 |
 | 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 / February 2010Goog grammar in the 50's
Watching a B&W episode of Peter Gunn, from the late 50's or early 60's. He needs to put a note in a pin-ball parlor machine with a question. The question is, "Whom do I see about getting a building burned down?" I'm impressed with his grammar.  SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 7 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years > Watching a B&W episode of Peter Gunn, from the late 50's or early > 60's. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I'm impressed with his grammar. I too! (Whom ya gonna call? Ghostbusters!) P. > > Watching a B&W episode of Peter Gunn, from the late 50's or early > > 60's. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > P. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Another good grammar source are the videotapes of the old Sherlock Holmes movies starring Basil Rathbone. I recently found the VHS of "Kind Hearts and Coronets" with Alec Guiness....an old repeat flick from 50's late night television. It was at Half Price Books for $1. David H ~~~~~~~~~~ On 08 Feb 2010, Ulysses at Grasmere wrote >> mm <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote >> innews:n22sm5d5s75dca5f9mu01blehmm204 [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Another good grammar source are the videotapes Hmmmm..... I think I'd have avoided that particular clash by writing "Other good grammar sources are". SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >On 08 Feb 2010, Ulysses at Grasmere wrote > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >Hmmmm..... I think I'd have avoided that particular clash by >writing "Other good grammar sources are". Or "Another good grammar source is the videotapes..." SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 7 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years On 08 Feb 2010, mm wrote >> On 08 Feb 2010, Ulysses at Grasmere wrote >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Or "Another good grammar source is the videotapes..." That's the other clash I think I'd have tried to avoid, though. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >On 08 Feb 2010, mm wrote >>> On 08 Feb 2010, Ulysses at Grasmere wrote [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >That's the other clash I think I'd have tried to avoid, though. It's a problem, but it comes up often enough, in many places, expecially when nit-picking what other people have written, that I think people should bite the bullet and get used to it. Especially since it's correct. If one realizes it's correct and says it out loud ten times, it will start to sound correct. If it doesn't sound okay yet, people should say it ten times tomorrow. That should be enough. (The really stubborn can say it ten more times every Monday for 3 months. That should be enough for anyone.) SignaturePosters should say where they live, and for which area they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in Western Pa. 10 years Indianapolis 7 years Chicago 6 years Brooklyn, NY 12 years Baltimore 26 years On 08 Feb 2010, mm wrote >> On 08 Feb 2010, mm wrote >>>> On 08 Feb 2010, Ulysses at Grasmere wrote [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > (The really stubborn can say it ten more times every Monday for > 3 months. That should be enough for anyone.) Each to his own; that's a perfectly valid way to approach it, but it's not in my nature. I figure the "this is those" clash is similar to skunked words like disinterested and fulsome -- correct, but awkward in everyday use -- so I just try to avoid the problem by re-writing. (Frankly, I can't be arsed extending my job of writing readable text to tutoring my clients/readers in relatively obscure points of correct English. I'm happy to leave that to those with more energy.) SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed >I figure the "this is those" clash is similar to skunked words like >disinterested and fulsome -- correct, but awkward in everyday use >-- so I just try to avoid the problem by re-writing. While "fulsome" is a word I wouldn't even think of to use, "disinterested" seems like a very useful word (although many readers won't know what it actually means); how do you rewrite "disinterested"" Signature************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * On 09 Feb 2010, Hatunen wrote >> I figure the "this is those" clash is similar to skunked words >> like disinterested and fulsome -- correct, but awkward in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > readers won't know what it actually means); how do you rewrite > "disinterested"" I think "neutral" works more often than not, but when that doesn't quite fit, probably an explanatory phrase -- "with no personal interest", or something similar. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed I'm sure you all remember the Winston controversy. "Tastes good like a cigarette should." On 08 Feb 2010, Kalmia wrote > I'm sure you all remember the Winston controversy. "Tastes good > like a cigarette should." And the 1960s' joke -- "Like, wow, man." "No, no: *as* wow, man." SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > On 08 Feb 2010, Kalmia wrote > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > "Like, wow, man." > "No, no: *as* wow, man." Haw haw - forgot about that one. |
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.