2
   

You can/may go out...

 
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2011 04:40 pm
@McTag,
I've always held that you are an honest fella, McTag. But it's been pretty much all deception or diversion or millenarian pronouncements or worst of all opining with or without those friends who know stuff.

Is it that language is so difficult for you that thoughtful responses are impossible? You ask for proof from dictionaries, twice. When it came, I was waiting for you to pick up the ball and run with it as it was your contention that was called into question, no response, save for a grand diversion.

What the hell have you done with that honest McTag?
laughoutlood
 
  2  
Reply Fri 25 Mar, 2011 11:15 pm
@JTT,
cmon fess up didja flub minuscule ... : agian?

This is the best grammar class to which i ever went.

: uhuh :
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Mar, 2011 10:15 am
@laughoutlood,
laugh out loud
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  2  
Reply Sat 26 Mar, 2011 04:44 pm
@JTT,

Quote:
You ask for proof from dictionaries, twice


My dictionary, a Shorter Oxford (in two volumes, and published in Britain, although I don't see why that might/may be significant) tells me that may and might are the same in meaning. It says that might is may in the past tense, but there is no difference in meaning. Which is what I think; it gratifyingly corroborates my belief. I also think that changing the choice of word to suit the tense is not required nowadays, not much done. Otherwise, synonyms.

This argument has been a bit odd from you, because you are constantly lecturing all who care to listen (a small and dwindling number, it has to be said) that custom and usage is all. You are contradicting yourself in your mad struggle to be the biggest fish in this small pond.
And hey...you accuse me of ranting? Only one of us is foaming at the mouth, buddy.

btw, whatever happened to Debra Law? She was a clearsighted, fair and interesting poster.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sat 26 Mar, 2011 05:39 pm
@McTag,
Quote:
My dictionary, a Shorter Oxford (in two volumes, and published in Britain, although I don't see why that might/may be significant) tells me that may and might are the same in meaning. It says that might is may in the past tense, but there is no difference in meaning. Which is what I think; it gratifyingly corroborates my belief. I also think that changing the choice of word to suit the tense is not required nowadays, not much done. Otherwise, synonyms.


The boys make errors, McTag. It took them until 1996, I believe it was to come out and tell all that the split infinitive prescription was bogus.

Here too,

"It says that might is may in the past tense"

they show they don't understand all. 'might' is not the past tense of 'may' nor is 'may' the present tense of 'might'.

Sometimes, these stodgy old publications, like stodgy old men, can't bring themselves to invest the necessary thinking and so they rely on the old nonsense.

Try making a sentence illustrating "that might is may in the past tense".

Quote:
This argument has been a bit odd from you, because you are constantly lecturing all who care to listen (a small and dwindling number, it has to be said) that custom and usage is all.


And, you forgot to note, that my examples of usage, not to mention three dictionary sources, two of which I specifically put in because they described BrE usage, shows clearly that 'might' holds a lower level of certainty meaning than 'may'.






laughoutlood
 
  2  
Reply Sat 26 Mar, 2011 08:08 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
"It says that might is may in the past tense"



Trumping with the etymological fallacy card wins the trick.

however i don't give a rats what the lexicon says, words mean what i want them to mean and that may or may not include what others think they mean

there's no way i say might and mean a probability lower than may

so bring me more dictionaries that i might refute them
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sat 26 Mar, 2011 10:16 pm
@laughoutlood,
Quote:
there's no way i say might and mean a probability lower than may

so bring me more dictionaries that i might refute them


The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English notes that native speakers are notoriously bad about describing how their language works.

One more native speaker steps up to the plate and takes his/her quick three swipes and is gone.

You've done no refuting, Lol. I think that your record is pretty clear in showing that refuting is not really your strong suit.
laughoutlood
 
  2  
Reply Sat 26 Mar, 2011 11:31 pm
@JTT,
I intended to infer that you destroyed the etymological fallacy of the might/may tense conjecture.

I'm surprised you don't embrace the regional interpretations that certain phrases imply.

Love your posts, keep it coming.
McTag
 
  2  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2011 03:12 am
@JTT,

Quote:
my examples of usage, not to mention three dictionary sources, two of which I specifically put in because they described BrE usage, shows clearly that 'might' holds a lower level of certainty meaning than 'may'.


They don't show that at all. Take off your rose-coloured blinkers, and read them again.

I take no lessons from a fellow who can't spell "permissible" or "minuscule".
And I always mistrust people sounding off about "honesty".
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2011 05:43 pm
@McTag,
Quote:
They don't show that at all. Take off your rose-coloured blinkers, and read them again.

I take no lessons from a fellow who can't spell "permissible" or "minuscule".
And I always mistrust people sounding off about "honesty".


You do this all the time, McTag. You profess some nonsensical thing then do nothing to provide anything to support your position. That's dishonest.

You've taken way too many lessons from all manner of disreputable source. You have a Fowlers for dog's sake.

You're also being very dishonest about the spellings. I explained 'permissible' and miniscule is a variant spelling of minuscule. Don't try to suggest to me what my dialect uses. That is both dishonest and ignorant.

Quote:


1.

might

a. Used to indicate a condition or state contrary to fact: She might help if she knew the truth.
b. Used to indicate a possibility or probability that is weaker than may: We might discover a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
c. Used to express a higher degree of deference or politeness than may, ought, or should: Might I express my opinion?

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/might_2


I bolded it and underlined it so that you might not miss it. How in heavens name did you miss it?

'might' used for permission [see c. above] also points to its being weaker than 'may'. All deontic [social] modal uses derive from their basic epistemic meanings. 'might' shows greater deference or politeness than 'may' precisely because it describes a lower level of certainty than 'may'.

Quote:
might

1. used for saying that there is a possibility that something is true, or that something will happen, especially when it is not very likely

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/might


Note in the URL that this the BrE meaning and they have noted that 'might' is used "especially when it is not very likely".

Quote:
may


Usage note: may

Both may and might are used for expressing the idea that perhaps something is true or that perhaps something will happen, but might is more common in conversation, and may is more common in writing.

Might is often used for suggesting that a possibility is rather unlikely or not at all definite: You might have an accident.

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/may


Here too, they make special note of 'might' being weaker, epistemically than 'may'.
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2011 05:54 pm
@laughoutlood,
Quote:
I'm surprised you don't embrace the regional interpretations that certain phrases imply.


I do and have since, well, since forever. McTag just got smacked upside the head for not showing the proper respect for dialectal differences.

Weren't you just razzing me for miniscule, Lol? Smile

Quote:
I intended to infer that you destroyed the etymological fallacy of the might/may tense conjecture.


I don't know if I did that because etymologically speaking, modals did have tense. That's just not so, hasn't been so for, [as I've been led to believe, no original research on that aspect by me] a few hundred years.

I can't even begin to imagine how the modals had tense or how they could be used as past tense. That is as foreign a concept as a foreign language. It might be that the historical analysis was wrong.

laughoutlood
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Mar, 2011 07:29 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
Weren't you just razzing me for miniscule, Lol?



Only a tad, bit of a blind spot huh, i had the good grace to note you did it agian

speaking of simply noting (without a shred of academic prowess or evidence ) on my part

i guess common usage ( then some dictionary rightly or wrongly) cornered might and may into a tense corner along with the probabilistic interpretation of the meanings

and it would take quite some context for me to draw the purported distinction between might and may in terms of probabilty (and especially tense) but only because the usage is slightly unfamiliar.

noel coward seemed to overcome the problem through ellipsis: mad dogs and englishmen can/may go out in the midday sun






0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Mar, 2011 03:54 pm
@JTT,

Quote:
I bolded it and underlined it so that you might not miss it. How in heavens name did you miss it?


Thank you, I didn't miss it. And I didn't miss the fact that it was from Yahoo which suggests, crap, I have quoted to you. in support of my argument, from the Shorter Oxford dictionary and you dismissed this with an airy "the boys make mistakes". And then you comment about the honesty of others.
I pointed out shortcomings in your spelling and you witter on about allowing your dialect. Honesty?

That Yahoo vs. the Oxford dictionary thing is a little bit like a guy from Louisiana contacting the Academie Francaise with suggestions about how they might amend their French.
It might cause some amusement, but will not be too convincing.

What shall we say about your might/ may argument, for clarity's sake?

That "may" represents 51% probability?
"Might" represents what, 47.5%?
What do you think? Americans like statistics. Put some numbers on, do.

I'm always amused by you telling us that users of the language do not understand it, and require people like you to explain it to us.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Mar, 2011 04:50 pm
@McTag,
Quote:
Thank you, I didn't miss it. And I didn't miss the fact that it was from Yahoo which suggests, crap, I have quoted to you. in support of my argument, from the Shorter Oxford dictionary and you dismissed this with an airy "the boys make mistakes". And then you comment about the honesty of others.


Whoa! What have you done with that honest ole McTag?

Anyone can buy a dictionary company, McTag? That Yahoo is the American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language.

Now speaking of honesty, you haven't even mentioned the two other entries I provided, it could have been more but I chose just the BrE entries so as to not overwhelm.

I pointed up a rather serious error that the Shorter, and I strongly expect the Longer, Oxford has made. If they can make centuries long errors concerning something as dumb as split infinitives, it's not at all impossible for them to make other errors.

And indeed, in the same entry we saw that they had. Once more, make a sentence wherein you use 'might' as the past tense of 'may', my honest, not so young but vibrant nevertheless, friend.

Quote:
I pointed out shortcomings in your spelling and you witter on about allowing your dialect. Honesty?


You were in error on those, completely. I showed you why and you, dishonestly avoided that.

I asked some posts ago if this was the dismal route you wanted to take, no reply.

Quote:
That Yahoo vs. the Oxford dictionary thing is a little bit like a guy from Louisiana contacting the Academie Francaise with suggestions about how they might amend their French.
It might cause some amusement, but will not be too convincing.


I left the Oxford thing for you to expand upon. No expansion, just tangents, silly tangents. Why not discuss Oxford's stance with your opinions on same?

I also pointed out to you on the deontic [social] modal uses mirror the relative strong/weak epistemic uses of may and might.

No reply from you. That's dishonest.

Quote:

What shall we say about your might/ may argument, for clarity's sake?

That "may" represents 51% probability?
"Might" represents what, 47.5%?
What do you think? Americans like statistics. Put some numbers on, do.


Think of the modal range, McTag and you'll see that your

That "may" represents 51% probability?

simply can't work, following logic and something you're big on, the strict meaning of words.

Think about how we use these modals/semi-modals. It's not always a flat, monotone 'may' or 'might' or 'must' or 'almost certainly + verb' or 'probably + verb'

Why didn't you quote from your Oxford? Is this what your 'shorter' said?

Quote:
Usage

Traditionalists insist that one should distinguish between may (present tense) and might (past tense) in expressing possibility: I may have some dessert if I'm still hungry; she might have known her killer. However , this distinction is rarely observed today, and may and might are generally acceptable in either case: she may have visited yesterday; I might go and have a cup of tea.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_gb0506140?rskey=HiBWcy&result=3#m_en_gb0506140




0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Mar, 2011 05:02 pm
Quote:

Oxford Dictionary

modal verb (3rd singular present may; past might /mʌɪt/)
1 expressing possibility:
that may be true
he may well win
used when admitting that something is so before making another, more important point:
they may have been old-fashioned but they were excellent teachers
2 used to ask for or to give permission:
you may confirm my identity with your Case Officer, if you wish
may I ask a few questions?
3 expressing a wish or hope:
may she rest in peace

Phrases

be that as it may
despite that; nevertheless.
may as well
another way of saying might as well (see might)
that is as may be
that may or may not be so (implying that this is not a significant consideration).

Origin:
Old English mæg, of Germanic origin, from a base meaning 'have power'; related to Dutch mogen and German mögen, also to main and might


Usage

Traditionalists insist that one should distinguish between may (present tense) and might (past tense) in expressing possibility: I may have some dessert if I'm still hungry; she might have known her killer. However , this distinction is rarely observed today, and may and might are generally acceptable in either case: she may have visited yesterday; I might go and have a cup of tea.
On the difference in use between may and can, see can (usage)

Ibid



Quote:

Oxford Dictionary

modal verb (3rd singular present might)
1 past of may, used especially
in reported speech, to express possibility or permission:
he said he might be late
expressing a possibility based on an unfulfilled condition:
we might have won if we'd played better
expressing annoyance about something that someone has not done:
you might have told me!
expressing purpose:
he avoided social engagements so that he might work
2 used to tentatively ask permission or express a polite request:
might I just ask one question?
you might just call me Jane, if you don't mind
asking for information, especially condescendingly:
and who might you be?
3 used to express possibility or make a suggestion:
this might be true
you might try pain relievers

Phrases

might as well
1 used to make an unenthusiastic suggestion:
I might as well begin
2 used to indicate that a situation is the same as if the hypothetical thing stated were true:
for readers seeking illumination, this book might as well have been written in Serbo-Croatian
might have known (or guessed)
used to express one's lack of surprise about something:
I might have known it was you

Usage

On the distinction between might and may, see may (usage)
For a discussion of the use of might of instead of might have, see have (usage)

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_gb0519490#dws-m_en_gb-m-en_gb-msdict-00002%E2%80%93047998
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Mar, 2011 02:00 am
@JTT,

Quote:
this distinction is rarely observed today, and may and might are generally acceptable in either case:


So if you had read your own quotation, you might have saved yourself an awful lot of time on this, and may have been able to make more sense.
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Mar, 2011 08:05 am
@JTT,

A quick scan of your proffered extracts seems to show that they advance your case not one whit, jot, scintilla or iota.

So can we agree after all that, when probability is in question, that may and might are the same?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Mar, 2011 08:35 am
You not only can agree, you may agree . . . you have my permission.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Mar, 2011 09:50 am
@McTag,
Quote:
So if you had read your own quotation, you might have saved yourself an awful lot of time on this, and may have been able to make more sense.


What the hell is wrong with you, McTag? I asked you specifically if that was what your shorter Oxford said.

Is this,

"this distinction is rarely observed today, and may and might are generally acceptable in either case:"

what your Oxford version stated? If not, what did it state?


JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Mar, 2011 09:55 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
You not only can agree, you may agree . . . you have my permission.


Without the additional confirming note at the end, we could have,

You not only can agree [possibility or permission], you may agree [possibility or permission].
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 0.07 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 09:40:10