 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / November 2006"in the common vernacular"
'Common vernacular'....can there be any other kind? That was my first thought. It's redundant. I'm thinking: Dante wrote in the vernacular; whereas Petrarch wrote in Latin. Then someone says, sure, 'common vernacular' is correct. To substantiate this, we could say 'legal vernacular' or 'boardroom vernacular'. But isn't 'vernacular' the common tongue? So, although the other examples might be legit, 'common vernacular' isn't. A better alternative would be 'common parlance'. Can someone offer a more educated opinion about this? > 'Common vernacular'....can there be any other kind? > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Can someone offer a more educated opinion about this? Yes. Syntactically, "vernacular" is a noun. Nouns can be preceded by adjectives. End of story. >> 'Common vernacular'....can there be any other kind? >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Nouns can be preceded by adjectives. >End of story. 'End of story' generally indicates that someone who has a closed mind is unwilling to have their error pointed out (-: Are you happy with the following phrases? the nosey vernacular an orange vernacular the large, omnipotent vernacular To the OP - you are correct. That is not how the word is normally used. > an orange vernacular /Homer Simpson affectation mmm, orange vernacular, my favorite. \Homer Simpson affectation >> an orange vernacular > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >\Homer Simpson affectation (-: >>> 'Common vernacular'....can there be any other kind? >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > 'End of story' generally indicates that someone who has a closed mind is > unwilling to have their error pointed out (-: Or of someone who is tired of seeing unnecessary "rules" spring up out of nowhere, that have no grounding in reality. The reality is that the story ends there, so far as syntax is concerned. > Are you happy with the following phrases? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > the large, omnipotent vernacular Syntactically? They're all perfectly acceptable. > To the OP - you are correct. That is not how the word is normally used. Much better. Just don't declare it to be a "rule". If native speakers want to use the word that way, it is well within their rights. And at least 57,300 people do use it: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22%63%6f%6d%6d%6f%6e%20%76%65%72%6e%61%63%75%6c% 61%72%22 I can't say that I ever have, though -- but my not using it does not mean it cannot be used. But its being used by 57,299 (the top one doesn't count) people, the first few of whom seem reasonably intelligent (if a little pervy), would seem to declare that the "rule" is that it /can/ be used, no matter what your or my personal preferences are. Firstly, using Google to represent how many "people" use some phrase is just stupid. Google could provide a list of web pages in its index which contain the phrase. > >> jes...@aol.com wrote: > >>> 'Common vernacular'....can there be any other kind? [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > seem to declare that the "rule" is that it /can/ be used, no matter what > your or my personal preferences are. The question wasn't about syntax here, but semantics. My initial thought was that common vernacular is a tautology, but on further thought, I believe that "common vernacular" _could_ be fine. Common vernacular could be the language (language used by ordinary people or natives to a particular area) which is common to a group of people. For example, common vernacular in Australia would include mate, but not togs, for togs is not part of the language spoken by ordinary people everywhere in Australia. However, I would be surprised if that's what the author intended. The context, if it matters: "It should be called rib roast if it is not prime beef, but all the labeling laws in the world will not alter common vernacular." > Firstly, using Google to represent how many "people" use some phrase is > just stupid. Google could provide a list of web pages in its index [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > everywhere in Australia. However, I would be surprised if that's what > the author intended. > The context, if it matters: > > "It should be called rib roast if it is not prime beef, but all the > labeling > laws in the world will not alter common vernacular." "Common vernacular" seems to be the vernacular. >> The context, if it matters: >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > "Common vernacular" seems to be the vernacular. Exactly! >>>> 'Common vernacular'....can there be any other kind? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] >seem to declare that the "rule" is that it /can/ be used, no matter what >your or my personal preferences are. I don't recall any mention of rules. The only rule I recognise is usage. >>>>> 'Common vernacular'....can there be any other kind? >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > I don't recall any mention of rules. The only rule I recognise is usage. As do I, but the rules of syntax (the real ones, at least) are flexible enough to allow just about any common usage (and are not afraid to admit that there are exceptions). Someone complained about Google searches. How about a Google search of scholarly papers, that gives more results than you get for a great many phrases: http://scholar.google.nl/scholar?q=%22Common+vernacular%22&hl=nl&lr= The phrase is in common use, all over the English-speaking world -- by the educated and the uneducated, the washed and the unwashed. It is good English. >The phrase is in common use, all over the English-speaking world -- by >the educated and the uneducated, the washed and the unwashed. It is >good English. Fair enough. and so... > >The phrase is in common use, all over the English-speaking world -- by > >the educated and the uneducated, the washed and the unwashed. It is > >good English. > > Fair enough. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.