是`Oh，我的上帝!』 瀆聖？
這次辯論一共通過了我，直到我chanced在a 華盛頓郵報 故事今晨，但看起來有震驚在對「Oh的普遍用途，我的上帝!」
一些爭辯說，它徒然採取上帝的名字，其他它是每天表示相似與「Oh，我哎呀」或「Oh， s-!」 (使那說瀆聖？)的人們有時增加「聖潔」到「s」表示，如此做
您讀了「觀看您的首字母縮略詞」并且為你自己決定。
由grammarblogger張貼
0評論 檔案2007年12月
0評論 愉快的假日Musings
抱歉，但我在購物和返回禮物和非常不介意blog假日熙來攘往被捉住了。
我也抽樣某些電影被提及當Oscar喜愛。 一被證明的非常文藝; 其他更加抒情(和血汙)。
補償 是文藝一個。 對話和voiceovers (內部想法)表達強有力，美好的英語，相當文藝在口氣。
Sweeney托德 是抒情一個，逐字地，因為它是被做成電影由Tim ・ Burton的Broadway音樂會或歌劇。 故事是一好一個，但作用相當血汙。 (如果您在「Sweeney托德不知道劇情、正義參觀一個站點像MRQE.com和類型。」)
定案？ 去 補償 如果您喜歡用強有力的視覺圖像和強有力的講話的英語填裝屏幕的文學作品。 去 Sweeney托德 如果您是斯蒂芬Sondheim風扇原始或Tim Burton。 如果您去，然而，為更多血液準備比您在您的生活中看見了。
兩部電影很值您的時間。
由grammarblogger張貼
攻擊現實是堅硬的
我從比分和數百我教的學院類已經結束了最好仅一个在100位大學生甚而有詞的一個線索 他們 存在。 多數學生定期地糾正 那裡 他們是否需要它作為副詞或屬有代詞。
以這普遍無知和惡習，我是肯定的gool ol』 obligin』夥計在 牛津英語字典 will soon sign off on the use of there as both adverb and possessive pronoun. Oh, sad day.
Now, here’s a cute double-whammy I came across this morning in one of my U.S. history classes.
A student did some research on presidents and discovered that only 19 in total ever served at least four years (seems low, though I didn’t challenge it), but her rationale was more revealing: Since, she wrote, most people don’t become president until they’re really old in their (she wrote there) 60s, they quickly die of hard attacks.
You can’t argue with such logic.
Posted by grammarblogger
Mitchell Goes Yard, Fehr Whiffs
I don’t know how many of you live in the United States, and of those who do how many follow baseball, but I spent yesterday watching, first, the George Mitchell news conference on steroid use among athletes, and then, union boss Donald Fehr’s response a few hours later.
I thought both men were well spoken with reasonable statements and arguments, but that aside, let me judge their English usage.
Mitchell was impeccable in his grammar. At one point in a long sentence beginning with everyone–and then interrupted by a bunch of names in between–he even managed to get the correct singular usage of the verb to match his subject. Most people would’ve gotten confused by all the names listed in between and reverted to an incorrect plural verb.
Mitchell gets a home run for his English performance.
Now, Fehr–who tended to speak more circuitously but not necessarily incorrectly–did make one boo-boo (which is why I said he “whiffs”) when he said he had given something “to he….”
Naughty, naughty–prepostions always (a simple rule) take the objective case, so he should’ve said “to him.”
Okay, Fehr hit a triple rather than whiffing, but I had to make a contrasing headline.
It’s baseball that struck out.
Posted by grammarblogger
Building Blocks of English XIII: Verb Mood
English employs three verb moods–indicative, imperative and subjunctive.
Indicative mood is for simple statements, while the imperative is for commands: “Run!”
However, it’s the subjunctive, represeting a wish or untrue situation, that befuddles virtually every English speaker.
Remember the line from the song in Fiddler on the Roof, “If I was a rich man…”?
Completely wrong verb usage!
Since the singer (”I”) is expressing an untrue situation, or a wish, the verb must be changed to the plural subjunctive form, were: “If I were a rich man….”
If can be a big indicator that the subjunctive mood is called for, but not invariably. I wish is a definite call for the subjective: “I wish you were more serious.”
For more examples, peruse this handy guide.
Posted by grammarblogger
New Grammar Questions Answered System in Place
Because a lot of immature fools out there can’t handle the responsibility of free speech, I’ve deleted my grammar questions forum and instituted an e-mail form for you to send me your grammar questions.
All serious grammar questions will be answered by a posting on my main page. Please send serious grammar questions only. My delete button is quite functional, as it was with the now-defunct grammar forum. Sad, sad, sad.
Posted by grammarblogger
‘It Is What It Is’–Or Is It?
Out where I live in California, the saying, "It is what it is," is gaining a lot of use and cachet.
However, what exactly does it mean? It seems to be one of those usages that, like awesome, has somehow become the saying du jour.
There’s nothing wrong with this particular sentence, but I’ve always wondered how certain words and sayings make the rounds.
Is this an example of viral language (like viral marketing)?
Posted by grammarblogger
Building Blocks of English XII: Verb Voice
Whenever I teach a grammar/writing class, invariably more than a few students (read: a majority) keep confusing passive voice with past tense. (I covered tenses in a previous Building Blocks post.)
English verbs can have just two voices–active and passive.
The active voice is what you employ for almost everything you say.
Active: "I am sitting at my desk typing a blog post."
Simple, straightforward English that depicts an action taking place–that’s the active voice.
Now, were I to make this into a passive voice sentence (I can’t imagine why I would, however), it would read something like this:
"A blog post is being typed by me while I am sitting at my desk."
Notice that the whole point of the passive voice is to turn the object (of an active voice sentence) into the subject. In this example, blog post has switched from being the direct object to being the subject. That’s why you end up with the passive voice verb construction, is being typed.
To make things even more ridiculous to the ear–and to the comprehension–to change the subject of the active sentence, I, to the object, I has to take the form of a prepositional phrase, by me. (And in this example, getting that "sitting at my desk" part in there is really cumbersome.)
I didn’t pick the greatest example, but here’s another.
Active: "I am eating a hamburger."
Passive: "The hamburger is being eaten by me."
The distinguishing feature between active and passive is that the passive construction actually starts with an object in a role reversal as a subject.
Bottom line: Avoid the passive voice as much as possible. Leave it to scientists ("the patient was observed to expire after three weeks of non-feeding") and crime scene investigators ("the body was found in a pool of blood").
English grammar was indeed found to be complicated when the student shouted in frustration, "English grammar sucks!"
Posted by grammarblogger
