Idiotic Idioms - Wordsmith.org

That is pretty funny, especially in the "lose/loose" context, but maybe it was *just a typo? I'm just sayin'...

Welcome to the madhouse, PT.

Edit: I looked a little at your blog and have two observations:

- You've misspelled "linguistic."

- "Orientate" is a perfectly valid form.

Thank you, AnnaStrophic.

That is an honest typo. My real peeeve is with the usage as such: "...that was orientated the wrong way." It should be "oriented"

And, tsuwm, my apologies. I had completely overlooked the fact that it was a direct quote of my post

I am too new to this forum (in a glass house) to be throwing stones.
Thank you for being kind.

Quote:

My real peeeve is with the usage as such: "...that was orientated the wrong way." It should be "oriented"

welcome PT!

however, the ASp will be back to tell you that orientated is correct as well, as badly as it sounds....

Thank you etaoin, and thanks for the welcome.
Having been "out of school" the equivalent of many people's entire life, there are numerous changes to which am (reluctantly) becoming accustomed.
Just the other day I was conversing with my (college student) son's girlfriend, who is a literature student, about English sentence structure. While I was going through school, I recall a 'shift' in the labels for the varioius parts of a sentence.
I was originally taught about the:
Subject
Verb
Predicate
Later, it became the:
Subject
Verb
Object

But the evolutionary nature of our language is among the things that keep me fascinated.

Then, of course, I was also led to believe the Brontosaurus existed!

--------------------------
English is a crazy language

Quote:

...the ASp will be back to tell you that orientated is correct as well, as badly as it sounds....

Get with the program, Herr Shrdlu! I already done did.

nah, you only mentioned "orientate".

Say what you will, but orientate is nothing but pure verb. Orient is a verbed noun.

That said, the definition of orient, "to place or arrange so as to face the east" dates to the early 18th century, orientate comes in the mid 19th. Plenty of time to have gotten used to it, IMNSHO.

Welcome, ParkinT! Back to your original post: I've never seen "supposively" but my late mother-in-law frequently said, "supposingly..."

Quote:

Say what you will, but orientate is nothing but pure verb. Orient is a verbed noun.

That said, the definition of orient, "to place or arrange so as to face the east" dates to the early 18th century, orientate comes in the mid 19th. Plenty of time to have gotten used to it, IMNSHO.

I don't doubt its validity, I just don't like the sound of it. it sounds un-necessary.

Even though Jackie hates it (

), "orientate" -- as far as I know -- is the preferred form in the UK.

Anyway, PT, since you asked: one of my pet peeves is "phenomena" used as a singular.

Quote:

Even though Jackie hates it ( ), "orientate" -- as far as I know -- is the preferred form in the UK.

Anyway, PT, since you asked: one of my pet peeves is "phenomena" used as a singular.

YES.
That is a big one. As a matter of fact, there are many of those Latin singular/plural terms in our language that cause difficulty.
---
That reminds me of a story.
A film director needed to have a pair of mongoose(s) for a scene. He wrote to a local zoo asking for two of these animals, but was not certain of the correct plural for mongoose.

Is it "mongooses" or is it "mongeese"?

In order to avoid embarrassment, he phrased his request thusly:
Dear sir,
Please send me a mongoose. And, while you are at it, send me another one!

--------
Did you ever wonder...?

If you're going to complain about mongeese being used as the plural of mongoose you should probably complain about titmice being used as the plural of titmouse.

So, what is the plural of mongoose? There are definitely more than one running around the island here (and ending up roadkill) and I have no idea how to talk about them other than one at a time.

Although the plural of mouse is mice. That refers to the small rodent.
In the computer industry, a pointing device (referred to by the name "mouse") is pluralized as mouses.
It may sound a bit strange but is quite sensible.
I have had this discussion with many, many people.
What are your opinions/ideas?

Quote:

So, what is the plural of mongoose? There are definitely more than one running around the island here (and ending up roadkill) and I have no idea how to talk about them other than one at a time.

I think it would be many mongoose. No?

-------
Did you ever wonder...?

c'monguys....

Pick your dictionary: I'm partial to the AHD because it gives you both def. and etym. in one groovy swell foop.

NOUN: Inflected forms: pl. mon�goos�es
Any of various Old World carnivorous mammals of the genus Herpestes and related genera, having a slender agile body and a long tail and noted for the ability to seize and kill venomous snakes.

ETYMOLOGY: Marathi mangus, of Dravidian origin.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/63/M0386300.html

Quote:

In the computer industry, a pointing device (referred to by the name "mouse") is pluralized as mouses.

I've been in the computer industry for many years and have never heard "mouses" in the wild.

Quote:

...the definition of orient, "to place or arrange so as to face the east" dates to the early 18th century, orientate comes in the mid 19th. Plenty of time to have gotten used to it, IMNSHO.

So, if you spin an Asian person around do they become disoriented?

{Is there a rule here against puns?}
--------------

I've been in the computer industry for many years and have never heard "mouses" in the wild

I've heard it from the same sort of fussy computer professional who says "these data are", i.e., rarely.

orientated is correct No! No! No, it is NOT! I refuse to acknowledge that! [stamping foot e] GRR! [teeth on edge e]
===========================================================

{Is there a rule here against puns?} Heavens, no, though we have at least one member who has very specific ideas on what constitutes a pun.

===========================================================

Dravidian: I found some interesting ref.'s.
name sometimes given to the peoples of S and central India and N Sri Lanka who speak Dravidian languages. They are so called for purely linguistic reasons; the peoples are of varying racial types. It is thought that Dravidian-speaking peoples may have been spread throughout the Indian subcontinent before the invasions of the Aryans.
Bartleby

Dravidian Language Family
Nothing is known definitely about the origin of the Dravidian language family. Dravidian languages were first recognized as an independent family in 1816 by Francis W. Ellis, a British civil servant. The term Dravidian was first employed by Robert A. Caldwell, who introduced the Sanskrit word dravida (which historically meant Tamil) into his Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian or South Indian Family of Languages (1856).

At present, speakers of the Dravidian languages are concentrated in the southern portion of India, while speakers of the Indo-Aryan language predominate in the northern portion of the country. A well-established hypothesis is that Dravidian speakers were originally spread across all of India. The Indo-Aryan languages were not native to India, rather they were introduced by Aryan invaders from the north. A form of Dravidian must have been spoken in northern India before the arrival of the Aryans.
NVTC

The idea of Aryan and Dravidian races is the product of an unscientific, culturally biased form of thinking that saw race in terms of color. There are scientifically speaking, no such things as Aryan or Dravidian races.
hindunet.org

How I wish maahey was still here. I thought her post about Aryans was wonderful.

As a child I couldn't keep the correct spelling of loose and lose straight until my uncle pointed out that the moose is loose and we are at a loss what to do.
As for mouse:
if the plural of mouse is mice why isn't the plural of spouse spice?

Quote:

As for mouse:
if the plural of mouse is mice why isn't the plural of spouse spice?

Humor aside, that's actually an answerable question.

This is a timely thread for me, as I've recently had reason to wonder at seemingly unorthodox usage of singular and plural forms for animals. A friend of mine is currently living in Kenya, helping run a nature reserve there. From time to time he sends us news in the form of an e-mail newsletter, telling us all about the reserve and the animals in it. Well, I've noticed he tends to use the singular form to speak about the animals, even when mentioning several of them or a group. He'll write "If they feel threatened, lion will chase you", or "we saw a group of hyena and a herd of elephant".

What's this all about? Is this kind of usage, I don't know, more taxonomic - used to speak biologically about the animal species as opposed to individual animals?

On the original note of annoying idioms there is a TV ad for a house renovation program in which, complaining of unexpected costs the owner moans "This place is turning into a cash cow." It annoys me every time.

For those not familiar with English idioms a cash cow is an easy source of money and goes with "He milked the company of all its assets."

I've recently had reason to wonder at seemingly unorthodox usage of singular and plural forms for animals. A friend of mine is currently living in Kenya, helping run a nature reserve there.
..........................................................
This thought occurs : in some languages -and in some instances - plurals are not used. Perhaps that is the case with your friend in Kenya.
In Hawaiian it is lei for the floral necklace, whether it is one or 21!
And here in New England we have moose. Lots of moose.

"we saw a group of hyena and a herd of elephant".
I've seen this sort of thing more than once in print, especially in texts by naturalists or hunters. I thought it was similar to the use of "fish" for a collective.

As someone who has respond to *complaints about my (past) use of "loose" when meant "lose"... the comments came with a good hearted twisted application of my screen name of musick into moose... this in response to my spelling the AWAD member named "Whitman O'Neil" short name for himself (I believe) "WON" as "juan"... it all comes from being taught spelling thru phonetics, yet learning full well exceptions are littered all over that ground.

In the case of "lose", I was finally given a nemonic to remind me of the lost "o".

Why would one "o" be pronounced the same as two "o"'s and change the "s" to a "z" sound? Just use a "u". Ain't that what they're for? That's why we call them "ewez".

Not that I learned all the rules of phonetics, but possibly just the intent (...possibly not).

Quote:

Why would one "o" be pronounced the same as two "o"'s and change the "s" to a "z" sound? Just use a "u". Ain't that what they're for? That's why we call them "ewez".

I agree emphatically. Well spoken.

Then there is the opposite (yet similar) trouble with "bear/bare", "red/read", et cetera.

Quote:

Why would one "o" be pronounced the same as two "o"'s and change the "s" to a "z" sound? Just use a "u". Ain't that what they're for? That's why we call them "ewez".

Coz' English don't need no stinkin' rulz!
(Or at least we don't obey them much.)

>>I have written the Ultimate Self-Help Book!
The Complete Idiot's Guide for Dummies.

Wow!! Can I have your autograph?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/yzc4qj

oops, this was re: PT, not re: Zed!

Which one are you? Dolt or Dullard?

Quote:

Which one are you? Dolt or Dullard?

You talkin to me, nunc?

fwiw, Dolt and Dullard are the putative authors of The Idiot's Guide for Dummies.
-ron o.

Quote:

fwiw, Dolt and Dullard are the putative authors of The Idiot's Guide for Dummies.
-ron o.

...whence my subject line.

Quote:

>>I have written the Ultimate Self-Help Book!
The Complete Idiot's Guide for Dummies.

Wow!! Can I have your autograph?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/yzc4qj

oops, this was re: PT, not re: Zed!

Well.
I am quite flattered. No, I am not the author of THAT book, but the idea is my own. And I have been prophesing it for over 5 years now.
Not the first time one of my great ideas has been taken

I need to change my signature.

Pompous, campy, solipsistic Aramis is backing Jackie on this one. "Orientate" is retarded and if it shows in any dictionary it is only because of some kind of "enough empty heads are spouting it so we must put it in there" rule. Little doubt "conotate" will be added one day for the same reason.

~ will have to make a comeback!

connotate
v.
Obs.

[f. connotat-, ppl. stem of med.L. connotare: see CONNOTE.]

1. trans. = CONNOTE 1.
1596 BELL Surv. Popery I. III. iv. 101 They connotate 490 yeares. 1609 {emem} Theoph. & Remig. 124 The inward man doth connotate the soule, and the outward man the body. a1679 T. GOODWIN Wks. III. I. 256 (R.) His repentance was withall significantly connotated thereby. 1697 J. SERGEANT Solid Philos. 51 'Tis impossible to conceive Humanity, for Example, without connotating Homo its Suppositum.

2. Of things or facts; = CONNOTE 2.
1640 BP. REYNOLDS Passions xl. 519 Law and Punishment being Relatives, and mutually connotating each the other. a1660 HAMMOND (J.), God's foreseeing doth not include or connotate predetermining, any more than I decree with my intellect.
OED2

That they are actual old, actual words proves that antiques are not necessarily beautiful.
Check out your local antique store if you don't believe me. Most of the ugly stuff got turfed but some of it is still around.

ps anna doesn't want my autograph. I'm crushed - welll maybe slightly squeezed.

You talkin to me, nunc?

Nope, I was talking to the poster with the dot sig line.

if it shows in any dictionary it is only because of some kind of "enough empty heads are spouting it so we must put it in there" rule

The COED is OK with me.

And remember, the English language is nothing but a collection of usages that were once "incorrect" and words that were once neologisms.

from the neolexic era.

"Orientate" is a perfectly valid form.

Is not. Oughtn't. The verb is "orient."

Quote:

The verb is "orient."

Say what you will, but "orient" is a verbed noun; "orientate" has never been anything but a verb.

Astounding. Did the dictionary writers make "imaginate" a word too? Certainly tarnate will be in the Oxferd Hillbilly Dikshunary.

imaginate - obs. to imagine (ca. 1570) [OED]

What was old is new again!