| |||||||||||
X at OLSX at OLSPosted Jul 25, 2004 14:45 UTC (Sun) by ncm (subscriber, #165)In reply to: X at OLS by socket Parent article: X at OLS Apparently the OED doesn't distinguish among bits of the colonies. The American Heritage Dictionary identifies it as regional, restricted primarily to Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Iowa, Oklahoma, and Northern Ireland. The restriction to qualifying negative clauses doesn't come from some arbitrary Latin rule. It comes directly from the meanings of the words "any" and "more", which a moment's thought will elucidate. "Correct usage" does have, at base, an objective meaning: it means "expected to be understood by most readers". The usage in question manifestly confused enough readers that one posted his distress. Peculiar latinate constructions, by contrast, have never been a part of spoken English.
(Log in to post comments)
"anymore" Posted Jul 29, 2004 4:20 UTC (Thu) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link] Interesting. My upline family resides primarily in the US northwest,Oregon and Washington, altho I spent six years growing up in Kenya, East Africa, as a missionary kid, and have lived in New Mexico, graduated high school in Colorado, attended college in Nebraska, and am now (after another stint in Oregon) residing in Arizona. IOW, while I've had a generally broad geographic experience, none of it has been in the area claimed to be the region the term is used. However, it seemed an entirely ordinary term, to me. I wouldn't have been aware of its "regional" usage, had I not read this thread. <shrug> Maybe one of the other missionary families came from Tennessee, or something, and their usage rubbed off on me. I don't know. I just know it sounds entirely natural to me. <shrug> Duncan
"upline family" Posted Jul 30, 2004 22:28 UTC (Fri) by cdurst (guest, #2953) [Link] Interesting. My upline family resides primarily in the US northwest, ...Upline family? Yech, MLM terms are seeping into English! Kill me now.
"anymore" Posted Aug 5, 2004 15:15 UTC (Thu) by fache (guest, #23795) [Link] Just for the sake of discussion, in the six years I have been living inEngland, I have never heard nor read anymore used like so. I would thing it's an americanism. Thanks for explaining anyway!
incorrect usage Posted Jul 30, 2004 16:15 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link] "Correct usage" does have, at base, an objective meaning: it means "expected to be understood by most readers". That's just the opposite of how I understand "correct usage." The term is used to distinguish two sentences that both can easily be understood. The "correct" one additionally follows certain rules so as not to offend language purists. I personally find the correct form less ambiguous in many cases, but unless you know the grammar well, as most native speakers do not, you don't. Example: "to send someone an email, click on their address." Easily understood, but incorrect because "their" is plural and "someone" is singular. A sentence that can't be understood -- which is just jibberish -- usually goes by some description other than "incorrect usage."
incorrect usage Posted Aug 5, 2004 6:37 UTC (Thu) by xoddam (subscriber, #2322) [Link] That's "gibberish", to you :-)
X at OLS Posted Aug 5, 2004 6:36 UTC (Thu) by xoddam (subscriber, #2322) [Link] > Apparently the OED doesn't distinguish among bits of the colonies.> The American Heritage Dictionary identifies it as regional, > restricted primarily to Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Iowa, > Oklahoma, and Northern Ireland. Interesting ... I first heard it in Glasgow, and supposed it was Scots. But I may only have heard it once and the speaker may have been from Ulster ... hmm.
|
|||||||||||