 |
 | 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 / January 2009Thanks for your listening.
Dear all, My son is going to take part in a storytelling contest. He is going to say " Thanks for your listening" at the end of his speech. However, his teacher told him it is wrong to say "Thanks for your listening." Instead, his teacher asked that he should say "Thanks for listening." I feel confused. Can anyone please tell me why it is wrong to say "Thanks for your listening"? Thank you very much! Best regards On Jan 8, 7:17�am, lcyiu3...@yahoo.com wrote: > Dear all, > � � �My son is going to take part in a storytelling contest. �He is [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Best regards I don't believe it's wrong. Just redundant, but it's the kind of redundancy made for emphasis, which is excusable IMO. > Dear all, > My son is going to take part in a storytelling contest. He is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > listening." I feel confused. Can anyone please tell me why it is > wrong to say "Thanks for your listening"? Thank you very much! "Your listening" would be grammatically correct, but convention rather than grammar would say that "Thanks for listening" would be expected. Logic doesn't always rule the way English works! With best wishes, Peter.  SignaturePeter Young, (BrE), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004. (US equivalent: Attending Anesthesiologist) Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired. On 08 Jan 2009, wrote > Dear all, > My son is going to take part in a storytelling contest. He [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > please tell me why it is wrong to say "Thanks for your > listening"? Thank you very much! I don't think it's wrong, but "Thanks for listening" is the idiomatic version. (I think it has to do with the redundancy that Arcadian Rises noted: "Thanks for" is informal; the formal form would replace "Thanks for" with "Thank you for"; and "Thank you for your listening" sounds unidiomatically redundant.) SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 08 Jan 2009, wrote > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > for" with "Thank you for"; and "Thank you for your listening" sounds > unidiomatically redundant.) I would go further. It may not be grammatically wrong (if "listening" is a gerund), but it is uncomfortable and I'm sure it would be considered wrong by most native speakers. SignatureDavid >> On 08 Jan 2009, wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > is a gerund), but it is uncomfortable and I'm sure it would be > considered wrong by most native speakers. "Thank you for listening" would also be perfectly idiomatic (and, as noted above, slightly more formal). SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >> On 08 Jan 2009, wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >is a gerund), but it is uncomfortable and I'm sure it would be >considered wrong by most native speakers. As already stated, "Thanks for your listening" is not grammatically wrong, but a native English speaker would say "Thanks (or "Thank you") for listening". However, you WOULD say "Thanks for your attention". SignatureIan >As already stated, "Thanks for your listening" is not grammatically >wrong, but a native English speaker would say "Thanks (or "Thank you") >for listening". However, you WOULD say "Thanks for your attention". Yes. I had thought of the "attention" variant but decided not to risk mentioning it. The nearest grammatical equivalent to "Thanks for listening" would appear to be "Thanks for attending", but that means something different. A person can be "attending", in the sense of being present, without paying "attention", that is, attending to the speaker's words. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.english.usage) >> On 08 Jan 2009, wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >is a gerund), but it is uncomfortable and I'm sure it would be >considered wrong by most native speakers. Was someone going to sit on it? SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >> Dear all, >> My son is going to take part in a storytelling contest. He is [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > for" with "Thank you for"; and "Thank you for your listening" sounds > unidiomatically redundant.) The main thing is that the latter is not idiomatic and definitely marks the sayer as a non-native English speaker. SignatureSkitt (AmE) No NESsie, but oh, so close ... >>> Dear all, >>> My son is going to take part in a storytelling contest. He is [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >The main thing is that the latter is not idiomatic and definitely marks the >sayer as a non-native English speaker. Which is a formal way of saying, without further explanation, that something is wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland > >> Dear all, > >> My son is going to take part in a storytelling contest. He is [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Skitt (AmE) > No NESsie, but oh, so close ... Which is not idiomatic and definitely marks the sayer as a non-native English speaker, thank you for listening OR thank you for your listening? >On 08 Jan 2009, wrote > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >for" with "Thank you for"; and "Thank you for your listening" sounds >unidiomatically redundant.) But "Thank you for listening" sounds fine. The difference is not between Thanks and Thank you. It's just undiomatic. Whether it is non-native would depend on the OP and his son. Other than the email address is there anything to mark the OP as not a native English speaker? Or the son. I think it likely he chose that phrasing because he's a child and not hamstrung by idioms. While it's unidiomatic, who wants to say the same old idiom all the time?** Changing the words from the standard I think are likely to convey a slightly different meaning, although I don't know what the difference would be here. **The fact is students of all ages have to cater to the whims of their teachers. The teachers usually think they are right. How many here have at least once given what he thought was the wrong answer, because he figured that's what the teacher wanted? SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I have lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 10 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years >> On 08 Jan 2009, wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Other than the email address is there anything to mark the OP as not a > native English speaker? No. > Or the son. Yes. "Thanks for your listening." Once the son says that (we assume the son originated the line), we raise an eyebrow, since it is not an idiomatic expression. >I think it likely he chose that > phrasing because he's a child and not hamstrung by idioms. Or because he is actually not a native speaker? He may be, but you pose the question. > While it's unidiomatic, who wants to say the same old idiom all the > time?** Changing the words from the standard I think are likely to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > have at least once given what he thought was the wrong answer, because > he figured that's what the teacher wanted? That is aggravating*, to say the least. One vows after that to use one's own manner of speech and to let the teacher go hang. We have to allow for the teacher's broader experience, up to a point. But some teachers, we find out through our own experience much later, are talking through their respective hats. For the most part, it takes a native speaker to make changes in an idiom that would then still be idiomatic. But even then, some idioms, being regional, are going to mark the changer as an outlander if changed in a way that the region doesn't accept. In a classroom, once, I said that someone didn't know beans from barley. Well, the students looked at me funny, though not disapprovingly. I should have said "peas from beans". *In my bringing up, "aggravated, etc." were terms which I later came to change to "irritated, etc." >>> On 08 Jan 2009, wrote >>> [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] >Well, the students looked at me funny, though not disapprovingly. I >should have said "peas from beans". In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told its "eggs to apples". >*In my bringing up, "aggravated, etc." were terms which I later came to >change to "irritated, etc." Ah, yes. Lots of people use aggravated to mean irritated. I heard it all the time when I was little, and I might use it about myself if I weren't so placid. (The word I usually use is annoyed.) SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I have lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 10 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years >In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told >its "eggs to apples". I've never heard of that one before. I think it's absolutely 100% American. References show that it means "from start to finish". http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/5/messages/946.html I can only guess as to how such a phrase arose. Maybe the Latin version gives a clue. We start off life as an egg, and end up by being buried, fertilize the ground, which allows apple trees to produce apples? A bit like the English poem/song about Ilkley Moor? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Ilkla_Moor_Baht'at Sorry for digressing.......... SignatureIan >>In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told >>its "eggs to apples". >> > I've never heard of that one before. I think it's absolutely 100% > American. No so, but far otherwise! It's standard British English, albeit old-fashioned. The standard upper-class 19th century English formal dinner started with soup, and finished, after a mind-boggling number of courses later, with nuts. Beginning to end, in other words. With best wishes, Peter. SignaturePeter Young, (BrE), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004. (US equivalent: Attending Anesthesiologist) Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired. >>>In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told >>>its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >dinner started with soup, and finished, after a mind-boggling number >of courses later, with nuts. Beginning to end, in other words. That certainly makes sense. However, I had never heard it until today. SignatureIan > >In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told > >its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > like the English poem/song about Ilkley Moor? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Ilkla_Moor_Baht'at Since "soup to nuts" comes from the order of courses in a large meal, that would be my first guess for the Latin "eggs to apples". (Let's not argue about "entree" again just yet.) SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux >> >In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told >> >its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >(Let's not argue about "entree" again just yet.) Ah! That's a much more logical explanation. But, until today, I had never heard that expression. SignatureIan >>> >In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told >>> >its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Ah! That's a much more logical explanation. But, until today, I had > never heard that expression. Likewise. It must be American. I would have found "soup to coffee" or "soup to cheese" slightly more comprehensible - my only explanation is that, although we might eat nuts at the end of a meal, we wouldn't count it as a course. SignatureRob Bannister > Likewise. It must be American. I would have found "soup to coffee" or > "soup to cheese" slightly more comprehensible - my only explanation > is that, although we might eat nuts at the end of a meal, we wouldn't > count it as a course. It's not a course here either, at least anymore. It's just a saying. Brian SignatureIf televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up. -- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com) >> Likewise. It must be American. I would have found "soup to coffee" or >> "soup to cheese" slightly more comprehensible - my only explanation >> is that, although we might eat nuts at the end of a meal, we wouldn't >> count it as a course. > >It's not a course here either, at least anymore. It's just a saying. What about "From the erection to the resurrection"? SignatureIan >>> Likewise. It must be American. I would have found "soup to coffee" >>> or "soup to cheese" slightly more comprehensible - my only [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> > What about "From the erection to the resurrection"? That can occur fairly quicky, unless there's a dysfunction. SignatureSkitt (AmE) What's that about the four hours? >>>> Likewise. It must be American. I would have found "soup to coffee" >>>> or "soup to cheese" slightly more comprehensible - my only [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > That can occur fairly quicky, unless there's a dysfunction. You are very good at this, Skitt! Can you go back in this thread and put some class in the difference from shinola for CDB and Roland (although I really think Roland is thinking tongue in cheek)? >>>>> Likewise. It must be American. I would have found "soup to coffee" >>>>> or "soup to cheese" slightly more comprehensible - my only [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > put some class in the difference from shinola for CDB and Roland > (although I really think Roland is thinking tongue in cheek)? One has known it to happen. SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. [sometimes a nut is just a nut] >>>> What about "From the erection to the resurrection"? >>> That can occur fairly quicky, unless there's a dysfunction. >> You are very good at this, Skitt! Can you go back in this thread >> and put some class in the difference from shinola for CDB and >> Roland (although I really think Roland is thinking tongue in >> cheek)? > One has known it to happen. For my part, I was earnestly trying to make it easier for you to catch a commercial you had expressed interest in. Donna Richoux wrote, in <1it9wfz.lwba4q6utn86N%trio@euronet.nl> on Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:15:18 +0100: > > >In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told > > >its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > (Let's not argue about "entree" again just yet.) "ab ova ad malum" which is literally "from eggs to apple", malum being singular, and indeed originated in reference to a meal. I don't know whether it was used metaphorically in Latin. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > Donna Richoux wrote, in <1it9wfz.lwba4q6utn86N%trio@euronet.nl> > on Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:15:18 +0100: >>>> In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin >>>> I'm told its "eggs to apples". >>> I've never heard of that one before. I think it's absolutely 100% >>> American. References show that it means "from start to finish". >>> http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/5/messages/946.html >>> I can only guess as to how such a phrase arose. Maybe the Latin >>> version gives a clue. We start off life as an egg, and end up by >>> being buried, fertilize the ground, which allows apple trees to >>> produce apples? A bit like the English poem/song about Ilkley >>> Moor? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Ilkla_Moor_Baht'at >> Since "soup to nuts" comes from the order of courses in a large >> meal, that would be my first guess for the Latin "eggs to apples". >> (Let's not argue about "entree" again just yet.) > "ab ova ad malum" which is literally "from eggs to apple", malum > being singular, and indeed originated in reference to a meal. I > don't know whether it was used metaphorically in Latin. Yes, it was, even in antiquity. For the record, it was "ab ovo (usque) ad mala", from the egg [first course] (all the way) to the apples [dessert]. Horace used it figuratively, with the "usque", in Satire III, at line 9 of this translation, about half an inch down the side: http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext04/hrcst10.txt >> >In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told >> >its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Since "soup to nuts" comes from the order of courses in a large meal, >that would be my first guess for the Latin "eggs to apples". I've often seen nuts placed to the side of the table in restaurant, but I never thought of them as a course. "Nuts" is mentioned last in the expression, yet I don't recall where it is customary to serve nuts after the dessert course, or does the expression "soup to nuts" mean that the dessert course consists of nuts in some locations? SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland Chuck Riggs filted: >I've often seen nuts placed to the side of the table in restaurant, >but I never thought of them as a course. "Nuts" is mentioned last in >the expression, yet I don't recall where it is customary to serve nuts >after the dessert course, or does the expression "soup to nuts" mean >that the dessert course consists of nuts in some locations? At Lone Star Steakhouse, each table is given a small galvanized pail of peanuts to keep you occupied until your order arrives...customers are encouraged to drop the empty shells on the floor....r Signature"You got Schadenfreude on my Weltanschauung!" "You got Weltanschauung in my Schadenfreude!" >Chuck Riggs filted: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >to keep you occupied until your order arrives...customers are encouraged to drop >the empty shells on the floor....r Sure, I've been to those sorts of places many times, but in my experience they are better described as pubs, bars, road houses or steakhouses than an expensive restaurant where seven course meals with all the trappings are typically served. SignatureRegards, Chuck Riggs Near Dublin, Ireland >>In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm told >>its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >gives a clue. We start off life as an egg, and end up by being buried, >fertilize the ground, which allows apple trees to produce apples? A bit No, the speculators and knowers are right. Full Roman meals started off with eggs and ended with appples. >like the English poem/song about Ilkley Moor? >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Ilkla_Moor_Baht'at > >Sorry for digressing.......... I thought digressing was the basis of these groups. SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I have lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 10 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years >>> In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm >>> told its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > I thought digressing was the basis of these groups. Oh. Well, I find them diverting, to say the least. >> In English there's a phrase "from soup to nuts", but in Latin I'm >> told its "eggs to apples". [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I can only guess as to how such a phrase arose. You can not only guess: you can ask somebody who's had a full traditional dinner. Soup to kick off, wind your leisurely way through the courses, and finish with fruit and nuts and a good brandy. > Maybe the Latin > version gives a clue. We start off life as an egg, and end up by > being buried, fertilize the ground, which allows apple trees to > produce apples? If the Latin, which I don't think I ever knew, is an exact parallel to the English, then it suggests the Romans liked egg dishes as hors d'oeuvre--not unknown in our own menus, of course--and also had fruit as dessert. If so, then not > A bit like the English poem/song about Ilkley Moor [...] >In a classroom, once, I said that someone didn't know beans from barley. I saw a commercial twice last night--and still couldn't remember what it was for--that ended with "The one on the right is Shinola." ¬R "I love Blip just because it's the absolute opposite of fun" http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/travelog/19990710.html --Kibo >> In a classroom, once, I said that someone didn't know beans from >> barley. > > I saw a commercial twice last night--and still couldn't remember what > it was for--that ended with "The one on the right is Shinola." Great one! Wish I'd heard it. I will keep my ears peeled. >>> In a classroom, once, I said that someone didn't know beans from >>> barley. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Great one! Wish I'd heard it. I will keep my ears peeled. I don't suppose it could have been for shoe polish? SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. >>>> In a classroom, once, I said that someone didn't know beans from >>>> barley. >>> I saw a commercial twice last night--and still couldn't remember >>> what it was for--that ended with "The one on the right is >>> Shinola." >> Great one! Wish I'd heard it. I will keep my ears peeled. > I don't suppose it could have been for shoe polish? According to Wikip, it's for the curiously-named directory service kgb (under "shinola"). >>>>> In a classroom, once, I said that someone didn't know beans from >>>>> barley. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > According to Wikip, it's for the curiously-named directory service kgb > (under "shinola"). Amerike ganef! SignatureRoland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food. NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it. [snip] > **The fact is students of all ages have to cater to the whims of their > teachers. The teachers usually think they are right. How many here > have at least once given what he thought was the wrong answer, because > he figured that's what the teacher wanted? Indeed so. When I was first qualified, I worked for three years (1965-1968) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The nurses spoke good but idiosyncratic English, having mostly been taught by Indians. One usage I was unable to correct was the use of "no any", as in "she has no any pain". If I tried to suggest that this wasn't standard English, I was always told, "Our teacher told us to say this", and of course in that society the Teacher is above correction. In the end, I kept quiet! I've never discovered whether this usage is standard in any of the varieties of Indian English; do any of you wise people know? I could have found out, having worked with many people from the Indian subcontinent, but I never did. With best wishes, Peter. SignaturePeter Young, (BrE), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004. (US equivalent: Attending Anesthesiologist) Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired. >[snip] > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >have found out, having worked with many people from the Indian >subcontinent, but I never did. I wonder whether there was a Scottish teacher in the background. The words "has/have/had no", or with a stronger accent ""has/have/had nae", are, I think, Scottish English for "has/have/had not". SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.english.usage) >>[snip] >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > "has/have/had no", or with a stronger accent ""has/have/had nae", are, I > think, Scottish English for "has/have/had not". Could indeed be; the Scots got everywhere! I hadn't thought of that one. However, the "any" isn't in there. With best wishes, Peter. SignaturePeter Young, (BrE), Consultant Anaesthetist, 1975-2004. (US equivalent: Attending Anesthesiologist) Cheltenham and Gloucester, UK. Now happily retired. >>>[snip] >>> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >Could indeed be; the Scots got everywhere! I hadn't thought of that >one. However, the "any" isn't in there. I think that "had no any pain" = "had not any pain" would be idiomatic in ScotE, but I stand to be corrected. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.english.usage) >>>> [snip] >>>> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > I think that "had no any pain" = "had not any pain" would be > idiomatic in ScotE, but I stand to be corrected. I first thought of "Baa, Baa, Black Sheep", but then recalled Simple Simon: Simple Simon met a pieman going to the fair; Said Simple Simon to the pieman "Let me taste your ware" Said the pieman to Simple Simon "Show me first your penny" Said Simple Simon to the pieman "Sir, I have not any!" Scots dialect could drop the "t", (or use "nae", of course) but I wonder if there is the glottal stop that could account for the "no any". |
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.