De Bron van de grammatica: EnglishpediaBreng uw nieuwsgierigheid en uw vragen en bereken onze bizarre taal |
Ik groeide het geloven (misschien werd ik zelfs onderwezen dit) dat de pret, funner en het meest funnest juiste positief was, vergelijkende en superlative vormen van pret.
Maar deed ik toen wat onderzoek en vond sommige interessante debatten gaand op:
0 Commentaren Ik wil niet de indruk dat geven ik krachtig tegen om het even welke Engelse jargon ben, lokaal of witticisms. Ik ben meestal tegen het misbruik van gemeenzaamheid zoals ontzagwekkend, wat nu zo hackneyed is om pukifying die (veroorzaakt aan puke, een woord dat ik enkel omhoog heb gemaakt).
Vandaag had de radiogastheer van sporten jock [markering] Colin Cowherd [/tag] eigenlijk een paar goede degenen.
Welke…. waren
Ik heb dit omhoog voordien gebracht, maar het gebruiken van het woord gedaan ontzagwekkend hebben werkelijk om het even welke betekenis?
In het begin, zag de God dat het groot en plezierig was en het riep bitchin‘.
Later, was dit morphed in groovy, phat, ziek, slecht, enz.
Weten wij het hoe te om anymore zonder het zijn mee te delen groovy en, droevig, dwaas en onwetend te zeggen?
De Indisch-geboren auteur [markering] Salman Rushdie [/tag] was onlangs knighted door de Koningin van Engeland, waar hij lang leefde en werkte. Het was daar bijna 20 jaar geleden die hij publiceerde De Satanic Verzen, wat onmiddellijk als blasphemy door velen in de Moslimwereld werd gehekeld. Ayatollah Khomeini gaf zelfs a uit fatwa van dood tegen hem die zich nog bevindt.
In het spoor van zijn knighthood, verzoekt de moord van Rushdie opnieuw resoneren in de Moslimwereld. Een Iraanse groep bood zelfs $150.000 aan zijn moordenaar aan als beloning.
Het ding is, sleept niemand in de Westelijke media werkelijk aan de defensie van deze auteur mee, zoals [de nota's van markerings] Tim Rutten [/tag] en kleineert binnen zijn artikel in van vandaag De Tijden van Los Angeles.
Ik adviseer hoogst dat iedereen zijn artikel las.
This is no time for silence, which Rutten accurately describes as "a silence in which the only permissible sounds are the prayers of the killers and the cries of their victims."
I spend a lot of my time dealing with Internet issues. For the past few years, all the buzz has been about the social networking sites like My Space and the social bookmarking sites like Digg, which are part of what’s called [tag]Web 2.0[/tag]. But have you ever read the stuff that’s being posted on these sites?
Misspellings, misuses, fragments, run-ons, jargon and slang–you name it. A lot of the stuff resembles what an illiterate Madison Avenue might produce. In fact, that might be the exact result we’re seeing on these sites–an attempt to employ Madison Avenue marketing, promotion and advertising techniques for personal gain, but without any effort at literacy.
So this reality begs the question: Does literacy matter anymore?
Maybe it doesn’t matter in a pop culture sense, but in a survival-of-the-culture sense, literacy certainly does matter. It’s like those barbarians who overran the latter-day Roman Empire. They weren’t any less cultured than many of the Roman citizens they overran.
They just had more to gain. Ooh, scary thought.
On certain computer monitors my previous theme, named Magellan, looked fine, but on others it was just too hard to read. So, after considerable research, I’ve switched over to this new, more open and "whiter" theme named Rockin’ Big Idea.
I hope you enjoy it. Now if I can just figure out how to get my RSS feed working again. Anybody got any solutions?
I’m not sure if this word usage qualifies as a NotWord, but it certainly qualifies as incorrect. As a university instructor, both on-ground and online, I read a lot of papers. One great mistake I see a lot and which surprises me is the use of since when the author means sense.
Someone will write, for instance, that "his since of timing was off." Clearly, the word here has to be sense. The spell checkers of the world will normally not catch a misused word that is spelled correctly, so even if these students are relying on built-in word processing features, their misused words can easily slip through.
I’m not sure how students make this mistake since the words since and sense sound quite different when pronounced. I can understand typing out one word for another when they sound exactly the same, such as there and they’re, but to use since repeatedly instead of sense tells me something.
And what I think it tells me is that these people didn’t have enough "drill-and-kill" spelling exercises when they were in school, or if they did, they didn’t pay close enough attention to them.
Since this is Monday, that’s my sense of frustration for the week.
I’m no longer surprised when native English speakers (Americans) cannot define or locate in a sentence any of the eight parts of speech used in English. It just reflects the sorry state of education in the U.S.
The educational establishment starting in the 1960s or so developed this "drill and kill" mentality that rejected the teaching of anything that needs to be memorized and repeated–and then put into action with worksheets and quizzes. Supposedly, if you "drill," you "kill" the students’ precious little creative minds. Unfortunately, you also end up not teaching them anything.
Anyway, enough on that, here are the eight parts of speech: nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions and interjections.
I found a neat site for you to "drill and kill" yourself learning these. No, really, it teaches and then quizzes you: ESLUS.com .
Now, you hear this all the time: "I graduated high school in 1982."
No matter what year you use in there, the construction is still incorrect. The active verb form of graduate refers to what the school or institution does: It graduates students. Thus you are graduated or were graduated from high school, college, prison ([tag]Paris Hilton[/tag]?) or wherever.
However, this sloppy and misunderstood use of English, "I graduated," has been tacitly recognized as "informal" by dictionary folk, proving once again that, if people use it, the dictionaries will honor it.
This may be a bit off track for my audience, especially for those outside the United States, but I have simple advice for Yankees baseballer [tag]Jason Giambi[/tag]: "Shut up!"
I appreciate what Giambi has said publicly so far–especially the part that everyone in baseball should apologize for the sham of the steroid era when unbreakable records were routinely broken–but now that he’s being confronted with an ultimatum by [tag]MLB COmmissioner Bud Selig[/tag] to ‘fess up to investigator [tag]George Mitchell[/tag] or face a suspension, the time to zip the lips is here.
Selig is out of his mind. Giambi has already spoken. Baseball (Selig) doesn’t need to make a sacrificial lamb out of him. Selig is the very one who stood by actionless with full knowledge of the steroid abuse by players who were then shattering records and did nothing, absolutely nothing, but revel in the increased crowds and TV rankings.
Silence will be golden for Jason Giambi. Departure would be noble for Selig.
