Grammar, Spelling and Usage Peeves

[Wiploc]

^ LOL.

Agreed!

Another good one (or a needless convention that I cling to for no reason) is the subjunctive 'were'. I think the rule is to use 'were' when talking about something that could have been happening right now and 'was' to talk about something that could have happened in the past. So: if I were a banker, I would probably drive a nicer car;

I have no problem with that. It's how most people talk these days. English may be casting off moods.

That is to say, I think it is technically wrong, but I don't know what is right, and most people say it the way you do, so being technically right may not even be desirable.

if I was smarter in college, I would have become a banker. Is this accurate?

Okay, this one I think is wrong. "Was" is past tense, and you are in the past tense, so you can't use "was" as subjunctive. You can say it this way: "If I had been smarter in college, I would have become a banker."

I occasionally get told that I'm wrong about this, but I use "was" for the present tense subjunctive. "I am a banker, so I drive a nice car." "I am a baker, but if I was a banker I would drive a nice car."

 

[PyramidHead]

Okay, this one I think is wrong. "Was" is past tense, and you are in the past tense, so you can't use "was" as subjunctive.

What a language! lol

 

[4321lynx]

Okay, this one I think is wrong. "Was" is past tense, and you are in the past tense, so you can't use "was" as subjunctive.

What a language! lol

This is a mere nothing compared with Spanish verbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_verbs

Spanish verbs undergo inflection according to the following categories:

Tense: past, present, or future
Number: singular or plural
Person: first, second or third
T–V distinction: familiar or formal
Mood: indicative, subjunctive, or imperative
Aspect: perfective or imperfective (distinguished only in the past tense as preterite and imperfect)
Voice: active or passive

The modern Spanish verb system has sixteen distinct complete[1] paradigms (i.e. sets of forms for each combination of tense and mood (tense refers to when the action takes place, and mood or mode refers to the mood of the subject – e.g., certainty vs. doubt), plus one incomplete[2] paradigm (the imperative), as well as three non-temporal forms (the infinitive, gerund, and past participle).

The fourteen regular tenses are also subdivided into seven simple tenses and seven compound tenses

 

[PyramidHead]

This is a mere nothing compared with Spanish verbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_verbs

Spanish verbs undergo inflection according to the following categories:

Tense: past, present, or future
Number: singular or plural
Person: first, second or third
T–V distinction: familiar or formal
Mood: indicative, subjunctive, or imperative
Aspect: perfective or imperfective (distinguished only in the past tense as preterite and imperfect)
Voice: active or passive

The modern Spanish verb system has sixteen distinct complete[1] paradigms (i.e. sets of forms for each combination of tense and mood (tense refers to when the action takes place, and mood or mode refers to the mood of the subject – e.g., certainty vs. doubt), plus one incomplete[2] paradigm (the imperative), as well as three non-temporal forms (the infinitive, gerund, and past participle).

The fourteen regular tenses are also subdivided into seven simple tenses and seven compound tenses

That's intense.

 

[Tharmas]

Agreed!





I have no problem with that. It's how most people talk these days. English may be casting off moods.

That is to say, I think it is technically wrong, but I don't know what is right, and most people say it the way you do, so being technically right may not even be desirable.

if I was smarter in college, I would have become a banker. Is this accurate?

Okay, this one I think is wrong. "Was" is past tense, and you are in the past tense, so you can't use "was" as subjunctive. You can say it this way: "If I had been smarter in college, I would have become a banker."

I occasionally get told that I'm wrong about this, but I use "was" for the present tense subjunctive. "I am a banker, so I drive a nice car." "I am a baker, but if I was a banker I would drive a nice car."

So would you say "If I was you..."?

 

[Wiploc]

So would you say "If I was you..."?

Yes, present tense: "I am me, but if I was you, then..."

Past tense: "I was me, but if I were you..." Or, "I was me, but if I had been you."

Last time I had this conversation, somebody told me that "be" is the present tense subjunctive, as in, "I am me, but if I be you..." But I've never heard anybody talk like that, with the possible exception of Hamlet ("To be or not to be...").

 

[4321lynx]

This is a mere nothing compared with Spanish verbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_verbs

Spanish verbs undergo inflection according to the following categories:

Tense: past, present, or future
Number: singular or plural
Person: first, second or third
T–V distinction: familiar or formal
Mood: indicative, subjunctive, or imperative
Aspect: perfective or imperfective (distinguished only in the past tense as preterite and imperfect)
Voice: active or passive

The modern Spanish verb system has sixteen distinct complete[1] paradigms (i.e. sets of forms for each combination of tense and mood (tense refers to when the action takes place, and mood or mode refers to the mood of the subject – e.g., certainty vs. doubt), plus one incomplete[2] paradigm (the imperative), as well as three non-temporal forms (the infinitive, gerund, and past participle).

The fourteen regular tenses are also subdivided into seven simple tenses and seven compound tenses

That's intense.

 

[bilby]

So would you say "If I was you..."?

Yes, present tense: "I am me, but if I was you, then..."

Past tense: "I was me, but if I were you..." Or, "I was me, but if I had been you."

Last time I had this conversation, somebody told me that "be" is the present tense subjunctive, as in, "I am me, but if I be you..." But I've never heard anybody talk like that, with the possible exception of Hamlet ("To be or not to be...").

If I were you, I would only use 'be' if it was 'talk like a pirate' day.

 

[Wiploc]

So would you say "If I was you..."?

Yes, present tense: "I am me, but if I was you, then..."

Past tense: "I was me, but if I were you..." Or, "I was me, but if I had been you."

Last time I had this conversation, somebody told me that "be" is the present tense subjunctive, as in, "I am me, but if I be you..." But I've never heard anybody talk like that, with the possible exception of Hamlet ("To be or not to be...").

If I were you, I would only use 'be' if it was 'talk like a pirate' day.

 

[Rhea]

I believe the way I prefer it is the correct pronunciation.

I totally think that, too.

 

[Tharmas]

i.e. when e.g. is meant, and vice versa, which seems less common.

 

[Angry Floof]

i.e. when e.g. is meant, and vice versa, which seems less common.

I had no problem with this for decades of tech writing and editing. Then just last week I got the two confused on Facebook. (Bilby was there to correct me, though. )

 

[bilby]

i.e. when e.g. is meant, and vice versa, which seems less common.

I had no problem with this for decades of tech writing and editing. Then just last week I got the two confused on Facebook. (Bilby was there to correct me, though. )

I'm thinking of changing my name to Ibid, because I am becoming the most referenced authority on pretty much everything.

 

[Old Woman in Purple]

I believe the way I prefer it is the correct pronunciation.

I totally think that, too.

"I'm not out-of-step; the rest of the parade is!"

 

[Angry Floof]

i.e. when e.g. is meant, and vice versa, which seems less common.

I had no problem with this for decades of tech writing and editing. Then just last week I got the two confused on Facebook. (Bilby was there to correct me, though. )

I'm thinking of changing my name to Ibid, because I am becoming the most referenced authority on pretty much everything.

You're a pedant-of-all-trades!

 

[Hermit]

People who say and write ‘learnt’ and ‘burnt’ instead of ‘learned’ and ‘burned’.

Seems like you really meaned what you writed.

Learnt, burnt, earnt, spelt etc* are slowly but surely on its way to anachronia.


* I hate it when people spell it as "ect". That's not how it's spelt, people!

 

[rousseau]

When people get pedantic about the incorrect usage of 'less' when the correct word is 'fewer', even though the word less is being used because it has fewer phonemes and can easily be understood given context. Sometimes instinct, sub-conscious usage, and plain language leads to better communication than more cogent pedantry.

Other than that.. I'm good.

 

[bilby]

When people get pedantic about the incorrect usage of 'less' when the correct word is 'fewer', even though the word less is being used because it has fewer phonemes and can easily be understood given context. Sometimes instinct, sub-conscious usage, and plain language leads to better communication than more cogent pedantry.

Other than that.. I'm good.

I disagree. Theres nothing at all that is difficult to understand about the word 'fewer'. We should not let supermarket's and greengrocer's dictate our use of language.

 

[rousseau]

When people get pedantic about the incorrect usage of 'less' when the correct word is 'fewer', even though the word less is being used because it has fewer phonemes and can easily be understood given context. Sometimes instinct, sub-conscious usage, and plain language leads to better communication than more cogent pedantry.

Other than that.. I'm good.

I disagree. Theres nothing at all that is difficult to understand about the word 'fewer'. We should not let supermarket's and greengrocer's dictate our use of language.

It's about the phonemes and syllables man.

I'd take the drunk down the street who asks me 'if ur home' over the person who prides themselves on the complexity of their language, when it takes more effort.

 

[bilby]

When people get pedantic about the incorrect usage of 'less' when the correct word is 'fewer', even though the word less is being used because it has fewer phonemes and can easily be understood given context. Sometimes instinct, sub-conscious usage, and plain language leads to better communication than more cogent pedantry.

Other than that.. I'm good.

I disagree. Theres nothing at all that is difficult to understand about the word 'fewer'. We should not let supermarket's and greengrocer's dictate our use of language.

It's about the phonemes and syllables man.

I'd take the drunk down the street who asks me 'if ur home' over the person who prides themselves on the complexity of their language, when it takes more effort.

While I am the first to declare that laziness is a virtue, I cannot but disagree; Complex language done correctly requires less effort to comprehend than the simplified utterances of the poorly educated. More signal means more redundancy, and leads to fewer errors in comprehension, and as a result less effort in order to capture the meaning being conveyed.

It's like the ICAO/NATO phonetic alphabet; The use of more phonemes and syllables reduces the possibility of error. 'N' sounds much the same as 'M', but nobody confuses 'November' for 'Mike'.

Oscar Kilo?