To confer him with the honors

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Marius Hancu - 23 Nov 2006 03:36 GMT

Hello:

Is this correct
"to confer him WITH the GOAT honors?"

I'd have said: "to confer him the GOAT honors"

I find it in this article from the SI:
----------
If Federer completes the career Slam, I think you have to confer him
with the GOAT honors. [GOAT=Great Of All Time]

Jon Wertheim
http://tinyurl.com/yf9hwu
----------

Otherwise, mainly on non-US or non-UK sites, but still it exists on
the Web ...

Thanks.
Marius Hancu

Reply to this Message

dontbother - 23 Nov 2006 04:59 GMT

> Is this correct
> "to confer him WITH the GOAT honors?"

No. When "confer" is used as a transitive verb in such a context, the
"honors" (I'd probably say "honor") is what is conferred; it is,
therefore, the direct object and cannot take a preposition. "Him" is
the indirect object and can can a preposition, e.g., "confer the GOAT
honor(s) (up)on him".

> I'd have said: "to confer him the GOAT honors"

This seems correct to me.

> I find it in this article from the SI:
> ----------
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> http://tinyurl.com/yf9hwu
> ----------

A sports writer. What can one expect? Just the other day, one of the
CNN reporters in Iraq -- Farwa(?) Dana, I believe, a gaunt young
blondie with a mike -- said something about some human rights groups
declaring that Saddam should not "be hung".

> Otherwise, mainly on non-US or non-UK sites, but still it exists
> on the Web ...

Signature

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
Native speaker of American English; posting from Taiwan.
Unmunged email: /at/easypeasy.com
"Impatience is the mother of misery."

Reply to this Message

Tony Cooper - 23 Nov 2006 05:38 GMT

>> I find it in this article from the SI:
>> ----------
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>> Jon Wertheim
>> http://tinyurl.com/yf9hwu

"SI" is _Sports Illustrated_. It is not "the _Sports Illustrated_".
It's not some venerable old institution like _The Times_, but that
doesn't give one leave to play fast and loose with the "the".

Signature

Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

Reply to this Message

Evan Kirshenbaum - 27 Nov 2006 21:21 GMT

>>> I find it in this article from the SI:
>>> ----------
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> It's not some venerable old institution like _The Times_, but that
> doesn't give one leave to play fast and loose with the "the".

I subscribe to two "SI"s. One is _Sports Illustrated_, the other the
_Skeptical Inquirer_. Granted, I'd be more likely to expect to see
the quote in the former.

Signature

Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |If we have to re-invent the wheel,
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |can we at least make it round this
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |time?

kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

Reply to this Message

Richard Maurer - 23 Nov 2006 07:14 GMT

Is this correct
"to confer him WITH the GOAT honors?"

I'd have said: "to confer him the GOAT honors"

I find it in this article from the SI:
----------
If Federer completes the career Slam, I think
you have to confer him with the GOAT honors.
[GOAT=Great Of All Time]

Jon Wertheim
http://tinyurl.com/yf9hwu
----------

The standard form is
"Confer upon him"
or
"Confer on him".

Incidentally, it is
[GOAT=Greatest Of All Time]
which the article had right. (See Muhammed Ali.)

Signature

-- ---------------------------------------------
Richard Maurer To reply, remove half
Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply to this Message

Marius Hancu - 23 Nov 2006 10:18 GMT

> Incidentally, it is
> [GOAT=Greatest Of All Time]
> which the article had right. (See Muhammed Ali.)

Indeed.

Thank you all.
Marius Hancu

Reply to this Message

Brad Germolene - 23 Nov 2006 10:25 GMT

> Is this correct
> "to confer him WITH the GOAT honors?"
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> [GOAT=Greatest Of All Time]
>which the article had right. (See Muhammed Ali.)

Didn't he spell it "Muhammad", and didn't he call himself "the
greatest of all times", with an "s"?

Signature

Brad Germolene

Reply to this Message

Eric Walker - 23 Nov 2006 08:53 GMT

> Is this correct
> "to confer him WITH the GOAT honors?"

No. "Confer" in the sense of "bestow, grant" (as opposed to "meet with
for discussion") idiomatically takes the preposition "on". That
phrase, with the least fixing necessary, would be "to confer on him the
GOAT honors". The more common wording, though, would be "to confer the
GOAT honors on him".

(And, while we're at it, "the GOAT honors" sound awful; the plural is
unwanted, and whether the definite article is wanted is open to
debate.)

Failing to supply an idiomatic preposition for a given verb is one of
the easiest ways to sound like one almost wholly unfamiliar with the
tongue.

Reply to this Message

Robert Bannister - 24 Nov 2006 01:42 GMT

>>Is this correct
>>"to confer him WITH the GOAT honors?"
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> unwanted, and whether the definite article is wanted is open to
> debate.)

More idiomatic, at least in BrE, would be "the order of the GOAT" (or
maybe "Order").

Signature

Rob Bannister

Reply to this Message

Adrian Bailey - 23 Nov 2006 22:16 GMT

> Hello:
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> If Federer completes the career Slam, I think you have to confer him
> with the GOAT honors. [GOAT=Great Of All Time]

...confer on him the GOAT honor
or
...confer the GOAT honor on him

Better:
...confer on him the title of Greatest Of All Time

Adrian

Reply to this Message

Discussion Groups / English Usage / November 2006

To confer him with the honors