This isn't another rant. It's just an amusing coincidence. 10 days after I posted this, this appeared on YouTube.
Like I say, it is an amusing coincidence. I love David Mitchell, and I think he rants about the subject way better than I did. I like to think I successfully held the fort while he constructed a much better demonstration of why "I could care less" is idiotic.
Bravo!
ReplyDeleteExcept ranting on a metaphor ("hold" vs "hold down") carries a lot less weight than ranting on semantic correctness ("could" vs "couldn't").
And yes, my countrymen are at the OMGHELP level of education. Our strong suit isn't language. Or mathematics. Or geography. Or history. But hey -- Lady Gaga!
Now explain to me how "in hospital" is an intelligent omission of an article, definite or indefinite. Is it a misused Latin construct, like "in situ"? Or just laziness, so you don't have to move your mouth a little extra to say your mom (she returned your "u" for the higher-class "o") is "in a hospital" or "in the hospital"?
I think it is intended to convey something along the lines of "in pain". Adding the "a" loses that emphasis somewhat.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Paolo. But I'm a grammar Nazi, so bad grammar annoys me more than it does most people. I can't stand most slang, and that phrase "I could care less" annoys me to death.
ReplyDeleteIn your posts about americanisms you speak about text-speak as a way of not considering the words. And I understand that to mean in a purely linguistical sense, because you're a geek like that.. But what I'd also consider bad about text-speak if it is - as you say a way of not weighing your words, is that it will eventually inhibit communication rather than enhance it. I realize that texts in particular is no good for communication anyway, but I feel that considering how you say things is important in any circumstance, and especially with texts, since they can easily be misinterpreted.
ReplyDeleteI can also proudly state that I suck at text-speech - it's not faster for me, I sometimes use it to convey a childish tone, but that requires a lot more thought than if I were to write it normally. So the point about it being faster really falls flat considering that you need the practice. - but you've said that already. Also, the idea that cutting out letters to make it faster just doesn't work. Since we're not computers - and computers would indeed go faster by cutting out characters, but only by a fraction - it doesn't matter at all.
Getting to the main subject about your posts, americanisms.
I am in fact swedish, and the way I learn/learned English is not by education primarily, but by watching TV and playing videogames, and occassionally reading books. I consider myself lucky, because I'm currently in touch with a group of British Gentlemen who can politely correct me when I say things the wrong way - but watching TV and playing those videogames has mostly exposed me to American English. Now I do prefer British English, because it seems more precise and elegant to me, but since I don't live in England, I have a hard time detecting the difference between "There is still a way to go." and "There is still a ways to go" beyond the obvious extra s, that does indeed contradict the 'a' for singular. Since so many people with English as their first language say it like that, I'm likely to interpret that as a fluke of language, and assume it to bethe correct one - because I'm a foreigner after all, what the hell do I know? So to sum up the point I'm trying to make with all this rambling is - if you're a foreigner with basic knowledge of the language, it's still hard to detect and enforce the subtle difference between 'americanisms' and 'proper' English.