# Quick grammar question



## hjrdee (24 Jul 2007)

A business in my town has just moved offices and has put a notice up on his window to tell customers the following:

We have moved:

400 Metres that way, just *passed* the xxxxxxxxx.

Should that read *past*??

Not a life saving query but just curious as I think they have it wrong.


----------



## Purple (24 Jul 2007)

Past is correct.
Passed is incorrect.


----------



## Caveat (24 Jul 2007)

hjrdee said:


> Should that read *past*??


 
Yes it should - unless of course they are in a constant state of flux and are continually passing various landmarks.  

'Passed' instead of 'past' is a surprisingly common error - but not as bad as 'your' instead of 'you're', which is *very *common: I've seen a permanent shop sign that reads 'Now your talking'.


----------



## elefantfresh (24 Jul 2007)

Not forgetting the quiet/quite conundrum either. Also often see to/too misused. God help people learning this as a second language.


----------



## Vanilla (24 Jul 2007)

Should that read 'Quick grammatical question' ? LOL.


Also licence/license. People saying 'I got' instead of 'I received' and 'lots' instead of 'many'. My old English teacher used to wince when presented with those.


----------



## Guest127 (24 Jul 2007)

teacher used to give out yards if someone used an excuse for missing school ' due to a cold/ flu etc'  went mental and said it was ' owing' to a cold etc not 'due to'. personally can't really see much  difference in 'owing' and 'due to.'


----------



## Caveat (24 Jul 2007)

cuchulainn said:


> 'owing' to a cold etc not 'due to'.


 
To me 'owing to' now sounds a bit dated.  Surprisingly, grammar 'rules' are not always set in stone and some so-called 'rules 'are subject to revision.

E.g. 'Can' used for permission (e.g. can I have?) has been historically regarded as poor use of language, incorrect even.  However, most modern grammar texts will now 'allow' the use of 'can' for permission as an acceptable alternative to 'may'.


----------



## gipimann (24 Jul 2007)

elefantfresh said:


> Not forgetting the quiet/quite conundrum either. Also often see to/too misused. God help people learning this as a second language.


 
But didn't we all learn it as a second language (English not being our first official language)......


----------



## Staples (24 Jul 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Should that read 'Quick grammatical question' ? LOL.
> 
> 
> Also licence/license. People saying 'I got' instead of 'I received' and 'lots' instead of 'many'. My old English teacher used to wince when presented with those.


 
Technically right perhaps, but I can't imagine a kid going into school and saying "I received many presents for my birthday".  Sounds like Martin from The Simpsons.  It's a short cut to a wedgie if you ask me.


----------



## Seagull (24 Jul 2007)

The other favourite seems to be people loosing/looseing things when they can't find them.


----------



## Purple (24 Jul 2007)

It's not grammar related but the one that gets to me is when people say "Pacifically" rather than "specifically". Then there’s the whole “Chicago” “Chica*r*go” thing.


----------



## Caveat (24 Jul 2007)

Purple said:


> It's not grammar related but the one that gets to me is when people say "Pacifically" rather than "specifically". Then there’s the whole “Chicago” “Chica*r*go” thing.


 

or people who pronounce Thai as 'thigh'...


----------



## z109 (24 Jul 2007)

What about 'fewer' and 'less'? Many shouts at the radio are owing to advertisements using 'less' when they ought to be using 'fewer'. Gosh, you have to be really careful in this thread...


----------



## Bluebells (25 Jul 2007)

" excetera "


----------



## Superman (25 Jul 2007)

They're are also people who mix up there use of the word "there" - their the worst IMO.


----------



## Purple (25 Jul 2007)

Totally unique.


----------



## Marion (25 Jul 2007)

I think that everyone is been two pedantic. 

Marion


----------



## Betsy Og (25 Jul 2007)

While I don't consider myself a grammar dunce (dear This post will be deleted if not edited immediately I hope I don't make any errors in this post!), I've always grappled with the following issue. Should one write:

1) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or me.
2) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or myself.
3) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or I.
4) ... please contact me or my colleague Jacinta.

I'd usually go for 1 or 2 above (after some agonising). Number 3 sounds a bit Rastafarian/Jamaican, 4 just looks wrong because you are putting yourself first.


----------



## Purple (25 Jul 2007)

Go for number one, you wouldn’t say “Please contact I” or "Please contact myself", so don’t say, “Please contact Jacinta or I”.


----------



## Caveat (25 Jul 2007)

Betsy Og said:


> While I don't consider myself a grammar dunce (dear This post will be deleted if not edited immediately I hope I don't make any errors in this post!), I've always grappled with the following issue. Should one write:
> 
> 1) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or me.
> 2) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or myself.
> ...


 
I'm pretty sure 1 is correct.

I think 2 sounds as Irish as 3 sounds Jamaican (!) - but it sounds friendly and I would use it myself.

(Sorry - last remark sounds a bit calculating - I should perhaps say that I work in sales!)


----------



## Staples (25 Jul 2007)

I wouldn't use any of them.  The last time I contacted Jacinta, she put me on hold.


----------



## damson (25 Jul 2007)

What about that awful hybrid of _irrespective _and _regardless_ - _irregardless_? Heard it again this morning.


----------



## purpeller (25 Jul 2007)

Betsy Og said:


> While I don't consider myself a grammar dunce (dear This post will be deleted if not edited immediately I hope I don't make any errors in this post!), I've always grappled with the following issue. Should one write:
> 
> 1) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or me.
> 2) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or myself.
> ...



I would definitely use the first option.  This neat article explains it quite well.


----------



## bullbars (25 Jul 2007)

Some I have encountered;

They're/their/there
Wary/Weary
Quiet/quite
series/serious
Where/were/we're/wear 

It is really annoying when people are trying to write stern letters to you ( I get that in my job a lot unfortunatley!) and they cant even get the words right. Now I know when typing a bit of a rant on AAM etc. I wouldnt take too much time examining the spelling etc. but writing a letter I would always try and make sure it would at least read correctly!

If sum1 sends me a mail usin txt chat I SNAP!!


----------



## Superman (25 Jul 2007)

Betsy Og said:


> 3) ... please contact my colleague Jacinta or I.


 "I" is a nominative (the subject of a sentence: I run, I hit him, I write to her);
"Please contact I" doesn't work - because "contact" takes an accusative (or object).


----------



## ClubMan (25 Jul 2007)

bullbars said:


> They're/their/there


My mammy used to say that to me when I was a child.


----------



## Purple (25 Jul 2007)

ClubMan said:


> My mammy used to say that to me when I was a child.


All the time or just when you were upset?


----------



## Square Mile (25 Jul 2007)

Hello

The phrase "between you and I" is constantly being used on TV and radio, and smacks of people trying too hard to be gramatically correct, and over compensating for their lack of grammar.  The correct term is "between you and me", where *you* and *me* are the objects of the sentence.  The work "*I*" is the subject of a sentence.  The proper subject of the sentence in this case is the implied "*It*" as in "It is between you and me".

Professor SM


----------



## Staples (25 Jul 2007)

I think this is used a lot by people who want to sound as if they know what they're doing.  Twink comes to mind for some reason (and I'm not happy about it).


----------



## Seagull (25 Jul 2007)

Square Mile said:


> Hello
> 
> The phrase "between you and I" is constantly being used on TV and radio, and smacks of people trying too hard to be gramatically correct, and over compensating for their lack of grammar. The correct term is "between you and me", where *you* and *me* are the objects of the sentence. The work "*I*" is the subject of a sentence. The proper subject of the sentence in this case is the implied "*It*" as in "It is between you and me".
> 
> Professor SM


Actually, the verb "to be" has funny rules, and in the example you give
"It is between you and me"
I is correct.


----------



## z109 (25 Jul 2007)

Seagull said:


> Actually, the verb "to be" has funny rules, and in the example you give
> "It is between you and me"
> I is correct.



Between the two of us, I think you should read:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Between-You-I-Little-English/dp/1840464836


----------



## Sue Ellen (25 Jul 2007)

Square Mile said:


> Hello
> 
> The phrase "between you and I" is constantly being used on TV and radio, and smacks of people trying too hard to be gramatically correct, and over compensating for their lack of grammar. The correct term is "between you and me", where *you* and *me* are the objects of the sentence. The work "*I*" is the subject of a sentence. The proper subject of the sentence in this case is the implied "*It*" as in "It is between you and me".
> 
> Professor SM


 
Professor,

Is it the work or the word?


----------



## DrMoriarty (26 Jul 2007)

Between the both of us, the Professor is quite correct.


----------



## cambazola (26 Jul 2007)

Some FG spokesman on Morning Ireland this morning in relation to Bertie's phone call to AIB: "_Regretfully..."_ when he should have said "_Regrettably..."._


----------



## Purple (26 Jul 2007)

What about Bertie's famous comment when Albert Reynolds pushed out CJ? I think it was, "I never thought it would have came to this."


----------



## dangerhere (26 Jul 2007)

Not to mention its and it's being used incorectly.


----------



## dangerhere (26 Jul 2007)

Oops.! Incorrectly


----------



## gonk (26 Jul 2007)

A few of my pet peeves:

Exasperate for Exacerbate, as in "this has exasperated the situation"

Adverse for Averse, as in "he is very risk adverse"

Refute for Deny, as in "I categorically refute that allegation!"


----------



## ClubMan (26 Jul 2007)

What about the misuse of "fulsome apology/praise"?


----------



## Conan (26 Jul 2007)

My pet hate is those that say "renumeration" rather than "remuneration".


----------



## Slash (26 Jul 2007)

Around the time of the recent general election someone told me that "Of course Fianna Fail will get in - sure it's inedible!".


----------



## Caveat (26 Jul 2007)

Slash said:


> inedible!".


 
Well I thought another term was a bit hard to swallow meself...


----------



## elefantfresh (26 Jul 2007)

*cough*


----------



## Joe1234 (26 Jul 2007)

What annoys me are shops that have signs up for sunday trading - Open sunday 12AM to 6PM.  I didn't know Sunday trading laws allowed opening for 18 hours!


----------



## Purple (27 Jul 2007)

There is no such thing as 12AM or 12PM. It's 12 noon and 12 midnight. That one annoys me.... so do pedantic people


----------



## Dreamerb (27 Jul 2007)

And then there are those who refer to "2 a.m. in the morning". When else will we have 2 a.m.?

One of my biggest gripes has to be the likes of "five times poorer", "three times slower" and so on, which are utterly meaningless.


----------



## ClubMan (27 Jul 2007)

Dreamerb said:


> And then there are those who refer to "2 a.m. in the morning". When else will we have 2 a.m.?


2AM in _Samoa _is 1PM in _Dublin_ - ergo 2AM in the afternoon.


----------



## capall (27 Jul 2007)

In Irish you've got a Continuous past tense Gnáthcáite and a continuous present tense Gnáthláithreach
The lack of these tenses in english has led to some interesting work arounds  which you hear all the time eg I do be
I like the way in irish there is a special tense also for ordering people around remember the old Bígí ciúin


----------



## Gordanus (27 Jul 2007)

The English (i.e. in England) construction "aren't I?" always annoyed me - especially as they would correct my usage "amn't I?"  (I'm such a pedant, amn't I? - I'm right, aren't I?  )


----------



## capall (27 Jul 2007)

Not as bad as Ain't,that is the worse. What does it even mean


----------



## ClubMan (27 Jul 2007)

capall said:


> Not as bad as Ain't,that is the worse. What does it even mean


Isn't/amn't?


----------



## Betsy Og (27 Jul 2007)

I caught the end of a story on the Last Word about all the slang words that have their origins in the Irish language. Sounded interesting. 

Also read an article about Irish influencing the construction of sentences in english.

For example the very "Irish english" sentence "Isn't it late in the day you're doing this.", is a direct translation for (approximately) "Nach deanach san lae ata se seo a dheanamh agat".    

Ok that was dodgy but you get the idea......

I'm a terror for putting inverted commas around words to emphasise the meaning isn't literal - does this make me a bad person?


----------



## ClubMan (27 Jul 2007)

No - it makes you a "bad" person.


----------



## capall (27 Jul 2007)

Betsy Og said:


> I caught the end of a story on the Last Word about all the slang words that have their origins in the Irish language. Sounded interesting.
> 
> Also read an article about Irish influencing the construction of sentences in english.
> 
> ...


----------



## pansyflower (29 Jul 2007)

"There are not alot of irish words "

A pet hate of mine is "alot" used instead of "a lot",


----------



## capall (29 Jul 2007)

really ,does it annoy you alittle


----------



## Seagull (30 Jul 2007)

I know it's been mentioned before, and it seems that a fairly standard annoyance is the misuse of apostrophes, together with bad punctuation in general. One of the best has to be "apostrophe's" when the intended use was as a plural. Some posts are almost in the style of , described as having a 'ballistic approach to spelling and punctuation'.


----------



## hjrdee (30 Jul 2007)

"This means it is unlikely that the family will collect their *check *from National Lottery head quarters in Dublin today."

from the rte.ie news page today!!

very american.


----------



## ClubMan (30 Jul 2007)

hjrdee said:


> "This means it is unlikely...


Isn't this bad grammar?


> head quarters


And shouldn't this be one word?


----------



## Sn@kebite (30 Jul 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Isn't this bad grammar?


I think it should be _'This means that it is unlikely...'_ or _'That means it is unlikely...'_
Something like that


			
				ClubMan said:
			
		

> And shouldn't this be one word?


----------



## Seagull (1 Aug 2007)

OK, this isn't grammar related, but why do so many people here misuse the word "ignorant"? It seems to be used as a replacement for obnoxious / unpleasant / selfish / thoughtless / ill-mannered, etc. It is quite possible for someone to be highly educated, very knowledgeable (i.e. far from ignorant), and still act like a prat.


----------



## gonk (1 Aug 2007)

Seagull said:


> OK, this isn't grammar related, but why do so many people here misuse the word "ignorant"? It seems to be used as a replacement for obnoxious / unpleasant / selfish / thoughtless / ill-mannered, etc. It is quite possible for someone to be highly educated, very knowledgeable (i.e. far from ignorant), and still act like a prat.


 
Presumably it's used in the sense of being ignorant of the norms of good manners and civilised behaviour. There's a lot of it about . . . .


----------



## capall (1 Aug 2007)

Yes a lot of ignoramuses on the loose


----------



## Sherman (1 Aug 2007)

Ignorami?


----------

