ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

it's not an issue of more or less idiomatic really, you'd use them in different contexts

I defer to your judgement, of course, it's just that the second sentence sounds off to my ears without the extra 'have'.

ok lol i think i muddled myself (and everyone else) by writing my expanded examples in the opposite order to dog latin's

when i write "so i think you want the second, the first suggests something that might well still happen if conditions turn out right" and when i say "second" i'm referring to dog latin's order but when i say "first" i'm referring to my order! simples!

ffs

sorry abt that everyone, what i shd have said is ""i think you want the second (your second), which suggests something that might well still happen if conditions turn out right"

Tracer is right. In contrast, however, I would actually say (and write) both "have"s.

If he could have [done whatever], he would have [done whatever].

There may be a way to rephrase to get out of the clunkiness even if it takes more words. My philosophy is WARP (Words Are Readers' Pals). Maybe try inverting it, as pomenitul suggested?

He would have clapped John around the shoulder if he could have.

He would have clapped John around the shoulder, if he only could.

He would've clapped John around the shoulder if he could've.

He would have clapped John around the shoulder, but he couldn't.

He would have clapped John around the shoulder, if it were possible.

He would've clapped John around the shoulder, but didn't want people to think he was gay.

He would have clapped John around the shoulder, if he only could. Unfortunately, John was born without shoulders.

tracer is saying use the one without any haves

(i was trying to say this also but fucked it up)

this should be the only thread permits such pedantry, but there shouldn't be a comma preceding the attribution here

(unless that is an American-specific rule?)

Possibly not the right thread, but you guys will know - where do you go to google the historical usage of a phrase over time? Not just in books but in general (on the internet, I guess).
Or does anyone know if "control the narrative" is a relatively modern phrase?

https://books.google.com/ngrams

That's what I tried; is that not just books?

Oh OK it works anyway! thanks

You might also be interested in the Time Magazine Corpus of American English, which lets you search for the other words and terms that show up in conjunction with a given phrase and thus get a sense of how its connotation changes over time.

https://www.english-corpora.org/time/

Whoa

'It’s a wonderful example of historic architecture with a beautiful garden and an amazing history, particularly of the xxx family who led their creative lives here in the 19th and 20th century.’

OR

‘It’s a wonderful example of historic architecture with a beautiful garden and an amazing history, particularly of the xxx family who led their creative lives here in the 19th and 20th centuries.’

plur(al)

I'd even replace "in" with "during", but it's not a dealbreaker.

Thank you, I also went with the plural, although I suspect the first one might also be 'correct' in English.

Agree too about 'during' over 'in', but this is one of those "don't tamper with the client's copy more than is absolutely necessary" deals, so left as is.

O how I do know exactly what you're talking about.

If anyone ever wants to make a hypocrite meme about editors, feel free to use the "Please provide copy with files" b/w "This copy is all wrong."

Yikes! Thanks for the help upthread everyone. More complicated than I thought it would be.

I know there are common nouns for inhabitans of large English-speaking cities, such as "New Yorker" or "Londoner", but what noun would you use for someone who lives, say, in Oslo or Prague or Helsinki? Osloer/Praguer/Helsinkier? Or Osloan/Helsinkian/Praguean? Or something else?

Helsinkite? :)

These are in (e.g.) the Wikipedia articles for the cities, under “demonyms”

Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_adjectivals_and_demonyms_for_cities

Ah, okay, thanks! Apparently it's "Helsinkian" and "Praguer", but the Olso article has no demonym.

I wonder if there's some logic to these, or whether people just use whatever is easiest to pronounce out of the available suffixes: -er / -ian / -ite?

(xpost)

Ok, the article you linked says "Oslovian".

The list has “Oslovian” which is superb

sorry!

I wonder where the extra "v" comes from in demonyms like Peruvian or Oslovian?

I think it's to do with an implied W at the end.

Some discussion at
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/310461/why-is-there-a-v-in-peruvian

Wikipedia gives the etymology as Piruw [pɪɾʊw], from Quechua, the Inka language.
That [w] at the end would become a /v/ in Spanish when adding a suffix to produce Peruviano.

Time for a campaign for 'Glagovian' to upset the natives.

spanish word for peruvian is peruano though. could never understand the logic of spanish doing this, in the same vein, americano vs. estadounidense, nicaragüense, etc. why puertorriqueño and not puertorriquense.

Osloid

Christian

did we get this sorted?

Osilator

Oslonaut

Praguer U

demonyms should get their own thread imo

poll demonyms

this one is just...
Aguascalientes Hidrocálido

i mean why change from latin to greek

Search & Destroy: Demonyms

Ozalid

deemsonyms

I'm creating a gif where a quote begins on one screen (I don't really know how you describe gifs) and ends on another. Where do the quote marks go? I am working on the assumption it will work in the same way as in regular prose where a quote extends across two paragraphs, i.e. first para has an initial quote mark but no end quote (to show continuation), while second para has quotes at beginning and end. So like this:

"The quote begins on one screen...

"and ends on another."

Is that right? I suppose I would just follow whatever is standard in subtitling/captioning, but I don't know much about that.

not sure there's a right/wrong here so much as a "how clearly do you feel it reads?"

myself i wd probably go with:

"The quote begins on one screen...

… and ends on another"

(reason i guess bcz the regular-prose usage is abt how the eye reads and travels and reads when things are on the same page, on one line and then the next? but as reasons go this is merely an ex post facto ratioanlisation of my preferred taste really)

if the broken paragraph was many lines long i might not do it this way, but if it's this short yr talking abt the eye taking it in in one blink

Are these captions for people speaking, or is like a silent voiceover kind of deal?

(xpost)

Hmm, I think you're right. I did it the first way without thinking when writing the script in a doc, but it looks fussy in the gif. I'll go with your suggestion, thanks.

Are the ellipsis going to be visible?

It's just a little promotional gif - no sound.