... he said that his mother told him about 'people like me' :) We are the people our parents warned us about. LOL On 6 January 2012 20:40, Rebecca Caldwell <beckyakasha@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ugh, I've arrived at this one a little late; however I think we > 'discussed' the use of 'youse' a year or two ago. > > I remember that many pointed to the Macquarie, as 'youse' has been > included for many years as an accepted multiple tense of 'you' (As opposed > to y'all or all of you). I stand by my distaste for the word, but I do > agree that language is in constant evolution. I will stick with what I was > taught, regardless. If that dates my speech, then so be it. > > I did just get into a mini-fight with my partner; He pronounces H as > 'haitch' whereas I do not; he said that his mother told him about 'people > like me' :) > > Rebecca > > ------------------------------ > From: geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: atw: Re: Pronounseeashun > Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 11:41:08 +1100 > > > Christine, we’ve been truncating English words since time immemorial. > There’s not much new in texters writing “U” instead of “you”. We travel in > a bus these days, not an omnibus. We take kids out for a spin in a pram, > not a perambulator. We use “phone” more often than “telephone”. And texters > create acronyms and initialisms, just as we have done for centuries. Just > as “bus”, “pram” and “phone” have become accepted usage, there is no > logical reason why “U” could not come to be conventional usage in, say, > 2112. > > > > > > 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 > > > > *From:* austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto: > austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Christine Kent > *Sent:* Friday, 6 January 2012 11:00 AM > *To:* austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > *Subject:* atw: Re: Pronounseeashun > > > > So Geoff, if your audience is almost completely people who text, can > written language also be reduced to texted language? > > > > I must confess that I tend to ignore twitter feeds which use texting > language, but it is becoming more and more the norm in order to say more in > less space. Why would we not abbreviate you to U, given there is no > competing word in English so its meaning is abundantly clear? Similarly, > as it’s and its are quite different in context, why not miss the apostrophe > given the meaning is abundantly clear. I haven’t worked it through with > there and their, but I would also guess that context is all we need to know > which is which, so let’s simplify life and make them both “there”. At the > same time let’s make let’s lets as its meaning is also abundantly clear in > context. > > > > > -- Bob Trussler