Grammar, Pronunciation - Time for a rant.

***Yorks*** · 02-08-2007

Grammar, Pronunciation - Time for a rant.

OK, no doubt this has been done countless times before, but don't you find it increasingly annoying that we are inventing a new language with new meanings and pronunciations that really ought to be laughed out of the English language, rather than adopted by it? - I certainly do. I am no English graduate, and only had a basic education, but when people suddenly start using phrases such as:-

“It’s a big ask,” where “It’s a difficult target,” or “It’s a big thing to ask,” would be far better English – it’s makes my blood boil. When I was at school ‘ask’ was a verb – not a noun!

The infuriating thing is that these ‘buzz words and phrases’ are being endorsed and used by the very people in the media and advertising, who have had the education to know better and who should be maintaining the standards and setting an example to us all.

I turn on the TV to hear ‘minimum spend’ where I used to hear ‘minimum purchase’. I do know what the word purchase means.

I don’t know whether you have noticed recently, but there seems to be a current metamorphosis of the word ‘sixth’, which it would appear, is now acceptably pronounced - sickth. Just put ITV’s F1 on, on a Sunday afternoon and you will here James Allen (a keen exponent of this slicker version of the word), describing several of the drivers throughout the afternoon as being ‘down in sickth’! If he tries to pronounce it correctly, will the driver be in fifth by the time he’s said it?

You used to be kidding me, or joking. Now all of a sudden you’re joking me. What?

I could go on – but I won’t. Yes, words have been invented over the years to facilitate our ever changing society – I don’t have a problem with that. Nor is this a dig at the informal blogger. We are all members of that liberating clan. But if I worked in the media industry, I would take a little more care to ensure that what I was writing or saying was correct. It’s time that these people put a stop to their casual desecration of the English language, or we will all soon be speaking a foreign language.

Please contribute any material that you think has no place in our language.

Regards,

Yorks.

**Llew** · 02-08-2007

"Brown praises Bush ahead of the meeting". Ugly syntax - my pet hate at the moment. All media use it.

What was wrong with 'before'?

Llew

***2cvbloke*** · 02-08-2007

It's the americans, they don't know how to talk proper...

**rolfw** · 02-08-2007

My pet hate is the way many people now finish every sentence as if it were a question.

***Yorks*** · 02-08-2007

Arghhhhhhhhh

,

Don't start me off again. I'm currently coaching my 11 year old daughter to ditch that habit, before it get's a grip. To be fair to her, she does see the funny side of it when I bring it to her attention.

Apparently it's called HRT (High Rise Terminals), and is very popular with our Australian cousins, as you know.

**rolfw** · 02-08-2007

LOL, it certainly niggles me.

My Mum's pet hate is the use of "different to", rather than "different from", I am irritated by the use of the phrase so and so alluded to , when they didn't allude to it they made a direct reference to it.

**Llew** · 02-08-2007

In a similar vein - 'of' in place of 'with' - "bored of", "fed up of" etc.

And how many times do you see 'loose' in place of 'lose' ( in referring to something lost)?

Lightening in place of lightning has been noted many times, even in newspaper headlines.

Using 'it's' for 'its' and vice versa is so widespread, we can assume it's now OK to use either form.

Llew

**dig deep** · 03-08-2007

Well we have the same problems here in Sweden.

And I blame it on the Yankies

I am sure I should blame it on the school

***Yorks*** · 03-08-2007

Originally Posted by Llew

Using 'it's' for 'its' and vice versa is so widespread, we can assume it's now OK to use either form.
Llew

Yes. You're right Llew. I remember my son telling me recently that he has been told that either is now acceptable when writing formal business reports. Source - University.

***johnsattuk*** · 03-08-2007

What really niggles me is the use of phrases such as " yuh know". They seem to occupy 50% of some people's conversation

.

Unfortunately when something like this niggles you, every instance is noted

**jimbo** · 04-08-2007

I've noticed presenters using 'gonna' instead of going to. A number of incidents lately on BBC Breakfast.

**Channel Hopper** · 05-08-2007

Silent H's, as in 'istoric, and the grammar altered to correct, as in 'an 'istoric occasion'.

**Salty25** · 05-08-2007

I suppose I should argue the case for the defence.

We all agree that the primary function of language is to communicate a message or intention. Variety in structure of language is merely an attempt by speakers to be better understood, and to be more concise. If speakers are indeed better understood, that is good communication.

A good example of this is txt speak. Wth v lil frt u r bl 2 rd ths sntnce - therefore, it serves the function of communication.

I will conceed though that having a standard grammar is extremely important, but the standard is only what speakers agree upon now, and is able to change to suit speakers.

Now having said all that, I've have noticed the recent sloppy spelling of official news sources on the web, which doesn't give a good impression when you're relying on accurate information.

***Yeshi*** · 05-08-2007

Prime example of this is the welsh language, look where they are now. They speak english more so than Welsh.

There is an advert on e4 i think it is. it messes about with how words are spelt for example.

P.M - Pee Em
Thursday - Fursdey
Galaxy - Ghalixy

Etc.

But if we had the internet 300 years ago we would be saying

Where for art thoug Lnb, what is in thy Dreambox? Why, that's my dainty Dish! I shall miss thee.

You get the idea, what im saying though is we evolve. And the language we speak today is not TRUE english.

**rolfw** · 05-08-2007

Yes, of course language evolves, as we have to invent new words/phrases as technology and life changes. These annoying things are in the main nothing to do with the evolution of language though, they are mostly down to laziness, ignorance or affectation, perhaps all three on occasions.

How about the use of innit at the end of every sentence by some, that has nothing to do with evolution, but is certainly bloody irritating.

**T_G** · 06-08-2007

I blame the youts of today. In my day, ........

**Salty25** · 06-08-2007

Originally Posted by rolfw

How about the use of innit at the end of every sentence by some, that has nothing to do with evolution, but is certainly bloody irritating.

'innit' is meant to be confirmation of understand ("do you understand what I am saying?"), but I have to admit it does become bloody annoying when people go OTT with it

.

Also, you have to remember that speech and sentence structure changes are you go through life. The reasons for this are unclear, but it's certainly the case that an 14yo, a 40yo, and an 80yo form setences differently.

That's why grandparents talking to teenagers is so hilarious - they don't understand a word each other are saying

.

***zorba*** · 06-08-2007

I blame the 'mericans,but I've "gotten" used to it,you know ?

**rolfw** · 06-08-2007

You forgot innit zorba.

Daku · 06-08-2007

The things that annoy me are:
- the American use of the word "situation" ("We have a situation here..")
- the illiterate use of 'innit' to mean everything from "aren't I", "haven't we?" to "weren't you?"
- the pronunciation of February as Febry
- the use of US-9/11-style dates for events in England ("24/7" or whenever the London attack was)
- euphemisms used purely for misguided reasons of so-called political correctness and the related, apparently successful brain-washing which has been ongoing for the past 10 years or so
- people who write their names and addresses without beginning the words with capital letters when, e.g. filling out order forms
- people (especially the French) who write their names and addresses ENTIRELY IN CAPITAL LETTERS when, e.g. filling out order forms

**rolfw** · 06-08-2007

Originally Posted by Salty25

'innit' is meant to be confirmation of understand ("do you understand what I am saying?"), but I have to admit it does become bloody annoying when people go OTT with it .

Also, you have to remember that speech and sentence structure changes are you go through life. The reasons for this are unclear, but it's certainly the case that an 14yo, a 40yo, and an 80yo form setences differently.

That's why grandparents talking to teenagers is so hilarious - they don't understand a word each other are saying .

I think we're all aware of the intention of the innit at the end of every sentence, similarly the HRTs and y'knows, all being formed out of habit, but totally unnecessary.

Teenagers have no problems whatsoever understanding what their grandparents are saying, they know and fully understand standard English, it is just that they choose not to use it, particularly when they are with their bro's (sic).

My sentence structures in my fifties are no different from people I am aquainted with who are in their 90s, similarly, my nephews and nieces, even my great niece, speak no differently. Their mode of speech only seems to change due to peer pressure and their need to not be flagged up as different.

Fortunately most of the bright ones grow out of the necessity to utilise pseudo street talk. I find it quite amusing to hear a surrey comprehensive school student talking as if he were brought up in the toughest part of Harlem or Watts, particularly when his dad is an accountant and his mum a marketing manager.

**Salty25** · 07-08-2007

Originally Posted by rolfw

I think we're all aware of the intention of the innit at the end of every sentence, similarly the HRTs and y'knows, all being formed out of habit, but totally unnecessary.

Teenagers have no problems whatsoever understanding what their grandparents are saying, they know and fully understand standard English, it is just that they choose not to use it, particularly when they are with their bro's (sic).

Yeah, my grandparent comment was just comedy, but hand on heart I've personally heard conversations where the whole thing is "excuse me". Teenagers are teenagers, they'll use the lingo that identifies them with their friends.

My sentence structures in my fifties are no different from people I am aquainted with who are in their 90s, similarly, my nephews and nieces, even my great niece, speak no differently. Their mode of speech only seems to change due to peer pressure and their need to not be flagged up as different.

Definitely, everyone adapts. I should have explained that it changes depending on who you're speaking to (pretty obvious), but there does tend to be an underlying pattern, even if very faint. Not much different then accents, which we can all turn them on and off mostly if we need to.

Fortunately most of the bright ones grow out of the necessity to utilise pseudo street talk. I find it quite amusing to hear a surrey comprehensive school student talking as if he were brought up in the toughest part of Harlem or Watts, particularly when his dad is an accountant and his mum a marketing manager.

Don't get me started, Grammar school kids are chronic for this

It really makes you wanna bust a cap in their ass

**PaulR** · 09-08-2007

I could go off on a rant that would last for days on this subject so it's probably not wise to bait me.

But I hate it when people say "I'll be with you momentarily" when they mean soon, when they say that they "literally lost their head" when they mean figuratively and I absolutely loathe the glottal stop T that is used in Eastenders and the like "I'll have a pint of bi'er".