ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

I don't think 'ignore' meant 'nor' cos in the original use, which I doctored, the second thing was a subset of the first thing. like 'didn't expect to be able to afford a car, ignore a BMW'

"while" for "until" certainly common in Manchester too

I noticed an odd difference usage between me (southern UK) and my mother-in-law (Northwestern Illinois) recently - she seems to use "anymore" the way I'd use "these days" while I would only use it to mean a subset of "these days" these days where something has been lost / changed.

I could say "it's not cheap here anymore", and we would both find that totally standard use.
She could say "it's expensive here anymore" (or similar) and that sounds totally odd to me, though obviously I can get the drift fairly easily.

dublin has the "love" thing in the inner city too. not so often from men but funny when like a 12-year-old girl in a newsagent calls you "love" in a way inherited from an older relative.

I remember my mam asking the young lad in the petrol station for "£10 worth please, love." "I'm not your bleedin' love," was the answer.

To be clear, this was back in the days of full-service petrol stations. He was not a prostitute.

that you know of

Fair point.

Similar to "while" above: on my visits to Vermont, I used to hear people say e.g. "quarter of [the hour]" in place of "quarter to." I found it cute & quaint. Similarly, the English usage of "at the weekend" vs. "on the weekend."

Is that very regional? I've heard "quarter of" plenty often. Probably not as often as "quarter to," but still plenty. Never been to Vermont, BTW, my dialect is Midwestern / Midatlantic.

I thought "quarter of" was a common North American usage

I'd never heard "quarter of" before visiting VT. I'm Canadian; maybe that's it.

I'm sure I've heard it in Canada too!

saw on telly the following: "Did you trust him?" "Implicitly."

Does 'implicitly' actually imply a degree of trust in this way? It seems an odd word to use. (I know it's a common usage, but not really thought about it in this sense before).

I think it's fine?

One accepted use of "implicit" is "without doubt or reserve". It derives from the concept that what is implicit is also inseparable from the thing in view. So, an implicit trust would be a trust that is bound to the very essence of the person (or object).

xp dunno, if you read it literally, it sort of implies 'I trusted him but actually I hadn't really questioned whether I should'.

Aimless, yes I think that's how I've always read it (as 'unreservedly'). Just seemed an odd answer esp as then explicitly stating the trust.

ugly house

sad tidings

conrad haha yep. wasn't watching but mr kinder picked up on it.

I had the same reaction

on the basis of the verb, 'to wife':

do you think it should be 'wifing' or 'wifeing'?

Wifing. Would you write "knifeing" or "knifing"?

(Though I would be tempted by "wiving." We've come to wive it wealthily in Padua.)

To splice = splicing. To drive = driving. To brine = brining.

just don't make being a wife into a verb

^^

i am not opposed to verbing nouns in general but this one is:
* problematic
* not a natural fit for neologism since no 1 clear verb form emerges as the logical (comprehensible) one
* the variations listed above are incomprehensible and if no one knows what it means, don't try to force-invent a word that didn't ask to be invented

I was busy wifing (using wifi?)
I was busy wiving (dwiving?)
I was busy wifeing (wifeing = ???)

Good points LL.

Pro tip: husbandry and husbanding are different things.

(cf. Tom Lehrer: "he majored in animal husbandry... until they caught him at it one day."

Is "wifing" meant to be like "adulting"? Was not aware.

purely on the spelling question, i thiiiiiiiiink the only exceptions* to the rule that you drop the e for -ing are words where the e modifies a vowel: viz you don't drop the e with seeing or shoeing or -- treating y as a vowel -- eyeing

when adding e.g. -able you always need the e if it's modifying a consonant: viz changeable -- the a doesn't soften the g so you need the e

compare forcible: since the i softens the c you don;t need the e as well

*tbh this is always a risky thing to claim w/english, as it's an unusually irregular language but i certainly can't think of any

fwiw SOED has wifish (for "having the characteristics of a wife", 1616) rather than wivish

Anyways wiving means marrying a woman, not being a wife, of course

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/wifed

and more importantly:
https://www.anagrammer.com/scrabble/wifed

lol but also:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wive

and:
https://www.anagrammer.com/scrabble/wived

SOED also agrees with YMP on the verb form: to wive, meaning to be a wife (rare), to become a wife (obs. or arch.), furnish with a wife (obs. or arch.), or to take as a wife (presumably not obs. or arch. or even rare, tho it seems p rare to me)

don't try to force-invent a word that didn't ask to be invented

too late, done been did, we're just looking to mind the drift therefrom

ye m p otm

ymp otm. wiving is pretty ancient now, replaced by "taking to wife", which is also quite archaic and disused. nb: "swiving" was much more fun.

Motherfuckers be like "but what type of niggas will wife you?"

My type of niggas will wife me! The type of niggas that like bitches that pop off and suck dick all day motherfucking long bitch

Thanks to all my followers that always defended me, y'all my God brothers and God sisters, I would dare jump in your fight, I would dare jump in your fight. Now what's poppin?

i'm finally reading The Last Samurai and jesus does that book make me feel dumb. i mean it's about geniuses and i am not one of those but i really don't know much about much. is it too late in life to learn grammar rules or learn latin?

i am never using proper punctuation on this thread.

ALSO i love the lack of punctuation in that book! what a cool book.

i mean CASE ENDINGS i think i knew what that was but i looked it up and that just starts me on a rocky road through terminology i have no idea about.

THE VOCATIVE CASE. i dunno maybe its too late for me.

get yr head round finnish cases and the rest is easy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_noun_cases#Finnish_cases

They passed on their message with(using) the houses they built.

finns don't see gender. the language of the future!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRNAOBsXkAA4EP6.jpg

otm

are there any good reasons to use he's got rather than he has?

stylistically, it lends a colloquial informality to whatever is being written.

"she has the look" - prince

you know this is the first time I've read the opening post in this thread and it's a real doozy

you mean its a real doozy

it's a well established usage: shakespeare used it, johnson approves it, fowler quotes someone i haven't heard of calling it "not a real error but a counterfeit invented by schoolmasters"

which last i think paradoxically explains and perhaps validates the sense that it's more informal or colloquial

the other reason for choosing one over the other is, not rhythm exactly, since they're interchangeable in terms of syllables, but the sense of flow or of choppiness you need at that point

(either is fine, in other words: it's up to you)

sorry: xps to got vs have

fair. it's a tic of an otherwise terrible writer of my acquaintance and i wanted to hate it as well

tracer hand's recasting cracking me up