ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

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

I'm sure some Americans say bored of!

Will, are you an American? Sorry, haven't noticed...

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".

i always just try to limit the number of prepositions in any sentence

they will screw you every time

will is cdn! mtl even!

J'ai ennui DE ca.

ca m'emmerde!! (no prepositions!)

sorry, i read that as "that's my shit!"

This suggests that it's not particularly British either:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000636.html

prepositions are kinda the bane of my french

the other bane of my french is being a lazy anglo pigdog of course

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.

I would have said "followed a format similar to".

Maybe I wouldn't have. I don't know now.

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.

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, 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.

But if I said, "You are bigger than me," that would be correct, no?

No. Just very, very common.

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".

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)?!

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!

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000025.htm

Yes, you're comparing two subjects, he and I

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.

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)

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.

why do you think "taller" would call for difft grammar than "bigger"??

I don't think that... I am just woefully inconsistent w/ my examples

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

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...

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

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

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.

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.

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.

i'm making the style guide!

but yes that is helpful

AP seems to want to avoid hyphens whenever possible, but I think you def. need it in "automobile-related products" and "well-trained dog."

I would write "a well-trained dog" but "the dog is well trained".

(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?

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.

I agree, Alba. I mentioned that a few posts up.

I would write "a well-trained dog" but "the dog is well trained".

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!"

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

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?

They mean exactly the same thing and can be used interchangeably, 'whilst' is just more formal.

where is the thread for people who are driven crazy by writing, editing, re-writing, re-editing, re-writing etc etc press releases

because i'm being driven crazy

less crazy now