|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 346 responses total. |
md
|
|
response 100 of 346:
| 
Mar 29 16:14 UTC 1995 |
People often say, "I would've liked to have been [at the
concert, or whatever]."
"I would have liked to have been" is redundant. What is
probably meant in most cases is, "I would've liked to be,"
as in "I would've liked to be at Woodstock, but my parents
thought I was too young." Rarely, someone might actually
mean "I would like to have been," as in "I didn't want to be
at Woodstock at the time, but in retrospect I would like to
have been there."
There probably are situations in which "I would have liked
to have been" makes sense, but those are unusual: "When I
met Jerry Garcia yesterday I would've liked to have been at
Woodstock, but ordinarily I'm glad I wasn't there."
|
srw
|
|
response 101 of 346:
|
Mar 29 20:02 UTC 1995 |
Re 71: carl, yes, alright is not a word. I quote from the
Random House Dictionary of the English Language:
alright, adv. all right.
--usage. The form "all right" is occasionally seen as a variant of
"all right", probably by analogy of "already" and "altogether", but
it is not considered acceptable in standard English.
re: 80, fitz. You are late to register the gender peeve. I already
registered it in the pet peeve item a couple of seasons ago.
I guess it's all right to bring it back into public view again, though.
I am glad to know of your support for my peeve.
My goal is to eliminate the use of "gender" mean "sex" altogether.
Unfortunately, many people are shy to use the word "sex" and
retreat to the less threatening, albeit incorrect, "gender".
Re 91: aruba. You spelled those all wrong. It's "forego". "foregone".
and I never heard of "forewent", but it would be consistent.
Another srw peeve:
I get annoyed when I see programmers familiar with the term "recursive",
which is an adjective describing certain behavior of subprograms, struggle
to come up with the verb form. Invariably the result is "recurse".
This leads to all kinds of interesting images. The verb form is actually
the verb from which "recursive" was derived, namely "recur".
|
rcurl
|
|
response 102 of 346:
|
Mar 29 20:17 UTC 1995 |
' The form "all right" is occasionally seen as a variant of
"all right"...' certainly does represent a *very subtle* distinction!
One of my syntax peeves is the frequent use of the word "actually" when
its omission makes no change in the meaning of the sentence. I think it is
a variant of "you know".
|
gregc
|
|
response 103 of 346:
|
Mar 29 21:18 UTC 1995 |
Srw:
Programmers have, and will continue to create new words to help
describe things in their world. While the proper english verb form of
"recursive" may be "recur", I submit that within the context of describing
the action of a program, the term "recurse" is correct. It is a concept
for which "recur" was never intended. It is a new concept, and therefore
a new word.
|
srw
|
|
response 104 of 346:
|
Mar 29 21:39 UTC 1995 |
(oops) thanks for pointing out my error. The first "all right" should
have read "alright". It does make it more subtle than I intended.
I love many of the new words programmers create, but for some reason
"to recurse" grates horridly. Since a subprgram is recursive by nature
of the fact that its execution recurs before it completes, I prefer
the original verb to an improperly reverse-engineered one.
|
carl
|
|
response 105 of 346:
|
Mar 30 00:15 UTC 1995 |
Well, Steve, just get rid of your Random House and get a
Webster's New Collegiate and it will become a word. ;-)
|
popcorn
|
|
response 106 of 346:
|
Mar 30 01:36 UTC 1995 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 107 of 346:
|
Mar 30 02:20 UTC 1995 |
Re #101: Actually, Steve, "forgo" and "forego" are two different words.
"Forgo" means to abstain from or to renounce; "forego" means to precede
(and my dictionary also lists it as a variant of forgo). The past tenses
are forwent and forewent.
|
davel
|
|
response 108 of 346:
|
Mar 30 03:05 UTC 1995 |
(Ah, yes, "altogether" when "all together" was meant ... that was definitely
one I couldn't remember at the time.)
Re 105: Webster's, since around 1955 at least, seems to have a policy
amounting to "If we can find one use in print, it's as good as any
other word.". They are correct that a lexicographer's job is to describe
usage in a realistic way; they don't seem to realize that widespread
views of acceptability are also an important part of usage. Just FWIW.
|
srw
|
|
response 109 of 346:
|
Mar 30 05:45 UTC 1995 |
Thank you Dave. I still feel strongly that "alright" is not all right.
In fact I had it drummed into my head in 8th grade English that it
was all wrong. I am not impressed with Webster's if it allows that.
I stand totally corrected about forgo. I have always spelled it with an
"e", but the dictionary agrees that it is a word either way.
I should have foregone the quick criticism.
Forego definition 2 is the same as forgo, so I have not been using
it incorrectly, either. My apologies, Mark.
|
raytlee
|
|
response 110 of 346:
|
Mar 30 06:43 UTC 1995 |
Gender and sex have very different meanings. Gender refers to a culturally
constructed category. Sex refers to a biological difference. I am writing
a dissertation on gender but it has nothing about sex or anybody having sex.
I don't understand why people are using male and female as nouns so much
these days. I am not a male, a male human being perhap, a man certainly.
But a male, a male what?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 111 of 346:
|
Mar 30 07:51 UTC 1995 |
My Webster's New World gives a definition for male (n.) - a male person
or animal.
|
rogue
|
|
response 112 of 346:
|
Mar 30 15:39 UTC 1995 |
#110: I think you're being too anal. If someone says you're a "male", he/she
is saying you are a male human being. I guess you can ponder whether
or not they mean you are a male grasshopper or a male reptile, but
then you exit reality and enter the dimension of Extreme Analness.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 113 of 346:
|
Mar 30 15:48 UTC 1995 |
Its a matter of a set theoric concept. The set "male" includes all
that have the attribute of maleness. If one chose from the universe,
and obtained an element from "male", one would say "it is a male". Its
the same as (say) being a "blue-eyes". Then, there are the "anals".
|
nephi
|
|
response 114 of 346:
|
Mar 31 05:17 UTC 1995 |
Is it Grexxers or Grexers? Grexxing or Grexing? What's the rule concerning
this?
|
aruba
|
|
response 115 of 346:
|
Mar 31 05:55 UTC 1995 |
ROTFL over #112 & 113. Nephi, I think such things are decided by the
community at large, and that's the first time I've ever seen Grexxer or
Grexxing, so I think the others are "correct". But hey, whatever floats
your boat.
|
nephi
|
|
response 116 of 346:
|
Mar 31 06:15 UTC 1995 |
Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Let's try doing it by ananlogy.
Is it hexer or hexxer? Hexing or hexxing?
|
nephi
|
|
response 117 of 346:
|
Mar 31 06:36 UTC 1995 |
Ack! *Analogy*, even!
|
aruba
|
|
response 118 of 346:
|
Mar 31 06:51 UTC 1995 |
"hexer" and "hexing", according to my dictionary.
|
nephi
|
|
response 119 of 346:
|
Mar 31 06:58 UTC 1995 |
(Mine wouldn't say.)
|
gregc
|
|
response 120 of 346:
|
Mar 31 07:10 UTC 1995 |
"Life, is like, an analogy...."
|
otterwmn
|
|
response 121 of 346:
|
Mar 31 12:06 UTC 1995 |
Nephi, if your dictionary won't talk to you, perhaps it is hexed. =)
|
davel
|
|
response 122 of 346:
|
Mar 31 12:36 UTC 1995 |
Personally, I prefer "Grexies".
|
srw
|
|
response 123 of 346:
|
Mar 31 15:48 UTC 1995 |
Let's leave the doubling of exes to large oil companies. I abhor the thought.
|
headdoc
|
|
response 124 of 346:
|
Mar 31 21:19 UTC 1995 |
Valerie, your comment is going to encourage me to change my ways. . .I always
write a lot as one word to save time and space because when I type I am usually
in a hurry. But if it ticks you off, I don't mind modifying. Onew of my pet
peeves is when people interchange the word anxious for eager.
|
