PDA

View Full Version : Old Man Grammatical Grump Thread



RIP
07-08-2011, 11:16 AM
It's a miserable wet Sunday and my weekend plans for gowf, country walk and garden are all cattled. I'm reading Hibs.Net and watching Sky Sports wi ma laddies (15 and 13). I've been focusing on their grammar now that they are more advanced in their education but what chance have they got when everyone around them cannae even manage basic grammar? :grr:

Neil McCann - "He had went" instead of " He had gone"

Any other auld grumps out there got their pet messageboard/TV/Hibs TV commentator grammatical faux pas?

BEEJ
07-08-2011, 11:20 AM
"The boy done good".

The word 'lose' being written as 'loose'.

matty_f
07-08-2011, 11:21 AM
"I could of..." instead of "I could have..."

MWHIBBIES
07-08-2011, 11:24 AM
Everything Dean Windass has ever said on Soccer Saturday.

lyonhibs
07-08-2011, 11:28 AM
Everything Dean Windass has ever said on Soccer Saturday.

:top marks Him and Paul Merson definitely don't speak English.

"The boy's done ever so well" aka Jim Beglin's epitaph gets my goat as well.

Malthibby
07-08-2011, 11:29 AM
The loss of adverbs.
'Communicating loud and clear' is one painful example from Midlothian Council.
I blame the Americans, but I tend to do that anyway.
GG

Franck Stanton
07-08-2011, 11:30 AM
Quite a few posters use "through" when really meaning "threw" quite a few more but they escape me at the moment

Sherlock Jones
07-08-2011, 11:34 AM
The seemingly interchangeability of their/there/they're.

snooky
07-08-2011, 11:44 AM
It's a miserable wet Sunday and my weekend plans for gowf, country walk and garden are all cattled. I'm reading Hibs.Net and watching Sky Sports wi ma laddies (15 and 13). I've been focusing on their grammer now that they are more advanced in their education but what chance have they got when everyone around them cannae even manage basic grammar? :grr:

Neil McCann - "He had went" instead of " He had gone"

Any other auld grumps out there got their pet messageboard/TV/Hibs TV commentator grammatical faux pas?

"Here here" is my personal teethgrinder.

(Just for the record "Hear hear" apparently is short for "Hear him, hear him".)

CropleyWasGod
07-08-2011, 11:45 AM
:top marks Him and Paul Merson definitely don't speak English.

"The boy's done ever so well" aka Jim Beglin's epitath gets my goat as well.

The way people use "epitath" when they mean "epithet", or perhaps even "epitaph".

:greengrin

Jay
07-08-2011, 12:08 PM
Aswel and aken are not real words :rolleyes:

Having said that, they dont drive me mad, they make me smile :greengrin

Bunter
07-08-2011, 12:27 PM
Davie Provan's all consuming desire to describe every shot on target as, "a very decent" chance sets my teeth on edge.
Maybe that's just Davie Provan right enough.

lyonhibs
07-08-2011, 12:40 PM
The way people use "epitath" when they mean "epithet", or perhaps even "epitaph".

:greengrin

Don't know what you're (or should that be your................ :greengrin) on about.................

nonshinyfinish
07-08-2011, 01:11 PM
The seemingly interchangeability of their/there/they're.

You mean seeming, not seemingly.

EDIT: The offence that most enrages me is probably apostrophe abuse.

Saorsa
07-08-2011, 01:19 PM
"I could of..." instead of "I could have..."that one that really gets on my wick. :grr:

Sherlock Jones
07-08-2011, 01:28 PM
You mean seeming, not seemingly.


I knew some seeming know-all would pick me up on that.

nonshinyfinish
07-08-2011, 01:57 PM
I knew some seeming know-all would pick me up on that.

:greengrin

lapsedhibee
07-08-2011, 02:32 PM
Him and Paul Merson definitely don't speak English.

Do you mean "He and Paul Merson ... "? :wink:


"The boy's done ever so well" aka Jim Beglin's epitaph gets my goat as well.
Is that ungrammatical? :confused:

The offence that most enrages me is probably apostrophe abuse.
:agree: That annoy's me too.

nonshinyfinish
07-08-2011, 02:42 PM
Is that ungrammatical? :confused:

Well spotted sir - as written it's correct, a shortened version of 'the boy has done ever so well'.

Pedantry is the tit's. :thumbsup:

Future17
07-08-2011, 07:52 PM
That annoy's me too.

:greengrin

CropleyWasGod
07-08-2011, 07:54 PM
Don't know what you're (or should that be your................ :greengrin) on about.................

Me either. :wink:

da-robster
08-08-2011, 04:36 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law

McSwanky
08-08-2011, 07:25 PM
Interesting. I'm as big a 'pedant' as the next man, but the English language is constantly evolving. I don't know anything about the history of the Oxford English, but I'm intrigued that so many take it as gospel.

What are the criteria for a word making it into the OED? Are we likely to see the likes of 'aswel' make it in there if it's used often enough?

ArabHibee
08-08-2011, 09:20 PM
English can be tricky though:




1. The bandage was wound around the wound.


2. The farm was used to produce produce.


3. The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.


4. We must polish the Polish furniture.


5. He could lead if he would get the lead out.


6. The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.


7. Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.


8. A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.


9. When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.


10. I did not object to the object.


11. The insurance was invalid for the invalid.


12. There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.


13. They were too close to the door to close it.


14. The buck does funny things when the does are present.


15. A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.


16. To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.


17. The wind was too strong to wind the sail.


18. Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.


19. I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.


20. How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?

Twa Cairpets
08-08-2011, 10:20 PM
Not a grammatical error, but people saying: "It's a mute point". No. It isn't. It's a moot point.

Grrrr

Sodje_18
09-08-2011, 09:46 PM
When people use 'no' instead of 'know' ie. 'i no that'
Certain abbreviations - especially 'omg', makes you sound like a 12 year old lassie.

Sylar
10-08-2011, 07:45 AM
"yous"

Drives me loopy!

--------
11-08-2011, 01:54 PM
Interesting. I'm as big a 'pedant' as the next man, but the English language is constantly evolving. I don't know anything about the history of the Oxford English, but I'm intrigued that so many take it as gospel.

What are the criteria for a word making it into the OED? Are we likely to see the likes of 'aswel' make it in there if it's used often enough?


Language is indeed constantly changing and evolving. The OED can only record the language as it was spoken at the time of compilation - time has moved on, the language has developed, new words have been coined or adopted...

I used to get all wound up about it, but it's really not worth it. The point of language is communication, and as long as the communication taking place is clear and accurate, I don't gte annoyed. If someone isn't making himself/herself clear, it's probably because they're ignorant or stupid, and I derive a pleasing sense of superiority from this.

Case in point - this is a properly grammatical sentence, provided you know the meanings of the various words - but a degree of slang is involved.

So what does it mean?

Buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. :cool2:

Twa Cairpets
11-08-2011, 03:16 PM
Case in point - this is a properly grammatical sentence, provided you know the meanings of the various words - but a degree of slang is involved.

So what does it mean?

Buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. :cool2:

It means you need to go and lie down in a dark room

HUTCHYHIBBY
11-08-2011, 06:51 PM
I blame the Americans. I blame them for "my bad" wtf is that all about?

nonshinyfinish
11-08-2011, 10:01 PM
Case in point - this is a properly grammatical sentence, provided you know the meanings of the various words - but a degree of slang is involved.

So what does it mean?

Buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. :cool2:

If I remember this linguistic puzzle correctly, then your sentence is not only missing a buffalo, but is also incorrectly capitalised.

Re: pedantry, absolute correctness, and the changing face of the English language - my take on it is that at any given point in a language's history there is a convention (not an absolute right or wrong, just a convention) that must be followed. Despite the fact that this convention is permanently up for debate as the language naturally evolves, if it didn't exist and us pedants didn't adhere to it, then our beloved tongue would be reduced to anarchy. Change is good, I agree, but at least when it comes to language, it should happen gradually. If people are just allowed to spell words how they like, or fire in apostrophes wherever the hell they fancy it, then our precious, finely hewn language will end up resembling the mish-mash of Middle English.

For me, language pedantry is not about being definitively right (whatever that means), it's about at least keeping people honest regarding those facets of English that are not up for negotiation...Google as a verb - fine; tweet, LOL, etc. entering the OED - fine, these are new words. People putting an apostrophe in "face's", "lot's", "new's"...not fine. This isn't new usage of the language, or the incorporation of words that 'the kids' are using, it's merely abuse of existing English. And the changing face of English be damned, I'll always stand up against the apostrophe abusers. :grr:

Sir David Gray
11-08-2011, 10:32 PM
People who use apostrophes incorrectly in relation to people whose surname ends in an 's'.

I.E. "Jim Jefferie's just been sacked by Hearts. :grr:

I cannot believe that people make that error and it's not a rare thing either.

Double negatives also really wind me up.

I've just heard someone on Question Time talking about people who "Don't have nothing". :grr:

The incorrect use of words like 'come', 'came', 'done', 'did'.

How hard is it to say "You came", or "You have come" or "You did something" or "You have done something"? :grr:

I'm sure there are many other examples, I'll come back if I think on any more.

alfie
12-08-2011, 09:08 AM
Watched the last episode of Sherlock on the telly recently and it started with him interviewing some crim that spoke like a football commentator / manager. He was constantly correcting him, it was excellent! :greengrin

What really get my goat, is the old "I gave 110%" :grr: How can you give more than 100%?!?!?!

CropleyWasGod
12-08-2011, 10:32 AM
People who use apostrophes incorrectly in relation to people whose surname ends in an 's'.

I.E. "Jim Jefferie's just been sacked by Hearts. :grr:

I cannot believe that people make that error and it's not a rare thing either.

Double negatives also really wind me up.

I've just heard someone on Question Time talking about people who "Don't have nothing". :grr:

The incorrect use of words like 'come', 'came', 'done', 'did'.

How hard is it to say "You came", or "You have come" or "You did something" or "You have done something"? :grr:

I'm sure there are many other examples, I'll come back if I think on any more.

What about people who mix up "i.e." and "e.g."? :greengrin

--------
12-08-2011, 11:55 AM
If I remember this linguistic puzzle correctly, then your sentence is not only missing a buffalo, but is also incorrectly capitalised.

Re: pedantry, absolute correctness, and the changing face of the English language - my take on it is that at any given point in a language's history there is a convention (not an absolute right or wrong, just a convention) that must be followed. Despite the fact that this convention is permanently up for debate as the language naturally evolves, if it didn't exist and us pedants didn't adhere to it, then our beloved tongue would be reduced to anarchy. Change is good, I agree, but at least when it comes to language, it should happen gradually. If people are just allowed to spell words how they like, or fire in apostrophes wherever the hell they fancy it, then our precious, finely hewn language will end up resembling the mish-mash of Middle English.

For me, language pedantry is not about being definitively right (whatever that means), it's about at least keeping people honest regarding those facets of English that are not up for negotiation...Google as a verb - fine; tweet, LOL, etc. entering the OED - fine, these are new words. People putting an apostrophe in "face's", "lot's", "new's"...not fine. This isn't new usage of the language, or the incorporation of words that 'the kids' are using, it's merely abuse of existing English. And the changing face of English be damned, I'll always stand up against the apostrophe abusers. :grr:



I think not. There are a number of versions of the same conundrum.

This version (like the others) relies on three meanings for 'Buffalo/buffalo' - 'buffalo' as a noun meaning 'bison', 'buffalo' as a verb meaning 'to harass or bully', and 'Buffalo' as a proper noun referring to the city in New York State, USA.

So "Buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffalo Buffalo buffalo" translates as "Bison whom bison from the city of Buffalo bully or harass, also bully or harass bison from the city of Buffalo." It checks out - it's clearer with the comma.


Your point about the misuse of the apostrophe has my 100% agreement. It's ignorance - nothing more - and it irritates me mightily. Persistently offending in this regard should, in my humble opinion, result in the offender suffering the death penalty.

The inaccurate use of certain words also annoys me. "Refute" (a favourite of corrupt politicians who've been found out and are trying to justify themselves) does NOT mean "deny" - "to refute" means "to disprove", and not many allegations of corruption against politicians are disproved in my experience.

The commentator's favourite, "decimate", as in "Garry O'Connor is simply decimating the Hearts defence" actually means killing every tenth man, and goes back to the Roman Army's very nasty practice of doing just that to a mutinous or cowardly regiment of soldiers. Garry may be a bampot, but he isn't a serial killer. (At least, if he is, he hasn't been caught yet!)


BTW, I would take issue with your punctuation in the sentences I've marked in bold. I think they would be better punctuated:

"For me, language pedantry is not about being definitively right (whatever that means); it's about at least keeping people honest regarding those facets of English that are not up for negotiation. Google as a verb - fine; tweet, LOL, etc. entering the OED - fine; these are new words. People putting an apostrophe in "face's", "lot's", "new's" - not fine."

And the clause in bold red should surely read "if it didn't exist and we pedants didn't adhere to it"?

I do hope I haven't caused offence; I used to be an English teacher in a former existence.

I'm also a very sad person who really needs to get a life. :wink:

nonshinyfinish
12-08-2011, 01:52 PM
I think not. There are a number of versions of the same conundrum.

This version (like the others) relies on three meanings for 'Buffalo/buffalo' - 'buffalo' as a noun meaning 'bison', 'buffalo' as a verb meaning 'to harass or bully', and 'Buffalo' as a proper noun referring to the city in New York State, USA.

So "Buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo, buffaloBuffalo buffalo" translates as "Bison whom bison from the city of Buffalo bully or harass, also bully or harass bison from the city of Buffalo." It checks out - it's clearer with the comma.

I see. I dimly remember a different version.


Your point about the misuse of the apostrophe has my 100% agreement. It's ignorance - nothing more - and it irritates me mightily. Persistently offending in this regard should, in my humble opinion, result in the offender suffering the death penalty.

Hanging's too good for 'em.


The inaccurate use of certain words also annoys me. "Refute" (a favourite of corrupt politicians who've been found out and are trying to justify themselves) does NOT mean "deny" - "to refute" means "to disprove", and not many allegations of corruption against politicians are disproved in my experience.

The commentator's favourite, "decimate", as in "Garry O'Connor is simply decimating the Hearts defence" actually means killing every tenth man, and goes back to the Roman Army's very nasty practice of doing just that to a mutinous or cowardly regiment of soldiers. Garry may be a bampot, but he isn't a serial killer. (At least, if he is, he hasn't been caught yet!)

Actually, I think decimate is a good example of a word that has changed its (broadly) accepted meaning - so few people know its original meaning that its use to mean 'completely destroy' has become standard - and therefore correct? :dunno:

For the record, the OED includes the commentators' definition, but with the caveat 'rhetorically or loosely'.


BTW, I would take issue with your punctuation in the sentences I've marked in bold. I think they would be better punctuated:

"For me, language pedantry is not about being definitively right (whatever that means); it's about at least keeping people honest regarding those facets of English that are not up for negotiation. Google as a verb - fine; tweet, LOL, etc. entering the OED - fine; these are new words. People putting an apostrophe in "face's", "lot's", "new's" - not fine."

I appreciate the free proof-reading. I agree that my original punctuation, although correct, was a bit lazy and inconsistent. I would keep the comma in the first sentence, but that's down to personal taste.


And the clause in bold red should surely read "if it didn't exist and we pedants didn't adhere to it"?

Indeed it should.


I do hope I haven't caused offence; I used to be an English teacher in a former existence.

I'm also a very sad person who really needs to get a life. :wink:

Far from causing offence, I think you've underlined the one watertight excuse for continued pedantry - it's fun. :greengrin

CropleyWasGod
12-08-2011, 01:56 PM
Here's another one.

GENDER!!

When I was a lad, there were four genders. Masculine, feminine, common and neuter.

Now, it would appear, there are only two... male and female. All because no-one wants to use the "s" word :grr:

So, whenever someone starts banging on about "gender-equality", I start banging my dictionary and shout for equality for the trees... and tables!!!

And breathe............

alfie
12-08-2011, 02:30 PM
Your point about the misuse of the apostrophe has my 110% agreement. It's ignorance - nothing more - and it irritates me mightily. Persistently offending in this regard should, in my humble opinion, result in the offender suffering the death penalty.


Fixed that for you :wink: :devil:

--------
12-08-2011, 02:31 PM
I see. I dimly remember a different version.

Hanging's too good for 'em.

Actually, I think decimate is a good example of a word that has changed its (broadly) accepted meaning - so few people know its original meaning that its use to mean 'completely destroy' has become standard - and therefore correct? :dunno:

For the record, the OED includes the commentators' definition, but with the caveat 'rhetorically or loosely'.

I appreciate the free proof-reading. I agree that my original punctuation, although correct, was a bit lazy and inconsistent. I would keep the comma in the first sentence, but that's down to personal taste.

Indeed it should.

Far from causing offence, I think you've underlined the one watertight excuse for continued pedantry - it's fun. :greengrin


How about this one?

"James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher."

"James, while John had had 'had', had had 'had had'; 'had had' had had a better effect on the teacher."


And then there's the old, old joke...

"I say, I say, I say, I say - what's the difference between a buffalo and a bison?"

"I don't know - what IS the difference between a buffalo and a bison?"

"Well, you can't wash your hands in a buffalo!"


Tara! Ching, boom!


I'll tell you what REALLY gets me raging - people who use double comparatives like "more worser".

I'd feed THEM through a wood-chipper - VERY SLOWLY.

Geo_1875
12-08-2011, 02:39 PM
Apostrophes, its better to miss them out than put them where they shouldnt be.

--------
12-08-2011, 02:55 PM
Apostrophes, its better to miss them out than put them where they shouldnt be.

Oh no, it's not! :bitchy:

lapsedhibee
12-08-2011, 04:20 PM
Re: pedantry, absolute correctness, and the changing face of the English language - my take on it is that at any given point in a language's history there is a convention (not an absolute right or wrong, just a convention) that must be followed. Despite the fact that this convention is permanently up for debate as the language naturally evolves, if it didn't exist and us pedants didn't adhere to it, then our beloved tongue would be reduced to anarchy. Change is good, I agree, but at least when it comes to language, it should happen gradually. If people are just allowed to spell words how they like, or fire in apostrophes wherever the hell they fancy it, then our precious, finely hewn language will end up resembling the mish-mash of Middle English.

For me, language pedantry is not about being definitively right (whatever that means), it's about at least keeping people honest regarding those facets of English that are not up for negotiation...Google as a verb - fine; tweet, LOL, etc. entering the OED - fine, these are new words. People putting an apostrophe in "face's", "lot's", "new's"...not fine. This isn't new usage of the language, or the incorporation of words that 'the kids' are using, it's merely abuse of existing English. And the changing face of English be damned, I'll always stand up against the apostrophe abusers. :grr:

Good summery, Nonshinyfish.


I'll tell you what REALLY gets me raging - people who use double comparatives like "more worser".

I'd feed THEM through a wood-chipper - VERY SLOWLY.

Not sure that is a double comparative.
Isn't "worse" a comparative?
"Worser" or "more worse" would be a double comparative.
And "more worser" a triple comparative, non?
:faint:

And it's an absolute ****in disgrace that there aren't more threads on hibs.net about the Oxford Comma.

CropleyWasGod
12-08-2011, 04:23 PM
Good summery, Nonshinyfish.



Not sure that is a double comparative.
Isn't "worse" a comparative?
"Worser" or "more worse" would be a double comparative.
And "more worser" a triple comparative, non?
:faint:

And it's an absolute ****in disgrace that there aren't more threads on hibs.net about the Oxford Comma.

Can I be the first to say "Who gives a ***** about an Oxford Comma?" ?

Removed
12-08-2011, 04:28 PM
Can I be the first to say "Who gives a ***** about an Oxford Comma?" ? But is an oxford comma any different to any other type of comma :confused: Just don't want to upset anyone although we have established that Cropley doesn't give a ***** :greengrin

CropleyWasGod
12-08-2011, 04:30 PM
But is an oxford comma any different to any other type of comma :confused: Just don't want to upset anyone although we have established that Cropley doesn't give a ***** :greengrin

Not that I give a *****, but:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma

eg. Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull, and Ormond.

The Oxford Comma is playing just outside the inside-left.

As opposed to:-

Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull and Ormond.

The Oxford Comma has been dropped.

Removed
12-08-2011, 04:40 PM
Not that I give a *****, but:-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_commaeg. Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull, and Ormond.The Oxford Comma is playing just outside the inside-left.As opposed to:-Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull and Ormond.The Oxford Comma has been dropped. :greengrin

lapsedhibee
12-08-2011, 04:46 PM
Not that I give a *****, but:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_comma

eg. Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull, and Ormond.

The Oxford Comma is playing just outside the inside-left.

As opposed to:-

Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull and Ormond.

The Oxford Comma has been dropped.

Good.

Now, firstly, no wonder the FF scored so many goals with six in the forward line (when Comma played).

But secondly, surely it would be enough to say Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull, Ormond? There would be amply sufficient enough :wink: separators in there without the and. The separator and would only be appropriate if Comma was left on the subs' bench.

--------
12-08-2011, 05:32 PM
Good summery, Nonshinyfish.



Not sure that is a double comparative.
Isn't "worse" a comparative?
"Worser" or "more worse" would be a double comparative.
And "more worser" a triple comparative, non?
:faint:

And it's an absolute ****in disgrace that there aren't more threads on hibs.net about the Oxford Comma.


AAAAAAGH!

You're right. Hoist with my own pedantry, begad.


Never mind the Oxford Comma - what about the Gorgie Colon? :devil:

CropleyWasGod
12-08-2011, 05:34 PM
Good.

Now, firstly, no wonder the FF scored so many goals with six in the forward line (when Comma played).

But secondly, surely it would be enough to say Smith, Johnstone, Reilly, Turnbull, Ormond? There would be amply sufficient enough :wink: separators in there without the and. The separator and would only be appropriate if Comma was left on the subs' bench.

It used to be the fashion to read out a team thus:-

Herriott, Brownlie and Schaedler.

Stanton, Black and Blackley,

Edwardds, O'Rourke, Gordon, Cropley and Duncan.

In other words, let's tell the other team we're playing 2-3-5...

lapsedhibee
12-08-2011, 06:23 PM
It used to be the fashion to read out a team thus:-

Herriott, Brownlie and Schaedler.

Stanton, Black and Blackley,

Edwardds, O'Rourke, Gordon, Cropley and Duncan.

In other words, let's tell the other team we're playing 2-3-5...

Ah yes. Had forgotten that. But weren't there also three semi-colons in that mix? 1;2;3;O'Leary.

Dinkydoo
12-08-2011, 06:40 PM
Never mind the Oxford Comma - what about the Gorgie Colon? :devil:

:top marks:

nonshinyfinish
12-08-2011, 09:38 PM
Good summery, Nonshinyfish.

I wouldn't say it's been summery, but it has been well f***ing humid.

nonshinyfinish
12-08-2011, 10:40 PM
'Irregardless'

Are you f****** kidding me?

Lucius Apuleius
13-08-2011, 09:35 AM
It used to be the fashion to read out a team thus:-

Herriott, Brownlie and Schaedler.

Stanton, Black and Blackley,

Edwardds, O'Rourke, Gordon, Cropley and Duncan.


In other words, let's tell the other team we're playing 2-3-5...




The very thought brings a tear to the eye.

--------
13-08-2011, 11:11 AM
It used to be the fashion to read out a team thus:-

Herriott, Brownlie and Schaedler.

Stanton, Black and Blackley,

Edwardds, O'Rourke, Gordon, Cropley and Duncan.

In other words, let's tell the other team we're playing 2-3-5...


Do you by any chance remember the 'Newman' family - I can't tell you how many lads from that family played for Hibs Reserves in the old days. There was also a family called 'Trialist', and another with the surname 'Other' - funny thing, all the boys from that family had the initials 'A.N.'

So you could have a team like this - Newman; Trialist and Trialist; Newman, Newman, and A N Other; Newman, Trialist, Trialist, Newman and Trialist. Substitute: A N Other.

Whatever happened to these lads, I wonder? :confused:

lapsedhibee
13-08-2011, 12:56 PM
Do you by any chance remember the 'Newman' family - I can't tell you how many lads from that family played for Hibs Reserves in the old days. There was also a family called 'Trialist', and another with the surname 'Other' - funny thing, all the boys from that family had the initials 'A.N.'

So you could have a team like this - Newman; Trialist and Trialist; Newman, Newman, and A N Other; Newman, Trialist, Trialist, Newman and Trialist. Substitute: A N Other.

Whatever happened to these lads, I wonder? :confused:

John - mathematician
Paul - salad dresser
Arthur - Shteve's voice coach

Not sure about the other two.

--------
13-08-2011, 01:20 PM
John - mathematician
Paul - salad dresser
Arthur - Shteve's voice coach

Not sure about the other two.


I know that their great-great-grandad, John Henry Newman, was a Cardinal...

And I believe that Randy's now in show-business.

Campbell Newman went into politics in Australia: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/newman-vows-to-help-farmers-in-csg-fight-20110813-1irnl.html

s.a.m
13-08-2011, 02:51 PM
Has anyone read Guy Deutscher's 'The Unfolding of Language'? It's a really interesting and accessible look at the evolution of language, and tackles a few of the issues metioned here. Worth a read.

Personally, I'm annoyed in a way that's beyond rational by the expression "24/7". And if anyone is setting up a club for apostrophe error vigilantes, you know where to find me.:wink:

lapsedhibee
13-08-2011, 03:31 PM
Has anyone read Guy Deutscher's 'The Unfolding of Language'? It's a really interesting and accessible look at the evolution of language, and tackles a few of the issues metioned here. Worth a read.

Personally, I'm annoyed in a way that's beyond rational by the expression "24/7". And if anyone is setting up a club for apostrophe error vigilantes, you know where to find me.:wink:

I don't mind people who miss out apostrophes, but I'm all for setting up a club against missing out the letter n. You up for it? :wink:

s.a.m
13-08-2011, 04:23 PM
I don't mind people who miss out apostrophes, but I'm all for setting up a club against missing out the letter n. You up for it? :wink:

I'm away to put my hair shirt on.:greengrin

Hiber-nation
13-08-2011, 05:35 PM
This year I have heard the Prime Minister and the First Minister say they are going to "try and" do something. :grr:

If I had written "try and" instead of "try to" when I was in P6 the teacher would have strung me up :greengrin

lapsedhibee
13-08-2011, 07:28 PM
Have several times now heard BBC radio newsreader/announcers get their singulars and plurals muxed ip.

As in "Postponement of several fixtures were necessary last week".

This habit of making grammatical mistakes are starting to annoy me.

Jim44
13-08-2011, 07:56 PM
I definitely hate the use of definately but surely shirley annoys me more.

nonshinyfinish
14-08-2011, 09:00 AM
I definitely hate the use of definately but surely shirley annoys me more.

I assume that most of the posters who write 'surely' as 'shirley' are doing so in reference to the outstanding film 'Airplane!'.