I didn't understand this one. Can you provide an example?Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
Printable View
I didn't understand this one. Can you provide an example?Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
Sure...Quote:
Originally Posted by Оля
"Win a trip to Rio... and plus a host of other prizes"
In the above sentence, they already have AND, they don't need the PLUS on top of the AND, it is unnecessary or redundant as they both mean the same thing, yet... you hear it and see it often.
Here is another example: "I have to clean the house, go to the bank, fix a fabulous dinner and plus I have to go the airport to pick up my mother-in-law all in the next four hours!"
Other examples of therse types of redundancies are:
Free gift
the reason is because (my mom HATES this one and would always correct me)
end result
Now some of these are ones we are ALL guilty of and most likely will never stop using:
hot water heater (it should be just a water heater)
ATM machine (the M in ATM stands for Machine)
PIN number (The N in PIN stands for Number)
ancient history
I am certain with this very bright group, we can come up with others!
He he.... :crazy: We always say in Russian "и ещё" which literally is the same as "and plus" in English. :) You English speaking people always try to use "также" or "тоже" in Russian sentences where we Russians would say "и ещё". "Также" (=also) makes a sentence so unnatural...
Okay, so if I understand you correctly, English speakers need to learn to say AND PLUS or "и ещё," in Russian and Russians need to learn NOT TO say that when they speak English. Got that everyone????Quote:
Originally Posted by Оля
Excellent! :good:
If this is a redundancy then I would expect "recent history" to be an oxymoron. Is it, in English? It certainly is not in Russian. :dunno:Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
Hmmmm... I had not thought about that one... And that is a common statement, "I don't remember that happening in recent history."Quote:
Originally Posted by E-learner
I Googled it and it seems that it is as I got a numbner of positive hits for it and here are a few sites that say "yes it is"...
http://atextualtopographyofchance.bl...betically.html
http://www.ethanwiner.com/oxymoron.html
http://literaryzone.com/?p=126
http://www.clarionledger.com/misc/bl...on-ya-dig.html
Thats very good to know, thanks, especially as it is exactly like German 'und noch' - finally something I can just translate literally. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Оля
Robin
In my role as co-host of the Ancient History forum at about.com I strongly object to the allegation that this was a redundant expression. Ancient history covers the time from the invention of written language to the fall of the Roman empire or whatever your pet historian chooses to identify as the pivotal point when the Middle Ages begin. Prior to that you get prehistory, after that, medieval history.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
We now return you to your scheduled program. :mad:
Robin
okay...Kind Sir Robin... but what about when it is not used to actually refer to history and used as an expression like:Quote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
"Oh, Jason and Kelly, they are like so ancient history." OR "Skinny jeans are so ancient history."
Would you agree to it then being redundant? :unknown:
Can a newbie (and history graduate) chip in here?
If a relationship is described as 'ancient history,' it seems to me that hyperbole is being used. The speaker is emphasising that the pair didn't break up anytime recently and anyone who doesn't know that is WAY behind with the gossip channel feed.
'Learnt': I have used this in the UK where I was brought up and hear it in Ireland often. Then again, I also hear 'drownt' here, but I certainly wouldn't recommend anyone to adopt it! I'm taking a bit of a wild guess here, but I have a hunch the unvoiced stop at the end of the past tense has something to do with the type of English spoken in the North of England and Scotland. I'd like to hear the opinion of someone from the South on that. The lowland Scots, in colloquial speech, certainly have a habit of using the unvoiced past tenses in preference to the voiced alternative in certain combinations. e.g. followt (followed), climbt (climbed), phont (phoned), handelt (handled). cf. pronunciation of jumped, walked, dreampt. Taking it further, I hear the glottal stop taking over from the 't' these days.
No. That's obviously a colloquial expression, and anything which makes the topic at hand seem even older and more passé goes. I'd suggest they are so pre-ancient history even.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
Both English and German (and I suspect, Russian, too) have ways to use exaggeration in order to make things stand out in their respective value compared to others. See for instance the completely ungrammatical 'bestest friend' - I know, makes you cringe, but apparently there's a need to put that friend on a very special pedestal. I see nothing wrong with that in colloquial speech. Language isn't just a set of strict rules, it's also a toy.
Robin
In my experience in BrE wrt ~ed/ ~t past tenses, some verbs have both variants and are equally common, some have both but one form is more common than the other, and some are only ever used with one.
I, personally, use 'learned' and 'learnt' as the whim takes me, but I'd be unlikely to write 'dreamed' rather than 'dreamt', and I'd never write 'jumpt' in place of jumped (I actually have a friend who insists that the past tense of 'jump' is 'jamp', but that's another story).
I'm talking about written English here though, and it's important to make that distinction. I certainly say 'jumpt', but then I'm from the Scottish Borders and, as JayB pointed out, we talk funny there. I actually think that 'drownt' would be a bit of a stretch even then, but his basic point is sound.
Another peeve (the phone I'm writing this on doesn't have the word 'peeve' in its predictive text dictionary btw), and it's one I'm hearing more and more: 'supposably' in place of 'supposedly'.
Very common mistakes amongst Russians:
If I will decide to learn English, I'll need to enrol in a course.
Should be "If I decide to learn English, I'll need to..."
Also that stacking adjectives thing that was mentioned, "the specific to Russian mistakes". I actually like this one though, it's very useful for writing quickly in shorthand.
Called cashpoint in Britain... Problem solved!Quote:
ATM machine (the M in ATM stands for Machine)
:good:
(for those who still don't know what this is: This is called Bankomat or GAB and some other things across Europe -- it's the machine that dispenses money outside the bank.)
Me too, I am in London and I don't talk funny; :roll: :"": . But in writing it would be "He jumped to conclusions....." or "I jumped across the stream" right?Quote:
I certainly say 'jumpt'
Haha, you are lucky I am not a real Englishwoman, or I'd go on a rant against American "abuse" of the English language, particularly the way that people speak in TV series (but I don't agree with this view - if the English didn't want people other than themselves to speak English in their own way, then they shouldn't have colonised half the known world..! Too bad! )Quote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
English learner: QUE????? :wacko:Quote:
Originally Posted by American TV Series
Saying that something is "ancient history" is just a contemporary expression, right? It will go out of fashion soon. So it doesn't matter so much if it's a bit misleading. Otherwise Ancient History is used to refer to pre-Christian history.Clearly skinny jeans are not from "ancient" historical times.
"You guys" is a funny one... My Indian colleagues offshore (in India) have started using it. They say "US GUYS" when they talk about themselves!
These types of expressions (like "that's ancient history") are mostly used by native speakers though, who speak English with other natives every day. I am not sure if Robin is doing that or not. For instance if Olya started speaking writing these types of expressions I'd be quite surprised. But why not - if somebody has really mastered a language they will want to start speaking more like native people do.
Yeah, probably - some Northern expressions and ways of speaking just don't sound good when pronounced in the South England way. Also, as you know, there are lots of differences between how different people in SE England speak. There is Estuary, real East End, mixed and "posh". Probably something else that I forgot. Some people drop certain consonants and pronounce some vowels in a different way than others. It depends on where in London you live and your background.Quote:
I'm taking a bit of a wild guess here, but I have a hunch the unvoiced stop at the end of the past tense has something to do with the type of English spoken in the North of England and Scotland.
The catch phrase "think outiside the box" has to go.
So Robin... if ancient history is a no go for you...than what about "past history?"
Quote:
Redundancy typically takes the form of tautology: phrases that repeat a meaning with different words. Common examples are: "a variety of different items", "an added bonus", "to over-exaggerate", "and etc.", "end result", "free gift", "future plans", "unconfirmed rumor", "killed him dead", "past history", "safe haven", "potential hazard", "completely surrounded", "false pretense". There is also the self-referential joke "organization" called "The Redundancy Society of Redundancy", also rendered as "Society of Redundancy Society".
Jay, Welcome to MR and YES, newbies are most welcome to chime in here! About your thoughts, you had me laughing as most times when I hear the comment "ancient history" in a movie, see it in a book, or hear some sassy little thing say it... the age and knowledge level it is aimed at or the mouth it is coming from, I am not certain they have even ever heard of the word "hyperbole." :tease:Quote:
Originally Posted by JayB
Well I think that sounds a bit uneducated...Quote:
"past history?"
...and none of the other ones from that list sound odd or a bit silly to you? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
I prefer the Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things, but yes, some of the expressions may be seen as tautologies, which, however, can have their uses. I mean, if 'surrounded' is always complete, what about something that's nine tenths surrounded? Or is it not surrounded if there's an inch left open? What's the word then? Is it impossible to be surrounded on three sides? Because if any of that is possible, then 'completely surrounded' is not a tautology, it's just a clarification.
'Past history' might not usually be a sensible thing to say, but there are context in which you can use terms such as 'future history'.
Furthermore, redundancy is not always unwanted. In fact, much of normal speech is peppered with redundancy because if you really began to speak without redundancies the signal to noise ratio would be such that people would have a hard time understanding you. We actually like a certain amount of noise in between signals to digest them.
Robin
Dearest, are you always this logical? Your teacher and parents, what on earth did they do with you as a child? How many teachers are now wearing little white jackets and are in padded cells? And I can just see your sons trying to pull a fast one on you or begging you for something. I think I need to start coming to you for parental comebacks!Quote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
I never ever would have thought that we actually need "and plus" in our lives! Olya, rejoys and go forth and, "and plus" to your little heart's content! But just know I will still be wanting to correct you when you do so! :D
Ballpark figure and many others.Quote:
Originally Posted by sperk
All cheesy business speak expressions should be banned in fact. Just nonsense used by people who want to portray themselves as a corporate superstar....
Rockzmom ---- well I am a bit out of my depth in this thread I think... I get the feeling you know your grammar quite well.... But yeah I can see that "and" is not needed in the sentence above.Quote:
"Win a trip to Rio... and plus a host of other prizes"
:roll:
Jumbo shrimp.
Pre-owned car.
Free gift.
Scott
Okay folks... I first tried to post this around 7:30 a.m. my time and one of two things must have happened...the little gremlins don't like me picking on Robin OR they don't like my sense of humor as my posting went off into never never land... so without further ado, here is what I remember of that wonderful witty posting. You of course all may laugh 'til your sides hurt. :ROFL:
Robin, dearest... what must you have been like as a child I wonder? Were you always so logical? You poor teachers and parents. How many teachers are now wearing nice white jackets and are in padded cells? And your sons...do they ever win an argument? Maybe I need to come to you for parenting advice???Quote:
Originally Posted by bitpicker
Olya, I guess I was wrong and you may use "and plus" to your heart's content!
Now, new posting....
Okay, everyone who knows my writing...just keep on laughing about what Johanna wrote. Go on, I don't mind. I know I absolutely "suck" with grammar, punctuation, spelling, etymology... you can add on to the list if you like ... Don't forget to breathe a little. Okay, go on laugh some more at that one. :ROFL:Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
This is amazing! But it exactly what I have in mind when I post Russian songs with its lyrics. :yahoo:Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
That's very sweet when you do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lampada
When I get better I'll get back to those folk songs that I like, that you posted the lyrics for... I have liked those melodies all my life! But my first goal is to learn about 1000 words and some rudimentary grammar.
It's kind of tricky in Russian that the word order is quite different from Germanic and Romance languages. I think it's really only possible to get the hang of that by listening to music, films... reading.... etc...
Haha, well if so you are not the only one... I DID learn all the grammatical terminology at school, but I really don't remember any of it anymore -- other than Verb, Noun, Adverb, Adjective.... I can't think of anything more boring than picking up a book and cramming that again. I know that there ARE such a things as "Superlative", "Pluskvamperfekt", "Pronomen", "Predikat" and many, many more, however I seriously can't remember what they were.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
But for what it's worth your English seems fine to me at least! I know many native speakers whose written English... leaves a lot to be desired. Not the case with you in my opinion.
erm, did I use "whose" correctly? I hate that word!!!
Okay gang....let me know what you think of this one... Record vs. Recording
I've seen a number of Russians use this one like this:
"I'll make a record for you," or "I'll make a new record," instead of saying "I'll make a recording for you," or "I'll make a new recording."
To me, a record is a phonograph (or now days a CD or MP3), or a document as a "record of birth" or a way of documenting as in "for the record" or "off the record."
AND when someone "records" their voice, they make a "recording" of it.
Now I understand that a music record is now a MP3, but I don't thing they are really saying, "I'll make an MP3 for you to listen to," I think they are saying, "I'll make a recording of me reading this passage for you and then you can tell me how I sound."
How does this compare to your understanding of "record" and "recording" and how it is being used?
First, computers do what I tell them to. They fear me. :) That's probably why you lost your first post. I'm one of those geeks who, by merely standing next to you when you want to show them a computer problem, make that problem go away.Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
Now, jesting aside, your sympathies should really go to my wife - my sons are just as bad as I am. ;)
However, you may be glad to hear that I'm with you on the record / recording subject. :)
Robin
Yes, you did. And that's another fine example for a common mistake in English: writing "who's" instead of "whose". "Who's" is short for "who is" or "who has" only.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
Robin
Next item up for discussion! Ordinal Numbers and enumeration! First, second, third.. Firstly, secondy and thirdly... First, secondly, thirdly??? Is it British vs. American yet again, an idiom?
Two things here. The first mistake people make is to start off with "first" and then never have a second. If you have a first, you must have a second.
The second, and I must admit I am part of this second part, is to add the "ly" to the numbers.
Apparently you are NOT to add the "ly" to the numbers.. here are three articles...
http://languageandgrammar.com/2008/0...t-not-firstly/
http://brunerbiz.com/tag/first-second-third/
http://teacherseducation.wordpress.c...-wednesday-33/
What have you been taught? What do you actually write and/or speak (see article 2).
Adverbs (-ly) really don't make sense here. You can usually replace an adverb with a phrase like 'in X fashion': he replied eagerly = he replied in an eager fashion. There is no such thing as something going on in a first or second fashion.
Robin
Maybe I wasn't clear enough as it is used all the time and what made me think of this was Olya's posting in the movie thread..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Оля
Johanna, I don't know what exactly those from your list are, are there amongst them any of these – proactive, paradigm, synergy? Just like they sound makes me hate them, let alone what they mean, because what they mean I think is a load of crap in a fancy wrapping. As always The Simpsons agree with you on that one byQuote:
Originally Posted by Johanna
And a huge pet of a peeve that is your 'political correctness', the abomination invented in the West invariably conquering the world. To call a woman chairing a conference a chairman is abuse of her womanhood, manholes should be called manholes only when a man pops out of the hole, when a woman does that they should be referred to as what? You’ll never guess. Manchester as of this moment must be called Personchester, and all that Afro-American instead of black stuff, isn’t that ridiculous?Quote:
Aren't those just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
In Russian using "First" without "Second" is a common practice when the "First" is used as "The following thing should be beared in our minds during all the following talk". I don't know whether it is correct in Russian and does not hurt some grammar fans. So what would be the correct version of such an introducing statement in English?Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
I think in the sense of 'before we consider the main things, let's first discuss X' you can well use 'first' without a 'second'. You could also use it with 'then', either spelled out or implied.
I'd tend to use "firstly, secondly..." more often than "first, second...", but I have no objection to either, with a couple of caveats.
Should my enumeration end with "lastly" or "finally", I'd be more like to use the ~ly form. "Last" in place of "lastly" feels odd, and "final" in place of "finally" is plainly wrong, and using the ~ly forms throughout just seems more elegant.
If I had a lot of points to make I would more likely use "first, second,...", because higher numbers sound silly in the ~ly form. "Seventhly". Ugh. That said, I can think of no circumstances where I'd ever want to go that high in speech, and if I was writting I'd use bullet points instead.
I also disagree that if you have a "first/ly" then you need a "second/ly". I think a "first/ly" on its own indicates that everything said subsequently relates to that original point, wheras continuing to enumerate suggests that you're making several distinct points.
EDIT, JUST SAW SCOTCHER'S COMMENT! Haha we thought the same thing!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I always say "Firstly", "Secondly" etc.... Rockzmom I strongly suspect you of using an American grammar book as "proof"! :-D What we need is something like the "Oxford Guide to the English" language :mrgreen:Quote:
Originally Posted by rockzmom
No but seriously, I didn't know that there was a difference in how Americans say it. Either way seems fine to me, I don't think I would notice it.
But there is one thing that drives Brits crazy about American speech. That's when you/they exclude "-ly" on the adverbs:
He was screaming loudly (Americans drop "-ly" I think)
Things are going well, everything is well with me. (Americans would use "good" I think)
She is driving carefully
Come quickly!
It was brutally cold outside
I'm not sure if these examples are very good, but I think most native speakers will know what I am talking about.
One more American phenomenon which I hear on TV is "oftentimes"! It's funny when an academic is interviewed and repeatedly uses a word which sounds like it was made up by a child....! A really strange mix of "sometimes" and "often"???
Alex, yes all the words you mentioned. However these words have SOME limited valuable usage outside of business...Quote:
Originally Posted by alexB
Here are some more:
Going Forward --- Going forward, we must make sure that we..... (means "from now on")
Seamless --- Now that was hardly a seamless transition, was it?
Take ownership ---- What we need is somebody to take ownership of this issue
Team Player ---- James is a real teamplayer!
Touch Base :wall: --------- Let's touch base later on today
Manage Expectations ---------- You need to manage that customer's expectations properly
Mission Critical :wall: ---------- That database is mission critical and must not be allowed to go offline for a second.
Out of the box --------- This excellent idea is a good example of Jane's ability to think out of the box.
Push Back --------- It's time we pushed back a bit with XCorp, they're getting far too aggressive...
There are more but I've had enough.... :bad: :evil:
.
I know, one should never throw stones in glass houses...
The following was taken from an email I received today (it was also sent to 31 other people!). The author is in her late 40's or mid-50's and IS American born. :wall:
How many errors can YOU find????? (yes, I did delete some parts of the email, to protect the innocent and all that jazz.)Quote:
As you alll know... at 7:00 p.m at the... The festival is being held from October 23-25. It will cost $10 and apart of the proceeds for the festival go to Breast Cancer awareness. I will be attending and going to the reception. I hope to see you all their.