I was thinking the other day of the meaning of the word "stuff".

When I was young (many years ago) it mostly meant " a material, textile or cloth - usually woollen."

Nowadays though, it is used to describe almost anything - in a vague, imprecise sort of way.

It has become just a "filler" word.

Here are two examples from the conversation of modern teenagers:

A: Watcha been up to?
B: Eh? ... You mean what stuff?
A: Yeah. Do anything cool?
B: Did some stuff.
A: Buy anything?
B: Nah... just some stuff.

Sharon (whispers): OMG! There's stuff on my computer
Marlene (whispers): What stuff?
Sharon (whispers): It's STUFF ... On my computer
Marlene (whispers): What stuff like?
Sharon (whispers): In my FAVORITES...there's STUFF!
Marlene (whispers): Whose stuff?
Sharon (whispers) : It's not MY stuff... it's like not good stuff, neither.
Marlene: Wow! Let me like see.

Which brings me to the use of the word "like".

To me it means "similar" or "as", but It is now another "filler" word:

1. She like slapped me.
2. I bought like a wallet.
3. It's like huge.
4. I like must have been outside.
5. It's like around the corner.

It adds nothing and becomes a habit, like "basically" - another of my pet hates. Leave it out.

Those are extreme examples, but I am afraid that is the way our English language is going!

Before I close - a quotation I have just remembered from Shakespeare's "The Tempest":

"We are such STUFF as dreams are made of

And our little life is rounded with a sleep."

(But he used "stuff" with the old meaning of "material")

I am always being reminded that the purpose of language is communication and we should not be bound by strict rules.

So, to finish, here is an amusing little anecdote:

A pedantic teacher of the old school was informing his pupils that two negatives should never be used together - as they always make an affirmative.

He went on to say, " However, you can't put two affirmatives together to make a negative."

At which the whole class shouted: "Yeah, right!"

This is a trollop:

And here are two scallops:

mmmmm ... Delicious!

Tell me something though...

Why do so many people nowadays pronounce "scallop" as "scollop" (to rhyme with "trollop") ?

It is not an alternative pronounciation - although many years ago there WAS an alternative SPELLING - "scollop".

However, my dictionary says that spelling is now "Archaic" - so why can we not all pronounce "scallop" as it spelt today - to rhyme with "gallop"?

I visited London yesterday and saw the following notice on the counter of an open-air cafe:

"IN ORDER TO MAXIMISE YOUR EXPERIENCE WE DO NOT ACCEPT CREDIT CARDS"

It took me some time to realise that what they really meant was:

"To avoid inconveniencing you with delays at the pay-point, we only accept CASH"

And, of course, they don't have to pay the credit card commission!

Are you a Tautologist?

Do you indulge in needless repetition of an idea by using unnecessary extra words, as in the title above?

Here are some more examples:

All MPs voted unanimously 'yes'.

Free gift

Added bonus

New innovation

Widow woman

Pre-book and (even better) pre-book in advance

". . . the past is over." —George W. Bush

Finally, when a woman gives birth and you ask "What did she have?", how often do you receive the reply: "Oh! a sweet little baby boy" (or girl)?

Well, it would hardly be a TEENAGE boy (or girl) - would it?

In an office:

TOILET OUT OF ORDER...... PLEASE USE FLOOR BELOW

In a Laundromat:

AUTOMATIC WASHING MACHINES: PLEASE REMOVE ALL YOUR CLOTHES WHEN THE LIGHT GOES OUT

In a London department store:

BARGAIN BASEMENT UPSTAIRS

In an office:

WOULD THE PERSON WHO TOOK THE STEP LADDER YESTERDAY PLEASE BRING IT BACK OR FURTHER STEPS WILL BE TAKEN

In an office:

AFTER TEA BREAK STAFF SHOULD EMPTY THE TEAPOT AND STAND UPSIDE DOWN ON THE DRAINING BOARD

Outside a second-hand shop:

WE EXCHANGE ANYTHING - BICYCLES, WASHING MACHINES, ETC. WHY NOT BRING YOUR WIFE ALONG AND GET A WONDERFUL BARGAIN?

Notice in health food shop window:

CLOSED DUE TO ILLNESS

Spotted in a safari park:

ELEPHANTS PLEASE STAY IN YOUR CAR

Seen during a conference:

FOR ANYONE WHO HAS CHILDREN AND DOESN'T KNOW IT, THERE IS A CRECHE ON THE 1ST FLOOR

Notice in a farmer's field:

THE FARMER ALLOWS WALKERS TO CROSS THE FIELD FOR FREE, BUT THE BULL CHARGES.

On a repair shop door:

WE CAN REPAIR ANYTHING. (PLEASE KNOCK HARD ON THE DOOR - THE BELL DOESN'T WORK)

(click on pic to enlarge)

A malapropism (from French mal à propos, "ill to purpose") is an incorrect usage of a word, usually with comic effect. The term comes from the name of Mrs Malaprop, a character in Richard Brinsley Sheridan's comedy, The Rivals (1775).

"He's as headstrong as an allegory on the banks of the Nile." (i.e., alligator)
"He is the very pineapple of politeness." (i.e., pinnacle)
"Then he laid prostate on the ground." (i.e., prostrate)

President Bush is known for his malapropisms which, in the US, are known as "Bushisms".

Here are some of them:

"It will take time to restore chaos and order."

"I am mindful not only of preserving executive powers for myself, but for my predecessors as well."

"We cannot let terrorists and rogue nations hold this nation hostile or hold our allies hostile."

And one from the Vice President:

"Republicans understand the importance of bondage between a mother and child."

American pronunciation of salad fruit from an English county

How often has it happened to you?

You are waiting to emerge from a minor road at a T-Junction and you give way to a vehicle on the main road, approaching from your right.

However, without indicating, the other vehicle turns into the road from which you are emerging.

You have missed your opportunity and now there is a continuous stream of traffic in both directions. You are going to be held up for several minutes.

What do you do?

A friend of mine lowers his window and shouts at the offending driver - "I see you bought the model without the indicators!"

The above is a picture of the Arctic Ocean.

But, how do YOU spell and pronounce the word "Arctic"?

Please note that there are TWO "c"s.

It is the same with "Antarctic" - and "Arctic Roll":

I think part of the confusion is because of the abbreviation "Artic" - used for an Articulated Lorry.

I have read that the original spelling of the words "Arctic"/"Antarctic" in English left out the first "c", which was reintroduced into the spelling at the beginning of the 17th century, most likely in a conscious effort to make the English word conform more closely to its Greek ancestor ("arktikus".)

Quote: "The spelling with the "c" is now, of course, the only acceptable one, but the pronunciation with the "c" is not. Both "Arctic" and "Artic" are equally acceptable in speech."

However, I prefer to sound both "c"s.

But I am a Revolting Pedant!

No new post today. I am having a rest.

Why not check out my other two blog sites:

www.kendrive.blog.co.uk (Somewhere Along The Way)

www.colintellsyouwheretogo.blog.co.uk

You can go back to the beginning by scrolling down to the very bottom and clicking on "Next Page".

My first entry was on 7th June 2005 - "A Short Biography" (on www.kendrive.blog.co.uk "Somewhere Along The Way".)

What is it? Does she speak it?

Here is a dictionary definition:

"A pronunciation of British English, originally based on the speech of the upper class of southeastern England and characteristic of the English spoken at the public schools and at Oxford and Cambridge Universities. Until recently it was the standard form of English used in British broadcasting"

The following is from an article in "The Independent" in December 2000:

"Her Majesty may not be so amused to find that a team of linguists has found her guilty of no longer speaking the Queen's English.

A group of Australian researchers analysed every Christmas message made by the Queen since 1952 and discovered that she now speaks with an intonation more Chelmsford than Windsor.

Subjecting the Queen's speech to intense linguistic analysis, the scientists found that Elizabeth II has dumbed down – albeit unwittingly – to fit in with the classless zeitgeist of New Labour's Britain. Our analysis reveals that the Queen's pronunciation of some vowels has been influenced by the standard southern British accent of the 1980s which is more typically associated with speakers who are younger and lower in the social hierarchy."

A palace spokesman said: "We have been made aware of the research and we leave it for others to assess it."

(Surely that last "it" is unnecessary?)

Then there is "American English". I like this comment: "Though not everybody is aware of the fact nowadays, the English language actually originated in England. Following its historical formation, it has been exported to various continents across the globe, notably North America, where it has since morphed into a new, distinct dialect with its own peculiar spelling and idiosyncratic grammar."

A few years ago an American was appointed editor of The Oxford English Dictionary. He wrote: "Most people want to learn American English. In the past, everyone wanted to learn British English. That was considered the standard. That's not the case anymore."

However, there is an organisation to protect "The Queen's English". Its objects are "to promote and uphold the use of good English, and to encourage the enjoyment of the language. The Society aims to defend the precision, subtlety and marvellous richness of our language against debasement, ambiguity and other forms of misuse."

You can find it at: http://www.queens-english-society.com/

Let me have your comments.

I have to confess something.

I will say it quietly.

I've got a disease!

Like Claire McGowan, an undergraduate at Oxford University, who wrote:

"It's a little bit embarrassing. People might not look at me in the same way again. You see I have a sort of allergy. I'm hyper-sensitive to grammar and punctuation. You could say I suffer from Irritable Vowel Syndrome. (It's also a disease that makes you use really bad puns.) Misuse of apostrophes actually brings me out in a rash. It's actually a lot like the bubonic plague - lots of randomly scattered spots. I've been hiding this affliction for years, feigning indifference to every instance of their/they're confusion, but now I'm speaking out."

Read the rest of her article at:

http://www.oxfordstudent.com/ht2004wk0/Features/the_pedants'_revolt

Also from Oxford, Professor John Kelly of St John's College, could not abide bad punctuation or grammar. It disturbed his dreams - and he confessed that one night, under cover of darkness, he crept out with a bottle of Tippex and inserted the missing apostrophe in "President's Secretary." Then he went back to bed and slept like a child.

I suppose we are all "Revolting Pedants" and we would never confuse any of the following:

The Pedants Revolt = a statement of happening. (The pedants are revolting.)

The Pedant's Revolt = the revolt of a single pedant.

The Pedants' Revolt = the revolt of more than one pedant.

Is there any cure for our malady?

ANSWER to yesterday's question: YES - because, whether it is a learner or a qualified driver, it is against the law. A learner driver must be accompanied by someone qualified and a qualified driver should remove the L plates when he is at the wheel.

Quote: "Any vehicle driven by a learner MUST display red L plates. Plates MUST conform to legal specifications and MUST be clearly visible to others from in front of the vehicle and from behind. (Law MV(DL)R reg 16 & sched 4).

Plates should be removed or covered when not being driven by a learner (except on driving school vehicles)."

So, there you have it!

A qualified driver should NEVER drive a car if L-plates are being displayed. He is committing an offence.

You have been warned!

I suppose the only exception to a learner driver driving alone might be if the vehicle was a one-seater, like the one below.

Question: In the UK, when a car displaying 'L' plates has a single occupant (the driver), is an offence ALWAYS being committed when it is driven on a public highway?

(Answer tomorrow.)

I couldn't resist the following:

With acknowledgements to The Apostrophe Protection Society http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/

Over the next few days I shall be posting a few comments about the wrong use of the apostrophe (see example above).

In the meantime, I thought you might like to read the following excerpt from an article I found when I was doing a "Google" search on the subject:

"Recent work in cognitive rhetoric and the "poetics of mind" stresses the continuites rather than disjunctions between everyday linguistic usage--along with the thought processes presumed to underlie it--and figurative language. Apostrophe, the rhetorical figure identified by deconstructionist rhetoric as exemplifying the excessive, aberrant, "literary" character of figurative language, presents itself as an especially rich subject for reconsideration along cognitive lines. Far from typically striking hearers as unusual or "embarrassing," apostrophes pervade everyday discourse and are readily understood, although verbal artists can manipulate the objects and styles of apostrophic address to create unusual effects. Literary uses of apostrophe present a rough continuum, from familiar addresses to intimates to "bolder" invocations of inanimate objects or abstractions. The perceived unnaturalness of even the latter apostrophes, however, varies according to historical context. [A.R.]"

Can anyone tell me, in 10 words, or fewer, what all that means?

Perhaps even one word!

There seems to be some confusion about the use of the words "less" and "fewer".

Strictly speaking, that sign should read "10 items or fewer".

I have heard of someone who refuses to shop at certain major supermarkets because of the grammatical error - but I think that is going a bit too far!

Basically, the rule is: "If you can count them, use the word 'fewer' and if you can't, it's 'less'.

"Fewer cars on the road results in less traffic. This means less stress which, in turn, will result in fewer headaches."

I don't think it really matters which word is used, so long as it is understood and observed.

It is infuriating waiting, with one item in your hand, behind someone who has 20 items in the "10 Items Or Fewer" line.

And, of course, most cashiers say nothing.

Question: Which is correct - "My husband and I" or "My husband and me" ?

Answer: Both - according to the circumstances.

(1) Correct: "My husband and I welcome you here today"

Equally correct: "I and my husband welcome you here today". But it is preferable to use the former. (It is impolite to put oneself first.)

Definitely INCORRECT: "My husband and me welcome you..." or "Me and my husband welcome you ..."

(How often have you heard something like this? "Me and Pauline went to the disco" - or "Pauline and me went ..." )

(2) Correct: "Thank you to everyone who has sent good wishes to my husband and me".

Incorrect: "Thank you to everyone who has sent good wishes to my husband and I"

If you are not sure, remove one of the two persons from the phrase.

You would not say " ... sent to I".

Finally, why do most people say "I am a friend of Fred's". Fred's what? His cat or his dog?

What is wrong with "I am a friend of Fred" or "I am one of Fred's friends" ?

Now - I feel a lot better for that!

Whew!

P.S. Check out my other blog at: kendrive.blog.co.uk

RULES OF WRITING

1. Verbs HAS to agree with their subjects.
2. Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
3. And don't start a sentence with a conjunction.
4. It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
5. Avoid cliches like the plague. (They're old hat)
6. Also, always avoid annoying alliteration.
7. Be more or less specific.
8. Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary.
9. Also too, never, ever use repetitive redundancies.
10. No sentence fragments.
11. Contractions aren't necessary and shouldn't be used.
12. Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
13. Do not be redundant; do not use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
14. One should NEVER generalise.
15. Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
16. Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
17. One-word sentences? Eliminate.
18. Analogies in writing are like water off a duck's back..
19. Eliminate commas, that are, not necessary.
20. Never use a big word when a diminutive one would suffice.
21. Use words correctly, irregardless of how others use them.
22. Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
23. If you've heard it once, you've heard it a thousand times: Resist hyperbole; not one writer in a million can use it correctly.
24. Puns are for children, not groan readers.
25. Even IF a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
26. Who needs rhetorical questions?

And the last one...

27. Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.

Gordon Brown recently announced his decision on whether Britain is ready to adopt the euro, but it was not what the Chancellor said, rather what he left unsaid, that is of real interest. DeadBrain has learned that the government's decision not to adopt the common currency until the key economic tests have been met has a twist.

A reliable government source told our reporter, after five pints at the "Cock and Bull", that not only will Britain never, in fact, adopt the euro but it will turn its back on decimal currency and the entire metric system altogether, and revert to the former imperial system of currency, weights and measures.

"Just because the continentals can't do elementary mental arithmetic unless it's all in tens doesn't mean that we can't," he said. "There is nothing wrong with the good old system of pounds, shillings and pence, stones, pounds and ounces, yards, feet and inches. It's what made Britain great, and set us apart from the rest of Europe. It's time to go back to it. After all, we have resisted embracing their bizarre habit of driving on the wrong side of the road. Well, most of us, at least. Most of the time."

"The government needs time to plan for this switch back to the imperial system," he added, "and that's why the Chancellor is still talking about the euro."

When asked what the cost of four yards, two feet and six inches of lino at £1 19s 6d a yard would be, the source excused himself, saying nature called, and did not return.

(With acknowledgement to: http://deadbrain.co.uk)

You probably know that one of my "betes noir" is the abbreviation of words.

So here are two more:

(1) Uni (University) and

(2) Pee (penny/pence)

I don't know when people started using "Uni" for University. I think it was at about the time when many technical colleges were becoming "universities". Would undergraduates at Oxford or Cambridge say "Uni" when referring to their colleges?

I note that the University of Surrey (one I respect) has a website "UniS". Shame on them!

On to "Pee".

I was 37 in 1971, when decimal currency was introduced in the UK - so I was well-grounded in "Pounds, Shillings and Pence".

When the switch was made, we just dropped one of the units ("shillings"), but continued with the other two - "Pounds" and "Pence". So £1.20 became "One Pound 20 Pence", or "One Pound Twenty".

£0.50 was 50 pence, £0.90 was 90 pence etc. and £0.01 was "one penny". (At first "one NEW penny")

Who decided to abbreviate "penny" to "pee" (or is it "pea"?)

And, while I am going on about it - £0.01 is "One penny" not "One Pence" (the plural form.)

How often, at the till in a shop, have you been told "One pence change" ?

Julius Caesar said the words "the die is cast" (or rather he said it in Latin: "jacta alea est!") when he crossed the river Rubicon.

This river was the boundary between ancient Italy and the province of Cisalpine Gaul. When Julius Caesar crossed the river in 49 B.C., he passed beyond the limits of his province of Cisalpine Gaul and became an invader in Italy, thus starting a war with Pompey and the Senate of Rome.

Caesar used the phrase as a metaphor to express the fact that he had crossed the river, and there was no going back.

Of course, "die" denotes the singular and "dice" the plural - so, if you wish to be grammatically correct, you should never speak of "a dice". But many people do.

While I am on the subject, do you have any "dangly bits"? (In your car)

Like this:

Years ago my driving instructor told me to beware of cars displaying hanging things, because the drivers are usually frivolous and erratic, and it obstructs their view.

What do you think?

I am probably quite pedantic (and old!), but I have difficulty in accepting some of the changes that have taken place in our English language over the past few years.

Do you remember when we spoke of going to the pub for a "Ploughman's Lunch"? That was quickly abbreviated to a "Ploughman's".

A Ploughman's what?

Then, very soon, an Indian meal became an "Indian". I am "going out for an Indian." Or "a Chinese". (But not "an English", or "a French"?)

I suppose it is all to do with our rush to shorten everything.

Some time ago Estate Agents described a house as having an "en suite bathroom". That soon became "with an En Suite". (With "an adjoining"!)

The fast food chain "Pret A Manger" ("Ready to Eat") have shortened their name to "Pret" ("Ready"). I suppose that make sense, so long as they don't keep their customers waiting too long!

Back to Estate Agents - why do some of them say "comprising of" when listing the accommodation of a house? There is no need for "of". I think they are confusing the phrase with "consisting of". It is just bad grammar.

On the same point, I heard a traffic report on the radio yesterday about an accident "outside of" the Albert Hall. Why not simply "outside'?

Some time ago, I had a friend who always talked about going shopping at "Mark's". I used to ask - "What happened to poor Mr. Spencer?"

A recent report about the closure of fire stations in Central London spoke of the reduced number of available "fire trucks". What became of "fire engines"?

I will conclude now, but I am sure you can think of many more examples.

So, I AM pedantic and I should realise that English, like all other languages is always changing - and that adds to its richness - so I am told!

But I still find some of it jarring.

What do you think?

P.S. My own grammar is often less than perfect.

(Copied from a post to my other blog : kendrive.blog.co.uk)

When did people start saying "Train Station" instead of "Railway Station"?

I think it is an Americanism.

Most street signposts still say "Railway Station", but on radio and television "Train Station" is increasingly used.

Some time ago, I spoke to a young man, in his early twenties, and he said that he had never heard the expression "Railway Station". For him it has always been "Train Station".

Which do you use?

And does it really matter?