atw: Re: Change of collective noun use and other changes - why? Just because
- From: "Nebauer, Mark" <Mark.Nebauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 09:37:03 +1000
When it comes to language, I am a conservative at heart. I like the language I
grew up with so I am prepared to take on a little Sisyphean labour, no matter
how pointless. To the day I die I will fight Americanisms, e.g. may our ears
never be assaulted with, “It was reported Monday that Mark was killed by a
giant boulder rolling downhill at one-hundred-forty-two miles an hour...”
Mark Nebauer
APLNG Upstream Project
Procedure Writer
● Origin
● Level 2, 144 Montague St., West End, 4101
● GPO Box 148, Brisbane, Qld, 4001
● t 30283183|f 07 3369 7840 |e
mark.nebauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:%20mark.nebauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>|w
originenergy.com.au<http://www.originenergy.com.au/>
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Lewis
Sent: Monday, 19 March 2012 9:14 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: Change of collective noun use and other changes - why? Just
because
Michelle, it's changed by people who _use_ it - they usually don't really care
about it, and merely take it for granted.
- Michael
On 19 March 2012 06:44, Michelle Hallett
<michelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:michelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
While not seeking to control language, I'm really tired of such constructs as
'the below email' (don't they know it's an adverb, not an adjective) or
'companies' used as possessive while 'fee's' is used as plural. Worst, this is
all caused by well educated corporate ninnies who think they are writing
English correctly. Or who don't care as long as they come across as looking
smart.
I'm all for the language changing and growing, but why can't it be changed by
people who love language?
Michelle
On 18/03/2012, at 8:23 PM, "Geoffrey"
<geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
… and then again there are collective nouns that have always taken a plural
verb. We typically say “Police are attending the scene”, not “Police is
attending the scene”. Likewise, “There are cattle in the field” and “Vermin are
under the house”.
There seems to be few so-called rules of English grammar that do not admit of
exceptions. So perhaps we should shift our focus from “rules being broken” to
“rules trying to be discerned in acceptable, idiomatic usage”. The so-called
rules of grammar are like mathematical equations that scientists try to fit to
a not unruly, but still not tidy, set of data points. A parabola might fit
nicely … except for a few outliers; a verb and subject should agree … except
for first-person and second-person pronouns (and so on). I before e except
after c except … After how many exceptions and qualifications does a rule
cease being a rule?
Rules follow usage; they will never dictate usage. Users will do their own
thing (as is their right), which is why we no longer speak or write in the
manner of Geoffrey Chaucer. And why those in the twenty-fourth century will no
doubt struggle to understand what we are writing today.
Those who seek to control language should first consider the labours of
Sisyphus.
Cheers
Geoffrey Marnell
Principal Consultant
Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd
P: 03 9596 3456
M: 0419 574 668
F: 03 9596 3625
W: www.abelard.com.au<http://www.abelard.com.au/>
From:
austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]
On Behalf Of Michael Lewis
Sent: Sunday, 18 March 2012 6:54 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: atw: Re: Change of collective noun use - why?
One further observation about the sing/pl issue with collectives: it has long
been recognised that we use those collectives in two different ways - as
reference to the collectivity and as a general reference to the individual
members. We say that the committee is united, but we often say that the
committee are not in agreement. (US English is much more rigid about this; Aus
E follows British English in recognising this idea of "conceptual" agreement
between subject and verb.
But that is possibly "too difficult" for some people. There is a general
principle that exceptions to grammatical "rules" fade away - the tendency to
normalisation is very strong. Oddly, that's why "media" and "data" are now
treated as singular, but because most people are aware that teams and
committees and governments are made of multiple people, those nouns are treated
as plural.
Not approving; merely observing.
- Michael
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Note: This email, including any attachments, is confidential.
If you have received this email in error, please advise the
sender and delete it and all copies of it from your system.
If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must
not use, print, distribute, copy or disclose its content to anyone.
Other related posts:
