ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

second one sounds better to me

or eliminate both -- it's a cliche.

Alfred OTM. So go for No. 2 if you have no choice, that's the way it's said.

I mean, a field is level or it's not. Saying some fields are leveler than other fields or that they are more level when the speaker really means they've been leveled better or that they are flatter -- it's not a pleasant situation to be in as a copywriter.

i think you're talking about scalar/absolute adjectives? empty, bald, pregnant. level.

yeah you're right. level. thanks guys.

I can easily assign a meaning to "more level", and I can't think of a better way to express that meaning (I'm ignoring the "playing field" part of the idiom here). I'm sure I say things like "more linear" all the time, even if some people would consider that infelicitous.

ok "flatter" conveys a similar meaning but pplains would presumably argue that a field is either flat or not flat and we're back where we started

http://www.hum.uu.nl/medewerkers/a.toledo/papers/Absolute_Relative_Variance.pdf

"Flat" doesn't necessarily mean "horizontal," does it?

second option, and no there's nothing wrong with the concept of a more level playing field

Late to this party. I would encourage the construction "more nearly level", because level is a state more than a quality. To my mind, either something is 'level' or it is 'not level'.

People who say they seek "a more level playing field" are actually requesting "a playing field that has been leveled more than others" or "leveled better than it has in the past."

There's no "leveler" field. Maybe "level" isn't an absolute description of something, but tell that to my wife after I've tried to instal a shelf on the wall.

In past use, "leveler" was a noun, referring to a person who wanted to eliminate inequalities of rank in society.

They were this weird breed of green bubble-headed people who couldn't keep their balance.

http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/500/396653/Levellers.jpg

Dont understand the prob with degrees of level.

You'd agree that the cliffs of Dover might be more level than the cliffs of Moher?

in this case - and i want to put the grammatical element to one side - let us imagine two football pitches. Pitch A has an incline running west to east of 2 degrees. Pitch B has an incline running east to west of 9 degrees. Pitch A is clearly "more level" than Pitch B, even tho neither of them are absolutely level.

Pitch A is also "more level" in the advantage it offers to the team playing from the higher end, altho most team sports try to minimize that advantage by changing ends at some point.

imagine two carpenters' apprentices having their work judged by their master

'closer to level' > 'more level'

And home team might water according to preferred style of play obv

Ok i think thats that cleared up now

This merry bandiment around what is better than 'more level' seems to me to be ignoring that 'more level' appears as part of a whole that simply is not to be fucked with in the ways suggested

mookie i can see how that construction might be logically preferable, sort of, but it's clumsier-sounding than "more level" imo

Pitch A definitely closer to being level than Pitch B, that's for sure.

xp before mookie's

"...levels the playing field somewhat"

I don't know if this is exactly the right thread, but I am confused by the use of "vintage" to seemingly mean "classic" (as in "this US Open performance has been vintage Nadal" or "this essay is vintage Didion") Is this a slangy usage that became mainstream or does the word "vintage" have a shade of meaning I'm missing? I know the word originally comes from wine ("vin" as in "vinyard"), so the "vintage" was the harvest, which in turn came to mean the year. Then I guess from this it somehow got bastardized to just mean "old."

get a dictionary homie

I don't know where else to put this:

http://www.elezea.com/2014/02/lorem-ipsum-gone-wrong/

here here herey herey herey

♥

blah blah blah blah blah blahb
albvh alvhbahv albvha blah,
says Lungani Zama

i would have lay
vs
i would have lain

"to lie" being the infinitive

THIRD CONDITIONAL LAIN

lain

lain--lay is a transitive verb

c1380 Wyclif Wks. (1880) 286 Þei han so longe leyen in so gret cursinge.

Apparently "have lay" is attested up to the 17th century or so.

yes, third conditional, thanks

Larger Q is why you would use a verb w/so many frikken rules

look

i understand that this isnt going to stop now.

but 'speak to' is horrific. it's fucking horrific.

prepositions often get warped when describing abstract relationships. nature of the beast.

A Utah language-school employee was reported to have been fired for blogging about homophones.

is there a recognized supplement to the apa manual on questions of style? i am way more used to chicago and i keep finding that every time i have a question i can expect chicago to answer, the apa manual is a useless piece of garbage

what's a good word for "approachability" -- i.e. referring to someone who is accomplished but not intimidating

In what sort of a sentence would this good word be employed?

Would modest or humble work in the context?

i went with "affable". "modest" seemed insufficiently...reverent for someone so accomplished

approachable