DonationCoder.com Forum

Main Area and Open Discussion => Living Room => Topic started by: Renegade on March 01, 2011, 08:43 PM

Title: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 01, 2011, 08:43 PM
Am I the only one that's annoyed by the seemingly decreasing quality of language in "professional" news, articles and general writing?

I really don't care about people making mistakes in forums or informal writing. A lot of people don't speak English as their first language, and that's not a problem. What I find annoying is "professional" media that simply don't know how to use English properly.

e.g.
* Statistical "outlyers". It's "outliers". Sigh...
* "mass nouns" -- They're called "countable" and "uncountable", not "mass".
* Verb agreement

The list goes on and on.

It's just jarring to get "hit" by grammar, spelling, and word choice mistakes that there really is no excuse for.

It's one thing for it to be "the odd time", but it's not. It's all the time.

Am I just super-anal? Is poor grammar really acceptable in professional media?

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 01, 2011, 08:44 PM
Am I just super-anal? Is poor grammar really acceptable in professional media?
-Renegade (March 01, 2011, 08:43 PM)

No, you are not. No, it is not.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: housetier on March 02, 2011, 12:20 AM
When language is a tool, poor grammar (=poor or even wrong usage of the tool) for me is a sign of not-so-professionals.

You wouldn't trust a carpenter who only uses wallpaper paste, would you? So when those professionals are employed despite their poor handling of their tools of the trade, it shines a bad light on the employer who might make bad judgment in other areas as well. It is not very trust-inspiring to me.

And I don't think that's being overly anal at all.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 02, 2011, 12:34 AM
Do you find the same thing? That there's an increasing amount of content with poor grammar? It seems to be getting worse and worse. Like I said, the occasional blooper is ok, but all the time?
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: housetier on March 02, 2011, 12:44 AM
I found the opposite: spam is getting better at language. Especially in Germany, the spam emails are using better vocabulary and almost proper grammar.

They might fool my spam filter but they cannot fool me  8)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 02, 2011, 08:05 AM
It is disconcerting. I believe that part of the problem stems from misguided experiments in education, of which the pupils were more victims than beneficiaries. Then there's the decline in reading, and then the merging of multiple cultures (which has many, many benefits but...) and then…  Oh dear!

There is also the mildly amazing prevalence, among many who grumble, to point out that someone failed to use a spell checker. While some writing can be magical, the verification of spelling is unlikely to be so.

Having said all that, often we do seem able to decode what is meant by poorly framed expressions.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Target on March 02, 2011, 05:23 PM
unfortunately we've come to accept that close enough is good enough, instead of saying that's wrong, do it again

("speliing"?  luckily I knew what you meant :o)



Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: mwb1100 on March 02, 2011, 05:28 PM
I'm curious about one thing in the original post - what's the problem with "mass nouns"?


Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 02, 2011, 05:42 PM
I'm curious about one thing in the original post - what's the problem with "mass nouns"?
-mwb1100 (March 02, 2011, 05:28 PM)

It's a matter of proper jargon and using the correct term. It would be like calling a hard drive a "stiff drive".
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on March 02, 2011, 05:52 PM
I'm curious about one thing in the original post - what's the problem with "mass nouns"?
-mwb1100 (March 02, 2011, 05:28 PM)

It's a matter of proper jargon and using the correct term. It would be like calling a hard drive a "stiff drive".
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 05:42 PM)

Okay, I did have to google the term to find out what it was ... But that don't sound like it:

For example, the same set of chairs can be referred to as "seven chairs" and as "furniture"; though both chair and furniture are referring to the same thing, the former is a count noun and the latter a mass noun.
-short answer

...Either way I have heard the news folk screw it up.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: mwb1100 on March 02, 2011, 06:11 PM
I'm curious about one thing in the original post - what's the problem with "mass nouns"?
-mwb1100 (March 02, 2011, 05:28 PM)

It's a matter of proper jargon and using the correct term. It would be like calling a hard drive a "stiff drive".
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 05:42 PM)

Not to say this necessarily means it's correct, but I recall "mass noun" being used back when I was in school, many many years ago.  And a quick search on Google nets the term being used in linguistics research papers (where correct terminology would be important, I'd think).  Could this be a situation where there might be more than on one correct name for a thing?  Like "hard drive"/"hard disk" or dirigible/airship.

dirigible?  What the hell made that word pop into my head?


Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 02, 2011, 06:26 PM
This just seems bizarre...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_nounw

I've read a LOT of books on grammar, and NEVER seen that. They have ALWAYS used "countable" to describe it.

Maybe it's an American English thing or is a newer term. Dunno.

On that topic though, one uncountable noun that has crept into being a countable noun that I find somewhat irritating is "beers". It's like "waters". It contracts "X bottles of beer" or "X glasses of beer" into "beers". It just seems like a sloppy bastardization to me.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Target on March 02, 2011, 06:33 PM
the trouble with interpretising grammatical expression is that so much of it is contextual, and what is correct in one context is incorrect in another.

To use Stoic's example 7 chairs are countable or mass, whereas furniture is not.  But if you were referring specifically to the chairs you wouldn't say furniture, even though it is potentially correct.

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 02, 2011, 07:04 PM
Either way I have heard the news folk screw it up.
-Stoic Joker (March 02, 2011, 05:52 PM)

And just why is it <pause> that news folk feel <pause> the need to inject <pause> inappropriate pauses <pause> into almost every sentence spoken???  >:(
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 02, 2011, 07:24 PM
Either way I have heard the news folk screw it up.
-Stoic Joker (March 02, 2011, 05:52 PM)

And just why is it <pause> that news folk feel <pause> the need to inject <pause> inappropriate pauses <pause> into almost every sentence spoken???  >:(
-cranioscopical (March 02, 2011, 07:04 PM)

Their language buffers in their brains are too small, and they can't double buffer, so you get choppy playback. :P
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Target on March 02, 2011, 07:26 PM
Their language buffers in their brains are too small, and they can't double buffer, so you get choppy playback. :P
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 07:24 PM)

so it's an issue of blandwidth?
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 02, 2011, 08:12 PM
Their language buffers in their brains are too small, and they can't double buffer, so you get choppy playback.
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 07:24 PM)

More likely they're air heads so you get bubble duffer.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: eikelein on March 02, 2011, 09:11 PM
More likely they're air heads so you get bubble duffer.
-cranioscopical (March 02, 2011, 08:12 PM)
Just a few minutes I joined and OMG, you are hilarious!
I am looking forward to many more good laughs - besides all the info.

Oh, and BTW grammar and spelling are of utmost importance, YES!

and especially those permanent lower case writers should go back to school, IMHO at least  ;)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 02, 2011, 09:18 PM
Can I just make a comment about the word "alot?"

It's not a word at all  :o
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 02, 2011, 09:22 PM
Just a few minutes I joined
-eikelein (March 02, 2011, 09:11 PM)

Welcome aboard, I think I'm going to like you  ;)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 02, 2011, 09:25 PM
Can I just make a comment about the word "alot?"

It's not a word at all  :o
-timns (March 02, 2011, 09:18 PM)

My pet peeve that drives me batty is hearing people (that are supposed to be somewhat intelligent, or at the least sentient) screw up number agreement. e.g. "There is 20 posts above." Ahem... "are" perhaps?

1. Not 1. 1. Not 1. Pretty simple, or at least you'd think so.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 02, 2011, 09:26 PM
Can I just make a comment about the word "alot?"

It's not a word at all  :o
-timns (March 02, 2011, 09:18 PM)

My pet peeve that drives me batty is hearing people (that are supposed to be somewhat intelligent, or at the least sentient) screw up number agreement. e.g. "There is 20 posts above." Ahem... "are" perhaps?

1. Not 1. 1. Not 1. Pretty simple, or at least you'd think so.
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 09:25 PM)

One would :)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 02, 2011, 09:29 PM
It's not a word at all
-timns (March 02, 2011, 09:18 PM)

You're right, it draws a poor reception — salotto rubbish.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: app103 on March 03, 2011, 06:12 AM
On that topic though, one uncountable noun that has crept into being a countable noun that I find somewhat irritating is "beers". It's like "waters". It contracts "X bottles of beer" or "X glasses of beer" into "beers". It just seems like a sloppy bastardization to me.
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 06:26 PM)

So does that mean you'd be against me buying you a beer?

And just why is it <pause> that news folk feel <pause> the need to inject <pause> inappropriate pauses <pause> into almost every sentence spoken???  >:(
-cranioscopical (March 02, 2011, 07:04 PM)

Because they are usually reading off a teleprompter and those pauses are when it's flipping to the next frame of text.  :D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 03, 2011, 06:53 AM
On that topic though, one uncountable noun that has crept into being a countable noun that I find somewhat irritating is "beers". It's like "waters". It contracts "X bottles of beer" or "X glasses of beer" into "beers". It just seems like a sloppy bastardization to me.
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 06:26 PM)

So does that mean you'd be against me buying you a beer?
-app103 (March 03, 2011, 06:12 AM)

Oddly, that seems perfectly natural. The plural contraction doesn't. So sure, you can buy me a beer anytime~! :P
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 03, 2011, 09:54 AM
Oddly, that seems perfectly natural. The plural contraction doesn't. So sure, you can buy me a beer anytime~!
-Renegade (March 03, 2011, 06:53 AM)

Another brewhaha come to a head.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: mwb1100 on March 03, 2011, 11:13 AM
Can I just make a comment about the word "alot?"

It's not a word at all  :o
-timns (March 02, 2011, 09:18 PM)

Something changes language overtime. Sometime hence, "alot" shall be altogether alright if it's not already.

I'd allot around 4 score years.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 03, 2011, 11:31 AM
Can I just make a comment about the word "alot?"

It's not a word at all  :o
-timns (March 02, 2011, 09:18 PM)

Something changes language overtime. Sometime hence, "alot" shall be altogether alright if it's not already.
-mwb1100 (March 03, 2011, 11:13 AM)

I do hope you mean "all right" old bean  ;)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: CWuestefeld on March 03, 2011, 11:56 AM
The more you learn about language and "correct" writing, the more you discover the amount of rules that aren't taught in school (or not my school, any way).

For example, I was never taught what a transitive verb is (see Wikipedia (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Transitive_verb) if you don't know). But I notice this occasionally with my wife. (She's an immigrant, and with English as her third language, she does remarkably well, so much so that in casual conversation you wouldn't know she's not native.) But every once in a while she comes out with a clunker, all the more surprising because you can forget she's not a native speaker. And this is one of the common problems.

Another thing that most natives just get right from having heard it so much, but isn't really taught explicitly, is when a determiner is necessary. One of the things my wife finds most difficult is deciding when a noun needs a "the" in front of it.

Finally, there's an error that I see committed almost universally, and demonstrating how much it's not taught, I don't even know what the correct terminology is. I think of it as parallelization of lists. When giving a list, the items in the list need to all be of the same part of speech and conjugation. For example: "My dog Buster likes to chase a ball and poops in the woods". This is incorrect. I need to either change "poops" to "to poop" so that the list of what Buster likes is all of the same type, or I need to change it to "... and he poops..." so that it's not a list of what he likes to do.

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: mwb1100 on March 03, 2011, 01:22 PM
I do hope you mean "all right" old bean  ;)
-timns (March 03, 2011, 11:31 AM)

Yeah, sorta.  "alright" might not be all right, yet.  But I think it's a lot further along being an accepted word than "alot" (see http://www.word-detective.com/back-q.html).  And you can't seriously make me think that such stand-up Brits as "The Who" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kids_Are_Alright_%28film%29) might not know how to spell (don't bother with the remake (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0842926/) of that movie; it was no where - er, nowhere - near as good, even if they might have done better with the spelling).


My point is that sometimes word are combined (for various reasons) - it has happened for several words in that post, and will probably happen to some of the others.

Then again, words can fall out of favor or common use like "score" as meaning 20. And certayne wordes which might bring about yre and be considered garbidge today were once amonge truely correct spellings.

If I could trade 'word status', I'd gladly endure "alot" if I could get rid of "blog".  I don't like that word for some reason, even though there clearly needs to be a word for those things.  I just don't like "blog" - blecch.


Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: 40hz on March 03, 2011, 01:29 PM
I like sentences that leave you unable to determine exactly what is being asked because text is unable to convey the voice inflection that would make its meaning clear to anyone. Example: this topic was recently posted in the forum:

A plea for help from a VS developer...

Is this a VS developer who is asking for help - or - is it someone attempting to solicit help from a VS developer?

(It was the second BTW  :) )

Benny Hill used to base a great of his comedy routines on wordplay that took advantage of pauses and inflection.

My favorite was this classic sentence found on a telegram:

NOT GETTING ANY BETTER COME HOME SOON. STOP.

Should it be read as:

Not getting any better. Come home soon!  :(

-or-

Not getting any. Better come home soon!  :P


Love it! ;D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 03, 2011, 01:34 PM
@mwb1100: I enjoyed that!

I do actually agree with you about 'alright' - I find myself using it too and it's a hair's breadth away from being acceptable - which is my excuse whenever I type it ;)

For some reason I don't mind 'blog' - but I do know what you mean about some words or phrases being teeth-gratingly annoying. For instance, I hate to hear people say they "clicked through" a hyperlink.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: 40hz on March 03, 2011, 02:45 PM
Parallelism is difficult to teach because there are many cases where making something grammatically (i.e. correctly) parallel leads to awkward sentence construction. When that happens, it's usually best to split the original statement into two separate sentences to avoid a weird sounding albeit grammatically correct sentence.

My dog Buster likes to chase a ball. He poops in the woods.

Alternatively, the widely misunderstood and (IMO) underused semicolon can be employed:

My dog Buster likes to chase a ball; and poop in the woods.

@CUW: In your example, wouldn't 'poops' be a verb within the context of the sentence. Unless, of course, your dog chases poops (as in the...um...object?) while in the woods. Can't imagine that being much of a challenge for him however. From my experience, poops don't run around all that much. And thank goodness for it!

 ;D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 03, 2011, 02:48 PM
I hate to hear people say they "clicked through" a hyperlink.
-timns (March 03, 2011, 01:34 PM)

People seem to be "ticking boxes" quite a bit these days.
In the world as it is today, I like to avoid all kinds of ticking boxes.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: 40hz on March 03, 2011, 02:49 PM
I hate to hear people say they "clicked through" a hyperlink.
-timns (March 03, 2011, 01:34 PM)

People seem to be "ticking boxes" quite a bit these days.
In the world as it is today, I like to avoid all kinds of ticking boxes.
-cranioscopical (March 03, 2011, 02:48 PM)

Why is that? They're quite the bomb.

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on March 03, 2011, 03:11 PM
So who wants to do a proper computing grammar tutorial?
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 03, 2011, 03:33 PM
So who wants to do a proper computing grammar tutorial?
-Stoic Joker (March 03, 2011, 03:11 PM)

That ain't nuffink as wot I could do  :(
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on March 03, 2011, 03:55 PM
So who wants to do a proper computing grammar tutorial?
-Stoic Joker (March 03, 2011, 03:11 PM)

That ain't nuffink as wot I could do  :(
-cranioscopical (March 03, 2011, 03:33 PM)

We'll never get people to stop ticking boxes, mashing buttons, and clicking through hyperlinks with that attitude.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: mwb1100 on March 03, 2011, 04:17 PM
We'll never get people to stop ticking boxes, mashing buttons, and clicking through hyperlinks with that attitude.
-Stoic Joker (March 03, 2011, 03:55 PM)

Is mousing around still OK?
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on March 03, 2011, 04:32 PM
We'll never get people to stop ticking boxes, mashing buttons, and clicking through hyperlinks with that attitude.
-Stoic Joker (March 03, 2011, 03:55 PM)

Is mousing around still OK?
-mwb1100 (March 03, 2011, 04:17 PM)
That...Depends on who you're with...
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 03, 2011, 05:07 PM
We'll never get people to stop ticking boxes, mashing buttons, and clicking through hyperlinks with that attitude.
-Stoic Joker (March 03, 2011, 03:55 PM)

Is mousing around still OK?
-mwb1100 (March 03, 2011, 04:17 PM)
That...Depends on who you're with...
-Stoic Joker (March 03, 2011, 04:32 PM)

Once you open that dor someone could have a field day.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 03, 2011, 05:52 PM
The clowning around is reminding me of this:

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]

Very fun book, it is.

Little linguistic tricks and whatnot can be a lot of fun.

From "Ratspike":

I went to the pictures tomorrow,
I took a front seat at the back.
I fell from the floor to the ceiling,
And broke the front bone in my back.

I went round a straight crooked corner,
I saw a dead donkey die.
I pulled out my pistol to stab him,
And he kicked me in the eye.

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 03, 2011, 05:59 PM
I can see one of the the errors straight away. Anyone got any ideas about the other one?
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 03, 2011, 06:06 PM
I can see one of the the errors straight away. Anyone got any ideas about the other one?
-timns (March 03, 2011, 05:59 PM)

Hehehe! The first thing you see is straight forward. The next issue is perhaps a bit more insidious. Read very carefully again. :) You'll love it once you see it.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: mwb1100 on March 03, 2011, 06:06 PM
I can see one of the the errors straight away.
-timns (March 03, 2011, 05:59 PM)

That right there is a clue to the other error.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 03, 2011, 06:07 PM
I can see one of the the errors straight away.
-timns (March 03, 2011, 05:59 PM)

That right there is a clue to the other error.
-mwb1100 (March 03, 2011, 06:06 PM)

And interestingly enough, your hint is somewhat misleading, which is another hint in itself. :D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 03, 2011, 06:10 PM
D'oh! Of course, it's a grammatical trick:

It should be "There IS Two Errors"
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: timns on March 03, 2011, 06:17 PM
OMG I think I know... who is this sadist?  :o
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 03, 2011, 07:11 PM
D'oh! Of course, it's a grammatical trick:

It should be "There IS Two Errors"
-timns (March 03, 2011, 06:10 PM)

Hahahah~! Nope. Verb-number agreement demands that it be "are".
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 03, 2011, 07:19 PM
OMG I think I know... who is this sadist?  :o
-timns (March 03, 2011, 06:17 PM)

Answer
The second "the" is the first error.

But there is no second error, so the title is wrong. But if the title is correct, then it isn't an error, and the only error is the first error, which means there is only 1 error, which makes the title wrong because it states that there are 2 errors when there is only 1.

So, is there 1 error or are there 2 errors?

This nicely shows how some statements do not have truth values.

e.g. Green ideas sleep furiously.

There is no truth value for that. It's simply nonsense.

(Ok, there's more to the debate than that, but whatever -- it's a good enough answer.)



Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: app103 on March 04, 2011, 12:53 AM
On that topic though, one uncountable noun that has crept into being a countable noun that I find somewhat irritating is "beers". It's like "waters". It contracts "X bottles of beer" or "X glasses of beer" into "beers". It just seems like a sloppy bastardization to me.
-Renegade (March 02, 2011, 06:26 PM)

So does that mean you'd be against me buying you a beer?
-app103 (March 03, 2011, 06:12 AM)

Oddly, that seems perfectly natural. The plural contraction doesn't. So sure, you can buy me a beer anytime~! :P
-Renegade (March 03, 2011, 06:53 AM)

Just seems a shame that you can have a beer but not a few beers.  Doesn't sound like as much fun.  :P
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 04, 2011, 07:13 AM
In my Korean language classes some years ago, a fellow student was a professor of Linguistics. We had a very interesting conversation one time when he explained why you can have "un-fucking-believable" but not "unbelieva-fucking-ble" or "unbe-fucking-lievable" (and other similar cases of injecting profanity into words). I forget the exact reasons at the moment, but it had to do with intonation and stress. Those are some strange rules that we all know and use, but aren't really conscious of them, and never had a class where they were taught. :D

Just seems a shame that you can have a beer but not a few beers.  Doesn't sound like as much fun.

Yes. Very true. :)

I'd like to know why a non-countable noun can become a singular countable noun, but not a plural countable noun. I think it has to do with them being assumed contractions of the form "# units of noun" to "a noun" or "nouns".

e.g.

I'd like a water.

But not:

I'd like some waters.

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 04, 2011, 01:58 PM
Perhaps not entirely off topic (for a change)

To the many of you who have sent me personal messages enquiring with such concern as to why I am so dopey a (and here I'll paraphrase — there are simply too few asterisks available on my keyboard) fellow. This could be the answer:

Research by the British National Formulary (BNF), which advises doctors, nurses and pharmacists, found labelling that has been around for decades is now too difficult for members of the public to understand.

It found phrases such as "may cause drowsiness" are no longer "readily understood" and should now be simplified to say "this medicine may make you sleepy".

and, just to add further clarity

Likewise, the phrases "avoid alcoholic drink" and "take at regular intervals" caused indecision among modern takers.

The report recommends the labels should now read "do not drink alcohol while taking this medicine" and "space the doses evenly throughout the day".

For those of you who feel that this does not explain my mental state fully, I offer the following:

Drinking a glass of wine a day or a pint of beer can cut the chance of developing dementia by almost a third, according to researchers.

So, in future, I'll go for a few bottles of each beverage. That should fix it!
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Ath on March 04, 2011, 02:04 PM
So, in future, I'll go for a few bottles of each beverage. That should fix it!
-cranioscopical (March 04, 2011, 01:58 PM)
:drinksmiley: ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on March 04, 2011, 02:10 PM
So, in future, I'll go for a few bottles of each beverage. That should fix it!
-cranioscopical (March 04, 2011, 01:58 PM)
:drinksmiley: ;D ;D ;D
-Ath (March 04, 2011, 02:04 PM)

Damn Straight! I'll sign-up for the Save-the-Marbles Drinking Competition (Er...) "Therapy" too!
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: 40hz on March 04, 2011, 02:51 PM
Save-the-Jewels erm..Marbles Therapy, huh?

Ok...I'll give it a try. Can't be to careful when it comes to issues of health.

However, I'll pass on the Martinis if you don't mind.

Make mine Stout, Bock (hey, ya gotta eat too!), or a nice microbrewed Dark Ale.

As long as it's dark and complex - and looks like there's a good chance some "pond life" lurking in it -  I'm in! ;D

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: cranioscopical on March 04, 2011, 03:10 PM
a good chance some "pond life" lurking in it
-40hz (March 04, 2011, 02:51 PM)

Good and newtricious!
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 04, 2011, 04:44 PM
Perhaps not entirely off topic (for a change)

To the many of you who have sent me personal messages enquiring with such concern as to why I am so dopey a (and here I'll paraphrase — there are simply too few asterisks available on my keyboard) fellow. This could be the answer:

Research by the British National Formulary (BNF), which advises doctors, nurses and pharmacists, found labelling that has been around for decades is now too difficult for members of the public to understand.

It found phrases such as "may cause drowsiness" are no longer "readily understood" and should now be simplified to say "this medicine may make you sleepy".

and, just to add further clarity

Likewise, the phrases "avoid alcoholic drink" and "take at regular intervals" caused indecision among modern takers.

The report recommends the labels should now read "do not drink alcohol while taking this medicine" and "space the doses evenly throughout the day".

For those of you who feel that this does not explain my mental state fully, I offer the following:

Drinking a glass of wine a day or a pint of beer can cut the chance of developing dementia by almost a third, according to researchers.

So, in future, I'll go for a few bottles of each beverage. That should fix it!
-cranioscopical (March 04, 2011, 01:58 PM)


It's sad that so many people are basically illiterate and perfectly clear instructions need to be dumbed down that much.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on March 04, 2011, 05:09 PM
You can bet your ass there is a lawyer behind it. Because (in reality) nobody is really that dumb ... But if the obvious can be muddied a bit in court...

Anybody dense enough to actually be confused by those instructions, would probably best serve the human race as a Darwin Award recipient.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 04, 2011, 05:12 PM
You can bet your ass there is a lawyer behind it. Because (in reality) nobody is really that dumb ... But if the obvious can be muddied a bit in court...

Anybody dense enough to actually be confused by those instructions, would probably best serve the human race as a Darwin Award recipient.
-Stoic Joker (March 04, 2011, 05:09 PM)

+1 and +1
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 04, 2011, 05:18 PM
Because (in reality) nobody is really that dumb ...
-Stoic Joker (March 04, 2011, 05:09 PM)

And -1. I think that there really are people that are that stupid.

Evidence? Sure~! :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Churchw

They provoked Anonymous:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12523184

And now their website is offline:

www . godhatesfags . com

(Not giving them any link juice.)

But seriously... There's no end to just how surprisingly stupid some people can be. The only truly sad thing is that there are other idiots out there trying to keep them in the gene pool~! :P
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on March 04, 2011, 06:16 PM
But seriously... There's no end to just how surprisingly stupid some people can be. The only truly sad thing is that there are other idiots out there trying to keep them in the gene pool~!
-Renegade (March 04, 2011, 05:18 PM)

That's why I tossed in the second part as a qualifier... ;)

I saw the real-time hack that Anonymous did during the WBC interview and almost pissed myself laughing ... That was truly a beautiful thing to watch (hatred fall down go boom (hehehe)).
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 04, 2011, 07:29 PM
But seriously... There's no end to just how surprisingly stupid some people can be. The only truly sad thing is that there are other idiots out there trying to keep them in the gene pool~!
-Renegade (March 04, 2011, 05:18 PM)

That's why I tossed in the second part as a qualifier... ;)

I saw the real-time hack that Anonymous did during the WBC interview and almost pissed myself laughing ... That was truly a beautiful thing to watch (hatred fall down go boom (hehehe)).
-Stoic Joker (March 04, 2011, 06:16 PM)

I didn't see that. Do you have a link for a video of it? I'd love to see that~! :D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: app103 on March 04, 2011, 07:33 PM
I'd like to know why a non-countable noun can become a singular countable noun, but not a plural countable noun. I think it has to do with them being assumed contractions of the form "# units of noun" to "a noun" or "nouns".
-Renegade (March 04, 2011, 07:13 AM)

You can have a can of beer.
You can have a bottle of beer.
You can have a glass of beer.

You can have a few cans of beer.
You can have a few bottles of beer.
You can have a few glasses of beer.

What you are actually having is cans, bottles, or glasses.....of beer.

Without specifying whether it is in a can, bottle or glass...

You can have a beer.
You can have a few beers.

What you are actually having is [units] of beer....aka beers.



e.g.

I'd like a water.

But not:

I'd like some waters.

How many different waters do you see in this photo?

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Renegade on March 04, 2011, 07:57 PM
I'd like to know why a non-countable noun can become a singular countable noun, but not a plural countable noun. I think it has to do with them being assumed contractions of the form "# units of noun" to "a noun" or "nouns".
-Renegade (March 04, 2011, 07:13 AM)

You can have a can of beer.
You can have a bottle of beer.
You can have a glass of beer.

You can have a few cans of beer.
You can have a few bottles of beer.
You can have a few glasses of beer.

What you are actually having is cans, bottles, or glasses.....of beer.

Without specifying whether it is in a can, bottle or glass...

You can have a beer.
You can have a few beers.

What you are actually having is [units] of beer....aka beers.



e.g.

I'd like a water.

But not:

I'd like some waters.

How many different waters do you see in this photo?
 (see attachment in previous post (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=25924.msg240160#msg240160))
-app103 (March 04, 2011, 07:33 PM)

That's "what it is", but not why. I'm curious as to how contractions by deletion of units (and the like) works. I'm not a linguist, so I can't really speculate.





@Stoic Joker -- Found it -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZJwSjor4hM :)

I just hated listening to her. She's just painful to listen to. The video would have been much better with her edited out entirely. :)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: housetier on March 05, 2011, 03:10 AM
There is a weblog about grammar as well: Throw Grammar from the Train (http://throwgrammarfromthetrain.blogspot.com/)

I have only glimpsed at a post about National Grammar Day (http://throwgrammarfromthetrain.blogspot.com/2011/03/its-international-grammar-day.html).

It shows that we are not alone with our concerns about grammar :)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: crabby3 on February 10, 2014, 08:26 AM
Am I the only one that's annoyed by the seemingly decreasing quality of language in "professional" news, articles and general writing?

I really don't care about people making mistakes in forums or informal writing. A lot of people don't speak English as their first language, and that's not a problem. What I find annoying is "professional" media that simply don't know how to use English properly.

e.g.
* Statistical "outlyers". It's "outliers". Sigh...
* "mass nouns" -- They're called "countable" and "uncountable", not "mass".
* Verb agreement

The list goes on and on.

It's just jarring to get "hit" by grammar, spelling, and word choice mistakes that there really is no excuse for.

It's one thing for it to be "the odd time", but it's not. It's all the time.

Am I just super-anal? Is poor grammar really acceptable in professional media?


-Renegade (March 01, 2011, 08:43 PM)

can't here/scan no pro info, yokel stuffs way 2 boaring to.  :)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on February 10, 2014, 11:49 AM
Am I the only one that's annoyed by the seemingly decreasing quality of language in "professional" news, articles and general writing?

I really don't care about people making mistakes in forums or informal writing. A lot of people don't speak English as their first language, and that's not a problem. What I find annoying is "professional" media that simply don't know how to use English properly.

e.g.
* Statistical "outlyers". It's "outliers". Sigh...
* "mass nouns" -- They're called "countable" and "uncountable", not "mass".
* Verb agreement

The list goes on and on.

It's just jarring to get "hit" by grammar, spelling, and word choice mistakes that there really is no excuse for.

It's one thing for it to be "the odd time", but it's not. It's all the time.

Am I just super-anal? Is poor grammar really acceptable in professional media?


-Renegade (March 01, 2011, 08:43 PM)

can't here/scan no pro info, yokel stuffs way 2 boaring to.  :)
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 08:26 AM)

Yokels?! Hell man we're in "The South" grammar is so far gone here "the yokels" get close captioned on the history/discovery channel. God knows why the hell these people are considered fun to watch (much like a train wreck I guess). Jesus Christ man, when people have to be close captioned (e.g. translated for) on the local news because their enunciation is really that bad...there is a serious problem ... And I don't think it in the water either.  :D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: IainB on February 10, 2014, 01:28 PM
...Hell man we're in "The South" grammar is so far gone here "the yokels" get close captioned on the history/discovery channel...
-Stoic Joker (February 10, 2014, 11:49 AM)
If that were true, then I would suggest that the captions might be for the hard of hearing.
If it were not true, then it's a very droll remark.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: crabby3 on February 10, 2014, 04:55 PM
can't here/scan no pro info, yokel stuffs way 2 boaring to.  :)
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 08:26 AM)

Yokels?! Hell man we're in "The South" grammar is so far gone here "the yokels" get close captioned on the history/discovery channel. God knows why the hell these people are considered fun to watch (much like a train wreck I guess). Jesus Christ man, when people have to be close captioned (e.g. translated for) on the local news because their enunciation is really that bad...there is a serious problem ... And I don't think it in the water either.  :D
-Stoic Joker (February 10, 2014, 11:49 AM)

Don't know where you are.  I'm in 'the South of Florida'.  Not The South or The Deep South.  That begins to end up around the border.
Back when the History and Discovery channels had less *reality* crap they had shows referring to The South.  Never mentioned Florida.
It was always Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Carolinas ..

Florida seems to be like a giant gravity water filter.  Don't know about Tampa but as you pass Mickey... most of 'The South' was been trapped.
Some make it down as far as the lake but the All-You-Can-Eat catfish places usually grab those.

...Hell man we're in "The South" grammar is so far gone here "the yokels" get close captioned on the history/discovery channel...
-Stoic Joker (February 10, 2014, 11:49 AM)
If that were true, then I would suggest that the captions might be for the hard of hearing.
-IainB (February 10, 2014, 01:28 PM)

When Closed-Captioned (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/closed-captioned) first started, down here, a voice would say: This program is Closed-Captioned for the hearing-impaired.  Of course this was stupid.
Soon they switched to verbage only.  Much, much better.  These days it's just cc in a box.

can't here/scan no pro info, yokel stuffs way 2 boaring to.
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 08:26 AM)

 ... hard making this joke .. ;D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on February 10, 2014, 05:11 PM
...Hell man we're in "The South" grammar is so far gone here "the yokels" get close captioned on the history/discovery channel...
-Stoic Joker (February 10, 2014, 11:49 AM)
If that were true, then I would suggest that the captions might be for the hard of hearing.
If it were not true, then it's a very droll remark.
-IainB (February 10, 2014, 01:28 PM)

The accents really are that bad. They can be heard just fine...but they must be translated for those unfamiliar with the tendency to jumble an entire sentence into a single (somewhat long) "word".
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on February 10, 2014, 05:19 PM
Don't know where you are.  I'm in 'the South of Florida'.  Not The South or The Deep South.  That begins to end up around the border.
Back when the History and Discovery channels had less *reality* crap they had shows referring to The South.  Never mentioned Florida.
It was always Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Carolinas ..
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 04:55 PM)

I'm in the middle of central Florida. And while "The South" might officially end at the border...straying more than a mile or so off the interstate around here will bring one up to speed real fast about how far south The South really goes. We're talking Rebel flags, Confederate money, a 5th grade education, and 3 teeth per family - that's extended on both sides (assuming there are actually 2 sides...) mind you.

There are places in the national forest here that the cops won't go into with less than 3 vehicles in a caravan.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: IainB on February 10, 2014, 05:26 PM
...The accents really are that bad. They can be heard just fine...but they must be translated for those unfamiliar with the tendency to jumble an entire sentence into a single (somewhat long) "word"...
-Stoic Joker (February 10, 2014, 05:11 PM)
Gosh, then the language has become rather like a local dialect. Mind you, American-English is arguably a dialect of received English anyway.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: crabby3 on February 10, 2014, 05:37 PM
Don't know where you are.  I'm in 'the South of Florida'.  Not The South or The Deep South.  That begins to end up around the border.
Back when the History and Discovery channels had less *reality* crap they had shows referring to The South.  Never mentioned Florida.
It was always Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Carolinas ..
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 04:55 PM)

I'm in the middle of central Florida. And while "The South" might officially end at the border...straying more than a mile or so off the interstate around here will bring one up to speed real fast about how far south The South really goes. We're talking Rebel flags, Confederate money, a 5th grade education, and 3 teeth per family - that's extended on both sides (assuming there are actually 2 sides...) mind you.

There are places in the national forest here that the cops won't go into with less than 3 vehicles in a caravan.
-Stoic Joker (February 10, 2014, 05:19 PM)

This is above Orlando?  We have Rebels, counterfeit money, many GED's and no teeth per.

We have the Everglades but the cops don't bother chasing.  There's only a few places with semi-potable water any time of year.
If the perps are driving... there's only one western exit... with cops waiting.  Most turn around and face the music.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: 4wd on February 10, 2014, 06:44 PM
On SBS World News here, we sometimes get stories with subtitles for interviews with people in Africa - who are speaking understandable English.  They might then have a news story from somewhere in the UK where, because it's Scotland, Yorkshire, etc, you have to wonder wtf they saying even though it's meant to be English ;D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: app103 on February 10, 2014, 07:05 PM
On SBS World News here, we sometimes get stories with subtitles for interviews with people in Africa - who are speaking understandable English.  They might then have a news story from somewhere in the UK where, because it's Scotland, Yorkshire, etc, you have to wonder wtf they saying even though it's meant to be English ;D
-4wd (February 10, 2014, 06:44 PM)

I have relatives that make Facebook posts that seem like that, loaded with misspellings and bad grammar, completely void of any punctuation and capitalization. I often wish that the "Translate this post" option would show up underneath.  :o

The other day, when someone mentioned it to one of my relatives, remarking that it was the longest "sentence" that he had ever seen, begging for some punctuation, the relative replied "Really [redacted] u run a train all night an ur telling me i have to put dot in there so u no when to take some air in come on ur smarter then that lol ok if i have to tell u take some air now read U just want me to say ur smart again stop take some more air lmao just joshing u"

I'd also like to point out that I am a high school dropout...and she is a college grad. :(
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: TaoPhoenix on February 10, 2014, 07:07 PM
Am I the only one that's annoyed by the seemingly decreasing quality of language in "professional" news, articles and general writing?

I really don't care about people making mistakes in forums or informal writing. A lot of people don't speak English as their first language, and that's not a problem. What I find annoying is "professional" media that simply don't know how to use English properly.

e.g.
* Statistical "outlyers". It's "outliers". Sigh...
* "mass nouns" -- They're called "countable" and "uncountable", not "mass".
* Verb agreement

The list goes on and on.

It's just jarring to get "hit" by grammar, spelling, and word choice mistakes that there really is no excuse for.

It's one thing for it to be "the odd time", but it's not. It's all the time.

Am I just super-anal? Is poor grammar really acceptable in professional media?


-Renegade (March 01, 2011, 08:43 PM)
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 08:26 AM)

Naw, you're not going crazy Ren. "Professional" media took a hit with the rise of Bloggers and the Web mauling their cash cows of comics and classifieds and a few other things that *also* helped pay for a Few Good Men.

"Professional" blogs are really feeling the heat to "post or perish", and that's where for me the worst mistakes are seen to be made.

Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: TaoPhoenix on February 10, 2014, 07:29 PM
Gosh, then the language has become rather like a local dialect. Mind you, American-English is arguably a dialect of received English anyway.
-IainB (February 10, 2014, 05:26 PM)

Actually to amuse you, I would like to suggest half seriously that "dialect" is a "space time" phenomenon! I am a partial "style empath" depending on what I am reading as a Project. (Not just a misc wiki entry, but when I really get into a Project of the Month.)

This Month the project is a writer called O. Henry. Y'all may have heard of him, but except for the five or so staple classics that always show up in English Class textbooks, I bet you haven't seen his real flair for a really "Heavy Narrator" and fondness for "Parallel Sentences" and such. He also so mastered his style that when he passed away, no one had the heart to try to best him at it for decades.

Nowadays the Heavy Narrator is frowned upon, though I've noticed Tom Clancy at it.

Let's try an example, modified (badly!) for the times:

Mouser was displeased. A man of less culture and poise but more wealth would have sworn out of arrogance. However, Mouser was more cultured, more poised, and less wealthy, and "Two out of Three Ain't Bad" is true, except the first two are MeatLoaf and meatloaf, making poor Mouser the third, and he was in a bad way.

His Thesis wasn't going well. All Genius is bestowed upon us by Karma Angels, but poor Mouser's Karma could not quite afford the highest grade Genius. He received just enough to become tantalized by the Higher Orders, but not yet to solve them. So while taking some time to ponder, an image of a little white bird crossed his luminescent mind.

So Mouser strapped some code to his hard drive, ordered a pizza, and set out to make his or somebody else's fortune with a software site designed upon begging with onion tears asking for donations. Thus TearyEyedProgrammer DonationCoder was born.

:D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: IainB on February 10, 2014, 11:17 PM
...They might then have a news story from somewhere in the UK where, because it's Scotland, Yorkshire, etc, you have to wonder wtf they saying even though it's meant to be English.
-4wd (February 10, 2014, 06:44 PM)
Speaking as a Yorkshireman, I think you will find that Yorkshire-English is recognised as being an example of having a sort of English dialect, though I am unsure as to how many people actually use the dialect - e.g., "Put wood i'th 'ole." meaning "Put the wood in the hole" (i.e., "Close the door").

Most of the time, what you hear in the news is probably just English spoken with a strong Yorkshire (or, in the case of Scotland, Scottish) accent.
Another example of a dialect could be Cockney rhyming slang (from London).
There was a time when all radio and TV presenters and announcers on the BBC radio/TV were trained to speak a standardised and clear form of English based on "received English", and it gave rise to what became commonly known as "BBC Midlands English", but the new mantra has become "diversity", so now it seems that anything goes, no matter how incomprehensible, and the the thicker the better. I must admit I think some of the regional accents are very interesting and easy on the ear, but it doesn't surprise me if people sometimes say that they can't understand what is being said.
If you listen to BBC Cymru (Wales) you will hear spoken not English, but an entirely different language - Welsh - which is incomprehensible to those who have never learned to speak Welsh, though it has adopted many modern English words, but puts its own slant/emphasis on them.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: tomos on February 11, 2014, 05:15 AM
On SBS World News here, we sometimes get stories with subtitles for interviews with people in Africa - who are speaking understandable English.  They might then have a news story from somewhere in the UK where, because it's Scotland, Yorkshire, etc, you have to wonder wtf they saying even though it's meant to be English ;D
-4wd (February 10, 2014, 06:44 PM)
:D

Gosh, then the language has become rather like a local dialect. Mind you, American-English is arguably a dialect of received English anyway.
-IainB (February 10, 2014, 05:26 PM)
-
which 'English' was, in turn, a dialect of English which got favoured for use as 'proper' English (London English, I think).
Ironically many of the quirks of American-English (for English speakers from East of the Atlantic) were words and pronunciations that stayed the same -- while English in England changed and evolved. Of course it happened the other way too. (This happens to a lesser extent with Irish-English - more with word pronunciations.)

In Maine the accent is reminiscent of a Yorkshire accent (I found). In Eastern Canada and Newfoundland you can hear accents distinctly derived from *local* Irish accents -- this from people who have lived there for generations.


Edit// Iain, I had missed your post above. Yeah, 'BBC English' was a part of that too.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: crabby3 on February 11, 2014, 05:38 AM

How many different waters do you see in this photo?
 (see attachment in previous post (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=25924.msg240160#msg240160))
-app103 (March 04, 2011, 07:33 PM)

Two?   :huh:
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on February 11, 2014, 07:10 AM
Don't know where you are.  I'm in 'the South of Florida'.  Not The South or The Deep South.  That begins to end up around the border.
Back when the History and Discovery channels had less *reality* crap they had shows referring to The South.  Never mentioned Florida.
It was always Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Carolinas ..
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 04:55 PM)

I'm in the middle of central Florida. And while "The South" might officially end at the border...straying more than a mile or so off the interstate around here will bring one up to speed real fast about how far south The South really goes. We're talking Rebel flags, Confederate money, a 5th grade education, and 3 teeth per family - that's extended on both sides (assuming there are actually 2 sides...) mind you.

There are places in the national forest here that the cops won't go into with less than 3 vehicles in a caravan.
-Stoic Joker (February 10, 2014, 05:19 PM)

This is above Orlando? 
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 05:37 PM)

Yes, ~80 miles north.

We have Rebels, counterfeit money, many GED's and no teeth per.

We have the Everglades but the cops don't bother chasing.  There's only a few places with semi-potable water any time of year.
If the perps are driving... there's only one western exit... with cops waiting.  Most turn around and face the music.
-crabby3 (February 10, 2014, 05:37 PM)

(hehe) now you're getting it. Florida being a transient state (e.g. most residents are from somewhere else) likes to pretend they're above all that Mason Dixon line shit ... But they're not. We're just as much The South (as the true locals quickly show) as the rest of the (classically held as) Southern states.

Mind you I'm not sayin' that it's good or bad ... I'm simply pointing out that it is. ;)


@IainB - I was actually trying really hard not to use the word 'dialect' ...(as it tends to upset the locals)... But yes it does rather fit.


How many different waters do you see in this photo?
 (see attachment in previous post (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=25924.msg240160#msg240160))
-app103 (March 04, 2011, 07:33 PM)

Two?   :huh:
-crabby3 (February 11, 2014, 05:38 AM)

Agreed. Two waters strikes me as correct also. :D
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: IainB on February 11, 2014, 02:35 PM
How many different waters do you see in this photo?
 (see attachment in previous post (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=25924.msg240160#msg240160))
_____________________________
-app103 (March 04, 2011, 07:33 PM)
Two?   :huh:
_____________________________
-crabby3 (February 11, 2014, 05:38 AM)
Agreed. Two waters strikes me as correct also. :D
_____________________________
-Stoic Joker (February 11, 2014, 07:10 AM)

I'm not sure there is necessarily a "correct" answer here. The answer would probably differ depending on how you defined "waters":

From Concise Oxford Dictionary (10th Ed.)
water
· n.
1 the liquid which forms the seas, lakes, rivers, and rain and is the basis of the fluids of living organisms. [Chemical formula: H2O.] Ø one of the four elements in ancient and medieval philosophy and in astrology. Ø (the waters) the water of a mineral spring as used medicinally. Ø a solution of a specified substance in water: ammonia water. Ø urine. Ø (waters) amniotic fluid, especially as discharged shortly before birth.
2 (the water) a stretch of water, such as a river, sea, or lake. Ø the surface of this. Ø [as modifier] found in, on, or near the water. Ø (waters) an area of sea regarded as under the jurisdiction of a particular country.
3 the quality of transparency and brilliance shown by a diamond or other gem.
4 Finance capital stock which represents a book value greater than the true assets of a company.
· v.
1 pour water over (a plant or an area of ground). Ø give a drink of water to (an animal). Ø take a fresh supply of water on board (a ship or steam train).
2 (of the eyes or mouth) produce tears or saliva.
3 dilute (a drink, typically an alcoholic one) with water. Ø (water something down) make something less forceful or controversial by changing or leaving out certain details.
4 (of a river) flow through (an area).
5 Finance increase (a company’s debt, or nominal capital) by the issue of new shares without a corresponding addition to assets.
– PHRASES like water in great quantities. make water (of a ship or boat) take in water through a leak. of the first water 1 (of a diamond or pearl) of the greatest brilliance and transparency. 2 referring to a person or thing unsurpassed of their kind: she was a bore of the first water. under water submerged; flooded. the water of life whisky. water on the brain informal hydrocephalus. water under the bridge (or N. Amer. water over the dam) past events that are over and done with.
– DERIVATIVES waterer n. waterless adj.
– ORIGIN OE wæter (n.), wæterian (v.), of Gmc origin.
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: Stoic Joker on February 11, 2014, 03:33 PM
I was actually just going with liquid and solid (ice at bottom of photo) for a total of 2.

I did not however see any lakes in the photo. ;)
Title: Re: A Point About Grammar
Post by: IainB on February 12, 2014, 02:39 AM
I was actually just going with liquid and solid (ice at bottom of photo) for a total of 2.
I did not however see any lakes in the photo. ;)
-Stoic Joker (February 11, 2014, 03:33 PM)
OK, as I recall from my fisics edukation, any substance (such as water) that can go from vapour<-->liquid<-->solid at different temps/pressures is said to be going through "phases". So water in liquid and ice form would be examples of two phases of water, by definition.

Presumably, all bottled water is for drinking, so you could call this "bottled potable water". Some bottled water might come from mineral springs with dissolved minerals, and these can be called "waters" per the above Concise Oxford Dictionary definition (and also as mentioned here (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=28386.msg266332#msg266332) in DCF), and some bottled water might be distilled water (pure H20 condensate from a distillation process). You could call these "different types" of water.
The plastic bottled water reputedly could contain BPn compounds from the plastic manufacturing process, so you might call these potentially "contaminated" or "polluted" types of potable water. Water is a universal solvent, and thus not all water is potable as it could contain all manner of harmful-to-health dissolved chemicals. Water also can contain bacteria that is dangerous to human health and this would usually not be potable either. All water on the planet is recycled water.

Then there's tap water. Oddly enough, this is the water that has been shown to be the safest to bottle and drink in urbanised societies, from a human health standpoint, because it has been mucked about with quite a lot before it runs out of the tap. It is water that has been filtered using various filters including insoluble aluminium compounds to flock/trap particulates in suspension, and then contaminated (treated) with a small amount of dissolved toxic/poisonous gas - chlorine - to sterilise the water. Some urban water also has an added toxin - stannous fluoride (a compound of the metal tin) which scientists tell us is good for our teeth by helping to reduce the incidence of decay.

The most beneficial potable water from a human health standpoint would be water containing lots of useful (to the human organism) dissolved minerals (so, for example, dissolved toxic lead minerals would make it not potable, by definition), and the least beneficial would be pure distilled water.

Some people reckon that the nicest-tasting water is that used to water down a glass of whisky, whereas others say that it spoils the taste of the whisky.

Water is the cause of the greatest solvent abuse and addiction on the planet, and causes many deaths. People can't seem to live without having to imbibe large amounts of it every day, and inhaling the stuff can be fatal.