Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - maxsims

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 30
31
Your Thoughts Exactly / Re: Advocacy for Formal Language Instruction
« on: May 09, 2010, 08:06:44 AM »
In great disgust, one American politician quipped that there are lies, there are bigger lies, and then there are statistics.

The "American politician" was, in fact, Winston Churchill, and his quip referred to "lies, damned lies, and statistics".

Ahhh, Renz, have you contemplated setting up your own website instead of parasitically using Joe's?

32
Use and Misuse / Re: Subject-Verb Agreement?
« on: May 08, 2010, 06:08:50 PM »
Carillo:
Grammatically, of course, the verb should take the singular form because the operative subject in the noun phrase “those many gallons of petrol” isn’t the plural “those many gallons” but the singular mass noun “petrol.”

Glensky:
Just like the second example, "many gallons" is the real subject." "Of petrol" is a modifier.

Carillo:
Good point, Glensky! I absolutely agree with your explanation.

Bemused readers:
?????

33
My Media English Watch / Re: When a newspaper’s English falls below par in education and culture reporting
« on: March 21, 2010, 03:57:07 PM »
I think not.

I'm a little weary of your habit of moving the goalposts when your reasoning is challenged, and of your penchant for quitting the ring when you have been shown to be wrong, as in "blatant sexual innuendos", "sort of" and "cavalierly", among others.

And, I object to your use of my texts in your newspaper column.   While I dare say that such use is not illegal, it would have been nice to be asked.

And, I object to your recent questioning of my courage.  I, sir, am an Australian!   And let me point out that, if I were in your shoes and I was asked (presumably) to run that grammatically-deformed ad for the Manila Times College on my website, I would have the courage to refuse.

The best of British luck (and grammar) to you.


34
My Media English Watch / Re: When a newspaper’s English falls below par in education and culture reporting
« on: March 21, 2010, 10:22:47 AM »
Come off it, Joe!   Admit it.   No-one is his right mind would swallow that (to extend your fruity allusions).  You really meant to say "But it's in the third paragraph that the story's grammar begins to unravel precipitously."   Didn't you?

35
My Media English Watch / Re: When a newspaper’s English falls below par in education and culture reporting
« on: March 21, 2010, 04:39:18 AM »
So, what was the bad grammar doing before it unravelled?

36
You Asked Me This Question / Re: Can the article “the” be dropped if it refers to a specific noun?
« on: March 21, 2010, 04:36:08 AM »
There is a subsequent question:

In light of "The words of an idiom are not substitutable", are you not now moving the goalposts?

37
My Media English Watch / Re: When a newspaper’s English falls below par in education and culture reporting
« on: March 20, 2010, 05:56:21 PM »
...the less-than-stellar financial performance...   ...but less than stellar feature films...

 
Careless editing?


...But it’s in the third paragraph that the story’s bad grammar begins to unravel precipitously...

Surely just "the story's grammar".   And "precipitously" is usually equated with falling; how one can unravel precipitously is beyond imagination.

38
You Asked Me This Question / Re: Can the article “the” be dropped if it refers to a specific noun?
« on: March 20, 2010, 04:27:24 PM »
In the same token...

Did you not recently say that to change one word of an idiomatic expression is to alter the idiomatic nature of the expression?

Does that hold for "in the same wavelength"?    For "an idea implanted in her head"?   For "sore spot to.."?

Did you not write in "Give Your English The Winning Edge",  "Indeed, only when we have become adequately conversant with its idioms can we really say that we know our English."?

39
Readings in Language / Re: You’ll need more than just good English for that job interview
« on: March 20, 2010, 04:11:10 PM »
I believe that Forum members will see that if an applicant shows that he or she is better than the other applicants, the demonstration has thereby been made.   "Demonstrably" is superfluous.

Drop "demonstrably" and replace "show" with "demonstrate".

"to their prospective employers" is also superfluous.



40
Readings in Language / Re: You’ll need more than just good English for that job interview
« on: March 20, 2010, 02:35:25 PM »
No doubt that many of the entry-level job hunters are now busy perfecting their résumés and honing their English for the inevitable job interviews, during which they must show to their prospective employers that they are demonstrably better than the other applicants.

The person who wrote this piece of grammatical circularity could do with a little English-honing, too.

41
Essays by Joe Carillo / Re: Which words pack the most wallop
« on: March 14, 2010, 02:25:04 PM »
“Take a look at this sentence, which violates that rule…”, dropping “that/which violates that rule” will change the meaning of that statement. It would no longer semantically link the sentence to the previous sentence that states that this particular sentence violates that specific rule.

You can look at it every which way but it still makes no sense.    Which is "the sentence", and which is "the previous sentence that states....etc"?

42
Essays by Joe Carillo / Re: Which words pack the most wallop
« on: March 14, 2010, 11:17:45 AM »
“Take a look at this sentence, which violates that rule…”, dropping “that/which violates that rule” will change the meaning of that statement. It would no longer semantically link the sentence to the previous sentence that states that this particular sentence violates that specific rule.

I'm sorry, Joe Carillo, but I have no idea what you are saying.   What is the "previous sentence that states...etc"?

43
Use and Misuse / Re: Aaaargh!
« on: March 14, 2010, 11:09:25 AM »
Exactly.    So it's not the sexual innuendoes that are blatant but the manner in which they are expressed.    Quite a different thing.

44
Use and Misuse / Re: Aaaargh!
« on: March 14, 2010, 07:18:52 AM »


Blatant sexual innuendoes
in headlines can get newspapers
into a lot of trouble!

If an innuendo is blatant, can it by definition still be considered an innuendo?

45
Essays by Joe Carillo / Re: Which words pack the most wallop
« on: March 13, 2010, 07:54:39 PM »
Has a new English usage-rule been recently formulated against that usage? I'd be interested to know.

Not that I'm aware of.   It seemed to me that with "Take a look at this sentence that violates that rule:", you are merely saying something about the sentence, not defining, limiting or identifying it.  In which case, "...this sentence, which..." applies, I would have thought.

 

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 30