|
Mark B also says things like "he hasn't got nothing to lose" though he is a good pundit, we all have our ways, for sure I am not a good spella!
|
|
Keep an eye on planet-f1.com's race reports. At the end, under the "Mark 'Get orf ma barrow' Blundell" section, they record all his pearls of wisdom.
|
And can someone please tell them that the plural is Grands Prix, NOT Grand Prixs.... Oooh that does annoy me (note to self, must get out more!)
--
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
Richard - the misuse of English, spoken and written, is down to a number of factors. You and I know that it is courtS martial like GrandS Prix, but if we used it in public we would be thought wrong. Partly poor education, partly text speak, partly the language does evolve but above all IMHO the dreadful example set by the BBC, the former arbiter and guide to the use of the language. Impenetrable regional accents (John Reid and Neil Oliver come to mind) and the news readers themselves - what are these eggzits that people rush for when there is a fire in a cinema?
|
There is no such thing as "misuse of english" It is a form of communication. It changes, it grows, but as long as the communicated idea is understood then there is no problem.
If you dont understand whats being said, or the idea being coveyed, then its not aimed at you.
And by the way. Grands Prix is french, nothing do do with english. If howere we decide to turn it into Grand Prixs then it becomes english.
The bus for the 21st century is just down here....opps you missed it.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
>as long as the communicated idea is understood then there is no problem.
Just as well then as I see your speeling chukka has given up the ghost this morning.
(or is it the Labrador on the keyboard again??.)
Phil I
|
(or is it the Labrador on the keyboard again??.) Phil I
Fifi (the faithful TVM hound) wishes it to be know that these are the views of her owner, and rejects the scurrilous notion that her speeling should be that bad.
She adds "where is my breakfast - don?t you know I am a starving Labrador"
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
|
|
I am going to keep calling it "Grand Prixs" because "Grands Prix" does not sound right, and I've never even heard anyone say it like that.
|
>"Grands Prix" does not sound right, and I've never even heard anyone say it like that.
You don't say it like that! It's (roughly) gron pree, singular or plural. The S, as in almost all French plurals, is silent.
|
|
|
|
There is no such thing as "misuse of english"
There is when it's spelt with a lower case e!
--
L\'escargot.
|
english and English has the same meaning does it not? Did the lack of a capital letter prevent you from understanding the message?
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
english and English has the same meaning does it not?
Not always, no. The phrase 'english mustard' might mean 'mustard in the English style'; 'English mustard' would have to have been grown and/or made in England.
The point - not aimed personally at TVM, and as a few here have hinted already - is that a sloppily typed, spelt or worded passage can usually be deciphered to the point where you can work out what the writer probably meant. But getting it right from the start shouldn't be about winning grammar prizes, but about leaving the reader in no doubt what you mean.
And that, if you're the BBC, means not having your Radio 4 newsreaders say, "A police source has said..." because it will leave your listeners wondering why the force's equine members are making statements to the media.
|
>A police source has said..." because it will leave your listeners wondering why the force's >equine members are making statements to the media
Usually because they have a better grasp of the situation, and the police dog was unavailable for comment.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
ITV should demand certain standards from their employees when they're speaking in public. As a last resort they could either educate their commentators or delete/bleep where necessary. It's not as if the English language doesn't have lots of legitimate alternatives to "for sure". In any case, putting "for sure" at the start of a sentence is superfluous because it doesn't add anything to the meaning of the sentence.
--
L\'escargot.
|
There is nothing wrong with starting a sentance "for sure" It conveys - up front - a degree of certainty about the information that follows.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
ITV should demand certain standards from their employees when they're speaking in public.>>
Why? They are employed for what they say not how they say it.
|
|
Using 'for sure' as a cliche is not misuse of English, it's just a bit careless. Let him who is without similar habits cast the first stone.
|
. Let him who is without similar habits cast the first stone.
I think it is "he" not "him". (Dives for cover under hail of stones)
"For sure" has an Irish ring to it, would oi be tinkin?
|
|
'Let he', CP? I think not.
|
|
I'm beginning to work out which of you live near Tunbridge Wells!
|
'Let he' CP? I think not.
The Biblical quotation is "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
A noun is always the subject of its own clause, or it was when I did English O level many years ago.
|
I know CP, but that was written (quite well it must be admitted) in the 17th century. I did write it that way at first, but it sounded wrong and still does to me, so I changed it.
You may well be right, but I don't like 'Let he...'
|
You may well be right but I don't like 'Let he...'
OK, try "All things come to he who waits"
|
OK try "All things come to he who waits"
>>
everyfink comes to im wot hangs about.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
everyfink comes to im wot hangs about.
and if he is stuartli, it won't pass him by.
|
>> The Biblical quotation is "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".
Or even "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone"
|
|
drbe, you are my main man. That is perfectly correct. But 'let he...'? Nah.
|
"For sure" has an Irish ring to it would oi be tinkin?
Yes it does, for sure and for certain. But you won't hear it used on RTE or TG4!
|
|
|
Why? They are employed for what they say not how they say it.
They are employed for both. What they say has to be said in a way that the audience both understands and expects. Interest groups all have their own ways of saying things--it makes the members feel included and exclusive--and this "F1 language" is just one of those versions of English aimed at a particular audience. F1 commentators use English differently from football commentators for example because the perceived expectations of the audiences are different, even if the audiences overlap.
|
|
|
|
ITV should demand certain standards from their employees when they're speaking in public. As a last resort they could either educate their commentators or delete/bleep where necessary. L\'escargot.
They should also check the qualifications of their so-called Science Correspondent. [For sure... he is Irish...]
Whilst pontificating on the latest grimness "oop north" he opined that the current dampness was exacerbated by "the local topology."
Those mathematicians get the blame for everything....
|
Q: What does a single yellow line on an Irish road mean?
A: No parking at all.
Q: What does a double yellow line on an Irish road mean?
A: No parking at all, at all.
I'll get me coat...
(PS: you can see from my name I am of Irish descent)
|
|
|
I always found Martin Brundle to be the most articulate and intelligent of any pundit that I ever heard on TV. Blundell, can't string a sentence together.
But if you want to hear commentary that makes you wish you were dead, watch Monster Jam on Bravo on a Saturday. And when you think it can't possibly get any worse, they interview one of the drivers. Everything that's wrong with America neatly packaged and summed up in one "sport".
|
|
Always enjoy the use of the verbs "to podium and "to pit"
|
Monsieur L'escargot said: "It's not as if the English language doesn't have lots of legitimate alternatives to "for sure".
Call me really, really picky if you like, but this is an English language debate.
Where I come from there are only ever two alternatives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
