New grammatical constructs???

[Mr. Jelly]

Originally Posted by tinnitus

have a good rest of your day."

I have come to responding to this statement by saying "Have a better one"


Language is fluid.

[bfm612]

Originally Posted by Nymuso

All languages change and evolve over time. The “peeves” just mean you’re noticing it.

Agreed. (Or should I say "I agree"?) I'm not sure if people honestly prefer no changes or regionalisms to language and think we should all be talking like we're in The Canterbury Tales.

[RP]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

Of course, what we're discussing here isn't really grammar per se. We're talking about ellipsis, words that are being used for functions other than strict meaning.

el·lip·sis - the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues.

gram·mar - the whole system and structure of a language or of languages in general, usually taken as consisting of syntax and morphology (including inflections) and sometimes also phonology and semantics.

You introduced ellipses into the thread, but that's not what all the other posts have discussed...

[The Watchman]

The problem with "no problem" is that it implies that serving you could have been a problem.

I think idiom is the grammatical term.

[Silly Moustache]

Go to a small shop or cafe in the west country of England and make a purchase from a female waitress and she might well say, "You're welcome my lover!"

In them's parts, it is a common alternative to "darlin'"

[Gryf]

Language rules are fine, but if I worried about how everybody said what they wanted to say, I might never be happy. Speak however you like. I'll adjust.

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by RP

el·lip·sis - the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues.

gram·mar - the whole system and structure of a language or of languages in general, usually taken as consisting of syntax and morphology (including inflections) and sometimes also phonology and semantics.

You introduced ellipses into the thread, but that's not what all the other posts have discussed...

I used "grammar" in the sense that many understand: a set of strict rules that govern how language should be structured, with somethings being "correct" and others not. See, even when discussing the word "grammar" itself, we can go 'round and 'round about common meaning vs. dictionary definitions.

And I do believe that many idiomatic phrases *are* examples of ellipsis. "No problem" is a shorthand phrase for "(it was) no problem (to help you)", or "thanks for having me (as a guest on your program)".

Anyway, whether or not I'm correct or anyone else thinks I am, my point is that I don't think you can say that certain phrases are "gramatically incorrect" based on some arbitrary rules. That's not to say those phrases still can't bother the heck out of you personally!

[GoPappy]

The "No problem" response irritates me as it connotes that the server was doing me a favor. I'm patronizing that business and paying money for their product (in this case, food), and I'm thanking the server for his/her service and giving the server a nice tip to demonstrate my appreciation. The correct response would be either, "It was a pleasure to serve you" or "Thank you for dining with us" or some combination of the two.

[GoPappy]

Here's a current grammatical phrase that drives me nuts. When referring to something that needs to be repaired, they will say or write, "It needs fixed." The correct grammar would be "It needs to be fixed."

I know, I know. It doesn't amount to a warm bucket of spit, but it makes me crazy. I'm just wondering if it bothers anyone else.

[GoPappy]

Originally Posted by A Scot in Otley

. . . And I'm not starting on the 'less' and 'fewer' misuse ... which has been going on since

Thank you for saving my faith in humanity's future. I was beginning to think I was the only one that understood when to use which one.

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by GoPappy

I'm just wondering if it bothers anyone else.

Yup (though I never saw it to date).

Something that's probably grammar too, and that really bugs me: iPhone has <you name it>. That should be "Your" or "This" or "The" <object name> has, or, in this case, "iOS has ...". Much as Apple apparently like to think otherwise, an iPhone is not a living being.

"Your Android" bugs me a bit less but it's just as wrong (you don't own Android the OS and your phone that runs it is only an android in the LucasFilm universe).

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

a female waitress ... might well say, "You're welcome my lover!"

In them's parts, it is a common alternative to "darlin'"

Do they also look like Vera?

About language evolution: while unavoidable it's also something that's worth keeping in check if you're not the world's current Esperanto and want to avoid ending up with different Sabirs based on that language... As a liberal-minded Dutch person I used to lauch at France's Académie of grey/no-hairs who carefully decide what's French and what isn't, and calling French a dead language. But that was before I saw how my own native language has been devolving (itself a concept that my former philosophy-of-biology professor howled with laughter at) but just using English terms often despite the existence of perfectly good Dutch expressions for them, or even inventing "Double Dutch" English-sounding terms that mean nothing or something completely different.

BTW, that Académie decided it would be la covid because it is la maladie (and apparently foreseeing it would be impossible to impose something like macovi or mavico). In practice almost everyone talks about le covid because the word sounds like it should be masculine.
And yes, that bugs me. But that's mostly because I get corrected all the time when the wrong gender rolls out of my mouth while speaking (Dutch uses them like English does, so I my brain probably just picks a gender that seems to fit best in the current context).

[RP]

Originally Posted by A Scot in Otley

...And I'm not starting on the 'less' and 'fewer' misuse ... which has been going on since...

Originally Posted by GoPappy

Thank you for saving my faith in humanity's future. I was beginning to think I was the only one that understood when to use which one.

You're not. Using less and fewer incorrectly is one of my pet peeves...

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by RP

You're not. Using less and fewer incorrectly is one of my pet peeves...

Maybe recap the rules so each and everyone (plus the non-native speakers) can decide for themselves if they needed the refresher?

[RP]

Originally Posted by RJVB

Maybe recap the rules so each and everyone (plus the non-native speakers) can decide for themselves if they needed the refresher?

The way I learned it was to use less when dealing with something that you can't count and use fewer when dealing with something than can be counted.

Less weight and fewer pounds
Less time and fewer minutes
Less money and fewer dollars
Lines in stores usually have it wrong but it should be "Fewer than 10 items" not "Less than 10 items."

Fewer means “not as many.” We use fewer with countable nouns like cookies. Cookie Monster was told to eat fewer cookies. Less means “not as much.” We use less with uncountable nouns like milk.