1
   

next time/in future

 
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Nov, 2007 03:09 pm
Joe Nation wrote:
Come to visit vs. come visit shows the difference between formal and colloquial speech.


Not just that! Joe Nation appears to have very little awareness of British English. The difference between "come to visit" and "come visit" has an Atlantic dimension. Missing out the "to" is a very AmE thing, or, if you like, adding it is a very BrE thing. BrE speakers would say "Go and tell it on the mountain". The issue I had with Joe Nation is that he seems to think that American English is "standard".
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Nov, 2007 06:47 pm
Neither is right or wrong - as long as communication is clear, who cares? We shouldn't bemoan evolutionary changes to something so fluid as language; if so, we should still be speaking Elizabethan English.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Nov, 2007 08:16 pm
Contrex wrote:
Quote:
The issue I had with Joe Nation is that he seems to think that American English is "standard".


Well, buddy, then you have picked a fight with the wrong guy for the wrong reason. I haven't a clue where you got that idea. Did I say that somewhere? Because I don't think there is any such thing as Standard English. Are there standards? Yes. Do they vary from place to place? You betcha.

The standard in an international office is not the same as the standard in a broadcast booth is not the same as the standard on the football pitch is not the same as the standard on A2k.

I work in a little town called New York City. People here speak English, but it's Hispanic English, Nigerian English, French-Canadian English, Canadian English (West), Canadian English(Mid-Country), Guyanese English, Pakistani English, Indian English, Hong Kong, Shandong and Beijing English, West Indies and East Indies English, Irish Northern, Irish Southern and Kerryman Irish, Texan and thousands more varieties, all of which have their very own music.

The standard I look to most is whether or not I can make myself better understood to all these speakers. I do that, I hope, by listening. You can hear a lot as the guy from some long away place tries to figure out how to express "brick chisel" in this thing we call English.

He wants to be better understood too.

"Oh, yes. I understand." is a phrase which causes deep relief.

Joe(It washs over their faces like water.)Nation
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Nov, 2007 08:28 pm
Joe Nation wrote:
Contrex wrote:
Quote:
The issue I had with Joe Nation is that he seems to think that American English is "standard".


Well, buddy, then you have picked a fight with the wrong guy for the wrong reason. I haven't a clue where you got that idea. Did I say that somewhere? Because I don't think there is any such thing as Standard English. Are there standards? Yes. Do they vary from place to place? You betcha.


Joe(It washs over their faces like water.)Nation


Contrex must have just been pullin' your leg, Joe, because there is a Standard English for every dialect of English, AmE, CdE, AuE, even BrE, NzE, ... , but it ain't the same thing as everyday speech patterns.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 03:42 am
McTag wrote:
"In the future" sounds silly to me.

In fact it IS silly.

So in future, pull your socks (sox) up.


I have thought some more about this, since we actually use both phrases, but in different ways: one refers to the near future in the sense of "from now on", and one to a time in the more distant future.

Examples:

"So in future, keep your big nose out of my business, okay?"

In the future, we will all survive on protein pills and vitamin tablets, scientists predict.
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 04:01 am
McTag wrote:
I have thought some more about this, since we actually use both phrases, but in different ways: one refers to the near future in the sense of "from now on", and one to a time in the more distant future.

Examples:

"So in future, keep your big nose out of my business, okay?"

In the future, we will all survive on protein pills and vitamin tablets, scientists predict.


Thanks, McTag. This backs up my contention of Saturday 24th Nov, that at least in BrE, "in future" and "in the future" are both legitimate phrases which do not mean exactly the same thing.

Contrex wrote:
In BrE certainly, "in future" tends to mean "from now on", "starting right now", "immediately". "In the future" tends to mean "some time in the future, but not immediately".

"In future, wash your hands after leaving the toilet", Joe's angry boss at the pizza parlour told him.

"In the future, it may be possible to travel from Europe to Australia in a rocket plane."

That does not mean that you may not sometimes see the reverse!
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 04:06 am
Well my goodness, that's identical. Sorry. Embarrassed

I had overlooked that.
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 04:17 am
McTag wrote:
Well my goodness, that's identical. Sorry. Embarrassed

I had overlooked that.


No, don't be sorry! (I wasn't trying to put you down) It's always good to know other people think the same!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
concentrated - Question by WBYeats
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 06:29:35