General Chat

My friend Barbs on my usual thread says ow bist,
and she is from Bristol.
Loch Muick is Loch Mick walked round that Loch
many a time in my younger days. :-)

Joonie, in reply to your post of 17:08
Surely, 'j'aurais dû faire mes devoirs' is an example of using 'of' in French where we use 'have' in English? But has little bearing on it's use in the English language.

I think you'll find that those who tend to say 'bored of' are very likely to say 'should of' and could of' - mainly because (in the case of eg 'should of') they've never grasped the shortening of 'have', and when spoken, 'should've sounds like 'should of'.
Agreed, 'bored' should be followed by 'with' or 'by' and not 'of', but if people don't read much, they're likely to use the most common preposition.

Posh words should not be allowed to eclipse the message.

Well my grammar is not going to improve; she's dead ;-)

Oh my, maggiewinchester :)

"Surely, 'j'aurais dû faire mes devoirs' is an example of using 'of' in French where we use 'have' in English?"

Shirley not indeed!

I can only guess that you are identifying "dû" as meaning "du" ("de le"). Actually it is the past participle of the verb "devoir" and has nothing to do with "de" (or "du") at all!

"Aurais dû" derives from the verbs "avoir" and "devoir". It means "should have". "Aurais dû faire" is "should have done". There is no "of" in the French.

There truly is no linguistic connection between "bored of" ("of" is a preposition) and "should of" ("of" is a mishearing / misunderstanding of "ve" or "have"). There may be cultural collocation, as it were -- people who say one tend to say the other -- but they truly are unrelated.

But you are getting at the same thing as I was when you say "most common preposition". In French, "de" covers a myriad of sins -- far more than in good English. For example: "entreprise de capacité reconnue". Not "company of recognized capacity" -- company "with" or "having" the recognized capacity.

Here's a fun one, along the "bored of" line:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fed%20up%20of

"Definition of fed up of -- informal, **British** -- very tired of (something)"

Heh heh.

A semi-learned discussion you might like:

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/66710/which-is-correct-bored-of-bored-by-bored-with

* The BBI Combinatory Dictionary of English says that "British English also has bored of, esp. in children's language." I thought you might like that quote.

* I had a friend who used to rant about people saying "I would of [done something]". She regularly used to lay into "bored of [something]" within the same tirade, despite me trying to point out that they were totally different contexts. The first is really ignorant - the second just sounds ignorant (probably by association, imho! :).

* In relation to the sub-issue of "would of". This has arisen purely through slack speech, i.e. people saying the correct form, past tense, "would have", but pronouncing it "would've" which sounds like "would of".

There we have it!!

Of course, you must be right, Joonie Cloonie.
Obviously Vera and I have absolutely NO idea about the English language.
Really, how should I know what 'normal' is in English schools? I've only worked there, but you obviously have a 'superior' knowledge of the situation, and how children learn or not.

I mean, why bother, when working in a school to try to teach children proper grammar. - let them continue to say whatever they want.

I have no intention of wasting any more of my time on pedantry, or one-upmanship.
I'm of to do something more interesting - like watching the washing dry. :-D

Have a lovely day, maggiewinchester. And whatever you do, don't actually read what I actually said! let alone acknowledge that I happen to know what I'm talking about when it comes to FRENCH. What would you do when someone said something to you about something you are an expert in, that made no sense at all? Agree with them, I suppose, hm?

Someone's dog must know why you are talking to me about "what 'normal' is in English schools", since I did not say one single thing about any such thing and I have no idea myself why you said it. So actually I doubt that anyone's dog would have the least clue why you would tell me that I obviously have superior knowledge of something I said precisely nothing about.

I guess I was right in my post about nothing having changed around here ... even though I was actually referring to the buggy code at the site.

It never ceases to amaze me how people can actually start a fight when someone agrees with them ...

I agreed with you about the French - but disagreed it would affect the way primary school children in the UK would use grammar. You became pedantic.
You haven't changed.
The washing's drying nicely :-D

I listened, enthralled, to some French & German politicians on a radio show recently, as they debated in near flawless English.

Can you imagine any of our recently elected representatives being invited on to a French or German chat show, and trying to converse in anything other than a laughable version of 'Pidgin English'?

I can remember our Head of English coming back to the class she was supposed to have been teaching. She was over the moon as she no longer had to teach grammar.


So forgive us our transgressions. Some of us just weren’t taught proper.

It is the Governments fault - as usual.

maggiewinchester: "I agreed with you about the French - but disagreed it would affect the way primary school children in the UK would use grammar. You became pedantic.
You haven't changed.
The washing's drying nicely"

You CANNOT disagree with something I never said.

I did not say a single word about how primary schoolchildren in the UK would use grammar. I have not got the first clue why you are saying these things.

I said nothing about schoolchildren in the UK or the teaching of schoolchildren in the UK or anything else to do with schoolchildren or grammar or teaching or anything ANYTHING at all like that.

When I said that the spreading use of "of" to replace correct English prepositions in constructions like "bored of" was an infection from French, I WAS NOT TALKING ABOUT schoolchildren or the teaching of grammar.

I simply do not know why you started saying and are persisting in saying that I have made assertions I have never made, that in fact make no sense at all and I would never have said.

You seem to be saying that I claimed that schoolchildren in the UK are taught to say "bored of". Why on this green earth would I or anyone else claim that?

At least, that is the best I can make of what you are saying, because every time you say something, you ignore what I have actually said and claim or insinuate that I said some bizarre other thing.

You or someone raised the "should of" issue. The only thing I said about this was that it is illiterate. It has NOTHING to do with, it is UNCONNECTED with, the "bored of" (or "fed up of", etc.) construction. THAT construction is what I addressed.

And the word "dû" in the French sentence you inexplicably confronted me with is 100% unrelated to the word "du" (of the). You seem not to have understood the French sentence you presented as evidence of I know not what, really. I don't know what more to say. All I could and can say is that the French sentence you presented has nothing to do with anything I said.

I DID NOT SAY what you are pretending I said. Why don't you just admit that and retract all these awful things you are saying?

Nothing changed indeed. Yup.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Just by the bye -- I am not unfamiliar with the fact of people making claims about things they know nothing about, viz. several things in the thread right here about Harry and Meghan and Canadian taxpayers/voters. Surely it should be apparent after all this time that I know what I am talking about, and if I don't know about something, I don't talk about it, let alone claim that people who do know about it are wrong. This alone would be good reason not to assume/assert that I said something that makes no sense about something I don't know about.

I had been trying to just get back to the subject of the thread and avoid these resumed efforts to attack my character. On that note:

My own bugaboo, closely related to Sharron's opening complaint, is

"Save up to 50% off"

No.

The item is on sale at 50% off.

You save 50%. Not 50% off.

There.

Like Rose, in general, grammatical errors (and spelling mistakes) do not faze me as long as the intent is clear.

If they appeared in reports or official documents that would be a different kettle of fish altogether and when I worked I would have expected to be castigated strongly if I had ever committed that 'sin' - and quite rightly so. (I never did, by the way.)

I believe that it could be construed as elitism if a government bent the rules on grammar and spelling in state schools so that pupils were not taught correctly as you can bet your bottom dollar that private schools would continue to teach correct grammar and spelling ..... and which person would you employ?

The difference is clear when some universities have complained about having to teach English to some students whose grasp is not well enough for academia.

Careful Joy Louise.
With the atmosphere on the boards at the moment I might have to accuse you of casting aspersions on my education ;-) :-D

But is OK. My secondary education was not at Private School. (called Public in the UK)

Such a shame my ex Public School teacher Oh is away for now so I can't ask if grammar was still being taught a few years later. But remember, all schools had the same choices of examining board and teachers would surely have attended the same meetings.

Names. :-D :-D :-D

No casting aspersions from me, Names. As you wrote, would I dare do so at the moment? :-D

I am in the UK but, although I knew they were public and not private schools, I used the word private to distinguish from public which was what state schools were called when I lived in Oz; they were usually known as PS 123 (Public School plus whatever number they were given).

Only explaining why and not being pedantic, Names. :-D

JoyLouise

I knew WE weren't confused but these boards are very multinational - so I was just making it clear (???)


:-D

Yup, Names. Some of our Oz friends may have been a tad confused if I'd used British terminology as far as status of schools is concerned.

There you have it ... but there may well be someone who questions why I thought someone from Oz might not understand UK terminology as much as someone from the UK would understand Oz terminology ....

..... so I think it would be a wise move to stop digging myself a hole now. :-D :-0 :-D :-0

Maybe we should both stand in the corner facing one of Caroline's brick walls.

:-D :-D :-D

I have yet to see a multilingual thread.

Could be interesting in testing our translation ability - but don't ask me to start it. ;-)

(I suppose there are some miscellaneous GR rules to be observed.) :-(