"The strength and weakness of the book are in its dream-like quality."
Why does the "are" in this sentence jar with me?
― Alba, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 11:40 (4 years ago) Permalink
"My bat and my cap are in the car" sounds fine. I don't know.
I guess I'd write:
"The book's dream-like quality is its strength and its weakness." instead
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 11:46 (4 years ago) Permalink
The "in" is superfluous.
― Jarlrmai, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 11:55 (4 years ago) Permalink
Two things "are" one thing, though?
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 12:01 (4 years ago) Permalink
yes, but one thing, in this case, is two things! tracer, i was about to post your exact alternative sentence.
― CharlieNo4, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 12:24 (4 years ago) Permalink
It implies the strength is the weakness? I dunno.
― Autumn Almanac, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 22:53 (4 years ago) Permalink
The 1930s were a time of racism division.
or
The 1930s was a time of racism division.
?
― Alba, Thursday, 3 July 2008 15:23 (4 years ago) Permalink
Neither???
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 3 July 2008 15:23 (4 years ago) Permalink
The 1930s WERE a time of RACIAL division.
― Tracer Hand, Thursday, 3 July 2008 15:24 (4 years ago) Permalink
Though probably not in Sweden.
The 1930s were a time of racism and division.
― CharlieNo4, Thursday, 3 July 2008 15:26 (4 years ago) Permalink
Sorry - was slotting in other words to replace the real ones and cocked up.
― Alba, Thursday, 3 July 2008 15:27 (4 years ago) Permalink
(ie forget about racial and racism. It's just the was/were thing.)
1930s = plural decade = singular
this happens a lot. it's ok.
― CharlieNo4, Thursday, 3 July 2008 15:31 (4 years ago) Permalink
While I do consider myself a Grammar Fiend, I am a little bit confused over the usage of "its" and "it's".
o_O
― jhøshea, Thursday, 3 July 2008 16:47 (4 years ago) Permalink
haha yeah i know, that's like the #1 question in the Are You a Grammar Fiend pass/fail test
― rrrobyn, Thursday, 3 July 2008 17:19 (4 years ago) Permalink
That's because its a stupid test.
― Autumn Almanac, Thursday, 3 July 2008 22:44 (4 years ago) Permalink
HAH I typed 'it's' correctly by habit and had to go back and change it.
― Autumn Almanac, Thursday, 3 July 2008 22:45 (4 years ago) Permalink
Another disagreement with my French Canadian supervisor. Please pick one:
"The odds are against us demonstrating..."
"The odds are against us to demonstrate..."
― caek, Saturday, 5 July 2008 16:07 (4 years ago) Permalink
numba one
― G00blar, Saturday, 5 July 2008 16:35 (4 years ago) Permalink
I don't think the odds are actually against 'us'. They're against our having success in demonstrating something.
― G00blar, Saturday, 5 July 2008 16:36 (4 years ago) Permalink
the odds against OUR demonstrating
― Zelda Zonk, Saturday, 5 July 2008 16:45 (4 years ago) Permalink
The odds are against us in demonstrating?
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 5 July 2008 21:14 (4 years ago) Permalink
Zelda OTM.
― jaymc, Sunday, 6 July 2008 02:17 (4 years ago) Permalink
From the NYTimes Estelle Getty obit:
In the show, Sophia was the mother of Dorothy Zbornak, played by Bea Arthur who, in real life, was older than Ms. Getty.
Not exactly a copyeditor and grammar fiend question, but: am I wrong to think that the phrase 'in real life' is one of those casual, almost childish, expressions that shouldn't see their way into print?
― G00blar, Wednesday, 23 July 2008 16:32 (4 years ago) Permalink
Iit's certainly redundant there. Was that writer paid by the word?
― Autumn Almanac, Thursday, 24 July 2008 03:00 (4 years ago) Permalink
i don't know, i think it helps keep things clear. but i guess you could shorten it and lose a clause by just writing "who was actually older than ms. getty."
― tipsy mothra, Thursday, 24 July 2008 04:03 (4 years ago) Permalink
bea > estela
― Autumn Almanac, Thursday, 24 July 2008 04:14 (4 years ago) Permalink
http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/chi-typo-guys-0521may21,0,6902266.story
Insufferable douches or fearless crusaders or, y'know, just a bit of harmless fun?
― ledge, Sunday, 3 August 2008 23:19 (4 years ago) Permalink
hello.
can it be said of someone that they are effronterous, or temeritous even. if not why not - an man of audacity is audacious, plainly.
thanks in advance.
― r|t|c, Tuesday, 19 August 2008 21:00 (4 years ago) Permalink
temericious? no.
― r|t|c, Tuesday, 19 August 2008 21:01 (4 years ago) Permalink
Imagine some marketing spiel for a company going on about "our firm, our designers, as we go forward..." for three paras, and then ending "I hope you enjoy our new brochure! (signed) Mr Head Honcho". Is the switch from "we" to "I" ok, or a bit off?
― ledge, Monday, 25 August 2008 08:29 (4 years ago) Permalink
I always thought 'typo' as in 'typographical error' referred to genuine finger-slippage or similar when typing e.g. 'teh' instead of 'the' - where you didn't mean to type what you did. Most of the examples given in this story I'd be hard pushed to call typos. Maybe the Millwaukee one seeing as they got it right one time. The rest of them would appear to be actual mistakes, e.g. not understanding how to use apostrophes. But obviously you can't actually tell for sure. Can you make such a distinction between typos and stupid mistakes?
― Not the real Village People, Monday, 25 August 2008 12:57 (4 years ago) Permalink
But a grocery store that can't spell grocery [as he encountered in California] makes you question the food they sell.
No, no it doesn't.
― libcrypt, Monday, 25 August 2008 17:01 (4 years ago) Permalink
(a) That guy in the picture looked to me like Jaymc for a second
(b) I have often dreamed of going around correcting things, actually, although to be honest it's my conviction that I'm not alone in that impulse that's prevented me from thinking it'd be that cool to be a grammar-pedant graffitist
― nabisco, Monday, 25 August 2008 17:06 (4 years ago) Permalink
(b.2) And the correcting impulse was usually just a matter of taking the train home from proofreading work and still being in proofreading mindspace and wanting to mark up every ad in the car
― nabisco, Monday, 25 August 2008 17:08 (4 years ago) Permalink
i know this is v impt, but could people stop using "schwag" for "swag"? kthxbye.
― gabbneb, Saturday, 30 August 2008 15:02 (4 years ago) Permalink
Is there a thread expressly for whinging about English language transgressions? I'm hissing like a pressure cooker.
― the usual olfactory abuse (Autumn Almanac), Wednesday, 17 September 2008 08:08 (4 years ago) Permalink
When you require an overhead activity to be undertaken, ...
^ Subjunctive mood? Or should I start the sentence again?
― You are wrong (Autumn Almanac), Friday, 19 September 2008 06:31 (4 years ago) Permalink
WAHT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?
― quincie, Friday, 19 September 2008 15:19 (4 years ago) Permalink
Wanky business talk. I think I rewrote it in the end.
― You are wrong (Autumn Almanac), Friday, 19 September 2008 21:03 (4 years ago) Permalink
Where do we stand on blog vs weblog, (noun) bloggers (noun), to blog, blogging (verb) blog post vs blog posting (noun) etc.
In a linguistically conservative economics publication.
What do the newspapers do?
I don't like blog as a verb, myself, but I'm not sure what else to use,
― Jamie T Smith, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 13:49 (4 years ago) Permalink
bloggingblog (noun) collection of articles, (verb) action of publishing an article to the blog: "I just blogged about that"
^^^ Guardian style guide.
― Raw Patrick, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 13:55 (4 years ago) Permalink
Yeah. Thanks. The Times don't even have it in theirs.
― Jamie T Smith, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 14:06 (4 years ago) Permalink
post wins vs. posting i'd think
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 14:17 (4 years ago) Permalink
I don't like blog as a verb, myself, but I'm not sure what else to use
You'd have to add words, basically, so that "he blogs about the election" becomes "he maintains a blog about the election" or "he covers the election on his blog" or similar ...
I think the issue with this isn't linguistic so much as, like, philosophical -- i.e., do you really think of blogging as a form of writing that just happens to be done on a blog, or do you think of blogging as a distinct activity that is functionally different from, e.g., "she writes about the issue on her blog." I like blogging as a verb because I think it really is a distinct activity in a distinct context, and it's nice to have a word that captures that.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 17:50 (4 years ago) Permalink
Considering 'blog' is a recently made-up word, it probably doesn't matter.
― You should be an artist, in in your shower. (Autumn Almanac), Wednesday, 24 September 2008 21:25 (4 years ago) Permalink
Cf. "journal" as a verb.
― jaymc, Wednesday, 24 September 2008 21:41 (4 years ago) Permalink
do you really think of blogging as a form of writing
no.
― synaptic knob (grimly fiendish), Wednesday, 24 September 2008 21:54 (4 years ago) Permalink
which is right?
The ___ project was conceived in the late 1980s as a “multimedia-based ___ experience,”
The ___ project was conceived of in the late 1980s as a “multimedia-based ___ experience,”
the latter seems correct but also awkward, i guess because it's in passive voice? i can't just say it was conceived, right, because it means baby-makin'?
― metametadata (n/a), Thursday, 25 September 2008 20:36 (4 years ago) Permalink