I Saw This and Thought of You

[Mindy]

Us. We. Ourselves.
Whatever.

Grammar

[pshrynk]

Oh, I love this!

[RickyMaveety]

Well, with respect to #18 (or a portion of it), I can tell them where the "s" in vs. went. It was a casualty of modern "legal style" thanks to the court system.

The various state and federal courts, as a group, set the appropriate citation styles for legal writing. And, somewhere in there, someone decided to drop that "s." I have no idea what it did to piss them off .... but the correct citation style has (for many years now) been "Plaintiff v. Defendant."

And, I would guess that this has now leaked over into common usage.

Hey ... these things happen.

[Taylor514ce]

Because, spoken, it's quicker to say "Taylor Vee Google" than "Taylor versus Google".

Brevity ftw!

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Taylor514ce

Because, spoken, it's quicker to say "Taylor Vee Google" than "Taylor versus Google".

Brevity ftw!

(please tell me the don't actually pronounce that "Taylor Vee Google")

[RickyMaveety]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

(please tell me the don't actually pronounce that "Taylor Vee Google")

Sorry, but yes ... that's exactly what they say. Sad, no??

[zelda_pinwheel]

i can only sigh and shake my head in consternation at this news. truly, the world is in a sorry state.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Winston Churchill is (perhaps incorrectly) attributed with saying, when confronted with the rule about not ending a sentence with a preposition: "This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put."

I love that one.

[Mindy]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

(please tell me the don't actually pronounce that "Taylor Vee Google")

Originally Posted by RickyMaveety

Sorry, but yes ... that's exactly what they say. Sad, no??

In 'Legal System & Method' class we were taught that regardless of whether it was written as v. or vs. you always said 'against'.
Presumably anything else was just bad form.

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Mindy

In 'Legal System & Method' class we were taught that regardless of whether it was written as v. or vs. you always said 'against'.
Presumably anything else was just bad form.

wow, my latin skills are clearly more inadequate than i even realized (which is saying a lot). i never would have guessed that the pronunciation of "versus" is "against".

[pshrynk]

Only in Great Britain, Canada, and Australia, where they can't spell anything right. Actually, they spell anything right, but get it all wrong on plow, check, humor, and French Fries.

[Elsi]

1. The one that really annoys me is how people suddenly seem to confuse "have" and "of", as in: "I could of learnt how to write properly." There's no excuse for it!

I challenge anyone to discern the difference between "I could've" and "I could of" when hearing it. The only fair complaint is if it's written [s]wrong[/s] wrongly.

18. The usage that I find particularly irritating is that of a single noun with a plural verb, for example: "the team are happy with their victory", or "management have congratulated the workforce on the recent increase in productivity". Team is a singular noun so it should read "the team IS happy..." or "the team members ARE happy", the same applies "management HAS congratulated..."

I'd bet that the submitter of this one has been listening to (or reading) American rather than English. In school (late 1960s) we were taught the rule that a collective noun takes a plural verb. I asked for an example and the teacher could not come up with one. Twenty years later, I travel to England, pick up a copy of The Times and see the rule illustrated, "Parliament are ..."


Edit -- hmmm... looks like this site doesn't support markup for a strike-thru.

[Elsi]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

(please tell me the don't actually pronounce that "Taylor Vee Google")

Originally Posted by RickyMaveety

Sorry, but yes ... that's exactly what they say. Sad, no??

And has been said that way for a long time. I remember hearing "Roe v Wade" from the beginning.

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Elsi

I challenge anyone to discern the difference between "I could've" and "I could of" when hearing it. The only fair complaint is if it's written [s]wrong[/s] wrongly.

well, i admit that one drives me crazy too (when written)... i agree with you that they sound alike, but "could of" makes no sense !! if you stop and think about it for one second you realize that it's completely meaningless. whereas "could *have*"...

then again i get very irritated about things that most people would consider trivial if they noticed them at all, like using "mythical" when you mean "legendary" (they're not the same !!!!!). or "travesty" for "tragedy" (again, not the same !!!! arg !!!!).

also, i've noticed lately a lot of people saying "forbid from (doing something)". this is a sincere question, but is that correct ? shouldn't it be "forbid to (do something)" or "forbid (something, which could be a gerund : "forbid smoking)" ? where did this "forbid from doing" come from all of a sudden ???

excuse me while i go take a deep breath and maybe have a glass of cold water.

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Elsi

Edit -- hmmm... looks like this site doesn't support markup for a strike-thru.

yes it does it's [ strike ]