*penkwe
A word whose existance has never been confirmed (because no one ever wrote it down, or, if they did we have no record of it now) but whose existance has been inferred.
The worship of the Indo-European and Hebrew gods as volcanic mountains may explain the great importance of the fire rituals amon both the Brahmins and the Levites. It may also explain the name o fYahweh, so long a puzzle to Bible scholars...
Another curious connection is the actual name of the Levites. The Hebrew name for these priests, Lewi and Levi are much the same word. It is here that Ms. Stone makes a rather interesting series of relationships that may have significance later. She points out that, in Latin we have lavo which means to wash in a stream which flows, while lavit means to pour. In Hittite, lahhu also means to pour. In French we have laver, to wash and in German we have lawine, meaning avalanche and the English word lavish. Levo in Latin means lift and is especially associated with the sunrise. In Sanskrit lauha is "glowing redness," while lightning is lohla. In German we have lohe, meaning blaze or flame, while in Danish lue means to go up in flames. In English, the word lava, the German lave, and the French lave, each meaning the blazing molten mass that pours from a volcanic mountain, may give us the key to the two concepts in unity: that which is light and flaming, while still pouring almost as a liquid at the same time. Sons of Light and Fire. The mountain top Weather God who issues from DEEP within the Earth!
At Qumran, where was found the oldest extant Hebrew texts, there was a scroll discovered that was completely new to Biblical scholars entitled The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness. This text consists of the plans for a battle that is about to be fought. This scroll reveals that the Levites were still in control at that time, and may be still in control at the present!
The name of the Hebrews as Yehudi, or Judah, is rather close to the Sanskrit word for warrior: Yuddha.
As Ms. Stone points out, if these speculations, supported by so much circumstantial evidence, hold up to further investigation, then what are we to make of the Aryan versus Jew stance of WWII? It becomes more than a tragedy, it becomes utterly ironic that the monster of monotheism created by the Hebrews turned around to devour them. On the other hand, maybe it was intentional. It is even beginning to look like the Hebrews, as an ethnic group, were actually created for "use" by the members of the Control System. And we have to keep in mind also, that the same Control System seems to be behind the development of Kaballah and the many related occult/mystical practices, in which case we have to ask ourselves why?
But, before we move one, let us make one last observation: It was sometime before and directly after WWI that nasili was being accepted as the real name of the Hittite language, and Nesa or Nasa, their first capital. The original name of the Hittite invaders may have been Nesians or Nasians. Nuzi was the capital of the Indo-European nation of Mitanni. And this brings up another connection between the Hittites and the Hebrews, the use of the word nasi for prince from which we derive nazarene. We can't help but observe here how close to these words is the term Nazi.
he whole book (from the previous post) and this whole article are nothing more than racist, sexist pseudo-science.What article? Yours? o_O
I am, but I'm terrible about checking blogs, regardless of how much I like them.ditto
Although I might object to the "nazi" thing, I thought you were right on. Forgive me for ignoring; I wasn't aware that I ought to be reading your blog.But of course you should be reading my blog!
I am, but I'm terrible about checking blogs, regardless of how much I like them.Have you ever tried a feed reader like Google Reader? I love it. But then again, I've got about two dozen blogs, columns, and web comics in it, so I check it daily. If you're using it to just keep up on one or two things, you'll probably have trouble remembering to check Google Reader just like you had trouble remembering to check the blogs.
I disagree with you on fewer and less, though.Care to elaborate?
And just so you know, I'm not trying to pick on you or bait you or anything.I know. :)
You're right.But why should we? What does it add to communication to express the ideas "more milk" and "more people" with different words instead of using more for both?
We should.
Not offhand.Like Jonathon, I'm not trying to pick a fight, but what was the usefulness you were referring to when you said you think it's a useful distinction?
I find myself unable to express why. Probably if we hadn't lost some of the nuances of language along the way I'd be able to find the right words. ;)I'm not sure how serious you're being, but I don't really buy that. Are you really saying that Old English speakers had more power to communicate than we have today, and that Proto-Indo-European speakers had more power to communicate than Old English speakers?
I'm not sure how serious you're being*cheerfully* Not particularly.
I want you to make something that would automatically correct the passive-aggressive voice.It ain't automatic, but it's a start.
I'd do it myself, except I don't want to.
And I'm not terribly invested in this. While I do think we should keep the fewer/less distinction, if it becomes accepted not to (as "hopefully" officially now means what it did not used to), I will grit my teeth and bear it.Standard English has never had the fewer/less distinction as prescriptivists state it. less has been used with count nouns for a thousand years. In 1770 someone named Baker wrote that he didn't like it, and somehow his opinion was repeated by many writers as a rule. But there is no grammatical or historical justification for it.
Meanwhile, I will cheerfully gripe about "10 items or less" signs.
Someone who somehow came across my Arrant Pedantry blog several months ago and who has a blog of his own (http://bradshawofthefuture.blogspot.com/) dedicated mostly to cool and obscure etymologies.er, yes. Hello!
Welcome!
So, did y'all get the science/shit connection from the same source, or were you his source?uncanny coincidence.
But I think the final straw was annoyance with a lot of my fellow editors. Almost none of them seemed interested in doing anything other than following the strictures laid out in style guides and usage manuals (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage was somehow exempt from reference). And far too often, the changes they made did nothing to improve the clarity, readability, or accuracy of the text. Without any depth of knowledge about the issues, they were left without the ability to make informed judgements about what should be changed.
I know! I was pretty excited when I saw that. I wonder how he came across my blog.Hmm.. Well, if you Google Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage, your blog comes up on page 4. So unless he was really digging..
AA?Administrative Assistant.
I just didn't know that administrative assistants were called AAs.Well, now you know.
Rivka: Are you pondering what I'm pondering?Yes, but if our knees bent the other way, how would we ride a bicycle?
Why can't you say "10:30 o'clock"? Discuss. (http://www.arrantpedantry.com/2010/05/12/1030-oclock/)Discuss here or there? I discussed there. But no one else is discussing.
See, the advantage of being a prescriptivist is that the "why" is rather besides the point.And this is my single biggest problem with the standard prescriptive approach to language: it all boils down to a bunch of ipse dixits.
Because it's WRONG, darnit! That's why! ;)
Discuss here or there? I discussed there. But no one else is discussing.Either. Both. C'est tout le même.
I was kidding, you know. I actually find the why fascinating.QuoteSee, the advantage of being a prescriptivist is that the "why" is rather besides the point.And this is my single biggest problem with the standard prescriptive approach to language: it all boils down to a bunch of ipse dixits.
Because it's WRONG, darnit! That's why! ;)
I was kidding, you know. I actually find the why fascinating.Yeah, I know. But most people simply assume that something is wrong because the rule says so, without ever stopping to question why the rule exists in the first place.
I totally should make a screen name of Ipse Dixit.I can't believe you actually did that. :lol:
Huh? Where?QuoteI totally should make a screen name of Ipse Dixit.I can't believe you actually did that. :lol:
Hey me too! I've always thought grey sounded nicer. And greyer.I couldn't a grey more.
Yay!
I knew you before you were famous.
Congratulations, Jonathon. You have arrived!
An editor at Merriam-Webster (the "octopodes lady (http://www.merriam-webster.com/video/0015-octopus.htm)", according to her profile) retweeted my tweet about my column and added "Well said." ;D
You can’t come to a better understanding of the truth by combining apocryphal anecdotes with a little misguided grammatical analysis.Amen.
My blog has been nominated for the Best Blog of 2011 at Grammar.net (http://www.grammar.net/contest-2011)!Wooo! When it comes time to vote, you know where to go to ensure victory. >: )
Voting for this contest starts on September 2th6
you’ll help a few of those crazies come around.Ouch.
Maybe if you'd sent the payment a little earlier . . .Maybe if you have mentioned it was *really* going to be a Kindle Fire . . .
Maybe if you'd sent the payment a little earlier . . .Maybe if you have mentioned it was *really* going to be a Kindle Fire . . .
who “lives” in the bottom-left quadrant?The ghost of Robert Lowth.
Thanks, but I must disagree. Completely different subfields.We aren't talking about subfields, we're talking about dominating the entire field of linguistics. You are language!
Distinctions, Useful and Otherwise (http://www.arrantpedantry.com/2011/12/06/distinctions-useful-and-otherwise/)I enjoyed that.
Karl's here? When did Karl get here?
Hi Karl!
I enjoyed that one also, and read a few back that I'd missed. How is your research project coming? Mom doesn't read over here (that I know of) but she's a retired professional editor* and I could point her this way if you still need people.
*This is how I justify the fact that I still have my mommy check my homework even in grad school. She's the best proofreader on the planet.
Sounds like she got quite stressed out towards then end, almost to the point of insanity some might say. ;)I enjoyed that one also, and read a few back that I'd missed. How is your research project coming? Mom doesn't read over here (that I know of) but she's a retired professional editor* and I could point her this way if you still need people.
*This is how I justify the fact that I still have my mommy check my homework even in grad school. She's the best proofreader on the planet.
I proofread my mother's doctoral dissertation when I was in high school.
Look. I'm winking. Look at my eye.It's good you pointed that out. I hadn't noticed.
Oh, I got it just fine without the emoticon. :pOk, I need it. I want to be able to fully express myself!
I've never heard either of those phrases and have no opinion.Ditto.
I found the topic and explanations too esoteric for this woefully ignorant English major to understand.Ditto, only sub in "almost-minor" for "major".
And who’s to say it isn’t correct now?That would be me.
QuoteAnd who’s to say it isn’t correct now?That would be me.
I gather that we're assuming that cases in which they aren't both independent clauses are a different situation. As in: My mother, however, feels it is wrong.
Hey, that was a great article. I just e-mailed your site to my mom.
As for me, I usually use singular die and feel twinges of self-loathing when I do soWhile I feel twinges of something else altogether. ;)
There's only half a billion English speakers. How long could it possibly take?I could speed things up if I enlist American and British English teachers in my cause. I'll tell them ignoramuses disagree with me, and they can be snobby and dismissive if they do it my way. I can't lose!
Actually, English teachers have minimal control over the way people speak.What Porter said.
(or did I just ruin the funny with facts?)
English teachers have zero control over how people speak. They do have some not-minimal influence over how they write, though, at least in school, and for some people it's a very deep and lasting influence.But does writing have such a distant relevance to speech? The words we use in writing one would think would travel into our common speech, that's certainly true for me. When reading aloud, teachers correct our pronunciation, and it's common for students to read a text that differs from the rules they use and to ask about it.
English teachers have zero control over how people speak.English teachers had an effect on how I grew up speaking.
A couple of months ago, Geoffrey Pullum talked made the argument in this post on Lingua Franca that it’s impossible to talk about what’s right or wrong in language without considering the evidence.
But does writing have such a distant relevance to speech? The words we use in writing one would think would travel into our common speech, that's certainly true for me. When reading aloud, teachers correct our pronunciation, and it's common for students to read a text that differs from the rules they use and to ask about it.
I'll grant that's not nearly as huge an influence as just hearing parents speak, or actively trying to fit in with how your community speaks the language.
QuoteEnglish teachers have zero control over how people speak.English teachers had an effect on how I grew up speaking.
When I was in Qing Hua University almost two years ago, my teachers would constantly interrupt my pronunciation, and my awkward diction. My accent changed, as did the words I used in conducting my daily affairs after just a few weeks of influence. They could still pick out my Taiwanese accent, but I definitely started sounding more local by the time I left.
Learning Spanish had an incredible impact on my understanding of English.
English came so naturally to me, as I was raised around it, that I never really paid too much attention in class. Then, very on early English class moved from the rules of the language to literature and all that fancy stuff.
Having to learn a second language later really caused me to think about the functions of words within a sentence.
Why should it be? If I was enrolled in a "Rhetoric" or "Public Speaking" course it would have the same effect.When I was in Qing Hua University almost two years ago, my teachers would constantly interrupt my pronunciation, and my awkward diction. My accent changed, as did the words I used in conducting my daily affairs after just a few weeks of influence. They could still pick out my Taiwanese accent, but I definitely started sounding more local by the time I left.
This was your learning a second language, though, which is something totally different.
A rhetoric class in your native language might affect how you speak in certain situations, but it wouldn't affect how you spoke at home or with your friends.It did for me.
Because Chinese is your second language.Annie, I for one don't believe there really is a "standard English". I have no problem with people with accents teaching English because by and large there is so much shared media it creates a sort of standard we can reference when we speak to each other, rather than pockets of America where there are more and more distinct accents and vocabulary.
eta: A rhetoric class in your native language might affect how you speak in certain situations, but it wouldn't affect how you spoke at home or with your friends. Native, everyday language is very unsusceptible to external mandate. It is, however, very susceptible to peer groups and culture. We weren't originally talking about rhetoric classes, though, we were talking about English teachers.
This is a very touchy subject for me because of some of the crazy political nonsense that's going on recently. Arizona was trying to pass a regulation that teachers who spoke with "foreign accents" couldn't teach elementary school because they would teach the students nonstandard English. One of my linguistics professors posted on facebook a letter written by a coalition of linguists repudiating, point by point, the ridiculous assumptions of that policy. I was trying to find that letter but I haven't been able to again.
The good news is that there is a standard English. The bad news is that the only native speaker was William Shakespeare.
I'll back any law for that.
Is that King Lear?Nah, I just made it up. I wish I could type stuff like that out in under 3 minutes.
I knew Jon Boy before he was almost famous, and every point after that until he goes mad with fame, spirals, and then I'll have never known him.
Hey, I once was awarded once of his blog posts!
is no excuse for any degree grammatical laxness.
You see, bad grammar doesn’t just indicate an unclean conscience; it threatens the very foundations of democracy.I've been telling you this for YEARS! ;)
Missing word?Quoteis no excuse for any degree grammatical laxness.
QuoteYou see, bad grammar doesn’t just indicate an unclean conscience; it threatens the very foundations of democracy.I've been telling you this for YEARS! ;)
10,000 is Chinese for "more than I feel it would be productive to count." I don't know if that's how he's using it. The qualifier that only a fraction are repeated is what makes me suspicious of the total. But I don't know, maybe the guy does it for a living, and maybe he really keeps a spreadsheet somewhere.
But does he keep a spreadsheet? I was pretty sure he is a professor in English or language.
Well, he's a professor of linguistics and English language, so yes, this is what he does for a living. ;)
I don't think it's at all surprising that a large number of the rules are one-offs. It seems like pretty much everyone who writes a usage handbook or dictionary puts in their own pet peeves, which may be highly idiosyncratic. And a lot of people have written about usage in the last 200+ years.
I find it amusing to see people respond to me when I put actual estimates or qualifying statements where hyperbole usually goes.
"I swear I have told that guy about four times that..."
"Did you see that movie? Ah, man! It was the best superhero movie in at least the last five years."
"This bag feels like it weighs one hundred lbs, and I've been carrying it for several minutes."
Don't get me wrong, I like hyperbole, but it loses its punching power when we use it to excuse our laziness in actually describing something.
I find it amusing to see people respond to me when I put actual estimates or qualifying statements where hyperbole usually goes.I do that fairly frequently with statements such as "That's the saddest thing I've heard this morning".
Weird Al chose 27 as his weirdly specific number.Exactly.QuoteI find it amusing to see people respond to me when I put actual estimates or qualifying statements where hyperbole usually goes.I do that fairly frequently with statements such as "That's the saddest thing I've heard this morning".
Hmm. I'm not quite sure if that's the same. I'm talking about it in the sense in which we'd normally use that or which. In English, we wouldn't use anything where your FIL used that what. But German does use was, which is cognate with English what, as a relative pronoun in some constructions, usually referring to a whole clause rather than just a single word or phrase.So what's an example of a full English sentence using what the way your column describes? I read the bit about the prayer, but I'm still havin troubl grasping it.
The only twentieth-century example in the OED is "If I sat down to write a book, I'd want to shove in all what I saw." Standard English would use all that I saw. In the example from the prayer, the standard construction would be "our leaders who guide and direct us" or "our leaders that guide and direct us". Does that help?So what about, "I went back up on the roof to get all the tools what I left up there."?
But even if what is a nominal relative in your example, I don't really know what the from is doing there. Is this a Yiddishism?Yes.
I kind of like that I know the "real" meaning of enormity. It.makes me feel superior to regular folk.
Enormousness sound odd. Too many coronals. I use enormity to refer to overwhelming tasks that I should do but don't, which is the opposite of wicked.
I think maybe it just sounds odd because it's almost never used, and it's almost never used because everyone uses enormity instead.I agree.
It's interesting that everyone I know who remembers being taught this uses the same exact example for hung: people are hanged, pictures are hung.
(Also, your last parenthetical has no close.)
Probably because it makes a good mnemonic—it's memorable and easy to grasp.Probably. Nonetheless, it's interesting there are (as far as I am aware) no alternative mnemonics used.
It's interesting that everyone I know who remembers being taught this uses the same exact example for hung: people are hanged, pictures are hung.Probably because it makes a good mnemonic—it's memorable and easy to grasp.
Completion Successful (http://www.arrantpedantry.com/2012/12/10/completion-successful/)
I'm showing that that doesn't work in some situations.That much I followed.
Normally the second that would be which.And with that substitution, I can decode.
Or you could replace them both with what.But not with that one. *headasplode*
"they want what what they can't have".
It was a good review.Indeed.
Just because there are other options doesn’t mean one is right and the rest are wrong.Stab me in the heart, why don'cha? ;)
Are you getting a database connection error? It's been doing that all day because my server apparently can't handle all the traffic.
And we knew you before you were famous! Go Jonathon!
Are you getting a database connection error? It's been doing that all day because my server apparently can't handle all the traffic.That might have been it, I waited it out and eventually got through. Seems like GC is slower these days as well. But I'm not sure that's related?
to me, AHN rhymes with dawn.*runs screaming*
The dialog quiz thing that's going around asked whether I pronounced crayon like cray-AHN or to rhyme with dawn. I had no idea how to answer because to me, AHN rhymes with dawn.
Is it a different sound in Now and flower?
Holy crap that gave me deja vu.
eta: Sputnik tells me he meant flour, not flower. Now my 3% is really swimming.
The dialog quiz thing that's going around asked whether I pronounced crayon like cray-AHN or to rhyme with dawn. I had no idea how to answer because to me, AHN rhymes with dawn.I had the exact same problem.
I live in the mid atlantic until I was 17,
It's a thing:Huh. So mid-atlantic seaboard then?
http://md.water.usgs.gov/publications/wrir-97-4139/html.htm
I'm surprised that people don't know about this. It's the part of the East Coast between New England and the Southeast. Then again, being from there may make me more aware of it.Nobody calls Hong Kong the anything Pacific.
“we might as well all gooff and kill ourselves.”
Maybe linguists are like meteorologists who observe that, contrary to the claims of some individuals, the sky is not actually falling.This might not be the best analogy, unless you are a global warming denier, or possibly a manmade global warming denier. The latter would be very consistent with the point you're trying to make.
Teaching grammar for its own sake is fine, but learning grammar can also be a tool for upward mobility, for people whose native grammar is nonstandard. Like with Eliza Doolittle and her posh accent lessons with George Bernard Shaw.
I liked this line: "Good writing breaks these rules all the time, and following all the rules does little if anything to make bad writing good."
I'm not saying it was good writing or anything, but it still bugs me that a sixth grade teacher changed a word of a poem I wrote for an assignment because he didn't think the word I used was grammatically correct. But the word he wanted me to use wasn't what I meant!
(Ironically, I don't even remember the actual poem anymore, just the incident.)
Some of us loved grammar class and think many of the rules are cool.
And now I have a guest post on the Macmillan Dictionary blog: "Grammar and Grammar (http://www.macmillandictionaryblog.com/grammar-and-grammar)".
And last I checked, linguists are people too, and they have just as much of a say as anyone else. Language is the ultimate democracy, and everyone gets a vote. I vote for greater understanding of what grammar really is.Nice. :D
I would have loved it if it had been taught better—I certainly loved grammar once I got to college. And many of the rules are cool, but I think it's important to recognize which rules are valid and which aren't and to teach kids the difference.I had some decent English teachers, who emphasized that these are the rules, but if you know what you are doing you can sometimes break them. I also had some crappy ones, who clearly hated teaching grammar as much as most of my classmates hated learning it.
QuoteAnd last I checked, linguists are people too, and they have just as much of a say as anyone else. Language is the ultimate democracy, and everyone gets a vote. I vote for greater understanding of what grammar really is.Nice. :D
I always say "nauseated" rather than "nauseous" ever since a high school English teacher embarrassed me in front of the class. I'd asked to be excused because I was nauseous, and he answered, "Yeah, I guess you do kind of smell disgusting".:o
Could it be they are using "nausea" in the same way one might use "noxious"? They both cause a condition.
I always say "nauseated" rather than "nauseous" ever since a high school English teacher embarrassed me in front of the class. I'd asked to be excused because I was nauseous, and he answered, "Yeah, I guess you do kind of smell disgusting".
I don’t pretend that my preference is an ironclad grammatical law or proof of my superiority.I do.
B)It's because you included the word "listicle". ;)
It blows my mind how much traffic I still get on that post.
New post on Visual Thesaurus (not paywalled this time): Less Usage Problems (http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/wc/less-usage-problems/).Hmm. Ok, I think I agree with that.
Kudos. You come off as charming and humble.Exactly right.
Thanks! I was a little thrown by a few of the questions, especially "greatest contribution to the English language" one. I was like, I'm just this guy, you know.
Did I scare everyone off with that warning?In my case, not so much scared off as saved for when I got home.
Did I scare everyone off with that warning?In my case, not so much scared off as saved for when I got home.
Very interesting. I was not aware of the claims about Celtic languages having flavored English, but I think you make some very thoughtful points.
(Also, I believe the phrase In Welsh, however, gwneud may have some accidental excess italicization. Darn open/close thingies.)
It makes me think that the tile distribution and points value must be very different in the Welsh version of Scrabble.
Changing “doesn’t sound very exciting” to “it does not sound very exciting” is probably fine if you’re editing dialogue for Data from Star Trek, but it just isn’t how normal people talk.;D
Celtic and the History of the English Language (http://www.arrantpedantry.com/2014/12/01/celtic-and-the-history-of-the-english-language/)
Warning: it's really freaking long.
This is why the war of the scriptivists rages on with no end in sight.
[T]here are an awful lot of children’s book authors who apparently feel compelled to write in verse, despite being terrible at it.Too, too true.
That was a terrible poem you quoted. (But a good column-type thingy).
You are both hilarious.
In technical terms, pretending that you don’t understand someone is called engaging in uncooperative communication. In layman’s terms, it’s called being an ass.
Indeed. I especially enjoyed:QuoteIn technical terms, pretending that you don’t understand someone is called engaging in uncooperative communication. In layman’s terms, it’s called being an ass.
But they aren't really even quotes from anyone.
A headline that they run as 'Terror attack' foiled in France could just as simply be written Terror Attack Foiled in France. No quotes needed. It drives me nuts because they are so unnecessary and change the whole intonation when I read it.
words mean things
Historic, Historical (http://www.arrantpedantry.com/2016/01/28/historic-historical/)
How to Use Quotation Marks (http://www.arrantpedantry.com/2015/11/30/how-to-use-quotation-marks/)
So how do we explain this?:D
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I’ve never read anything by Bujoldis something you should correct.
Yeah, yeah, I know. I've heard a lot of good things about them but just haven't gotten around to reading them yet.Fair enough. :)
Woah means something different from whoa? I wonder what she thinks it means?
Woah is me? :p
Huh. I'm assuming there's no evidence for that definition, right? To me, "whoa" means both of those things.Woah means something different from whoa? I wonder what she thinks it means?She says, "'Whoa!' is a command meaning 'Stop!' 'Woah!' is an exclamation of astonishment, rendered phonetically." I'm not really sure how she thinks that's rendered phonetically, unless she rhymes it with Noah.
Woah is me? :p
Oh, man, that would have been a great title for the post. I wish I'd thought of that.
Huh. I'm assuming there's no evidence for that definition, right? To me, "whoa" means both of those things.
We could call this phenomenon Steve, and it wouldn’t change what it is.True, but it would be terribly confusing.
QuoteWe could call this phenomenon Steve, and it wouldn’t change what it is.True, but it would be terribly confusing.
The poll results are hilarious.
I showed it to a couple of my co-workers -- one of whom got a huge kick out of it -- and hung it up. It is far enough away that I can't actually read the text, but I keep grinning when I look up and see it.That flowchart (the one about using quotation marks) is still up on the wall in my office. It's far enough away, and the text is small enough, that I cannot read it from where I sit. But I was standing up to deal with something else on that wall, and happened to read it again.
People have been using "they" in this sense for literally centuries, and I mean literally in the literal sense.-Steve Kleinedler, Executive Editor, American Heritage Dictionary.
QuotePeople have been using "they" in this sense for literally centuries, and I mean literally in the literal sense.-Steve Kleinedler, Executive Editor, American Heritage Dictionary.
The German word is essentially just a highly narrowed sense of the word: poison is something you give someone. (Well, hopefully not something you give people.)Just myself. >_<
In another chapter, she relates how she discovered that the word bitch had no stylistic label warning dictionary users that the word is vulgar of offensiveI think you intended "or" instead of "of".
After all, it’s not like you’re committing a serious crime, like not using a serial comma.;D ;D ;D
I often wonder how many of my friends' Facebook posts I'm not seeing. Sometimes I'll like or comment on a friend's post, and then I suddenly start seeing lots of posts by that person, which makes me think that Facebook is saying "Oh, you interacted with that person. You probably want to interact with them a lot more."
I really wish they'd stop with the algorithms and just let you pick what you want to see.
Well, I'm glad you think so, because I'm having a LOT of arguments on Twitter with editors who don't seem to have read the whole thing.
I'm quite impressed.Same here!
Hebrew grammar is mostly analytical, expressing such forms as dative, ablative, and accusative using prepositional particles rather than grammatical cases.
And by the way, I just copied the Hebrew from Wiktionary, so I can't vouch for it.Oh, it's right. (I would have mentioned if there were an issue. I know you'd want to know.)
By now, the more popular spelling looks wrong to me, so I suppose you've ruined me for it a little.Yup, me too. We had a student a while back who spells it the other way, which delayed the process slightly (and meant I always had to check when writing to either you or to him). But once he graduated, it was -thon all the way. ;)
Oh, it's right. (I would have mentioned if there were an issue. I know you'd want to know.)
By now, the more popular spelling looks wrong to me, so I suppose you've ruined me for it a little.Yup, me too. We had a student a while back who spells it the other way, which delayed the process slightly (and meant I always had to check when writing to either you or to him). But once he graduated, it was -thon all the way. ;)
Maybe they just don't get the whole alignment chart meme?This strikes me as fairly likely.
I don't play D&D either but have enjoyed a lot of alignment chart memes too.Ditto. However, a few years back when they were relatively new (at least to me), I did have to educate myself to understand them.
That was a good read.Agreed!
Though I'm disappointed with myself for not working in this Calvin & Hobbes strip (https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1993/01/25).That was definitely a missed opportunity, but perhaps might not have worked with the piece's overall tone.
Even though my utterance has the form of a yes-or-no question, you’d only answer “Yes, I know what time it is” if you were trying to be a smart alec.Or if you were on the autism spectrum. This sort of question is legitimately difficult for those who are. My son is both on the spectrum and a smart alec, so . . . . :P
As with so many things that editors do, I think we assume we're helping the reader, while our readers are completely oblivious.Yeah. You know I'm entirely sympathetic to that view, and in fact push for following various accepted rules/standards in both my jobs (and just in general). But if almost no laypeople know about a rule, it's hard to have its usage communicate anything to them.
The autism spectrum question actually crossed my mind, but it felt like too much of a sidetrack in what was already a long post.That's fair.
(And thanks for catching the missing quotation mark.):)
Also,QuoteEven though my utterance has the form of a yes-or-no question, you’d only answer “Yes, I know what time it is” if you were trying to be a smart alec.Or if you were on the autism spectrum. This sort of question is legitimately difficult for those who are. My son is both on the spectrum and a smart alec, so . . . . :P
Nöw yöu knöw.AAAAAAAhhhhhhhhhhhh! My eyes, my eyes!
Nobody hired us to preserve the language.Oh. Hmm.
I Am Begging You to Learn How Dictionaries Work (https://www.arrantpedantry.com/2021/11/08/i-am-begging-you-to-learn-how-dictionaries-work/)I have seen some articles arguing about whether certain words should be included based on whether they are ever used in published (for some definition of "published") work. That at least seems like a reasonable question, although the articles' merit varies. But going by whether one particular individual recognizes a word? What an odd and capricious metric.
I Am Begging You to Learn How Dictionaries Work (https://www.arrantpedantry.com/2021/11/08/i-am-begging-you-to-learn-how-dictionaries-work/)I have seen some articles arguing about whether certain words should be included based on whether they are ever used in published (for some definition of "published") work. That at least seems like a reasonable question, although the articles' merit varies. But going by whether one particular individual recognizes a word? What an odd and capricious metric.
And I was also among the kids who was told "go look it up". My kids try to get me to "just tell me!" when I say that, though. And if I respond with "Do I look like a dictionary?", you can guess their usual response. ;)
I Am Begging You to Learn How Dictionaries Work (https://www.arrantpedantry.com/2021/11/08/i-am-begging-you-to-learn-how-dictionaries-work/)
For the record, the only word you mentioned that I'm not familiar with is teraflop.Interesting. It's the only one of them I hear regularly, although I had heard of at least a couple of the others.
You could also use it to win arguments with people who think they know what a word means but are wrong.Or at least move the argument to a new level, when you debate the meaning of the meaning (or have dueling dictionaries). ;)
This actually happened at my last jobAh, that makes sense.
Many of the lines are direct or near-direct quotes.I had a feeling. ;)
And I'm probably safe pointing out here that the coworker in question was literally named Karen.:D