Whazzis about a catastrophe? Where? When?
Well, the catastrophe was limitrophe to Bancroft..or astropov?
My, my. This just occurred to me:
a·pos·tro·phe [ ə páwstrəfee ]
noun
address to imaginary person: a speech, especially in the form of a digression, addressing an absent or imaginary person or a personification of an abstract or inanimate entity. example can be found in Juliet's soliloquy concerning Romeo.
I think Setanta mentioned that, however.
I'm more fascinated by your phonetics in brackets than by the actual definition, Letty.
so much for copy and past, Andy.
Yes, the past is too much with us, Letty.
at least the past tense of Shakespeare.
Hey, JTT. I done that on purpose!
Letty - are you apostrophizing someone? :wink:
Well, I certainly hope not, Francis. I'm not here to win any "troph"ies or gold stars or iambic pentameters or trochees.
tro·cha·ic [ trō káy ik ] :wink:
now for another pet peeve:
the word often. the t is silent. Many folks of TEN make that mistake our our local TV channel.
Why do Americans say oftentimes? I think it's cute, but kind of clunky.
I asked a question on p. 98 and it got completely ignored:
Do you say "try to" or "try and" or both?
Most older people, I think, would say that only the former is strictly correct, but most people in my experience use both.
Try to climb a tree
Try to balance a plate on a stick
Try and do better
Try and not annoy me
You hear these and similar things....are they wrong?
(I believe they are...but you see how cautious I'm getting )
Habit - and the differentiation of American English from the mother tongue (which was also busy differenting) over time.
(Er - that related to "oftentimes".)
Hmm - I would never say "Try and not annoy me."
I would say: "Try not to annoy me."
I would also say "Try to do better" - not try and.
true, Deb, but to McTag, I use both structures. One is a compound verb and the other is the object of a preposition.
From the rabbit- habit? That's an answer? I should grab it?
Even within the United States, there are areas in which people say "try to . . ." while in other areas, the people will say "try and . . . "
I have lived in many places in the States, and encountered many unfamiliar locutions common to a particular area. In the Carolinas, one expresses one's disinterest in the rant of another by saying: "Who don't know is me." or "Who don't care is me." In many places in the midwest, people might say: "Oh, let me go with."--having dropped the objective pronoun. But people still basically understand one another. There are certain New England accents, and certain Carolina and Georgia accents which are almost incomprehensible to those not from the particular region--but mostly, if i say: "Oh yeah, we went, and we had a BIG time," everyone knows what i mean, although the locution is prevelant mostly in the South.
dlowan wrote:Heehee: Julian the Apostrophate.
heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee . . .
Just saw this . . . would he have been the Emperor of Expostulate?
McTag wrote:Why do Americans say oftentimes? I think it's cute, but kind of clunky.
That is among a host of locutions which we have evolved for the express purpose of causing confusion or consternation among speakers of English.
Does "try to" have more to do with intention than actual behavior. "He tried to find a tool" refers to his intentions or purpose more than to his searching behavior. In spanish the term, "intentar" equates "try" with "intention", action with purpose.
Shepaints said a long time ago that she " cannot abide changing a noun into a verb....e.g. I'm parenting or I'm all hockeyed out.....ohferchrissakes!!!!" I have a similar peeve: I detest using the noun, impact, as the verb, to impact." To "affect" is good enough.
