|
|
Post by suvvern on Nov 3, 2017 0:10:47 GMT
I'm really surprised that we've reached the 3rd and not got a November thread started ........ Is being able to open one my Welcome Back gift from all you lovely people ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Little Jack Horner on Nov 3, 2017 0:53:50 GMT
In August, I ran out of patience on the 4th of the month. This month, I posted an item at the end of October. I hadn’t noticed the change of month — and I also missed a clinic appointment on 1st for which I must now apologise to the nurse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Miller on Nov 3, 2017 8:39:13 GMT
Welcome back, Suvvern!
|
|
|
|
Post by Little Jack Horner on Nov 3, 2017 22:51:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Miller on Nov 4, 2017 9:32:04 GMT
All very interesting, but what worries me is that this kind of "language is going to change anyway" approach is so often taken as a reason not to take care.
When speaking or writing, we could just take the latest (seemingly wrong) version and say "things have changed", or we could try to choose the word forms which carry the meaning with best grace.
To me, the author's "over these kind of time spans" gives a graceless barrier to some readers, where "over this kind" or "over these kinds" would work for all readers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Geoff on Nov 5, 2017 23:07:08 GMT
All very interesting, but what worries me is that this kind of "language is going to change anyway" approach is so often taken as a reason not to take care. I agree, Dave. |
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Nov 10, 2017 23:08:43 GMT
The shops are full of Christmas products and are beginning to be decorated with festive cheer. Christmas advertisements, including the traditional John Lewis one (which, apparently is making grown men cry, although it made this one feel vaguely unwell) are already appearing on television. Then we'll have the New Year crap with that revoltingly maudlin "Auld Lang Syne" song that has absolutely no relevance to the event in question. For God's sake, it's only early November! How am I supposed to survive another seven-and-a-half weeks of this nauseatingly puerile drivel? Scrooge had it right originally, but then do-gooder bastards put psychotropic drugs in his gruel and brainwashed him during his ensuing hallucinations. |
|
|
|
Post by Little Jack Horner on Nov 24, 2017 11:54:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Miller on Nov 24, 2017 13:32:07 GMT
I'm all too afraid that it.s.he is real, ljh!
|
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Nov 24, 2017 19:48:54 GMT
It's interesting that, in the interests of feminism and political correctness, the anglophonic and francophonic worlds are taking opposite approaches. Here we seem to be abolishing gender-specific words - such as "actress" and "authoress" - and using ones like "actor" and "author" to represent both sexes, whereas the French are taking single-gender words, e.g. "professeur" and "citoyen" and making them dual-gender, adding "professeuse", "citoyenne" and the like.
It's difficult enough to learn their language anyway; I'm sure they're just trying to make it more complicated so we can't do so! The French can't even make up their minds what gender some things are; for example the same bicycle is both UN velo and UNE bicyclette, when UN village gets big enough it changes sex to UNE ville, and my house is UNE maison, not UN chalet.
I shall continue to learn le français traditionnel, not le.la français.e nouve.au.lle.
|
|
