"There was two Mini Cooper parked in front of my house", or "there WERE two mini coopers"?

So, have any of you driven a Mini Cooper? or, conceivably, Mini Coopers?
I haven't, but I almost rented one my second to the last time in Los Angeles.

How about:

There was a Mini Cooper parked in front of my house. Oh, by the way, there was a second one there also.

If you DO drive two Mini Coopers, please don't park them in front of my house!

Is this by any chance an invitation to the philosophy folks on this site to join this thread? ;-D

Or

'There was more than one Mini Cooper parked in front of my house'?

No, it most certainly was not, Roger, I agree. Neither was the same type of remark addressed to Lash. I pointed this out to both Contrex and McTag.



I'll let you discuss that with Joe, Roger.

'mini' is no more an adjective than 'dining' is in 'dining table'. Mini Cooper is the name of a particular vehicle. It's a compound noun.

If your last name happened to be Smith, would 'Roger' be an adjective modifying 'Smith'?

Would we say, "Are there two Rogers Smith?" or "Are there two Roger Smiths?"

Frank Gifford used to say, "They still have two times-out left in the half."

I understand the correct form is, "They still have two time-outs left in the half.

Unless, of course, they've already used two...then they only have one.

It's not really that popular when compared to other similar sites.

You also noted this, "He invented it".

Can I ask what you really meant, if anything?

Frank G suffered under the same dismal education system as the rest of you, Frank A.

Maybe he and JoefC were classmates.

I had one for a short time. It was hopeless. I've had that many different wheels that I can't remember much about it. A petrol driven clog.

I incline to "was" for that reason. What is being referred to is a singular occurrence. There was X. There wasn't two occurrences. It's a picture in the memory.

I certainly am not, you're being very rude.

I beg your forgiveness Madam. For what I don't know.

My contrary experience is that many kids would have no idea what you mean by "polite language ".

You spin a good idealist line which flies about a thousand feet above the social landscape. From my ground position, "lording it over the language" is likely to be an evolutionary trait related to primate social stratification. It is not behavior naturally mirrored by reactionary youth with it's in-group slang ? Do you think middle class educators have the credibility in the eyes of their audience to counter the normal forces of social reality. Shall we perhaps take such "democratic" language teaching to its logical extremes and warn about lexical selection a la Foucault say by banning birth announcements like "It's a girl" ?









[/i][/i]

I've always done more than my fair share of swearing, JTT, even as a kid. I remember several of my teachers mentioning to me that swearing was the sign of a poor vocabulary. My report cards often had a comment mentioning this failing in me.

But many of the teachers who had written those kinds of notes on my report card...or who had lectured me on a poor vocabulary because of my swearing--had to deal with the fact that I was regularly at the top of the class in language, vocabulary, and grammar.

They may have been teaching me what you consider bullshit, but I was able to master it a hell of a lot faster and more thoroughly than most of my classmates.

I took a certain amount of pride in both sides of that coin...that I was a rouge not afraid to swear in front of a teacher...and that I was able to handle language assignments with ease.

I still feel that way despite your opinions of the lessons and of my language abilities.

Occasionally I will bust balls and point out what I see to be a grammar deviation...and occasionally I will chime in when a question is asked about grammar. And I will give the conventional responses...which really is what most of the questions are asking for.

I don't let it consume or preoccupy me.

Some people do.

I was kidding you, re "A petrol driven clog", admittedly a humor stretch.

Hey osso--have you seen the exalted company we are in. " Regularly at the top of the class in language, vocabulary, and grammar".

Gosh--we had better mind our Ps and Qs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-y3FEAaj7k

The full classroom scene in Amarcord is a joy to behold. This bit is all I could find.

Language and vocabulary aren't really at issue, Frank. There weren't too many old wives tales surrounding those.

It's the grammar that you were taught. The silliness that you've tried to correct others with.



What's to master about memorizing a bunch of old wives tales and then regurgitating them, Frank? That doesn't indicate any real measure of smarts.

Consider what you're relating to us. You're telling us that your abilities in English grammar comes from what grade school grammar lessons, middle school, high school?

HA It wasn't philosophical at all.

JTT said that, "kids should be taught to engage those who hold to the abysmally ignorant lay idea of correctness. This could easily be done by actually teaching them how language works instead of the ongoing nonsense that they still receive from way too many educational sources."

But JTT most carefully refrained from explaining how language works or what should be done about the "ongoing nonsense". An assertion.

Which is a highly delightful entertainment whereby some utopian fantasy is offered without any ideas of how it go about it.

A hobby horse in other words.