Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Weaver]

I had never thought about the get a pint thing. I analyse it as ‘can I obtain’ then in the sense ‘obtain from you’. So because I analyse it in a different way it doesn’t give me any problem, but I can absolutely see why it offends you because your default analysis is different from mine.

The could of thing was I just though an autocorrect horror the first time I encountered it which was here in fact in writing, so I thought that the author did not mean it, and thus I thought nothing of it. Then I heard it on coronation street and to my dismay realised it was a reality. I never heard it twenty years ago when I was down in London, but then I never mixed with the likely speaker group, working class uneducated but I have no idea if it’s specifically north or south of England or lowlands of Scotland.

[sevenlayermuddle]

You had me worried there, whether 'can I get' was just me.

This blog seems to agree with me, suggesting that it might be US habit, though incorrect even there, spreading to the UK with the Friends TV series.

http://www.macmillandictionaryblog.com/can-i-get

I did not perform exhaustive research, there may be contradictory views, but at least I am not alone.

[roseway]

I'm another one who cringes at "could of". Unfortunately it's become so common that I fear that the correct usage isn't taught in schools any more (assuming that the teachers understand it).

[Weaver]

When did ‘could of’ begin?

I think that that is so horribly ignorant that it’s time to fight back. Don’t just put up with it.

Maybe I ought to be equally angry about the pea but it’s a bit late now.

[vic0239]

One of mine is the use of the past participle to indicate some continuing action either in the present or past particularly with the verbs "to sit" and "to stand”. When I hear someone say something like “I was stood at the bus stop” or “I was sat at the table” the first thing to enter my mind is … by whom? 

[Weaver]

I’m afraid vic is wrong there. Those verbs are not only causatives.

[sevenlayermuddle]

I think that that is so horribly ignorant that it’s time to fight back.

Well there might well be a general election coming up, we could mention it to campaigners that knock on our doors?

That, together with a law that says 'thou shalt not cycle on pavements', but enforcement guidelines that say 'ignore it'.  Oops sorry, off topic, but still vaguely relevant in terms of lowered standards?

[Weaver]

I read the macmillandictionary article that 7LM referred to, interesting. The core of this is something linguists’ call ‘illocutionary force’ and was the subject of exam questions half a lifetime ago. Illocutionary force of an utterance is about what the speaker really wants to achieve, what they really mean as opposed to the ‘surface’ apparent meaning gained from reading the words literally. My example was

Man: darling can I have a beer?
Woman: it’s in the fridge
Man: I want beer not information.

We have been talking about syntax and semantics for the most part, but there is a third vital aspect to language and unfortunately this isn’t taught to schoolchildren in my experience. This is called pragmatics and its about context and conversation, communication, illocutionary force and so on. The ‘transport-layer’ and protocols of conversation flow and exchange of information, what information is and is not sent, not sent because it is presumed to be already present and accessible at the other end, and data compression systems such as pronouns, relatives and other mechanisms, these are the kinds of topics and concerns. Pragmatics can explain phenomena in certain languages such as word order, special markers and the use of pronouns and relatives. Illocutionary force can be for example connected with special politeness constructions such as ‘wont you have a cup of tea?’ Which at the deepest layer isn’t really a question, it’s an offer of tea, assuming the context is one in which tea is the only thing in offer. If both tea and coffee are on offer it could be trying to persuade you to take tea for some reason. In other contexts it could be a genuine question - a request for information. One interesting thing here is that a question is being used as an offer and it is more polite than a straight imperative ‘have some tea!’ and that might be cross-linguistic for understandable general reasons. But the really interesting thing is that it is a negative question that is really a sort of command but a very polite one. Scottish Gaelic and English both have this exact same odd mechanism - negative question for an offer/very polite command.

[roseway]

When did ‘could of’ begin?

I don't know when, but I think it's fairly clear that it arose from a simple misunderstanding. Very few people in modern times will say "could have"; instead we say "could've", and I suppose it's easy to mistakenly hear this as "could of".

[Weaver]

Quite, as roseway says. The change came when very strangely the unstressed -ve with a schwa [əv] (like er in butter, mother, a in arrival ) had become a full vowel [ɒv] and so had clearly become confused with of.

That just shocked me when I first heard it, how strong the o was. How could people not know that the word was ‘have’ not ‘of’ ? Whatever happened to education?

[kitz]

Currently the use of ‘of’ In ‘he could of done it’ wants to make me scream, but in time it may become recognised widely. I’m sure that some ignorant uneducated working class people in eg Manchester don’t know how wrong it is.

I hate the "could of" and "should of" instead of could've/should've.   I tend to see a fair amount of Americans using it - particularly during Trump debates.  :/
They're/There/Their also drives me nuts.

However I try not to be presumptive.  I make allowances for dyslexia - although it tends to be a lot more common amongst the younger generation.   I am also mindful that there may be older generations who never decent schooling.  I always felt for dad who was not unintelligent, but really struggled with spelling.   

My grandparents moved to a new area to set up a new business just after the war ended. Unfortunately my grandmother died a few years later, leaving g'dad alone to bring up young children and run a business with no family nearby.  Dad never talked much about those days as I gather they were tough, but I know he said rationing was still in force and g'dad had leg injuries.  Dad was the oldest and at the tender age of 12 had to do an awful lot to help run the business and look after his younger sister.  He left school early and did most of the heavy work, so never really had any chance to gain a decent education.

I'm also a self admitted queen of typos - I've always joked I have dyslexic fingers.  But I struggle even more these days when FM limits my vocabulary and I can't even recall certain words nvm type them - and that's on a day when my fingers aren't so swollen and sore to even be able to sit at the keyboard.   

no one ‘goes online’

I suspect that is a generalised term that has come into being.  Online means connected and to many people online, the www & the Internet are one and the same thing.    As you say there is online banking, online auctions and even online help.

We have been talking about syntax and semantics for the most part, but there is a third vital aspect to language and unfortunately this isn’t taught to schoolchildren in my experience.

I don't believe it is.  It probably went out of the window with the demise of Grammar schools
Whilst that may appear a pun - I suspect there is a lot of truth in that. I went to a brand new High School after the demise of the 11plus exam and I can't ever recall having such lessons. 

[sevenlayermuddle]

Anybody up for confessions of one’s own bad habits?

For me, an uncertainty through most of my adult life, over “its” vs “it’s”.   I now understand when to use each, it’s not that complicated.   But embarrassing to admit I was in my mid 50s, getting it wrong and not worrying about it, before I got around to seeking out the answer. 

Another lingering uncertainty is ‘while’ vs ‘whilst’.   I like both words and would like to use both of them, but I have actually concluded, while(/whilst?) I would like to find a rule, that there is no hard and fast rule on that one.

[Weaver]

I have no idea about ‘whilst’. That’s a problem for me too.

My personal nightmares are: compliment / complement and worst of all; dependent, independant, independent, independant.

I struggle with these so much that I look them up in (very bad) dictionaries, again and again, and still will not effectively remember the answers because of gnawing fear and self-doubt.

I have similar problems in languages other than English. Today it is (once again) the ScG verb iarr - what the hell are its arguments, its subcategorisation frame.