 |
 | 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"To whom it may be concerned" or "To whom it may concern"?
Which is correct to use at the beginning of a letter,"To whom it may be concerned" or "To whom it may concern"? we just had a debate on it . Thanks Dorothy > Which is correct to use at the beginning of a letter,"To whom it may be > concerned" or "To whom it may concern"? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Dorothy The latter, the former is nonsense. 'To whom it may be of concern' is grammatical but 'to whom it may concern' is the standard idiomatic way of addressing a letter to unknown recipients. E.g. the letter I carry from my doctor explaining that as a diabetic I need to carry liquids and sharps aboard an aircraft. It may concern check-in staff, security staff, flight attendants etc. "Derek Turner 写道： " > > Which is correct to use at the beginning of a letter,"To whom it may be > > concerned" or "To whom it may concern"? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > sharps aboard an aircraft. It may concern check-in staff, security > staff, flight attendants etc. Thank you for ur direction > Thank you for ur direction That's "your", not "ur".  SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "C takes the point of view that the programmer msb@vex.net | is always right" -- Michael DeCorte "Mark Brader 写道： " > > Thank you for ur direction > > That's "your", not "ur". > -- > Mark Brader, Toronto | "C takes the point of view that the programmer > msb@vex.net | is always right" -- Michael DeCorte I'm from a non-English speaking country and I'm not so good at English. But when I chat with a friend who used to study in UK he always use "ur" as "your", at first I can't understand but later I'm used to it. By the way recently I'm reading the novel "Forrest Gump" (not quite sure about the spell of the name and I find there are a lot of words I haven't seen and I can deduce them from the pronunciation and the context. Now my question is : when should I use these words and when shouldn't? Thanks Dorothy schrieb: > I'm from a non-English speaking country and I'm not so good at English. > But when I chat with a friend who used to study in UK he always use > "ur" as "your", Its a part of what is becoming almost a new dialect, namely "text message speak" and only accetable in the context of a phone text message or other informal electronic communication. > at first I can't understand but later I'm used to it. > By the way recently I'm reading the novel "Forrest Gump" (not quite > sure about the spell of the name > and I find there are a lot of words I haven't seen and I can deduce > them from the pronunciation and the > context. Particularly in novels like Forrest Gump you will encounter misspellings or phonetic spellings used as style elements. They are not normal usage and rerely acceptable outside literary contexts.. > Now my question is : when should I use these words and when shouldn't? Never. As a language beginner you should stay away from strongly idiomatic usage unless you are totally sure of its use. Initially this may that you sound somewhat stitlted and old fashioned to a native speaker but thats better that writing a letter with "ur" in it. One of the other classics is the usage of shortened words like "shouldnt", Your usage above is wrong, and (having just had to correct a letter that was supposed to be a european CEOs Christmas greeting and was full of "couldn't"s shouldn't"s and "wouldn'ts) I would avoid using such contructs until you are sure of them. "when should I use these words and when should I not?" or "when should I use these words and when not?" andy M "Dorothy": > > Now my question is : when should I use these words and when shouldn't? Andy M.: > One of the other classics is the usage of shortened words like "shouldnt", > Your usage above is wrong ... It's wrong, but not because "shouldn't" was used. If Dorothy had written "when should not", it would still be wrong. In this situation if you repeat the verb, you also have to repeat the subject. > "when should I use these words and when should I not?" > or > "when should I use these words and when not?" Andy is recommending a formal style. I would prefer a conversational one: "when should I use these words and when shouldn't I?" SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "This is a film of non-stop action msb@vex.net | and non-start intelligence." --Mark Leeper My text in this article is in the public domain. > Never. As a language beginner you should stay away from > strongly idiomatic usage unless you are totally sure of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > "couldn't"s shouldn't"s and "wouldn'ts) I would avoid > using such contructs until you are sure of them. *coff* I hope your corrections to the European CEO's Christmas greeting were better than your post above. SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary Amethyst Deceiver schrieb: > *coff* > I hope your corrections to the European CEO's Christmas greeting were > better than your post above. No doubt you will enlighten me as to your problems with it? I am agog. andy M andy M <andrew.morgan@nurfuerspam.de> had it: > Amethyst Deceiver schrieb: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I am agog. That's useful. Europe needs more gogs. SignatureDavid ===== the Omrud schrieb: > That's useful. Europe needs more gogs. Big training programme on in Germany at the moment, watch this space. andy M the Omrud wrote, in <MPG.1fce40b52ab5eb4c98b200@news.ntlworld.com> on Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:09:13 GMT: > andy M <andrew.morgan@nurfuerspam.de> had it: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > That's useful. Europe needs more gogs. Magogs too. SignatureNick Spalding > Amethyst Deceiver schrieb: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I am agog. I gave you two corrections in my sole sentence. Seriously, Andy, if you can't see your errors you're not best placed to correct anyone else's. > Never. As a language beginner you should stay away from > strongly idiomatic usage unless you are totally sure of > its use. Initially this may that you sound somewhat ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Have you missed out a word? > stitlted and old fashioned to a native speaker but thats ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ stilted old-fashioned that's > better that writing a letter with "ur" in it. One of the > other classics is the usage of shortened words like ^^^^^ use > "shouldnt", Your usage above is wrong, and (having just ^^^^^^^^ > had to correct a letter that was supposed to be a > european CEOs Christmas greeting and was full of ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ European CEO's > "couldn't"s shouldn't"s and "wouldn'ts) I would avoid ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ , " If you must use quotes. > using such contructs until you are sure of them. In addiion, wouldn't you like to explain what is wrong with couldn't", wouldn't and shouldn't? SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary Amethyst Deceiver schrieb: > In addiion, A modern day classic - An overly pedantic spelling flame with spelling mistakes. You do realise that not one of your corrections in any way amends, corrects or clarifies the *information* in my posting? > wouldn't you like to explain what is wrong with couldn't", > wouldn't and shouldn't? If you had bothered to actually read my post, you would have seen me do that. andy M > Amethyst Deceiver schrieb: > >> In addiion, > > A modern day classic - An overly pedantic spelling flame with spelling > mistakes. Skitt's law at work. > You do realise that not one of your corrections in any way amends, > corrects or clarifies the *information* in my posting? For pity's sake. The corrections correct your poor English. Amethyst Deceiver schrieb: > > You do realise that not one of your corrections in any way amends, > > corrects or clarifies the *information* in my posting? > > For pity's sake. The corrections correct your poor English. Actually, no. But whatever. andy M > Dorothy schrieb: >> I'm from a non-English speaking country and I'm not so good at English. >> But when I chat with a friend who used to study in UK he always use >> "ur" as "your", > Its a part of what is becoming almost a new dialect, namely "text > message speak" and only accetable in the context of a phone text > message or other informal electronic communication. It seems like this has had to be invented to reflect the new situation whereby friends communicate via written text. Just as it's an indication of friendship that one would make heavy usage of slang in conversation, so it is that one does so in text messages. However, it does seem to be the case that many young users of these forms can't get to grips with the different registers, and so use these forms in *any* electronic communication ioncluding - I see this all the time - email sent in communication from them as students to me as a university lecturer. >> Now my question is : when should I use these words and when shouldn't? > Never. As a language beginner you should stay away from strongly > idiomatic usage unless you are totally sure of its use. Initially this [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > of "couldn't"s shouldn't"s and "wouldn'ts) I would avoid using such > contructs until you are sure of them. "Shouldn't" is certainly not of the same status as "ur". It is not "strongly idiomatic" or slang, it is standard English. Convention is not to use these contractions in formal English, but in informal but standard English they're fine. A Christmas greeting is surely somewhat informal, and I'd have thought it perfectly acceptable to use "couldn't" etc in it. In this newsgroup, people write in standard but informal English. So it's completely incorrect and very misleading advise to say "Your usage above is wrong" meaning the use of the word "shouldn't". Particularly as in the preceding sentence you yourself used a contraction "thats" (you meant "that's") rather than "that is". Matthew Huntbach "Matthew Huntbach" >Convention is not to use these contractions in formal English I have never been taught about it. It seems that I really should improve my English. Thank you all. Matthew Huntbach schrieb: > "Shouldn't" is certainly not of the same status as "ur". It is not > "strongly idiomatic" or slang, it is standard English. Ok. >Convention is > not to use these contractions in formal English, but in informal but > standard English they're fine. A Christmas greeting is surely somewhat > informal, and I'd have thought it perfectly acceptable to use "couldn't" > etc in it. You need to have seen the context. I would still feel very unhappy using contractions in anything that went beyond very informal usage and I know non-mother tongue speakers tend over-use these forms inappropriately so my personal recommendaion is to steer clear of them until they understand them. > In this newsgroup, people write in standard but informal English. So it's > completely incorrect and very misleading advise to say "Your usage above > is wrong" meaning the use of the word "shouldn't". As Mark somewhat more succinctly pointed out. It wasn't my intention to focus on "shouldn't" as the error but that was the impication of the way I wrote it and I agree that that was not the problem. andy M > In this newsgroup, people write in standard but informal English. You ain't just whistlin' Dixie! 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. > "Mark Brader 写道： > " [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "ur" as "your", > at first I can't understand but later I'm used to it. Not only is 'ur' completely nonstandard, it's ugly and marks the person using it as either stupid or illiterate. It's okay that you didn't know that before, but now that you know it, you should never ever use it again. If your friend uses it, that's a mark of his poor education, and you should not emulate him in this respect. Similar mistakes include: 'u' instead of 'you', 'l8r' instead of 'later', and so forth. Always spell words correctly and completely. > By the way recently I'm reading the novel "Forrest Gump" (not quite > sure about the spell of the name and I find there are a lot of words > I haven't seen and I can deduce them from the pronunciation and the > context. I would still recommend using a good dictionary to make sure. I have made mistakes in my assumptions when I was watching a foreign movie with subtitles-- mistakes that could have been very embarassing, if I hadn't checked with a dictionary and discovered my initial assumption, based on context, was wrong. > Now my question is : when should I use these words and when shouldn't? That should be, "... and when shouldn't I?" The answer is, you should use them when you are ureasonably sure you're using the right word in the right context. It's okay to be wrong-- after all, it should be obvious to those listening to you that English is not your first language. It's also okay to ask how you pronounce a word, if you're not positive. You should not use them if none of those conditions apply, or if you are in a group or location where it is not appropriate to ask for pronunciation or meaning of a word. -=Eric Eric Schwartz schrieb: > It's okay to be > wrong-- after all, it should be obvious to those listening to you that > English is not your first language. It doesnt appear to yours, either, Eric, or you wuld know that using "ur", "L8er" and similar constructs is not a sign of illiteracy and stupidity, but of peer pressure and mobile phone use. You may not like them and they may not help literacy levels, but your post was unhelpfully vicious and negative. Language, whatever the pedants may try and say, is dynamic. > It's also okay to ask how you > pronounce a word, if you're not positive. FACK on that though which is exactly what I said. andy M [ ... ] > Not only is 'ur' completely nonstandard, Not in the Chaldees. (But of course it should be capitalized.) > it's ugly and marks the > person using it as either stupid or illiterate. Seriously, I'd settle for "ignorant" or "misinformed" there. (And the rest of your post suggests that you would too.) Non-native speakers in particular can trip over such things as "u" for "you" and "ur" for "your" so frequently in their Internet wanderings that they may be led to believe that they are standard usages. Another similar category is such ESL shortenings as SB and STH. Those who use them here are neither stupid nor illiterate, simply misinformed. > It's okay that you > didn't know that before, but now that you know it, you should never > ever use it again. Two different referents for two different "it"s, but I think the point is clear. I fully agree [ ... ] SignatureBob Lieblich Who nvr uses abbrevs > > Which is correct to use at the beginning of a letter,"To whom it may > > be concerned" or "To whom it may concern"? <snip> > The latter, the former is nonsense. 'To whom it may be of concern' is > grammatical but 'to whom it may concern' is the standard idiomatic way > of addressing a letter to unknown recipients. E.g. the letter I carry > from my doctor explaining that as a diabetic I need to carry liquids and > sharps aboard an aircraft. It may concern check-in staff, security > staff, flight attendants etc. Not to disagree -- for I agree -- but let me add that some people prefer the shorter and less traditional "To whom it concerns", especially when that, rather than "To whom it may concern", is what they mean. Michael Hamm AM, Math, Wash. U. St. Louis msh210@math.wustl.edu Fine print: http://www.math.wustl.edu/~msh210/ ... legal.html >Which is correct to use at the beginning of a letter,"To whom it may be >concerned" or "To whom it may concern"? >we just had a debate on it . To whom it may concern. "To whom it may be concerned" is meaningless. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk > Which is correct to use at the beginning of a letter,"To whom it may be > concerned" or "To whom it may concern"? > we just had a debate on it . The standard opening is "To whom it may concern". |
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.