|
||||||||
Alesha sort out your grammar for goodness sake (Merged) |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#501 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 123
|
Quote:
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. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#502 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lancaster
Posts: 5,642
|
Quote:
You are quite right that "classist" is most definitely not in the OED. But then show me any work on good English that suggests leaving out capital letters!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#503 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,141
|
Just wanted to let you all know that I have just spent an hour reading this thread -and really enjoyed it!
![]() Seriously!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#504 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Somewhere in the UK
Posts: 6,493
|
The OED responds to linguistic change. "Classist" (if not incorporated yet and I am not bothered to find out) is bound to be included in forthcoming editions. It is widely used in technical literature (principally political and sociological) so it has excellent credentials.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#505 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,013
|
Quote:
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
#506 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Durham
Posts: 914
|
Quote:
It's in the OED online. I can't link because it requires a log in, but I screen grabbed it here: Clicky.
![]() ![]() Anyways, as you were (was) people, back onto the topic now... |
|
|
|
|
|
#507 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lancaster
Posts: 5,642
|
Quote:
Not strictly on topic but thanks for alerting me to the OED online, I can log-in via my institution. It'll save me lugging my pocket version about...3 years into a PhD and I'm a tad slow on the uptake
![]() ![]() Anyways, as you were (was) people, back onto the topic now...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#508 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 17,496
|
Quote:
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#509 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,110
|
Did anyone else hear Craig say 'we was' tonight?
I replayed it twice and I'm positive he said to Ricky G after his tango.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#510 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sacred Heart
Posts: 3,177
|
Quote:
Did anyone else hear Craig say 'we was' tonight?
I replayed it twice and I'm positive he said to Ricky G after his tango. ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#511 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 62
|
Quote:
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
#512 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 62
|
Quote:
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... |
|
|
|
|
|
#513 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 62
|
Quote:
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. also, compared to - say - german, english uses much less capitalisation. it doesn't make german any easier to read, in my opinion (and, ironically, or maybe unsurprisingly, there is a very vocal "less capitalisation" movement in the german-speaking world) |
|
|
|
|
|
#514 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,110
|
Quote:
i feel flattered that you took my post personally and i obviously appreciate all yoru comments, but it was a plural "you"
You did well to thank gorlagon for his/her succinct summary of your long and tedious post. Let's hope you learnt a lesson in plain English. Is yoru also in Websters dictionary - I've searched for it in vain? |
|
|
|
|
|
#515 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 62
|
Quote:
Don't be - in view of the fact that it was my post you quoted I think it was fair to assume your comments were a direct reply to me.
You did well to thank gorlagon for his/her succinct summary of your long and tedious post. Let's hope you learnt a lesson in plain English. Is yoru also in Websters dictionary - I've searched for it in vain? i don't do succinctness. to me language is like food, i like to savour it. though i do appreciate that some people subsist on the linguistic equivalent of fast food |
|
|
|
|
|
#516 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,110
|
Quote:
no, but i did find the word "typo" - what i didn't find in my grammar guide is your erroneous use of the question mark at the end of your final sentence - unless, of course, you're not sure or you can't remember whether you searched for it in vain, in which case the question mark would be appropriate.
i don't do succinctness. to me language is like food, i like to savour it. though i do appreciate that some people subsist on the linguistic equivalent of fast food A question mark is always placed at the end of a sentence, even when the question is followed by further comment. I do find the inclination to add 'ness' to an adjective to form a noun very clumsy, and it exposes a lack of vocabulary. It's my opinion that brevity or indeed concision would convey your meaning with equal clarity. Your analogy between language and food was very good. Of course a surfeit of either can produce unwanted side effects; in the case of food a tendency to gain weight - in the case of language, verbosity can make one a figure of fun. Oops a daisy - did I say verbosity instead of verboseness?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#517 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,011
|
I havent watched scd since Alesha took over, but unfortunately had to suffer some of it tonight as i was at my dads and he loves it. She is diabolical. I am gobsmacked as to just how cringy she is. Her grammer is pretty grim, almost unacceptable in a way. She comes across as quite rude and pretty much full of herself, i actually cannot stand listening to her. I cant watch it again next series unless they get rid. Personally i think they will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#518 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 1,282
|
Quote:
no, but i did find the word "typo" - what i didn't find in my grammar guide is your erroneous use of the question mark at the end of your final sentence - unless, of course, you're not sure or you can't remember whether you searched for it in vain, in which case the question mark would be appropriate.
i don't do succinctness. to me language is like food, i like to savour it. though i do appreciate that some people subsist on the linguistic equivalent of fast food Ironically enough I broadly agree with your observations on regional dialect. However, to support your argument you have ignored the notion of context, and that's the critical aspect. That's why your argument falls apart. You obviously have passion for language, and some knowledge, but not enough. Normally I wouldn't launch into an ad hominem, but you are really asking for it! Your rejection of capitals is utterly ridiculous, contradictory and, as others have said, a definite cry for attention. Your position makes no sense whatsoever. You seem to pride yourself in your knowledge of English, yet your posts are meandering. long winded, aggressive and pompous. You eschew capitals, making your posts harder to read, and you 'don't do' (utterly grotesque phraseology) succinctness - in effect you are rejecting the whole basis for the creation of language -to convey meaning effectively. This is nothing to do with a fast food approach, it's to do with mastering the form, and you have a long way to go in that regard. |
|
|
|
|
|
#519 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 123
|
Quote:
You are without a doubt a 100% double cream Internet eccentric! I see that other posters in this thread have had some fun with you, very successfully tearing you to shreds. Most amusing. Unfortunately your sneering and pompous attitude opens you up to such comment.
Ironically enough I broadly agree with your observations on regional dialect. However, to support your argument you have ignored the notion of context, and that's the critical aspect. That's why your argument falls apart. You obviously have passion for language, and some knowledge, but not enough. Normally I wouldn't launch into an ad hominem, but you are really asking for it! Your rejection of capitals is utterly ridiculous, contradictory and, as others have said, a definite cry for attention. Your position makes no sense whatsoever. You seem to pride yourself in your knowledge of English, yet your posts are meandering. long winded, aggressive and pompous. You eschew capitals, making your posts harder to read, and you 'don't do' (utterly grotesque phraseology) succinctness - in effect you are rejecting the whole basis for the creation of language -to convey meaning concisely. This is nothing to do with a fast food approach, it's to do with mastering the form, and you have a long way to go in that regard. A quite excellent post. It does seem that twen_angst is somewhat desperate for approval as an intellectual. Sadly the main point of language seems to have been forgotten. Its purpose is to communicate and the clearer the better. The comment about German was amusing and totally missed the point. Of course when the point hits home, it's always good to avoid it! German capitalises nouns and the purpose of this capitalisation has little to do with readability. Capitals at the start of a sentence is all do with readability. "i haven't used capitals in years". Your communication must be limited to plenty of other lazy people then. If you were anywhere near the business world your ludicrous uniqueness would not be tolerated. As a small attempt to return to the subject of the thread, Alesha says "you was" to be different. She knows it's wrong but has no intention of changing. Your adamant refusal to use capitals falls into the same category - arrogant and pig-headed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#520 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SW London, Crystal Palace Tx
Posts: 2,769
|
Quote:
Capitals at the start of a sentence is all do with readability.
Quote:
Alesha says "you was" to be different. She knows it's wrong but has no intention of changing.
Exactly.parthena |
|
|
|
|
|
#521 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,013
|
Quote:
At risk of increasing tension further and toppling you from your fence, I would point out that RP refers to pronunciation, not grammar. It is not a variety of English, either. Even on the BBC (!), I wouldn't expect a newsreader to say "That were the news", or "You was watching the Ten O'Clock News". It isn't correct.
Yes, I know what RP is, but do you catch my drift? For me - and actually, I am someone who finds "you was" to be tooth-numbingly grating, so in some ways I'm playing devil's advocate - too much objecting to varieties of English like this is part of the rigid attitude that meant we DID only hear RP on TV for so many years, when it was actually spoken by very few people at all - and they were the elite. I do feel quite strongly that there are plenty of better criticisms to make on Alesha's judging. And I feel slightly uncomfortable laying into her on one that potentially has all kinds of potential for regressive follow-throughs. I find "you was" irritating. I feel "you was" is sometimes used through ignorance but as often form a correct part of one or more varieties of English. But most importantly, I feel that it's not something that should form part of a yay or nay argument/debate over Alesha's tenure as judge. |
|
|
|
|
|
#522 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 250
|
Just thought of an idea that could really work for the show
deleted
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:07.





