I know you can be overwhelmed, and that you can be underwhelmed, but can you ever just be whelmed?
I am a teenage girl from the 90s.
Likewise, can you be plussed? Or sheveled? Or ebriated?
Also, legitimate question, why do the rules of grammar and syntax state that you can't start a sentence with the word, "But," when you can start a sentence with word, "However," as they mean exactly the same thing?
"but" is a coordinating conjunction and "however" is a transition.
Words are cool. "Nice" used to be an insult now it's a compliment. The meaning of "bad" changed with African American culture to mean "good"--that's "badass". "Common sense" was also an insult (meaning to have sense of the commoners) but now seems to be a complement (wish this one didn't change).
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
"Do you want to have sex with my wife?! Because I would be amenable to that!"
"....uh"
"What? Why you lookin' so nonplussed?"
"I wasn't sure if you knew what 'amenable' meant. Until you followed it up with 'nonplussed.'"
Bout ye, Language Thread? What's the craic? A weean was yapping 'cause she was foundered, so I said "Houl yer whisht!" and dandered over to the shop and had a hoke for Soda Farls. They didn't have any! Their bakes were spouting feckin gobshite about being closed at me lugs. So I said "What are yous on about? Shut yer gobs!" The eejits made me want to boke. I'm totally scunnered at them! Me plans are totally banjaxed today.[/Mid Ulster English]
If you weren't aware, I enjoy my local dialect. :P
Yer man at the shop? What a muppet. Muppets, the lot.
I'm probably one of the few people who enjoys My Fair Lady, not because of the romance or the music, but because of Henry Higgins and his mastery of British dialects.
I was reading this thread and thinking I don't really like any specific words except for swear-words. Especially new swearwords or mixes. Fuck-knuckle. Cunt-bucket. John Cooper Clarke's poem, 'Twat'.
But then I realised I do like metalanguage: synecdoche, metonymy, ergative, trochee, dactyl, bilabial plosive, velar fricative, acceptability, deixis...
I really love finding that there's a technical term for an aspect of language that I've seen but never isolated before. And once I learn the term, I see it all the time.
"but" is a coordinating conjunction and "however" is a transition.
So almost everyone uses "but" wrongly, even within sentences?
No, even within the 'rules' but is usually used fine. Conjunctions link 2 sentences together to make one long sentence, linkers/transitions connect two sentences but still leave them as 2 sentences.
"but" is a coordinating conjunction and "however" is a transition.
So almost everyone uses "but" wrongly, even within sentences?
Yeah, informally. Would be interesting to trace some sort of history because it's one of those rules that has changed quite a bit. Even in creative writing "but" and the rest like them are supposed to be reserved to add emphasis when used at the beginning of the sentence. But even that has been changing.
This is my own guessing, but I think one shouldn't begin a sentence with "but" (or the other coordinating conjunctions--so, and, nor, yet, for, or) because it's unnecessary. If a person wants to link two sentences with "but", then link the two sentences with a comma and the word (George ran up the stairs, but the dog didn't follow him). The period creates an additional pause, disconnect, from the connection. Who knows though.
Yeah, words. "Awful" is a good one too. The term went from meaning to inspire "Awe", full of "Awe", to something terrible. Even as recent as Moby Dick the term "Awful" meant something that fills another with a sense of awe, not necessarily a good or bad thing, so when modern readers come across the passage where the waves are discussed as "awful", they might think of huge, treacherous waves pounding the boat, which wasn't necessarily how Melville would have thought of the word.
And, as I mentioned, those 4 vowels do nothing. They just hang around because Q is a fun letter. Queue is an awesome word.
I'm a fan of expanding ones vocabulary. I noticed after studying for the GRE that I'd watch TV shows and movies (particularly Joss Whedon stuff) and catch a bunch of words that I had just learned that I had just ignored before.
I know you can be overwhelmed, and that you can be underwhelmed, but can you ever just be whelmed?
I am a teenage girl from the 90s.
Likewise, can you be plussed? Or sheveled? Or ebriated?
Also, legitimate question, why do the rules of grammar and syntax state that you can't start a sentence with the word, "But," when you can start a sentence with word, "However," as they mean exactly the same thing?
If something is palpable, can you palp it?
Can you funge that which is fungible, tange that which is tangible, and formid whatever is formidable?
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
When I was in my American English class, I learned a new definition. The official term for inserting one word inside of another word is called an "in-fix." Most of the time, this occurs with swear words.
In-fucking-credible. The fucking is an in-fix.
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Can you funge that which is fungible, tange that which is tangible, and formid whatever is formidable?
With regards to at least "palpable," the verb there is "palpate," which often comes up in medical terminology quite often. However, that should indicate that the adjective form would be "palpatable," and that's dead wrong.
Which leads me to a huge pet peeve of mine: when people say "orientate" or "orientated."
0
Options
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Suffixes and prefixes usually come from patterns in other languages, and those languages are usually latinate ones.
French often has adjectives ending in 'able' so we decided in English you could make adjectives by adding 'able'. But some words use an English word+able (e.g. fuckable) and some words are loan-words from the French, with no verb root, e.g. formidable.
I figure I could take a bear.
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
Also, legitimate question, why do the rules of grammar and syntax state that you can't start a sentence with the word, "But," when you can start a sentence with word, "However," as they mean exactly the same thing?
They don't. It's an old-fashioned usage prescription that was wrong even 100 years ago. Ernest Gowers would be an example of somebody who recognised this - Kinglsey Amis as well, in the King's English.
Can you funge that which is fungible, tange that which is tangible, and formid whatever is formidable?
With regards to at least "palpable," the verb there is "palpate," which often comes up in medical terminology quite often. However, that should indicate that the adjective form would be "palpatable," and that's dead wrong.
Which leads me to a huge pet peeve of mine: when people say "orientate" or "orientated."
I have a pet peeve with people saying something is "addicting" versus "addictive." -Ing is a verb suffix and would imply that the object itself was taking action, when in fact, it is the person taking action, therefore the -ive suffix is the correct one.
Example: "These cookies are addicting." The cookies themselves aren't doing anything. They are inanimate objects. The literal verb is "are" and the implied verb is "eating."
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I once heard a person use the word "revenged" in a non-ironic context.
Apparently, this a real word. Though I suggest it and "avenged" fight to the death in a Thunderdome-type scenario, leaving us with just the one option.
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Two things that make me feel I have grown as a person in the past few years:
-learning the difference between "use" and "utilize"
-learning when to use "because" and not "since"
When I was in my American English class, I learned a new definition. The official term for inserting one word inside of another word is called an "in-fix." Most of the time, this occurs with swear words.
In-fucking-credible. The fucking is an in-fix.
I could spend hours discussing portmanteaux.
Edit: Also Hugh Laurie makes far too perfect a fop and/or upper class twit.
"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
Yeah, words. "Awful" is a good one too. The term went from meaning to inspire "Awe", full of "Awe", to something terrible. Even as recent as Moby Dick the term "Awful" meant something that fills another with a sense of awe, not necessarily a good or bad thing, so when modern readers come across the passage where the waves are discussed as "awful", they might think of huge, treacherous waves pounding the boat, which wasn't necessarily how Melville would have thought of the word.
"Mean", the adjective, is a fairly interesting one as well. It was more or less equivalent to the arithmetic "mean" i.e. common, and eventually everyone was like "well, everyone sucks, so if something's mean then it's bad."
Posts
Likewise, can you be plussed? Or sheveled? Or ebriated?
Also, legitimate question, why do the rules of grammar and syntax state that you can't start a sentence with the word, "But," when you can start a sentence with word, "However," as they mean exactly the same thing?
Words are cool. "Nice" used to be an insult now it's a compliment. The meaning of "bad" changed with African American culture to mean "good"--that's "badass". "Common sense" was also an insult (meaning to have sense of the commoners) but now seems to be a complement (wish this one didn't change).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-BAUG97gZo
queue. Only 5-letter word with 4 vowels!
"....uh"
"What? Why you lookin' so nonplussed?"
"I wasn't sure if you knew what 'amenable' meant. Until you followed it up with 'nonplussed.'"
So almost everyone uses "but" wrongly, even within sentences?
Actually, pretty much. But no one really cares outside of academics because, like you said everyone is doing it.
Yer man at the shop? What a muppet. Muppets, the lot.
But then I realised I do like metalanguage: synecdoche, metonymy, ergative, trochee, dactyl, bilabial plosive, velar fricative, acceptability, deixis...
I really love finding that there's a technical term for an aspect of language that I've seen but never isolated before. And once I learn the term, I see it all the time.
No, even within the 'rules' but is usually used fine. Conjunctions link 2 sentences together to make one long sentence, linkers/transitions connect two sentences but still leave them as 2 sentences.
But fuck grammar. Seriously. Ugh.
Yeah, informally. Would be interesting to trace some sort of history because it's one of those rules that has changed quite a bit. Even in creative writing "but" and the rest like them are supposed to be reserved to add emphasis when used at the beginning of the sentence. But even that has been changing.
This is my own guessing, but I think one shouldn't begin a sentence with "but" (or the other coordinating conjunctions--so, and, nor, yet, for, or) because it's unnecessary. If a person wants to link two sentences with "but", then link the two sentences with a comma and the word (George ran up the stairs, but the dog didn't follow him). The period creates an additional pause, disconnect, from the connection. Who knows though.
Yeah, words. "Awful" is a good one too. The term went from meaning to inspire "Awe", full of "Awe", to something terrible. Even as recent as Moby Dick the term "Awful" meant something that fills another with a sense of awe, not necessarily a good or bad thing, so when modern readers come across the passage where the waves are discussed as "awful", they might think of huge, treacherous waves pounding the boat, which wasn't necessarily how Melville would have thought of the word.
And, as I mentioned, those 4 vowels do nothing. They just hang around because Q is a fun letter. Queue is an awesome word.
I'm a fan of expanding ones vocabulary. I noticed after studying for the GRE that I'd watch TV shows and movies (particularly Joss Whedon stuff) and catch a bunch of words that I had just learned that I had just ignored before.
If something is palpable, can you palp it?
Can you funge that which is fungible, tange that which is tangible, and formid whatever is formidable?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
In-fucking-credible. The fucking is an in-fix.
With regards to at least "palpable," the verb there is "palpate," which often comes up in medical terminology quite often. However, that should indicate that the adjective form would be "palpatable," and that's dead wrong.
Which leads me to a huge pet peeve of mine: when people say "orientate" or "orientated."
French often has adjectives ending in 'able' so we decided in English you could make adjectives by adding 'able'. But some words use an English word+able (e.g. fuckable) and some words are loan-words from the French, with no verb root, e.g. formidable.
They don't. It's an old-fashioned usage prescription that was wrong even 100 years ago. Ernest Gowers would be an example of somebody who recognised this - Kinglsey Amis as well, in the King's English.
I have a pet peeve with people saying something is "addicting" versus "addictive." -Ing is a verb suffix and would imply that the object itself was taking action, when in fact, it is the person taking action, therefore the -ive suffix is the correct one.
Example: "These cookies are addicting." The cookies themselves aren't doing anything. They are inanimate objects. The literal verb is "are" and the implied verb is "eating."
Apparently, this a real word. Though I suggest it and "avenged" fight to the death in a Thunderdome-type scenario, leaving us with just the one option.
-learning the difference between "use" and "utilize"
-learning when to use "because" and not "since"
i prefer just to never use it, ever
99.9999% of times you can replace it with use with no loss of anything
Indeed.
It makes me feel like I'm lecturing the Robot Devil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2krXq8fw90
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
I could spend hours discussing portmanteaux.
Edit: Also Hugh Laurie makes far too perfect a fop and/or upper class twit.
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqRkkVQ6OSE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnHv7NGWb0k
A Bit of Fry and Laurie, a fantastic sketch show Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry made back in the day.
Though she does dislike tea and Dr. Who, so I have suspicions about her authenticity.
Better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtaPaQwSQPA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFyY2mK8pxk
if u gonna go pedant, go octopodes or bust