Grammar Pet Peeves - Page 7 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums

PG44 · 2010-04-24, 09:15 AM

Hmm. I'll have to think about that one over a "samwich."

haystack · 2010-04-24, 11:39 AM

Amazing the amount of tormented souls traumatized for a lifetime by grade 5 grammar and spelling.

Nuje · 2010-04-25, 03:41 PM

Another pet peeve: using "amount" with regards to a number of items (as in "amount of tormented souls"

), where "number" should be used.

This is similar to the "less" (general quantity) and "fewer" (number of items) frequent mis-use.

MAXAM · 2010-04-28, 09:04 PM

Does anybody know when to use "further" vs."farther"? I constantly hear newsreaders say "farther" when in my mind I think they should have used "further." e.g. "They couldn't go any farther up the river due to the rapids." He couldn't swim any farther because of leg cramps." etc.

BGY11 · 2010-04-28, 09:18 PM

Your examples are actually correct - farther is a measure of distance (near vs. far)

Further refers to "amount" or time (as in, "we need to discuss this further to determine what the best action should be").

MAXAM · 2010-04-28, 09:42 PM

Thanks BGY11 for your quick response. I've always wondered when to use it.

CrazyInSane · 2010-05-13, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BGY11

Just wondering which one is correct in that regard, or if it can go both ways.

For example, "#1 Hits of the 80s" or "80's #1 Hits." (Which one would be correct in this comparison?)

Edit: Hmm, looking at it, it seems my first example would apply to hits from all of the years between '80 and '89, while the second one would just be for 1980.

Sorry for the delay in response, but yes, you're right. The latter would apply only to 1980, not the entire 1980s decade.

Korak · 2010-05-14, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyInSane

Sorry for the delay in response, but yes, you're right. The latter would apply only to 1980, not the entire 1980s decade.

"80s' #1 Hits".........would refer to the decade.

Jake · 2010-05-14, 10:09 AM

Her 80s' and 90s hits.

Toss in a pronoun, a series of plural nouns and make them possessive and I can see why anyone might get confused. Is that correct?

CrazyInSane · 2010-05-14, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Korak

"80s' #1 Hits".........would refer to the decade.

Exactly, meaning they are the #1 hits of (possessive) the 1980s decade.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake

Her 80s' and 90s hits.

I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be any apostrophes, because the entire thought is: "Her (collection of) 80s and 90s hits". But yes, decade and year–related grammar is very confusing.

BGY11 · 2010-05-15, 09:43 PM

I think CrazyInSane is correct, since the hits belong to her, not the decade in question.

daviharr · 2010-05-16, 01:12 PM

This drives me around the bend.You see it on Digital Home quite often as it is a common spelling mistake. Misspelling as "Reciever" when it should be "Receiver"
We were taught this verse in school."I" before "E" except after "C", or as sounded as "A" as in "Neighbour" and "Weigh"

BGY11 · 2010-05-16, 10:14 PM

Then there's the odd weird word that doesn't quite follow that rule.

Jake · 2010-05-17, 10:09 AM

I wonder why the folks that brought us English verbs did not fix read (reed) and read (red).

PG44 · 2010-05-20, 04:33 PM

I often hear people say they will speak "to" a point or an issue, particularly in meetings (e.g. There are financial implications with this option, and I will speak to that a little later."). Is this correct, or should they not speak "on" or "about" a point?

2010-05-14, 10:09 AM	#99
Jake Moderator Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Gatineau and Ottawa Posts: 10,171	Her 80s' and 90s hits. Toss in a pronoun, a series of plural nouns and make them possessive and I can see why anyone might get confused. Is that correct? __________________ Tip: See an offending post? Don't reply, report it by clicking on the 'Report Post' icon.

2010-05-17, 10:09 AM	#104
Jake Moderator Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Gatineau and Ottawa Posts: 10,171	I wonder why the folks that brought us English verbs did not fix read (reed) and read (red). __________________ Tip: See an offending post? Don't reply, report it by clicking on the 'Report Post' icon.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2010-04-24, 09:15 AM	#91
PG44 Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Guelph, Ontario Posts: 246	Hmm. I'll have to think about that one over a "samwich."

2010-04-24, 11:39 AM	#92
haystack Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2,113	Amazing the amount of tormented souls traumatized for a lifetime by grade 5 grammar and spelling.

2010-04-25, 03:41 PM	#93
Nuje Veteran Join Date: May 2002 Location: A charted un-desert isle Posts: 2,465	Another pet peeve: using "amount" with regards to a number of items (as in "amount of tormented souls" ), where "number" should be used. This is similar to the "less" (general quantity) and "fewer" (number of items) frequent mis-use.

2010-04-28, 09:04 PM	#94
MAXAM Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 1,083	Does anybody know when to use "further" vs."farther"? I constantly hear newsreaders say "farther" when in my mind I think they should have used "further." e.g. "They couldn't go any farther up the river due to the rapids." He couldn't swim any farther because of leg cramps." etc.

2010-04-28, 09:18 PM	#95
BGY11 Veteran Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Calgary AB Posts: 3,164	Your examples are actually correct - farther is a measure of distance (near vs. far) Further refers to "amount" or time (as in, "we need to discuss this further to determine what the best action should be").

2010-04-28, 09:42 PM	#96
MAXAM Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 1,083	Thanks BGY11 for your quick response. I've always wondered when to use it.

2010-05-15, 09:43 PM	#101
BGY11 Veteran Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Calgary AB Posts: 3,164	I think CrazyInSane is correct, since the hits belong to her, not the decade in question.

2010-05-16, 01:12 PM	#102
daviharr Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: British Columbia Posts: 14	This drives me around the bend.You see it on Digital Home quite often as it is a common spelling mistake. Misspelling as "Reciever" when it should be "Receiver" We were taught this verse in school."I" before "E" except after "C", or as sounded as "A" as in "Neighbour" and "Weigh"

2010-05-16, 10:14 PM	#103
BGY11 Veteran Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Calgary AB Posts: 3,164	Then there's the odd weird word that doesn't quite follow that rule.

2010-05-20, 04:33 PM	#105
PG44 Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Guelph, Ontario Posts: 246	I often hear people say they will speak "to" a point or an issue, particularly in meetings (e.g. There are financial implications with this option, and I will speak to that a little later."). Is this correct, or should they not speak "on" or "about" a point?