Christmas presents for the Grammar Police

[Phil E]

http://metro.co.uk/2015/12/15/17-christmas-gift-ideas-for-the-grammar-pedant-in-your-life-5567630/

Happy Christmas's :wink:

 

[Camquin]

May I suggest someone send #13 to the new WR working group looking at simplifying the laws

 

[Pegleg]

Why do people have such a problem with folk that like things to make sense? My grammer is not great, my typing is worse. I have no problem with correction.

 

[Dixie]

I would of just sent of my order's, but the grammer police arrested me having seen me click you're link

 

[Dickie E]

Why do people have such a problem with folk that like things to make sense? My grammer is not great, my typing is worse. I have no problem with correction.

I assume that your question is rhetorical. If not, I can answer it.

 

[Taff]

I would of just sent of my order's, but the grammer police arrested me having seen me click you're link

I see what you did there. :biggrin:

 

[tim White]

I had 'Grandma Police' - she was my primary school head teacher. :=

 

[Wedgie]

Why Stannis Baratheon should have been the One True King of pedants


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRKU4-ZhHl8

:bday:

 

[Phil E]

Why Stannis Baratheon should have been the One True King of pedants


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRKU4-ZhHl8

:bday:

Awesome.

 

[OB..]

Why Stannis Baratheon should have been the One True King of pedants


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRKU4-ZhHl8

:bday:

Fowler comments that "The use of less instead of fewer in front of plural count nouns is a feature of spoken English, but less so of the standard written language". There is an etymological rationale for making a distinction, but as far as I can see, no case that so-called misuse causes any confusion in meaning. There are more important fish to fry.

 

[L'irlandais]

There are more important fish to fry.

Quite.
:sarc:
May I suggest some ground rules for grammar policing on this forum :

When a sentence does not conform to [Accepted standard grammar] it will be flagged as [Ungrammatical]*. However given that is RRF not a language forum, perhaps folks might overlook errors unless they are misleading in terms of context. Nobody under the rank of Grammar Police Sergeant should be entitled to an opinion on matters grammatical. The presence of a GP Chief superintendent is required before any forum member can be taken out of a discussion thread to be shot.

*Where Ungrammatical is understood to mean grammatically incorrect or awkward; not conforming to the rules or principles of grammar or accepted usage.

 

[Wedgie]

I heard Barry Cryer on the radio yesterday...

"Q. Who led the Pedant's Revolt? A. Which Tyler" :smile:

 

[Ricardowensleydale]

There is an etymological rationale for making a distinction, but as far as I can see, no case that so-called misuse causes any confusion in meaning. There are more important fish to fry.

The problem in our hospital is that we have less qualified nurses.

 

[Dickie E]

The problem in our hospital is that we have less qualified nurses.

a nice example.

How would we interpret:

"A feature of our hospital is that we have more qualified nurses" ?

 

[crossref]

The problem in our hospital is that we have less qualified nurses.

nice

but it's only a little bit ambiguous - I think almost everyone would understand that "less" qualifies "qualified"

 

[crossref]

I heard Barry Cryer on the radio yesterday...

"Q. Who led the Pedant's Revolt? A. Which Tyler" :smile:

.. but you mean Pedants' Revolt

 

[Ricardowensleydale]

nice

but it's only a little bit ambiguous - I think almost everyone would understand that "less" qualifies "qualified"

It's the "almost" that is the issue.

 

[Pegleg]

nice

but it's only a little bit ambiguous - I think almost everyone would understand that "less" qualifies "qualified"

Really? See how the Dail Heil would use such a headline!

 

[OB..]

The problem in our hospital is that we have less qualified nurses.

Yes, technically ingenious, but stilted and unhelpful. Such a sentence would get its actually intended meaning from its context.

"In our hospital, 50% of our nurses are nurse-practitioners."
"We have less qualified nurses."

"In our hospital we have 150 qualified nurses."
"We have less qualified nurses."

In both cases "We don't have that many", would have been more colloquial and more direct.

You may argue that it would be useful to have a distinction between "less" and "fewer", but in practice we don't.

 

[Rich_NL]

There are more important fish to fry.

Do you mean that there are many more important fish to fry, or much more important fish to fry?