"Of" and "have"

[Mayerling]

I recall another odd word confustion. When I was a kid I had a coloring book about the American Presidents, and while reading the biography of President James Polk I was surprised to find that when he went to a fine type of finishing school before going to college he seemed to have an interest in eastern European languages. The sentence said that at the school he was educated with the finest learning and "polish". For a number of months yours truly wondered why the 11th President, instead of learning Greek, Latin, French (or even German or Hebrew or Spanish) was learning the language spoken in Warsaw. My sister finally explained to me that it was not "Polish" but "polish" referring to proper manners of behavior.

Jeff

[caz]

In the Radio Times I was alarmed to see that someone had 'another thing coming' instead of 'another think coming', and I doubt it was a typo.

A common error, for which there is very little excuse, is 'pronounciation' - used by a poster to this very thread!

Also, I have lost count of the number of times I have seen otherwise intelligent posters using 'who's' when they mean 'whose' or 'it's' when they mean 'its'.

'It's' should only be used for 'it is', as in 'it is still pissing down with rain here'.

When the cat is licking its fur, there should be no apostrophe in sight.

Love,

Caz
X

[Ally]

Oh I am totally guilty of the it's/its thing. I even know the difference and firmly know that its is possessive. However, nine times out of ten, when I am writing and I go back and look, I've typed "it's". Probably because I use it's more than its and therefore my fingers type it without my brain being consciously aware of it. Drives me crazy when I catch it after the fact, but yes, I am completely guilty of that one.

[RivkahChaya]

Hi All,

One of my most hated manglings of the English language is "I bought it off him" instead of "I bought it from him."

Regards,

Simon

In the US, "bought it off," rather than "bought it from" means something specific. It's sort of a collapsing together of "took off" (or "got off, but since "got off" also means something else, you don't hear it as often), and "bought from," "took off" meaning something a little shady, but short of actual theft.

Anyway, you'd never say you bought something "off" of Walmart; "bought off" is reserved for stuff you bought from the guy on the corner, who probably did not have a vendor's license, or something someone wasn't even intending to sell, but you talked him into it, or maybe something you haggled for at a flea market.

When you say you "bought it off" someone, one can almost see it happening literally-- you liked someone's interesting jacket, and made him an offer for it, and he agreed, and took it off, and gave it to you.

A common error, for which there is very little excuse, is 'pronounciation' - used by a poster to this very thread!

My tablet does not have the word "pronunciation" in its dictionary, for some reason, and tries to get me to change it to "pronounce ation." I think I've caught it every time. I really hate its autocorrect feature, and I wish I could figure out how to turn it off, but I can't find the manual. Sometimes in trying to fix an autocorrect, where I originally spelled something correctly, but it wasn't in the dictionary, and the tablet changed it to an entirely different word, I end up changing it back, but spelling it wrong. That makes me so mad.

Is "exhonerate" really a correct spelling in Britain? I see it a lot on the board, not just from one poster, so I thought it might be like "faecal matter."

Split infinitives are not "correct" in the US, just because you may see them from us all the time.

[Phil H]

Split infinitives are not "correct" in the US, just because you may see them from us all the time.

I stand "corrected"!!

On the other hand, I think they are acceptable in the US, far more than in the UK. Here the concept is frequently not understood, but educated people will often draw conclusions about the relative literacy and education level of people who split their infinitives and draw conclusions on that basis.

Snobbish maybe, but true.

Phil

[caz]

Is "exhonerate" really a correct spelling in Britain? I see it a lot on the board, not just from one poster, so I thought it might be like "faecal matter."

It should be "exonerate" but "faecal" is fine for Brits. "Fecal" is the American version.

In Britain it should also be "licence" and "practice" for the noun, and only "license" and "practise" for the verb.

Split infinitives are not "correct" in the US, just because you may see them from us all the time.

I believe the rule is softening a bit here these days. It only came about because in Latin the infinitive is all one word and would therefore never have been split by another word. Since "to go" is naturally two words in English, and Latin is not widely used any more (or taught in every school), there is no special reason, apart from snobbery perhaps, as Phil suggests, why "to boldly go" need be considered incorrect, so it's more a matter of style and personal preference. Many of us have been conditioned to wince at the sound of it, including me - but maybe that's a tad unfair and we should move with the times.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Oh I am totally guilty of the it's/its thing. I even know the difference and firmly know that its is possessive. However, nine times out of ten, when I am writing and I go back and look, I've typed "it's". Probably because I use it's more than its and therefore my fingers type it without my brain being consciously aware of it. Drives me crazy when I catch it after the fact, but yes, I am completely guilty of that one.

Me too, Ally. I've done it before and I'll no doubt do it again. But at least we both know the trap and try to avoid it. Whenever I see someone doing it right, and using its correctly, I want to kiss them. So many people - often the pompous ones who talk about scholarship within ripperology - get this one wrong every time and appear not to know they are getting it wrong.

Love,

Caz
X

[Robert]

I think in the most famous example - the 'Star Trek' intro - the split infinitive is reasonable. It comes immediately after the infinitives "to explore..." and "to seek out..." so that 'boldly to go' would be absurd. If instead the writer had "to go boldly" then that would place the emphasis on the boldness when it's really the going that's important. Yet the writer wants to include the idea of boldness, so "to boldly go" seems fine to me.

BTW there are three infinitives in Latin which are composed of two words : the future infinitives active and passive and the perfect infinitive passive.

Caz you'll just have to pray that Howard never uses "its" correctly.

[Phil H]

Split infinitives can, I think, sometimes change the meaning of the sentence. Am I the only one who sees a subtle difference between:

to go boldly

and

to boldly go.

I would also confess not always to checking my grammar on here compared to a more finished hand written (say) piece of prose. I do often check posts for spelling (and give a reason for editing) but I am not always scrupulous. My apologies for those precious souls I offend.

Phil

[Barnaby]

With respect to Smoking Joe's post on the Cambridge research:

I'm wondering if the unsolved Zodiac codes could be something like this. The correct solution translates the code into a garbled mess such as the one above. A computer program, or someone looking for actual words, quickly discards the solution, yet it is readable if someone actually does the full translation and then attempts to read it.

[Scott Nelson]

Whenever I see someone doing it right, and using its correctly, I want to kiss them.

"It has its own merits."

OK, I'm waiting....

[Robert]

See? Howard will be along any time now.

[Limehouse]

What I have heard a lot of recently, is people using adjectives as adverbs as in 'I got there quick' (instead of quickly) or 'He did it proper' (properly).

I have stopped getting all wound up by the misuse of apostrophes but have not given up teaching the correct use to my students.

[Cogidubnus]

Eats Shoots & Leaves

Lynne Truss would be so proud!

All the best

Dave

[Bridewell]

The Subtle Difference

Split infinitives can, I think, sometimes change the meaning of the sentence. Am I the only one who sees a subtle difference between:

to go boldly

and

to boldly go.

Phil

No, Phil. You're not the only one. As I see it

"to go boldly" refers to not only going, but doing so boldly, whereas

""to boldly go" suggests that the very act of going is itself bold. It is subtle, as you say, but I think there is a difference, for what it's worth.