Team-BHP
(
https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fordday
(Post 4652923)
I could not decipher the usage of the highlighted word above.
|
I assume the OP typed "btw" (usual Internet acronym for "by the way") which was autocorrected by their device's keyboard app to "between".
Well done! That kind of backwards translation is becoming a common and necessary skill!
One thing which perplexed me is the plural of Attorney General. I assumed that it will be Attorney Generals.
Today I came across the plural mentioned in an online post and realized that it is in fact Attorneys General. Then of course I had to find out the meaning of the word general in the name. It turns out that Attorney General is someone who holds a general power of attorney or the principal holder of the power of attorney.
Thus it is not general but attorney which is pluralized.
From my youth comes the lesson of Postmasters General. The same would apply to Attorneys.
It is the noun which is plural.
By the way, I don't think you can (or should ;) ) verb that noun/adjective
So it's a three-hundred-year-old mistake!
rl:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom
(Post 4655556)
By the way, I don't think you can (or should ;) ) verb that noun/adjective
|
It seemed very natural while typing lol: and I did not give a second thought to it's legality or morality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by binand
(Post 4655560)
Merriam-Webster says that's OK and has been so since 1750.
|
Thank you for the research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom
(Post 4655854)
So it's a three-hundred-year-old mistake!
|
Nowadays you can hear (or read) a verb form or an adjectivification of almost any word.
adjectivificationalisation?
(Yes! I made the minimum post length in one word!)
lol:
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvDriving
(Post 4655887)
Nowadays you can hear (or read) a verb form or an adjectivification of almost any word.
|
Because you can does not mean you should. Good English is as much to do with style as grammar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom
(Post 4656688)
Because you can does not mean you should. Good English is as much to do with style as grammar.
|
Because someone at school (
wrongly, i now realise!) taught me that one shouldn't begin a sentence with because because because is a conjunction, it took me a moment to digest your sentence.
One can't, however, end any sentence with because because because is a conjunction.
:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by dailydriver
(Post 4656703)
Because someone at school (wrongly, i now realise!) taught me that one shouldn't begin a sentence with because because because is a conjunction, it took me a moment to digest your sentence.
One can't, however, end any sentence with because because because is a conjunction.
:D
|
The word that is used extensively in your post above is, because.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dailydriver
(Post 4656703)
Because someone at school (wrongly, i now realise!) taught me that one shouldn't begin a sentence with because because because is a conjunction, it took me a moment to digest your sentence.
|
I would support your teacher. But because we are writing informally in a forum, conversational style is fine. Hence...
:uncontrol
The oft-quoted formally-taught grammatical wrong with which I have patience is that one should not split an infinitive. Split away, folks, to your hearts' content: you are not writing in Latin!
*deleted because Binand's post was the correct interpretation and mine was not*
Is there a similar explanation to the "misuse" of till?
"Till now I have not had a problem posting on T-BHP," in British English, means that I now have a problem. [Un]til now implies a change.
I put misuse in quotes because it seems to be established usage in Indian English
| All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 06:26. | |
