Jump to content

Pedants on the EDF

Ladymuck

By Ladymuck
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
  • Author
Posted

dita-on-tees Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> ah well least you haven't had 100 driving lessons

> plus, and still no bloody license...



Sorry sweetie...I just CANNOT resist this...but I think it's licence! Please forgive me...the temptation is TOO great. You know I love you really!:))

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
  • Author
Posted
PS: I may not have had 100 driving lessons, but hubby did end up with bruising to his right arm and a ripped thumb fingernail when teaching me!:-$ And I still cannot park in small spaces...actually...I can't park in massive spaces either! Much prefer bikes! Keep at it sweetie...you'll be bloomin brilliant when you do pass.
dita-on-tees

dita-on-tees

Posted
Posted

Ladymuck Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> dita-on-tees Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > ah well least you haven't had 100 driving

> lessons

> > plus, and still no bloody license...

>

> ha ha ha ha I am such a moron! (oh and the "regardless" was a crossed posted not a dismissal!)

> Sorry sweetie...I just CANNOT resist this...but I

> think it's licence! Please forgive me...the

> temptation is TOO great. You know I love you

> really!:))

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
  • Author
Posted

No you're not...far from it (and I mean that)...I was just being an irritating pedant...(but it was meant in good humour - honest xxx)


And still no-one has come back with an answer to my great dilemma. Maybe the forum's pedants aren't so clever after all - when put to the test?

louisiana

louisiana

Posted
Posted

dita-on-tees Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ladymuck Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > Well Dita, I failed my English Language O Level

> > four times before I eventually passed. In fact

> I

> > obtained all of my qualifications (bar French O

> > Level) whilst attending evening classes/working

> > full time:-$ as I left school at 16. Still as

> > thick as 3 planks:-S.

>

>

> ah well least you haven't had 100 driving lessons

> plus, and still no bloody license...


Licence - noun British English

License - noun US English

License - verb British English

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
  • Author
Posted

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Err license is how Americans English spells it.

> Licence is Queen's English. Both spellings are

> therefore correct.


I thought L with an "s" referred to the verb whilst L with a "c" referred to the noun. No? Have I been using incorrect spelling all this time?:-S


*scratches pea-brain*

nashoi

nashoi

Posted
Posted
I'm sure I was taught that if a word ended in an s, which was preceded by a vowel, then there was no second s. Then I came to London and saw St James's everywhere. Strictly speaking they can both be correct though can't they? The apostrophe is either replacing the e of the possessive es of old english or both the e and the s.
louisiana

louisiana

Posted
Posted

Ladymuck Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Actually, whilst on the subject of grammar could I

> pick the brains of some of you.

>

> I have a problem with apostrophes in this

> situation:

>

> Prince Charles' garden.

>

> Is that correct? Or should there be a second "s"?

> I.e. Prince Charles's garden. The internet is

> split on this. I always feel there should be a

> second "s", but think it looks odd and therefore

> tend to omit it.

>


Prince Charles' garden is always correct.


Some publications - such as The Currant Bun - may, however, regard this form as affected and unnecessarily challenging for their readers. You'll find out more in the style guide, if the publication has one; this will invariably include instructions on dealing with proper nouns. Essentially it has become a matter of house style.


The main issue is consistency. You should not use one form in the body and the other in the headline, as I have just spotted in one publication, or both forms in the same publication.

computedshorty

computedshorty

Posted
Posted

Using Cockney Rhyming Slang

Some publications - such as The Currant Bun "SUN"


Many examples are based on places in London and could be meaningless to people unfamiliar with the capital,

e.g. "Peckham Rye", meaning "Tie" (as in necktie), which dates from the late 19th century;

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
  • Author
Posted

louisiana Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Prince Charles' garden is always correct.


You have no idea just how relieved I am to hear that!


> Some publications - such as The Currant Bun - may,

> however, regard this form as affected and

> unnecessarily challenging for their readers.

> You'll find out more in the style guide, if the

> publication has one; this will invariably include

> instructions on dealing with proper noun

> possessives. Essentially it has become a matter of

> house style.

>

> The main issue is consistency. You should not use

> one form in the body and the other in the

> headline, as I have just spotted in one

> publication, or both forms in the same

> publication.


Thanks Louisiana.


So what about Nashoi's mention of St. James's Park then? Is that, by implication, incorrect? Or is it permissible albeit a bit odd? Moreover, would you utilise the extra "s"?

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Interesting.


So, to summarise:


it is always correct to write Prince Charles' Garden(s) unless Charlie himself (or his staff) refer/s to his garden(s) as Prince Charles's. Even I can understand that! You've made my day Louisiana. Thank you so much.


Now, back to pedants on the EDF...funny how they've kept away from this thread - well, apart from the incorrigible Narnia!:))

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • HeadNun
      Cllr Williams to stand down

      By HeadNun · Posted

      I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • Sephiroth
      Cllr Williams to stand down

      By Sephiroth · Posted

      You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • HeadNun
      Cllr Williams to stand down

      By HeadNun · Posted

      I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
    • Rockets
      Is Rachel Reeves becoming the new Liz Truss?

      By Rockets · Posted

      To be fair we are as hosed as the majority of other countries post-Covid. The problem is Labour promised way too much and leant in on the we need change and we will deliver it and it was clear to anyone with a modicum of sense that no change was going to happen quickly and actually taking the reigns may have been a massive poison- chalice. As Labour are finding to their cost - there are no easy answers.  A wealth tax seems straightforward but look how Labour have U-turned on elements of non-dom - why? Because the super rich started leaving the country in their droves and whilst we all may want them to pay more tax they already pay a big chunk already and the government saw there was a problem.

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...