• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Several days until I attend my next meeting of Pedants Anonymous

inkpenspur said:
While we're on it then.... Glenn Hoddle/Andy Townsend drive me mad when they refer to 'the' Gerrards, 'the' Rooneys, and 'the' Lampards of the world. Are there several Steven Gerrards or just the one? Grrrrr
Click to expand...

If he's suggesting 'Gerrard' as a player type, then it's a collective noun. Players who fulfil certain criteria would qualify to be a part of this group. The criteria would be taken from the skill set of the definite article.

As such the word 'Gerrards' could be deemed to be an appropriate term, even if there is just one player with the actual name.
 
Rumour & innuendo.

You never get rumour by itself, it always has to be rumour AND innuendo.

They should just make a new word - rumounnendo.
 
Superted said:
Rumour & innuendo.

You never get rumour by itself, it always has to be rumour AND innuendo.

They should just make a new word - rumounnendo.
Click to expand...


Not sure about that squire.

I could deliver a glib innuendo about, say, the fact that my neighbour's wife has cottage cheese thighs and cankles and it most certainly might not be a rumour, but a truth!





Innuendo...an allusive or oblique remark or hint, typically a suggestive or disparaging one.


Rumour...a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth.
 
Seedy Ron said:
I have to think long and hard about effect/affect, I think the basic rule is affect is most commonly used as a verb, and effect as a noun.
Click to expand...

Correct.

It is possible to use "effect" as a verb, though, as in to "effect a change" - put a change into effect.

Iterate/reiterate: I had no idea these two were more or less the same, but according to dictionary definitions on t'internet, they are. An iteration is something like a part of a process that keeps repeating, while reiteration is to repeat something previously iterated.

Here is a similar puzzler: flammable and inflammable.

I wonder why we have two words meaning the same thing but which sound like they should be opposites?
 
Roland Beurre said:
Correct.

It is possible to use "effect" as a verb, though, as in to "effect a change" - put a change into effect.

Iterate/reiterate: I had no idea these two were more or less the same, but according to dictionary definitions on t'internet, they are. An iteration is something like a part of a process that keeps repeating, while reiteration is to repeat something previously iterated.

Here is a similar puzzler: flammable and inflammable.

I wonder why we have two words meaning the same thing but which sound like they should be opposites?
Click to expand...


Another fantastic question. What a thread this is Roland. Anyway, I researched your question and could only find some guff about one causing 'less confusion' than the other.
 
Roland, I think the morale of this story is to not let these things bring down your moral :( :)
 
thfcsteff said:
Not sure about that squire.

.
Click to expand...

My point (not well made, granted) was I only ever hear someone talk about rumour AND innuendo.

I know they are two separate words with different meanings but people use them interchangeably.

Once you hear it in an interview, you'll pick it up all the time.
 
Superted said:
My point (not well made, granted) was I only ever hear someone talk about rumour AND innuendo.

I know they are two separate words with different meanings but people use them interchangeably.

Once you hear it in an interview, you'll pick it up all the time.
Click to expand...

Agreed mate.
 
Has anyone else found that the word 'around' is suddenly being ridicluously overused? In place of 'in relation to' and things of that nature? I don't know if it's just the sector I work in, but it's starting to **** me off!
 
Commentator on the Winter Olympics saying "dissects" when he means "bisects".

I really hate it when broadcasters / journos get the English language wrong.
 
braineclipse said:
As a sidenote, English is my second language. I've learned it in part by making tons of mistakes that people have then corrected. If yourself Roland, or anyone else, spot grammatical mistakes in something I write I will actually appreciate being corrected. So if you're struggling to cope and spot a mistake by me, just lay into me. I won't mind.
Click to expand...

Well, seeing as you mentioned it ...

The term is "gilt-edged", not "guilt-edged". It comes from the ornate gilding that used to be on UK government bond certificates which to this day are known as "gilts". As we know, nothing in the world is safer than the Bank of England (cough) and so "gilt-edged securities" come with the highest backing and trust rating.

Another phrase that people sometimes have trouble with (though I have not seen BrainEclipse get this one wrong) is the term "top drawer", meaning of the highest quality. A lot of people mistakenly use the term "top draw".

I believe "top drawer" is a term derived from bedroom furniture, i.e. the top drawer is where a person keeps his or her "Sunday best" clothes. I get this confused with the "bottom drawer", which is where a spinster keeps her trousseau. If you don't know what a spinster is, look it up on DuckDuckGo.com or blekko.com.

I used to work with a guy who said a player on his Sunday League footie team was always boasting of having "opened up the bottom drawer", by which I think he meant performing a piece of skill that most people thought the exponent had long lost the ability to perform. No idea where that comes from, but it is evocative.
 
Another oddity I hear becoming more prevalent occurs in interviews, or it seems when anyone is explaining anything, that people now always start a sentence with 'so'. I think this is an extension of the 'right?', 'yeah?', and 'you know what I mean?' at the end of the sentence to reinforce what is usually opinion rather than fact.

For example: 'So, the sky, yeah, is green, right, with spots, yeah; you know what I mean?' Um, no, I don't, and repeating positive statements doesn't make something any more or less accurate.

Most annoying. Grrrr!
 
Making up new words on the spot! Earlier this week I heard the commentator defending his lack of impartiality at the Olympics when GB won the women's snowboard Bronze... he talked about his loss of 'professionality!'

Maybe a pre-requisite of becoming a BBC commentator should be a basic knowledge of the ****ing English Language???
 
What is it with foreign managers and their "moments"? They all seem to do it.

Do you think it will catch on with British managers, and we'll hear them saying "we were in a good moment", rather than "we were playing well"?
 
Roland Beurre said:
What is it with foreign managers and their "moments"? They all seem to do it.

Do you think it will catch on with British managers, and we'll hear them saying "we were in a good moment", rather than "we were playing well"?
Click to expand...

I quite like the idiosyncrasies of 'foreign' English.

I have a lot of colleagues for whom English is a second language and they all tend to use 'since' incorrectly. For example, they would say something like 'I have been here since 2 hours' or 'I worked for the company since two years'.

Always raises a fond smile!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back