It's Tesco not Tescos

FlutterinBantam · 09-09-2011 06:53PM

Go on down to Centra's and take a chill pil.

Only a total gimp would say that.

That Handsome Devil · 09-09-2011 07:02PM

Texacos
Essos
Tescos
Easons
Euros
Mark and Spencers

... After reading this thread I think I'll have a new source of annoyance, I've never thought about this before.... for good reasons too

Lawrence1895 · 09-09-2011 07:05PM

number10a wrote: »

Nothing can be as bad as hearing people call Lidl Lie-del. :mad:

Or Ahl-dee

The owners are cousins anyway

Yahew · 09-09-2011 07:36PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Of course... Note the type of people in the Púnt days who would say."That'll be seven pound boss."

I fully expected the same type of people to add the 's' after 'two euros'

Why?.Because that's what they do, it's really as simple as that.

That's what they do...see post 69....lazy diction, lazy diction my friend.

Do you really think that is an argument? Dont you think you have to be consistent? To put this remedially: Why do you think Euro doesn't take an s in it's plural form and pound does?

I dont personally say Tescos but I think it gramatically correct for the reasons I have previously explained. To argue against that point you can't just say "thats your opinion innit?" you have to explain why I am wrong.

The kind of people who worry about these things prove their very intellectual mediocrity by what they worry about. What they are really saying is "working class people say Euros and Pound but it should be Euro and Pounds".

That makes no sense, the very example of their intellectual incapacity is that they care about such nonsense - nobody of real intellectual ability would; and they can't defend their position when challenged.

Yahew · 09-09-2011 07:37PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Go on down to Centra's and take a chill pil.

Only a total gimp would say that.

only a total gimp would care what people said, particularly when it is grammatically correct.

Liam Byrne · 09-09-2011 07:40PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Why do people refer to Tesco as Tescos? Why throw on an extra s?

Because there's more than one store ?
Because the Tesco company owns that store - i.e. it's "Tesco's" store ?

That said, I've (a) never heard of it referred to Tescos and (b) anyone coming to our house used to say they were "going to the Byrnes's", which always amused me.

Liam Byrne · 09-09-2011 07:42PM

Yahew wrote: »

It's correct in bastardised Euro-english, for sure. It disobeys all other rules in English grammar though.

Not really, given that we all use the word "data" with no problems, even though it's the plural of "datum" and has no "s"......would you actually prefer "datums" ?

Also, we're typing this on a "forum" which has a link of "My Forums" on the top, even though - similar to "data" - the correct plural would be "Fora".

Liam Byrne · 09-09-2011 07:49PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I don't hear people saying Burger Kings

What about McDonald's ?

pickarooney · 09-09-2011 07:49PM

Solair wrote: »

You are criticising people for speaking perfectly correct English. It is you who is wrong!

If you're going to be pedantic, at least get your facts right

Another swing and a miss there, Solair me oul' flower :pac:

Yahew · 09-09-2011 07:51PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Not really, given that we all use the word "data" with no problems, even though it's the plural of "datum" and has no "s"......would you actually prefer "datums" ?

Also, we're typing this on a "forum" which has a link of "My Forums" on the top, even though - similar to "data" - the correct plural would be "Fora".

Wrong. The general rule in English is to add an s to a plural. The difference is when there are latin or greek roots to the word. Thats all.

The plural of datum is data. Not datas. We use the Latin plural here, historically. For new words English rules generally apply.

The plural of Forum is - using standard English - Forums. The Latin form of that is Fora, but we are not speaking Latin and Latin rules in general do not have to apply, but do sometimes for historical reasons. English speakers also used to use German plurals too - like er and en. ( The plural of Child getting a double germanic plural like childeren. But we dont now).

This is not relevant to Euro, which is a modern world like iPhone ( the plural of which is iPhones).

Some Eurocrat decided that the plural or Euro was Euro. I can guarantee if the UK had joined the Euro ( they never will now) they would have laughed at such nonsense.

Solair · 09-09-2011 08:13PM

pickarooney wrote: »

Another swing and a miss there, Solair me oul' flower :pac:

I actually noticed that and immediately corrected it. So, you're quoting an old version of the post.
Do try to keep up!

eternal · 09-09-2011 08:21PM

I believe it is grammarically correct to add the ' s'.

FlutterinBantam · 09-09-2011 08:30PM

Yahew wrote: »

Do you really think that is an argument? Dont you think you have to be consistent? To put this remedially: Why do you think Euro doesn't take an s in it's plural form and pound does?

I dont personally say Tescos but I think it gramatically correct for the reasons I have previously explained. To argue against that point you can't just say "thats your opinion innit?" you have to explain why I am wrong.

The kind of people who worry about these things prove their very intellectual mediocrity by what they worry about. What they are really saying is "working class people say Euros and Pound but it should be Euro and Pounds".

That makes no sense, the very example of their intellectual incapacity is that they care about such nonsense - nobody of real intellectual ability would; and they can't defend their position when challenged.

Makes plenty of sense to me .

You might try bluster and bluff but the fact remains, and nothing personal here, but correct use of grammar is the single most telling indication of the kind of person one is dealing with.

I don't call 'Tesco' ' Tesco's' you can call it that if you like, you can say you 'seen' something too,fine, no skin off my nose.

However whether you like it or not, it brackets you in a certain social position.

If that sits well on your shoulders ,fair enough, but if i open a job application which has 'seen' instead of 'saw'... cccclump... that's the sound of the CV hitting the thrash can.

That's the way it is buddy.

pickarooney · 09-09-2011 08:47PM

Solair wrote: »

I actually noticed that and immediately corrected it. So, you're quoting an old version of the post.
Do try to keep up!

It's still there, sorry.

Yahew · 09-09-2011 08:48PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Makes plenty of sense to me .

You might try bluster and bluff but the fact remains, and nothing personal here, but correct use of grammar is the single most telling indication of the kind of person one is dealing with.

I don't call 'Tesco' ' Tesco's' you can call it that if you like, you can say you 'seen' something too,fine, no skin off my nose.

However whether you like it or not, it brackets you in a certain social position.

If that sits well on your shoulders ,fair enough, but if i open a job application which has 'seen' instead of 'saw'... cccclump... that's the sound of the CV hitting the thrash can.

That's the way it is buddy.

Lol. I have a 6 figure salary in London. I doubt you would be looking at my CV, buddy.

what I am pointng out to you, buddy, is that - although I don't use it myself it is (as i remedially explained) perfectly correct usage.

You have

1) Failed to explain why it isn't
2) Failed to explain why you think there is one rule for Euro and a totally different one for pound.

I could explain this with more hope of success to a 7 year old.

That's the way it is buddy.

FlutterinBantam · 09-09-2011 08:50PM

Yahew wrote: »

Lol. I have a 6 figure salary in London. I doubt you would be looking at my CV, buddy.

what I am pointng out to you, buddy, is that - although I don't use it myself it is (as i remedially explained) perfectly correct usage.

You have

1) Failed to explain why it isn't
2) Failed to explain why you think there is one rule for Euro and a totally different one for pound.

I could explain this with more hope of success to a 7 year old.

That's the way it is buddy.

Tell me why you don't use it yourself, if you are so sure it is correct usage.?

hooradiation · 09-09-2011 08:52PM

eternal wrote: »

I believe it is grammarically correct to add the ' s'.

It is - but on occasion it just add confusion when spoken (see king's/kings or Spar's/Spars) usually when it ends up making a word sound like it's plural so it gets dropped.

So, yeah nothing wrong with saying "tescos", people who dispute this ought to go to eason's and grab themselves a book on the subject.

Edit: But not Esso's or Marks and Spencer's. They don't sell books.

Yahew · 09-09-2011 08:52PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

mar is the single most telling indication of the kind of person one is dealing with.

I don't call 'Tesco' ' Tesco's' you can call it that if you like, you can say you 'seen' something too,fine, no skin off my nose.

However whether you like it or not, it brackets you in a certain social position.

You probably would want to lose the scare quotes from the first Tesco, and put a comma after the second 'Tesco's', and add a space after the comma after too but before fine to make that sentence vaguely acceptable.

That kind of stuff brackets you in a certain social position

demanufactured · 09-09-2011 08:56PM

Have heard lidl reffered to as " littles"

FlutterinBantam · 09-09-2011 08:57PM

Yahew wrote: »

You probably would want to lose the scare quotes from the first Tesco, and put a comma after the second 'Tesco's', and add a space after the comma after too but before fine to make that sentence vaguely acceptable.

That kind of stuff brackets you in a certain social position

Stay on the topic, mate, don't try to sidestep the issue.

Namlub · 09-09-2011 09:04PM

I swear there's a new thread about Tesco every day in AH...

Shane-KornSpace · 09-09-2011 09:06PM

I shop in Dunnes's Stores's anyways

Sunnyisland · 09-09-2011 09:10PM

Fluttering Bantam wrote: »

Makes plenty of sense to me .

You might try bluster and bluff but the fact remains, and nothing personal here, but correct use of grammar is the single most telling indication of the kind of person one is dealing with.

I don't call 'Tesco' ' Tesco's' you can call it that if you like, you can say you 'seen' something too,fine, no skin off my nose.

However whether you like it or not, it brackets you in a certain social position.

If that sits well on your shoulders ,fair enough, but if i open a job application which has 'seen' instead of 'saw'... cccc lump... that's the sound of the CV hitting the thrash can.

That's the way it is buddy.

So and this is not personnel but what does that make you with all your buddies and pals act

Sunnyisland · 09-09-2011 09:11PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Why do people refer to Tesco as Tescos? Why throw on an extra s?

Every little helps.

FlutterinBantam · 09-09-2011 09:13PM

realies wrote: »

So and this is not personnel but what does that make you with all your buddies and pals act

I don't work for a recruitment firm.

What has this to do with the topic initiated by the OP?

wil · 09-09-2011 09:21PM

Duggy747 wrote: »

TESCOS

:pac:

TESCOES

Every little helps

:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

latenia · 09-09-2011 09:21PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

If that sits well on your shoulders ,fair enough, but if i open a job application which has 'seen' instead of 'saw'... cccclump... that's the sound of the CV hitting the thrash can.

That's the way it is buddy.

The use of seen instead of saw is understandable given the absence of an aorist tense in English. While I wouldn't advise using it on an official document like a CV, it does lend a different nuance to conversational speech.
For example, if someone said "I seen Jimmy on Grafton St yesterday" I'd take it that they caught sight of him briefly rather than stopped to chat with him or knew anything about what he was up to.

Sunnyisland · 09-09-2011 09:22PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I don't work for a recruitment firm.

What has this to do with the topic initiated by the OP?

Nothing what so ever but i couldent help notice you posting the correct use of grammer is the most telling indication of the kind of person one is dealing with yet all your posts have these buddys,pals etc etc. but thats no skin of my nose as i dont think a persons grammer or spelling is the most telling of the kind of person your dealing with, not at all.

pickarooney · 09-09-2011 09:28PM

latenia wrote: »

The use of seen instead of saw is understandable given the absence of an aorist tense in English. While I wouldn't advise using it on an official document like a CV, it does lend a different nuance to conversational speech.
For example, if someone said "I seen Jimmy on Grafton St yesterday" I'd take it that they caught sight of him briefly rather than stopped to chat with him or knew anything about what he was up to.

You reckon Anto is pining for a lost philological tense to best encapsulate his sense of existential ennui when he seen Deco down the market?

wil · 09-09-2011 09:30PM

Namlub wrote: »

I swear there's a new thread about Tesco every day in AH...

I swear there's a new AH in the Tesco thread every day ............

Korekted:D

It's Tesco not Tescos

Comments