Pro - Does anyone else's nest boxes get soaked in rain?

[Guest]

I've just had a posh looking postcard put through my letterbox from an estate agent.

 

"If your looking for a new home . . ."

[Guest]

Can anyone clarify a point of grammar for me? My mum has always told me that it's grammatically incorrect to say "lots of..." but I know lots of people use that expression She said one should say 'many' rather than 'lots of'.

 

Is she correct?

 

I'll have to admit to one irritating point of grammar. SO many people say/write comprises OF. One only has to look in any estate agent's window to see how many times it's used incorrectly

 

I'm still with cummings though, the sentiment of WHAT is being said is more important than HOW it's said, providing it's legible enough obviously

[The Dogmother]

 

......those of us who notice poor use of our language do so because we love all the rules and correct usage et cetera (sorry! I hope you understand my Latin phrase ).

 

 

 

You want to try working here Loon - Barristers are always using Latin

[bronze]

To be fair I was taught naff all grammar at school and what I do know is from reading and asking my parents. Is i tfair to then blame me or should my teachers have more responsibility.

I always hear ds1 teachers saying such delights as 'should of'. Surely they should know better if they're then passing on the knowledge.

 

Ginnette I would say writing on a forum was the same as speech so I think you should be let off a couple of those.

 

And, but and so are all words that you should not start a sentence with. Or something liek that

[The Dogmother]

I have had a couple of PMs from other forum users, complaining about the 'inflammatory and totally unnecessary' posting going on in this thread. I have deleted the main post that was featured in the complaint.

 

Let's all play nicely please children!

[Guest]

Did I miss something then? I hadn't noticed anything inflammatory.

 

There wouldn't be much left of the nesting box if we deleted all the 'totally unnecessary' comments.

[Cinnamon]

It was somewhat more than just unnecessary,Ginette

 

Still, its gone now so hopefully this very interesting thread can get back on track.

[Looney]

I missed the deleted post too. Efficient work moderators! I'm finding this thread very interesting!

 

Ginette, you would love the book my Dad found in his loft. It is from 1919 (original version printed in 1860-ish!) and is a school grammar book. Makes quite an interesting read although very much outdated. It's the sort of book I felt the need to read in a Queen's English accent rather than my usual Lincolnshire!

 

There are phrases such as "Mr X feared his life" which surprised me as I always thought it was "feared for". But then I have already admitted I am not too hot on grammar Did I also admit I have a languages degree?!

[Guest]

Phil - I have argued with our vicar's wife about the following bit of our order of service. She is a journalist and insists it is acceptable, but it really annoys me!

 

"The congregation shares the Peace with each other" I would prefer it to say 'Members of the congregation share the Peace with each other"[/color]

 

 

That is plainly wrong! Your solution sounds a little clumsy, though, for something supposed to be brief - like a service sheet. I think ours would normally read "The sharing of the Peace."

 

 

My favourite Grammar joke...

 

A linguistics professor was lecturing to his class one day. "In English," he

said, "A double negative forms a positive. In some languages, though, such

as Russian, a double negative is still a negative. However, there is no language wherein a double positive can form a negative."

 

A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah, right."

 

 

Phil xx

[Cinnamon]

HA!

Brilliant

[Looney]

Excellent! Must send that joke to my parents!

[Guest]

Maybe what people don't understand is that those of us who notice poor use of our language do so because we love all the rules...

 

Here are the rules - just for clarification:

 

1. Verbs HAS to agree with their subjects.

 

2. Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.

 

3. And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.

 

4. It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.

 

5. Avoid clichés like the plague. (They're old hat)

 

6. Comparisons are as bad as clichés.

 

7. Also, always avoid annoying alliteration.

 

8. Be more or less specific.

 

9. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually)

unnecessary.

 

10. Also too, never, ever use repetitive redundancies.

 

11. No sentence fragments.

 

12. Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.

 

13. Do not be redundant; do not use more words than necessary;

it's highly superfluous.

 

14. One should NEVER generalize.

 

15. Don't use no double negatives.

 

16. One-word sentences? Eliminate.

 

17. Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.

 

18. The passive voice is to be ignored.

 

19. Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.

 

20. Use words correctly, irregardless of how others use them.

 

21. Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said,

"I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."

 

22. If you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times:

Resist hyperbole; not one writer in a million can use it

correctly.

 

Phil

[..lay a little egg for me]

[Guest]

that's brilliant Phil

 

in your haste you forgot about telling people about mixing metaphors, I suppose you were chomping at the bit to get the ball rolling

[Cinnamon]

[Guest]

Ginette, you would love the book my Dad found in his loft. It is from 1919 (original version printed in 1860-ish!) and is a school grammar book. Makes quite an interesting read although very much outdated. It's the sort of book I felt the need to read in a Queen's English accent rather than my usual Lincolnshire!

 

There are phrases such as "Mr X feared his life" which surprised me as I always thought it was "feared for". But then I have already admitted I am not too hot on grammar Did I also admit I have a languages degree?!

 

That sounds a really interesting book. I would have 'feared for' too! It must be a bit like 'Beware the dog', not 'Beware of the dog'

[jlo]

Loving the rules Phil! (..and yes, I know that the grammar is terrible )

[MedusA]

How about "could of", "would of", "should of" etc.

 

DD used to say and write those all the time when she was younger. To say it annoyed me immensely would be an understatement!

 

The inserted "h" annoys me too. As in "ashume" "conshumer" etc.

[bronze]

For me its the extra g. Egzactly

[jlo]

How about "could of", "would of", "should of" etc.

 

DD used to say and write those all the time when she was younger. To say it annoyed me immensely would be an understatement!

 

The inserted "h" annoys me too. As in "ashume" "conshumer" etc.

 

My mum gets SOO-O-O cross about those "sh" too!

[Egluntyne]

Another one that gets on my wick a little more than somewhat is " secertry". It is sec..ret...ary.

[Guest]

How about "could of", "would of", "should of" etc.

 

DD used to say and write those all the time when she was younger. To say it annoyed me immensely would be an understatement!

 

The inserted "h" annoys me too. As in "ashume" "conshumer" etc.

 

are you not a fan of Sean Connery then??

 

 

"The naymsh Bond, Jaymsh Bond."

 

“God shave the Queen!” (Sean Connery on the monarchy)

 

 

Phil

[clootie]

Shurely shum mishtake Rev?

 

My beef is sikth instead of sixth. Grrrrr

[Guest]

Shurely shum mishtake Rev?

 

My beef is sikth instead of sixth. Grrrrr

 

you mean shixth??

 

Phil

[Guest]

For me its the extra g. Egzactly

 

 

How do you pronouncify it then Bron?? Darn here in Essix, many people (Supernanny perhaps being the most famous) pronounce it..

 

Ezzackly...

 

I pronounce it egg-zactly - so I would infuriate you!!!

 

Phil