Not to correct anyone, but as a matter of interest to some

Adopted by us, yes Phenomena is the plural of phenomenon (which very loosely means "a happening, a manifestation" (my Greek [true Greek, that is, not the modern nonsense ] is rusty). Phenomena is a word included in the BBC's campaign for plurals to take over from their singular versions, along with criteria, on the basis of lowest-common-denominator English

parthena

catt by name catty by nature?

I regularly listen to Talksport, and SCD darling Darren Gough, who is a presenter, has the most appalling grammar, even by my common standards; correct me if I'm wrong but is he not from up north?

If we're going to discuss Alesha's use of 'we was' instead of 'we were' then I think it's legitimate to point out that 'as are I' instead of 'as am I' is also incorrect.

Would you say 'I are' in conversation?

I stand corrected Oulady and Parthena - you was right and I were wrong in the usage of the word phenonema cos I got my singulars and plurals all muddled up. Oh slap my wrists and say 12 Hail Mary's. I must do penance and write out the singular is phenomenon and the plural is phenomena. You learn something new every day. I am still working hard on my Dixonese but realise my English is not perfect - but then I am not paid an inflated wage and nor am I on television to communicate and influence to way highly impressionable young children speak. Unfortunately Alesha Dixon is. She is a very beautiful woman - until she opens her mouth.

It is not racist to say someone's spoken English is appalling, especially when it is their mother tongue. I am sure Miss Dixon went to school and studied rudimentary grammar - but probably thinks it is cool to dumb down our beautiful language and speak like an uneducated street urchin.

Yes he is and I'm not suggesting that all northerners speak grammatically correctly - just as not all southerners speak perfect English - but the poster stated that 'he were' is accepted in the north as being grammatically correct. It isn't and I don't think it's being touchy to take offence at the generalisation.

Darren Gough was an England cricketer.
Alesha was a pop-singer and is now a judge of pro-dancers. She just has no credibility.

It's the BBC's Mission to Misinform and Spread Ignorance all over the country, don't you know? You can see how the poorly educated, poorly spoken Ms Dixon would appeal to the State Purveyor of Ignorance (SPI).

So widespread is ignorance across the SPI that I think it must trawl in streets and dives to recruit reporters / presenters and then send them to be finished in the SPI's very own School for Ignorance.

right. seeing as you don't believe, maybe you'll believe peter trudgill, who - as i'm sure you don't know - is arguably the most important british linguist. see what he says about the use of "to be" in different areas of britain: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=L...age&q=&f=false

feel free to ask for elucidation on the matter.

if you're struggling to find information on peter trudgill (who was not my professor and to whom i'm not related), please read (or skim, as that is probably more your thing) his wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Trudgill

finally, i'm afraid to have to contradict you AGAIN, but "classist" is a legitimate english adjective: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/classist

"london english", the definition of which you can find in any book on dialects, exerts its influence well beyond the confines of Greater London. Whether that's a good thing or not, I'll leave to you to decide.

again, as to the use of "to be"... http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=L...age&q=&f=false

finally, yes, standard english, a speaker of which ms. dixon most certainly is not, is conventionally more appropriate in certain contexts, one of which could be primetime television. however, this is only a result of historical conventional and not a reflection of any inherent value (or lack thereof) in a particular variant/dialect of english.

That's the whole point about the BBC, though. People do think it is correct to say a phenomena , or a criteria, precisely because they hear it on the BBC.

Aren't they entitled to assume that the BBC has a sure command of English and wouldn't be broadcasting ungrammatical garbage? Perish the thought!

Peter Trudgill is a sociolinguist and an authority on dialects (Wiki was my friend).

I did not, and do not, deny that some northerners probably use the verb 'to be' incorrectly - as happens in many other parts of the country (probably the English speaking world too) - my argument is that is not accepted as grammatically correct.

I don't need to ask for elucidation on the matter; I have nothing to learn from someone who appears to have no understanding of capitalisation.

btw - take a tip from me: attempts to put others down by adopting a tone of superiority e.g.(or skim, as that is probably more your thing) do nothing to enhance your argument and probably contravene the t&c's.

i (capitalisation in internet fora (yes, that is the correct plural of "forum" - seeing as we were talking "phenomena" earlier) - but i appreciate you knowing that already - seems like a waste of time to me - but then i would rather be lazy with regard to capitalisation than not know about the existence of "classist" and correct someone who was right and expose myself as someone who likes to argue his case without getting their facts straight). i enjoy a healthy debate, but it's hard to engage in one when you have to argue technicalities, as that doesn't allow you to get to the core of the argument.

this said (see, i did it again - twice!), standard english - i'll say it for the last time - is only one of many english dialects. yes, it is the one taught in schools, it is the one taught to foreigners. hell, it is even the one i speak (obviously, that might devalue it, some may claim). it has a hegemonic position among the dialects of the english-speaking world, but its dominance is historically and culturally conditioned and not due to any inherent linguistic qualities marking it out as superior. for instance, in black english double negatives are more common than simple negatives (reverend jesse jackson uses them, and he is a highly educated man, as was dr martin luther king, who also used them) - i.e. in black english, they're acceptable (or are you suggesting that there are superior and inferior dialects? surely not. so if martin luther king said "ain't no" on primetime tv it would be OK to attack him?) - but that's OK, because it is NOT what we call standard english. ms. dixon is not a speaker of standard english, she speaks a different variety of the english language - one that is just as complex and has just as many grammatical rules. if you have a go at her for not speaking standard english, then rev. jackson might as well have a go at you for not speaking black english and not using double negatives and "ain't". they're different, but equally acceptable varieties of english.

should alesha dixon be aware that in some contexts one MIGHT have to make compromises and adopt a different dialect so as not to offend viewers (and sanctimonious forum posters)? possibly so. does she have the tools to do so? is it a conscious decision not to do so? i have a suspicion, but cannot argue either way (because i like to get my facts straight, before i go spouting nonsense)

and this is not a supercilious post, just a very matter-of-fact and factually based (i'd gladly give you a bibliography to substantiate my claims, but won't do so for obvious reasons) argument i'm putting forth.

I didn't participate in that exchange, so I'm not sure why you feel the need to 'enlighten' me on something of which I'm already aware.


I see the closing bracket, but where is the opener? and surely if you're going to use the possessive personal pronoun you should be consistent; i.e. his case but their facts.

Healthy debate is an exchange of views, it does not necessarily equate to argument


If that's a promise there is no need for me to comment further.

Always wise to read a thread, or at least the posts of the person you are responding to before attempting to upbraid them. Had you done so, you would be aware that throughout this discussion I have been one of Ms.Dixon's defenders.


At the risk of repeating myself Alesha did not offend me, as my posting history makes quite clear.

That of course is open to opinion.

Amen to that.

The amusing thing is, this is a supercilious post and it's really quite poorly written.

[quote=samiskim;36806551]: Oh slap my wrists and say 12 Hail Mary's. I must do penance and write out the singular is phenomenon and the plural is phenomena.

Sorry to be pedantic but Hail Marys is a plural and doesn't need an apostrophe

I'm just waiting for someone to correct you... "Aha! It should be Hail Maries"

Samiskim - I didn't correct but informed you, as you had been interested enough to look up 'phenomena'

As for double negatives being correct because certain people use them...

parthena

I noticed too. Very poor understanding of punctuation and none at all of when to use capital letters!

This is getting a tad tense!

Because I like to sit on the fence:

I agree with the posters who are saying "you was" is correct usage in certain varieties of English and that Standard English isn't the only variety we should hear on TV.

I also agree with the posters who are saying that someone who is a) on TV, b) asked to make clear and concise judgements on competitors and c) is in the spotlight as to her suitability for that role, should probably make efforts to amend any part of dialect that may cause criticism.

It's true to say that few of us would use the same way of speaking in a job interview than the one we would with our mates at the pub, and perhaps Alesha would do well to think about that.

However, perhaps the antsy posters on this thread might like to ponder a return to the days when RP was the only variety of English heard on TV. It doesn't do well to be too regressive about these things. It turns us into old fogeys long before our time.

And there's no need for Alesha name-calling that's gone on either - that just devalues whatever point's being made.

dashes and brackets are quite acceptable forms of punctuation, and as to my lack of use of capitalisation, if you had read my post, you'd know that i don't use it. i'm not the first. ever heard of e.e. cummings? quite.

also, don't correct my use of punctuation with your poor syntax. it makes you look ridiculous, as your second sentence is not syntactically complete, as it has no subject and no main verb, not something i would normally decry, as i myself do not adhere to strict grammatical rules at all costs - clearly, but seeing as YOU do, you'd do better to practice what you preach.

thank you for neatly and concisely summarising the points i was making and for referring back to the days of bbc english, where people like trevor mcdonald with his regional accent (even if he had been white) wouldn't even have been allowed to open their mouth, no matter their dialect

Ahem! is this thread not relating to grammar then? I could have sworn it was. I don't see how DG's cricketing prowess comes into the equation of grammar! Just as Alesha's grammar has nothing to do with her judgement of the celebrity dancers.

Furthermore, by being a sports presenter where in the main DG, a cricketer, is discussing the technicalities of football rugby etc as if he were a professional on these matters, he is somewhat on a par with Alesha.

Also grammatical correction "Alesha was a pop-singer"? No no no, Alesha IS a popular singer

The lack of capitalisation is really quite lazy and selfish. The purpose of capitalisation is to help the reader identify your sentences.

Your insistence on no capitals seems like a cry for attention. The result is simply that your posts are very hard to read.

I think you will find that the Merriam-Webster dictionary is American English. This thread is about English.

I've just checked on the AskOxford site (I believe the OED is the accepted authority on English) for "classist" and got the reply "Sorry, there are no results for that search."

To me that invalidates claims for "classist" to be English. American English it may be, but not English.

I have a login for dictionary.oed.com, which does have an entry for "classist" - defining it as "A. adj. Of, pertaining to, or characterized by classism; discriminating on the grounds of social class. B. n. One who advocates or practises classism.".

I'd provide a link but I had to use my Athens password to get in...