Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Most hated grammatical error [Merged]
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
earlyevening wrote: »I'll learn you better grammar.
I think you'll find that should be grammer with an "e".
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Amn't. Just die.
Also, the way Irish people only score 23/24 out of 26 on pronouncing the letters of the alphabet. Dear god: A = ay, not ahh; H = aitch, not haitch; R = ar, not oar.
Now, to test Muphry's Law:The amount of times I see themlike the grammar Nazi that I am.
Aghhhhhhhhhhhh! Clearly you're not.The company I work for use American spelling rules, so we're forced to use commas before 'and' - it's so annoying.
A company uses..
Also, that's an Oxbridge thing - the commas with "and".Does be or do be!
+1You can evacuate people from something... the headline is merely omitting where they were evacuated from. Yes, the building was evacuated... but the people were also evacuated from the building.
You'd never say 'I evacuated' to mean you emptied your bowels. When you evacuate you evacuate something (your bowels or a building), or you are evacuated from somewhere. It's a transitive verb, it requires one or more objects. In this case, the object was omitted, but it's still implicit.
(OMG, cannot believe I can remember things from my syntax class in college
)
EDIT: The word evacuate has lost all meaning. And I have lost all sense of perspective.
Evacuate is not a transitive verb. It's complex-transitive, ie it has an arity of 3.
Wooohooo! I love Syntax class. My favourite module last year.Lots of little quirks like that in Hiberno English.
We need to kill them all. I speak Irish the Irish way, and English the English way.Nobody has picked up on this one yet. Using euros and cents as plurals.
E.g. 14 euros and 23 cents when of course it should be 14 euro 23 cent.
Drives me up the fcuking wall that one.
You, sir, are wrong. See below.The misuse of 'euros' bugs me, but by the same token, it baffles me why someone would INSERT an irregular plural into a language in this day and effing age. People have enough trouble learning English without the EU trying to confuse us all for the sake of uniformity across Europe.
Actually, the EU says use the s to pluralise. It says to use "Euro" as the plural in legislative contexts only, eg "... offenders will face a fine of Euro fifty."Wishbone Ash wrote: »I always say "euros" and "cents". It's a little protest. I will not allow the EU to decide on my pronunciation.
Not a protest against the EU. A protest against the idiots in the Euro changover team who can't read a simple EU document.mandysmithers wrote: »I hate when people use "I" wrongly at the end of a sentence.
eg. "I bought a drink for John & I."
It should be "I bought a drink for John & me" - you wouldn't say "I bought a drink for I."
Thank you. Not that I learned anything, just nice to know that not everyone sees the necessity to hyper-correct himself.ronnie3585 wrote: »I can't stand the so called 'soft t', i.e. when people pronounce Saturday 'Saherday' or Natalie 'Nahalie'. One of the weathermen on RTE always does it, grinds my gears!
The "soft 't'" of which you speak soes not result in Saturday being pronounced as "Saherday", but rather as "Sasherday". I HATE that, with a passion. "Saherday" is a glottalisation of the stop, not a lenition(softening).I think you'll find that should be grammer with an "e".
I hope I'll find you're being sarcastic.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
The correct saying is:
You can't eat your cake and have it.
It is quite simple. You can have your cake, and then later, you can eat it.
You can not eat your cake, and expect to still have it. Once it is eaten, it is gone!
Not very difficult when you think about it. 0 -
-
-
-
I don't know if this one is correct but it was in a film called Malice. Nicole Kidman and Baldwin (forget his first name
) were in it
To paraphrase:
"I saw a letter"
"What did it say?"
"It didn't say anything, it read ........"
So now you have it. You can't say something like "What did that newspaper article say?"
Insert read for say.
I've never heard anyone use "read" so could just be Hollywood0 -
The correct saying is:
You can't eat your cake and have it.
It is quite simple. You can have your cake, and then later, you can eat it.
You can not eat your cake, and expect to still have it. Once it is eaten, it is gone!
Not very difficult when you think about it.
It works both ways. You can't have your cake, as in you can't have it indefinitely, and eat it. The word "and" is important. It ensures that the words 'have' and 'eat' are mutually exclusive*. Ergo, it can be read and spoken either way.
In terms of the melody of language, it obviously sounds better to read it with the 'have' first.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
BroomBurner wrote: »It works both ways. You can't have your cake, as in you can't have it indefinitely, and eat it. The word "and" is important. It ensures that the words 'have' and 'eat' are mutually exclusive*. Ergo, it can be read and spoken either way.
In terms of the melody of language, it obviously sounds better to read it with the 'have' first.
No, because if you say to me: you can't have your cake and eat it.
I will say: yes, I can!
But if you say: you can't eat your cake and have it.
I have to agree, as it is physicaly imposibly for me to still have something after I have eaten it.
It is not about the melody of the language, this is why so many people get it wrong. They are more interested in it sounding nice than they are in it being correct.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement