|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692
Pooh-Bah
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692 |
A book published in 1991 by Chambers and called ‘Making Sense of English Usage’ by David Crystal was given to me recently. A slim thing – a mere 127 page paperback – as Mr Crystal says “… this book is … a personal collection of the famous, the fascinating, and the fringe, chosen with the same kind of quirky sentiment as will be encountered in any other anthology.” In fact, it sits quite well alongside Anu's book, but has less humour.
The book is simple and not written in a ‘formal’ style, not everyone would find it of value, its strength is approachability and it is designed to stimulate interest as well as answer some questions. There is continual contrast between what the usage manuals say and what is happening in real life! The Preface expresses an approach to language that, I believe, is pretty much identical to Anu’s and to what drives this board. I thought you might like to read some of it. Any clumsiness is due to my contractions, not to Mr Crystal.
“… I have learned that the majority of enquirers are not people seeking authority or reassurance; they are simply people interested in language, curious about language change, and puzzled about why things are happening in the way they are … insofar as they do want some guidance, they want this delivered in a sensible and objective way, and not thrust down their throats … people should be able to learn from their experience of using a usage book … to be told what is happening to the language … Space needs to be devoted to describing not only the usage variation itself, but the factors which have led to it – insofar as they are known … one thing is certain … as soon as the language begins to change, someone will be along to worry about it or to condemn it … wishing that matters were simpler, wishing that things wouldn’t change – in short wishing that language wasn’t language … if you (come to this book) expecting to see a clear and authoritative statement about what is right and what is wrong, you will be highly disappointed. I am not speaking with the voice of infallibility … this is a restricted and personal selection of what the language has on offer … if you are curious about the effects of linguistic change on language, and are looking for connections and explanations, and if you have previously found the stance of usage books unpalatable in their superior attitude and oversimplification … then you should extract some satisfaction and, I hope, enjoyment from my approach, which I offer as a first step in getting to grips with this intriguing subject.”
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
Sounds like my kind of book.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
In reply to:
A book published in 1991 by Chambers and called ‘Making Sense of English Usage’ by David Crystal was given to me recently.
Say a little about the publisher. Is Chambers a widely-known publishing company, and, if so, where is it located?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,400 |
Just guessing wordwind, but Chamber's is dictionary publisher, --the english equivient to our Websters.. in the UK if you told some one "chamber's said".. it would be about the same as saying "Webster's said" most everyone would realize you were talking about Websters Dictionary.
(if i am not mistaken, at one point even Sherlock Holmes checks a word or term in Chamber's..) Just as Oxford guides have a reputations, (and you might want to own an "Oxfords guide to English Usage", (and wouldn't really care who actually published it,since it would be under the imprimater of Oxfords,)* I think the book in question is printed under the imprimater of Chambers.
*of course this a bad example, since Oxford University has its own "press" or publishing house.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
The guy who preceded me at my job as a copy editor was a half-Brit  who, when we discussed finer points of grammar, said to me, "It all comes down to this. Know your Chamber's."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
Bingley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692
Pooh-Bah
|
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692 |
Is Chambers a widely-known publishing company, and, if so, where is it located?
Bingley has done my work for me in the chink of a link. Thanks, Bingley.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Or, as quick as a wink? How 'bout a clink of a link (in a chain)? OH! Is THAT why website links are called that? Because if you follow them, you have a chain of web sites? Could someone please tell me whether website or web site is correct? Ok, I'm going back to bed now...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
whether website or web site is correct?
A quick glance at the googlometer suggests website is preferred with 71.1kT to 6.6kT for web site.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692
Pooh-Bah
|
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692 |
clink of a link
Yes that's good. I was thinking of 'chink' as being a sound, but clink is less ambiguous.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Shouldn't that have been google-ometer? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
google-ometer?
A quick search of AWADtalk shows 5 posts with googlometer, all mine and 3 posts with google-ometer, all tsuwm's, in the last 6 months. This is excluding your post, Jackie, asking the question. Googlometer and google-ometer both score a good solid zero on the googlometer; googleometer (with no hyphen) scores a minuscule 3mT. It is my opinion that the hyphen is unnecessary in this context and that including the e only causes confusion, leading to expectation of the pronunciation googlyometer and the notion that it somehow is a device for measuring the curve of a bowled cricket ball.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542 |
..whereas and furthermoreover googlometer suggests the pronunciation GOO-glow-meter.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
GOO-glow-meter
Like OH-doh-meter, KILL-oh-meter or PAIR-eye-meter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
I think Brits say KILL-oh-meter (awaiting verification).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
kill-O-mitter (O as in hot)
Bingley
Bingley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692
Pooh-Bah
|
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692 |
Most Brits still say 'mile'.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,156 |
It's supposed* to be KILL-oh-metre. It's KILL-o everything else (KILL-o-gram, KILL-o-joule, KILL-o-watt), and the stress pattern is the same for the other prefixed units (CEN-ti-metre, MIL-li-metre, etc.). When I hear kill-AW-metre, I feel like yelling "cen-TIM-etre! mil-LIM-etre! kill-AW-gram!" at the TV. But that's just a personal pet peeve. Looks like the mass media (mostly USn) will change the pronunciation of this one until it becomes the accepted one, over time. Future generations will wonder about this anomaly when saying the names of SI units. 
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,412
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
907
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
