Anyway the "similar" is ye olde red herring, you could just say "like that of" and be clearer.
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:13 (sixteen years ago) link
The "of" is kind of essential to the meaning, even though nobody will care. It doesn't mean the format is similar to Popstar Idol, the whole show; it means the format is similar to the format of Popstar Idol. Hence "similar to that of."
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:18 (sixteen years ago) link
Also while on a tangent, Americans do NOT say "bored of". We say "bored WITH". Fun with prepositions!!
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:21 (sixteen years ago) link
Or maybe "bored BY", now that I think of it. But never "of".
American English differs from English English, which differs to Scottish English, which differs by Australian English, which differs through New Zealand English, which differs under Northern Irish English, which differs between Welsh English
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:28 (sixteen years ago) link
I'm sure some Americans say bored of!
― Will M., Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:29 (sixteen years ago) link
Will, are you an American? Sorry, haven't noticed...
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:30 (sixteen years ago) link
I suppose it's possible that there's some weird pocket of "bored of" in the same way that New Yorkers wait "on line", but it is deeply weird to average USian sensibilities. We do not, as a rule, say "bored of".
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:31 (sixteen years ago) link
i always just try to limit the number of prepositions in any sentence
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:32 (sixteen years ago) link
they will screw you every time
will is cdn! mtl even!
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:33 (sixteen years ago) link
J'ai ennui DE ca.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:38 (sixteen years ago) link
ca m'emmerde!! (no prepositions!)
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:41 (sixteen years ago) link
sorry, i read that as "that's my shit!"
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:43 (sixteen years ago) link
This suggests that it's not particularly British either: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000636.html
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:46 (sixteen years ago) link
prepositions are kinda the bane of my french
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:46 (sixteen years ago) link
the other bane of my french is being a lazy anglo pigdog of course
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:47 (sixteen years ago) link
Urgh I disagree! "a similar format to" strikes me as a grammar wreck. "a format similar to that of" does not.
Yeah, that's right -- I sloppily didn't even look at the rest of the sentence. My suggestion was just to use "had" in place of the other more awkward expressions.
― Eyeball Kicks, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:54 (sixteen years ago) link
I would have said "followed a format similar to".
― Alba, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:57 (sixteen years ago) link
Maybe I wouldn't have. I don't know now.
― Alba, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:58 (sixteen years ago) link
I'm having a hard time with these sentences:
1. "You are a bigger man than me." vs. 2. "You are a bigger man than I."
I saw the second written, and thought it was incorrect, but now that I think about it, I suppose that "am" is implied in the second sentence. Can anyone explain not only which sentence is better, but WHY? I am really confused as to why both a subject and an object work (albeit in different ways) within the EXACT same structure.
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:18 (sixteen years ago) link
Oh sorry I didn't respond Laurel, btw, I guess I accidentally stopped following the thread. I am Canadian, but I know several Americans. I'm sure that one of them might say bored of... but I might be thinking of myself, who is not American. Then again, I still say "on accident" instead of "by accident" which apparently REALLY bothers people (probably because it's so wrong and ugly-sounding)
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:20 (sixteen years ago) link
Will, I think only #2 is actually correct (for exactly the reason you say: "...than I am"), but everyone uses #1 colloquially so it's what you expect to hear.
― Laurel, Friday, 9 November 2007 15:24 (sixteen years ago) link
But if I said, "You are bigger than me," that would be correct, no?
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:26 (sixteen years ago) link
No. Just very, very common.
― Laurel, Friday, 9 November 2007 15:35 (sixteen years ago) link
I mean, it's acceptable in familiar/casual use, and frankly prob 92% of the population doesn't even notice or care, and using correct grammar like "...than I" is what gets you made fun of where I come from. But the casual version isn't "correct".
― Laurel, Friday, 9 November 2007 15:42 (sixteen years ago) link
I'm just confused, I guess, as to why there appears to be no object of the sentence. I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it. eg. "He is smarter than I" = He (subject) and I (subject)?!
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:46 (sixteen years ago) link
I swear, I'm not usually this dumb. Seriously! I just occasionally can't wrap my head around something simple. It's happening to my vocabulary, too... I had to log onto google talk just to bug my friend because I couldn't remember the word "ostracize." All I could think of was "shun," and even "alienate" would have worked in the context. I am actually getting stupider!
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:48 (sixteen years ago) link
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000025.htm
― Laurel, Friday, 9 November 2007 15:48 (sixteen years ago) link
Yes, you're comparing two subjects, he and I
― Tracer Hand, Friday, 9 November 2007 15:49 (sixteen years ago) link
Aw, that is a fantastic link! Thanks! That's what I was trying to communicate-- that using "i" and "me" are both grammatically correct but just mean very different things in some cases... just couldn't think of the cases, I suppose.
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:50 (sixteen years ago) link
objects only come in if the subject is affecting something, or doing something to something
If you said "He is a dog", "dog" is not an object, because it's just restating what the subject is (dog is a "predicate nominative" in that sentence if I'm not mistaken, eek)
― Tracer Hand, Friday, 9 November 2007 15:52 (sixteen years ago) link
Wait, so if I said "He is taller than her," could that theoretically be grammatically sound (but mean "he is more tall than he is her")? It makes no sense, but is kind of hilarious.
Also, did I ever say that I LOVE LOVE LOVE this thread? You guys are awesome.
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 16:03 (sixteen years ago) link
why do you think "taller" would call for difft grammar than "bigger"??
― Tracer Hand, Friday, 9 November 2007 16:05 (sixteen years ago) link
I don't think that... I am just woefully inconsistent w/ my examples
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 16:07 (sixteen years ago) link
you're actually very consistent!
"you are a bigger man than i" "you are bigger than i" "he is taller than she"
all exactly the same construction and grammar
― Tracer Hand, Friday, 9 November 2007 16:16 (sixteen years ago) link
ok something that is driving me a bit mad:
the use of "something related" - with hyphen or without? i don't know, i mean, i know that grammatically it's correct to say, e.g., "automobile-related products" and "these products are automobile related" - but is the former ever correct without the hypen? automobile related products? hrm. gotta make a decision...
― rrrobyn, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 15:30 (sixteen years ago) link
and then there's the old issue of "well-trained dogs" which to me is part of this but what, is different b/c well is an adverb? hyphens agh
― rrrobyn, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 15:33 (sixteen years ago) link
i'd say hyphens in both - it's when adverbs have an "ly" at the end that you forgo the hyphen i believe though i'm sure someone will be along to tell me exactly why that's wrong
― Tracer Hand, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 15:34 (sixteen years ago) link
i abide by the "ly" rule i have to stick with my grammar guns and take my office grammar power and use it for the good of all. or at least for the good of 4-colour brochures.
― rrrobyn, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 15:40 (sixteen years ago) link
Hyphens are tricky because there's not a whole lot of hard and fast rules about them. For instance, should it be "health care industry" or "health-care industry"? In a case like that, where "health care" is understood as a single term, my instinct is usually to hyphenate. However, some people will argue that it should be left open for the exact same reason, i.e., the words "health" and "care" are linked so strongly that no one is likely to be confused. At that point, it's kind of an aesthetic decision. (And to make the point moot, Bryan Garner tells me in today's Usage Tip of the Day that "healthcare" -- one word -- is inevitable.)
But in the case of "automobile-related," my company's stylebook says that compounds formed by a noun plus a past participle are almost always hyphenated. (Some have even turned into single words, like "homemade" or "airborne.")
Same goes for most compounds that include adverbs not ending in "-ly." The "-ly" ending gets dispensation because it presents no confusion whatsoever that it's an adverb. In the case of "well-trained dog," however, taking out the hyphen presents the possibility that you're talking about a trained dog that is well. I should also add that this rule only applies when the compound is before a noun. If you were to say that "the dog is well trained," then the hyphen is unnecessary.
― jaymc, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 15:55 (sixteen years ago) link
I don't know how helpful that is, since a lot of times my solution to hyphen-related queries is to just consult the stylebook.
― jaymc, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 15:57 (sixteen years ago) link
i'm making the style guide!
but yes that is helpful
― rrrobyn, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 16:02 (sixteen years ago) link
AP seems to want to avoid hyphens whenever possible, but I think you def. need it in "automobile-related products" and "well-trained dog."
― n/a, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 16:04 (sixteen years ago) link
I would write "a well-trained dog" but "the dog is well trained".
― Alba, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 16:45 (sixteen years ago) link
(on the grounds that I'm not answering "what kind of dog is it?", but telling the reader that the dog was trained well). Do people agree?
― Alba, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 16:47 (sixteen years ago) link
Somebody tell me about the word "whilst." It seems everyone uses it in the UK, and nobody uses it in the US... is i actually just a synonym for "while," or are there cases where one's correct to use and one isn't?
I suppose I could look this up, but I figure some folks here will have more insight.
― Will M., Wednesday, 14 November 2007 19:10 (sixteen years ago) link
I agree, Alba. I mentioned that a few posts up.
― jaymc, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 19:13 (sixteen years ago) link
Yes, this is the basic/common use of hyphens for compound modifiers -- e.g., if we still always used "health care" as two words, we'd talk about "the expenses of health care" but also "health-care expenses" ...
... this is sometimes a problem in my work, because if you change one adjective use to be hyphenated, non-editors down the line will often think "oh, this word is supposed to be hyphenated -- and look, they missed all these other instances, we'd better change that!"
― nabisco, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 19:23 (sixteen years ago) link
ugh i know...
also WHILST use by non-britishes makes me want to say asshole things like 'faagg' all idiocracy style. reminds me of highschool drama students
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 19:54 (sixteen years ago) link