online dictionary. Perhaps
archaic, like many of us here. Grin.

[Ron Hunter]

Well, I had a college roommate whose name was Jan. And he pronounced it
like the female 'Jan'. But he was definitely male, as one could tell by
the mustache, and beard. Grin.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/16/2013 8:09 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 16.05.2013 04:15, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 5/16/2013 2:22 AM, Daniel wrote:
>>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>
>>> <Snip>
>>>> Sounds like my brother. He always said that he used to have the fault
>>>> of being a bit conceited, but he had overcome that and was now perfect.
>>>
>>> Fond memories, Ron, I used (or should that be "used to use"??) that line
>>> about twenty years ago!!
>>>
>>> Memory failing now, so not perfect!
>>>
>> He passed away a couple of years ago from Parkinson's and a massive
>> heart attack.
>
> In reality, there is no such thing as a "massive" heart attack. Same for
> a stroke. The definitive factor is the one that causes death and the one
> that doesn't. Ok, so here we go again ... :-)
>

Hummm. A massive stroke would be one that caused a major bleed, or
occluded a major artery, wouldn't it? Pretty much the same for a heart
attack. My oldest sister had a stroke that left her mostly unable to
move, even to breathe on her own. I call that 'massive', as opposed to
one that affects only one arm, or one side of the body. The heart
attack my brother had was sufficient to cause the autopsy to mention
that he was probably effectively dead before he hit the ground. That
will do until something 'massive' by your definition comes along.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/16/2013 9:11 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on
> 5/16/2013 2:05 AM:

> Well, it could be worse, I suppose. It's kind of like the game of Life,
> change or become the next Latin :_)
>
Yes, and that is why I have laughed as France as it tries to kill its
own language by trying to prevent it from adopting new words, especially
ones taken from other languages. IF one took all the words out of
English that it got from other languages, there wouldn't be anything left!

[»Q«]

On Thu, 16 May 2013 08:09:48 -0500
Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:

> On 16.05.2013 04:15, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
> > On 5/16/2013 2:22 AM, Daniel wrote:
> >> Ron Hunter wrote:
> >>
> >> <Snip>
> >>> Sounds like my brother. He always said that he used to have the
> >>> fault of being a bit conceited, but he had overcome that and was
> >>> now perfect.
> >>
> >> Fond memories, Ron, I used (or should that be "used to use"??)
> >> that line about twenty years ago!!
> >>
> >> Memory failing now, so not perfect!
> >>
> > He passed away a couple of years ago from Parkinson's and a massive
> > heart attack.
>
> In reality, there is no such thing as a "massive" heart attack. Same
> for a stroke. The definitive factor is the one that causes death and
> the one that doesn't. Ok, so here we go again ... :-)

Patients and their relatives often want a non-fatal heart attack
categorized or qualified in some way, and a conversation along
those lines is a waste of a cardiologist's time. Saying "there are only
two kinds: ones that don't kill you and ones that do kill you" is the
easiest way for a cardiologist (or anybody) to deflect to a discussion
of what actually *needs* discussing with them. "Now let's talk about
what you can do to reduce the likelihood of that second kind...."

[Was Greywolf]

On 5/16/2013 5:05 PM, Sailfish wrote:
> It's sounding like you're saying that people today would have a heck of
> a time reading Olde English Shakespeare?
>
> Oh, wait ...

That's Early Modern. Old English is better called there's Anglo-Saxon
(ca 450 to 1100). Then there's Middle English (ca. 1100-1550), Early
Modern (ca 1550-1800), and Modern (ca 1800 to present. There is of
course considerable overlap, and there are several varieties of each.
The notion of a "standard English" did';t arise until printing made
books (including schoolbooks and grammars) cheap and ubiquitous. William
Caxton has a plaintive little essay about this. Which version of English
should he use in books intended to be sold all over England, with its
many dialects, some of which were mutually unintelligible?

Anglo-Saxon:
Fæder ure þu þe eart on heofonum...

Middle English:
Oure fadir that art in heuenes,....

Early Modern:
Our Father, that art in heaven...

Modern:
Our Father in heaven....

Have fun!
--
Best,
Wolf K.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/16/2013 4:05 PM, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on

> 5/16/2013 10:46 AM:

> It's sounding like you're saying that people today would have a heck of
> a time reading Olde English Shakespeare?
>
> Oh, wait ...
>

Shakespeare is not Old English, that's Beowulf, then there is Middle
English, (Canterbury Tales) which I can read, but most would have a
great deal of trouble with it, and then Modern English (Shakespeare).
BTW, reading the Canterbury Tales in the original is a VERY different
experience, since they are pretty much 'sanitized' in the translations.

[Ron Hunter]

The prevention of the second kind is the same as the prevention of the
first kind. All my brothers either died before they reached my age, or
had heart surgery. Since I was diagnosed as one with high blood
pressure, and later diabetic, I have had to modify things before the
problems got that bad.

[Jay Garcia]

The point is not that it isn't a "word" but rather an excersise that if
you are reading a sentence and intentionaly misspell a word but it
sounds like the correct one, you simply pass it by without further thought.

[Jay Garcia]

My dad taught internal medicine and cardiology at LSU Med School for
over 30 years and he put it quite succinctly, there are only two types
of strokes and heart attacks, the ones that kill you and the ones that
don't. Mild and massive are media classifications .. according to him.

[Jay Garcia]

My dad taught internal medicine and cardiology for 30+ years at LSU Med
School and was always quite the simplistic doc - the one that kills you
and the one that doesn't as he always said. Mild and massive are media
words ... according to him anyway. If it kills you it was massive and if
it didn't it was mild. :-)

I had a mild stroke in 1984 and I'm still here .. somewhat! :-)

[Jay Garcia]

Oh, forgot to mention. My sister is a "chip off the old block", forensic
pathologist and deputy coroner for Jefferson Parish. She feels exactly
the same and qets quite adamant when testifying in court. A trial or two
ago she encountered a really smart-ass defense attorney that kept
grilling her about what actually killed the victim. Expecting a long
drawn out technical explanation, she made a very short answer, " bullet
in the head" which was to the point and all that was needed.

[Jay Garcia]

Well, just so long as you doh't succumb to massive diabetes. :-)

[Daniel]

Ron Hunter wrote:

> On 5/16/2013 4:13 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> Ron Hunter wrote:

>>> On 5/15/2013 3:30 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:

>>>> On 15.05.2013 14:31, »Q« wrote:
>>>>
>>>> --- Original Message ---
>>>>

>>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 09:44:26 -0500
>>>>> Jay Garcia <J...@JayNOSPAMGarcia.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The one with Hilary is a bit too presumptive and the one sith the
>>>>>> semi-colon is flat dead wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> The one with the semicolon is right. Did you think one of the
>>>>> incorrect answers was correct?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought the entire thing was a joke not to be taken seriously. I hate
>>>> semicolons in sentences and therefore quite prejudiced as to useage.
>>>>
>>> And to spelling? (useage/usage).
>>> Grin.
>>> Someone should write a dissertation on online spelling and grammar
>>> usage....
>>

>> Someone from where, Ron?? UK or USA?? French?? German?? Etc.??
>>
> Well, it doesn't matter where, just as long as the subject is English,
> otherwise I won't be able to read it. Grin.

So, I re-frame my question ....

Someone from where, Ron?? UK or USA?? Australia?? NZ?? Etc.??

All different forms of English language!

--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130502201647
or

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:21.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130403022815

[Martin Edwards]

This is quite common in Northern English. For a small country England,
and other Anglophone parts of the British Isles, still have a lot of
regional variations.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman

[Martin Edwards]

The kids are alright.

[Martin Edwards]

Totally against theory, I seem to have had mild diabetes. I forgot my
pills on a short break and have not taken them for a year with /no/
symptoms. I am still having my annual retinopathy tests though.

[Martin Edwards]

On 16/05/2013 13:46, Was Greywolf wrote:
> On 5/16/2013 4:59 AM, Ron Hunter wrote:
> [...]
>> Yes, and then there are homograms (homographs), which are words spelled
>> the same put pronounced differently, depending on context, such as 'read
>> and read' 'lead and lead'..Not a bit of confusion when spoken, but
>> pretty difficult to decipher when written.
>
> ...which is why phonics instruction is necessary but insufficient.
>

There are also Greek and Latin roots which are pronounced the same in
English, but have different meanings.

[Martin Edwards]

There are alternative pronunciations to towns and cities, which often
get people quite worked up. I have also noticed on tv that some
Americans know the English pronunciation of, eg Worcester, Mass., while
others pronounce it phonetically. In a programme about breakaway
Mormons, we were introduced to a family called "Schinoff", to me a
Germanized Slav name, but when it appeared on screen it was Chynoweth, a
Welsh name.

[Martin Edwards]

On 16/05/2013 14:11, Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 16.05.2013 07:45, Was Greywolf wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>

>> On 5/16/2013 3:30 AM, Daniel wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> On the flip side, you have "wind" and "wind"! As in "The wind is getting
>>> up, so you'd better wind in the sails a bit!".
>>>
>>> You might understand what's written, but need to hear it spoken to tell
>>> the difference.
>>
>> Homographs.
>>
>> "Homonym" includes homophone and homograph.
>>
>>
>
> What about hominy .. Oh wait ... that's a sort of grit! :-)
>
True Grit?

[Martin Edwards]

On 16/05/2013 22:05, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on

> 5/16/2013 10:46 AM:

> It's sounding like you're saying that people today would have a heck of
> a time reading Olde English Shakespeare?
>
> Oh, wait ...
>

Shakespeare is not Old English, but Early Modern English. I have no
problem with it, but Chaucer is something else. Old English has to be
learned, and it is still done at Oxford and Cambridge.

[Ron Hunter]

Sorry, but I learned to read by the word recognition method. I see the
words, and if they look like the wrong shape, it is rather like finding
a rock in the furrow when plowing behind a horse.

[Ron Hunter]

I have known some stroke victims who would dispute that. Like the
doctor who had a stroke and wasn't able to return to practice. His
wasn't 'mild' to him because he no longer was able to do what he loved
to do most, even though he regained much mobility. I guess it depends
on what side of the stroke you are on. He said that he learned more as
a patient than he ever learned as a doctor, when it came to strokes.
My doctor once said anything that happens only once isn't something to
worry about. I heroically refrained from mentioning strokes and fatal
heart attacks in response. The big difference is if it is happening to
YOU, or someone else.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/16/2013 10:07 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 16.05.2013 17:02, »Q« wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> Patients and their relatives often want a non-fatal heart attack
>> categorized or qualified in some way, and a conversation along
>> those lines is a waste of a cardiologist's time. Saying "there are only
>> two kinds: ones that don't kill you and ones that do kill you" is the
>> easiest way for a cardiologist (or anybody) to deflect to a discussion
>> of what actually *needs* discussing with them. "Now let's talk about
>> what you can do to reduce the likelihood of that second kind...."
>
> Oh, forgot to mention. My sister is a "chip off the old block", forensic
> pathologist and deputy coroner for Jefferson Parish. She feels exactly
> the same and qets quite adamant when testifying in court. A trial or two
> ago she encountered a really smart-ass defense attorney that kept
> grilling her about what actually killed the victim. Expecting a long
> drawn out technical explanation, she made a very short answer, " bullet
> in the head" which was to the point and all that was needed.
>

Maybe it is because lawyers aren't affected by such things. Grin. It
reminds me of the cop who told a dispatcher that "his body is here, and
his head is about 30 feet away, He's dead" when she told him he couldn't
say a victim of a traffic accident was dead until the coroner told him
so. Sometimes things are just painfully obvious.

[Ron Hunter]

I am sure it will progress to needing insulin, eventually, unless one of
the new cures becomes feasible.

[Ron Hunter]

Does it really matter? Regardless of minor differences, the major rules
still are the same, else we would have real problems communicating. So
far, I haven't had much trouble understanding any version of English I
have encountered.

[Ron Hunter]

Yes, they do, and they laugh at people from places like east Texas, and
central Arkansas. Interesting.

[Ron Hunter]

Unless you are on a really strict diet, and exercise program, you
probably won't have symptoms that you can detect. That's the danger.

[Ron Hunter]

There are no rules for names. If you wish, you can name your child
'George', and call him 'marti'. Up to you, but don't expect him to have
a good time in school.... Grin.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/17/2013 1:45 AM, Martin Edwards wrote:
> On 16/05/2013 14:11, Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 16.05.2013 07:45, Was Greywolf wrote:
>>
>> --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> On 5/16/2013 3:30 AM, Daniel wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> On the flip side, you have "wind" and "wind"! As in "The wind is
>>>> getting
>>>> up, so you'd better wind in the sails a bit!".
>>>>
>>>> You might understand what's written, but need to hear it spoken to tell
>>>> the difference.
>>>
>>> Homographs.
>>>
>>> "Homonym" includes homophone and homograph.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> What about hominy .. Oh wait ... that's a sort of grit! :-)
>>
> True Grit?
>

Some of it is 'grittier' than others.

[Ron Hunter]

I tried to learn Old English, and gave up as the script (before moveable
type) was too hard to deal with.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/17/2013 2:09 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Martin Edwards graced us with on
> 5/16/2013 11:48 PM:

> I suspect in not too many more years they'll need to be transliterations
> of the Classics similarly as has been done with the Bible, along with
> any number of ersatz re-interpretations.
>
I don't have any problem with new words, or changing meanings for old
ones, but when the spelling changes (and it DOES change), or word forms
'simplify' into new forms, it makes reading hard.

[Ron Hunter]

On 5/17/2013 3:17 AM, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Ron Hunter graced us with on

> 5/17/2013 12:34 AM:

> It get easier as I age. They're all equally hard to read for me anymore,
> what with my eyes the way they are :_)
>
That is one area where I have been lucky. Other than reading glasses
for close work, the Ophthalmologist said my eyes were 'professionally
speaking, quite uninteresting'. I'll take that!

[Jay Garcia]

Problem is that if you are consumed by the syntax and spelling
correctness of the written communication then you are probably not
interested in the subject material.

[Jay Garcia]

I had one in 1984 and am still here, therefore it wasn't "massive". :-)