I really don't think I can think of any context in which "I'm stuffed" wouldbe used other than meaning full after a meal.And I've NEVER heard "I would like a stuff" etc.

Patrick has the "bit of stuff" comment right

quote:

Originally posted by beebee:
Were you able to get it changed back? I think the diversity of writing is as interesting as different accents so I would really regret this - luckily I'm too lazy to do a trip report yet, so haven't had to deal with it.

No,the editor had the final say.....despite my input, this is primarily a US site and is edited as such.

quote:

Originally posted by PatrickLondon:
NO NO NO!!!!

It should be "different from" anywhere in the English-speaking world. Habits may have changed for a lot of people in the UK, but I still think it's wrong.

I've just checked my trusty Fowler's "A Dictionary of Modern English Usage" because this seemed wrong to me. It is. Fowler states "That d. can only be followed by from and not by to is a SUPERSTITION."

He goes on to give grammatical chapter and verse and calls those who say that "different to" is wrong, "mistaken critics"

It may not be wrong technically, but even Fowlers acknowledges that in common usage "different from" is used by 88% of English(people from the UK) people in written work and by 67% in speech. Also it is more common in the US with the percentages being 93% and 69% respectively. So it is obvious that whilst it can be used, it is not common nor as taught on most English courses. It also cites other examples of adjectives that do not accord with their parent verb....but generally these exceptions prove the rule.

I'm not sure if this link will work

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=d...word2=different+from

It did!! can you do this with any " question", it's very funny!

Oh Yes! It doesn't tell you which is correct, just which is more common. I often use it for quite serious reasons (in technical writing).

The discussion of "different from, - to, - and than" led me to consult my favorite grammarian, Edward Johnson, author of "The Handbook of Good English," written primarily for US readers. His discussion is too lengthly to copy completely, but here is some of it, beginning at the end:

(Patrick you may disagree with this, but -) "In Great Britain, 'different than' is standard whether or not a clause follows: 'The present meaning is different than the former one.' The British also use 'different to' when a noun or noun clause follows, which sounds strange to Americans." [My comment: Indeed it does; I had planned to say that I don't think I've ever heard it on this side of the ocean.]

Back to the beginning and clauses: "'Different from' is the standard American phrase, except when a clause follows: 'The present meaning is different from the former one. The meaning is different than it was.'" ...

"The use of 'than' with 'different' is somewhat peculiar, since 'different' is based on the verb 'differ,' which always takes 'from' or 'with' and never 'than.' But 'from' cannot be directly followed by a clause, except a noun clause - it is a preposition, not a conjunction -" ...etc., etc., etc.

Ann

quote:

In Great Britain, 'different than' is standard

That's bizarre! I almost never hear that, or see it written here in the UK. And a quick bit of googling found these statistics, which seem to support my gut feeling: here.

Jonathan

The concept of a correct grammar (and correct spelling) is a fairly recent social construct. Social classes have used them as a means to assert superiority and authority over others.
English is itself a synthesis from languages which had different grammatical constructs and a lot of compromises emerged.
The idea of establishing a permanent correct grammar would have the side-effect of petrifying the language; if english could be controlled that way. Fortunately, language can't be controlled that way and it adapts to the needs of changing communication.

Language serves the needs of communication and not vice versa. Grammar and spelling are less important than getting the message across.

Does anyone know how one delete a post (within the requisite hour, or whatever it is)? The "edit" icon says "edit or delete message" but I can't figure out how to accomplish the latter.

I am afraid I disagree with the comment that spelling and grammar are less important than getting the message across. Why not just spell, puntuate and use correct sentence construction AND get the mesage across? It does not need to be either or. In fact using correct English normally improves the chances of the message being understood rather than the reverse.

Is there anything worse than receiving a badly written letter? with incorrect spelling and lazy punctuation? What impression does that give of the writer?

Punctuation is make or break tool,it is amazing what different constructions can be placed on words written without using even the rudimentary skills taught today.

The "ART" of using correct grammar et al is fast becoming a lost one because, over the years educationalists have tested their half baked theories on recent generations of kids. The use of a red pen for correction is outlawed in many establishments in case the student is demoralised, and many agree with you that it should not matter....will employers be so forgiving?. Would you really want to employ someone who could not spell, punctuate or use correct grammar, and have them represent you and your business to the world? Not me!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Naomi B.:
Does anyone know how one delete a post (within the requisite hour, or whatever it is)? The "edit" icon says "edit or delete message" but I can't figure out how to accomplish the latter.

I never found it either!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Naomi B.:
Does anyone know how one delete a post (within the requisite hour, or whatever it is)? The "edit" icon says "edit or delete message" but I can't figure out how to accomplish the latter.

There's a bug in the software right now that limits members to only editing their posts within 60 minutes of the original posting time.

If you want one of your posts deleted, click on the "alert" button (the triangle with exclamation mark) at the lower right of the post and note that you want it deleted. One of the mods will take care of it.

UK: in hospital, as in "He was not seriously hurt and is recovering in hospital."

US: in the hospital

I have what I think is maybe a Cockney question. The character Rose Tyler on the new Doctor Who speaks with, I think, a Cockney accent? I'm wondering if soft "th"s are always pronounced as "f"s (and hard "th"s as "v"s), or does it depend on where the "th" sound is positioned in a word?

That is, would "13th" be pronounced "firteenf" or "firteenth" or "thirteenf"; do dental fricatives simply not exist?

In some really old-fashioned Cockney accents, no - possibly because the teeth themselves might not always be there. There's an old novelty song: Forty Farzend Fevvers on a Fwush.

Things have changed a bit in that department. Just as the Dickensian v for w disappeared sometime in the late 19th century, so there are variations nowadays as to the loss (or addition) of an initial h: in Professor Higgins's day an old-fashioned Cockney accent might say to a fishmonger "I harsked you if you 'ad any 'addock", but now you might get some initial h's dropped and some over-pronounced. Likewise, the glottal stop is a well-known marker and therefore "t" sounds, especially in the middle of words, can be over-aspirated in compensation and a forceful attempt to avoid sounding "common".

So Rose Tyler is definitely Sarf London, but sounds a bit posher than her equivalent would have done 60-80 years ago.

quote:

so there are variations nowadays as to the loss (or addition) of an initial h

Re "addition": Believe it or not, Patrick, an initial "h" is still added in some cases by a few people in the Appalachian South, though fewer and fewer as the years go by. For example, our late friend, the noted storyteller Ray Hicks, consistently used the initial "h" before "it," as in, "Hit's a long way to go."

Also (no surprise), I agree with you, poet123, about the usefulness of "correct" spelling and (prescriptive) grammar. For one thing, although both do change over time, the purpose of both, as you suggest, is to help facilitate clear communication, not to be snobbish. To this end, punctuation is particularly important since you can't hear the tonal inflections of speech in writing.

Ann

quote:

Punctuation is make or break tool,it is amazing what different constructions can be placed on words written without using even the rudimentary skills taught today.

I agree that punctuation can make a difference to meaning; but not always. Punctuation is useful in those instances. In other cases variations do not make or break the meaning.

I have been to too many system specification reviews where the reviewers have caught the spelling and punctuation mistakes but have missed the fact it does not meet the requirements. I am sure that the customer prefers a product that does what he wants rather than one that does something else but has a specification with good grammar and punctuation.

Also, if "correct" spelling and grammar change over time when does incorrect become correct and vice versa? Who/what are your authorities?

quote:

Originally posted by JohnFromAus:
[QUOTE]I have been to too many system specification reviews where the reviewers have caught the spelling and punctuation mistakes but have missed the fact it does not meet the requirements.

Hi JohnFromAus,

I was in the process of composing a lengthy reply to your post, when I came to realise/realize that my reply was not terribly relevant. Why? Because I had misunderstood your sentence (quoted above).

Originally, I thought you meant that the documentation would be useless to your customers because it didn't accurately describe the product. Now, I think you might mean that the product will not do what it's supposed to do if it is developed according to the specifications outlined in the documentation. Those dangling modifiers get me every time.

Here is what I originally wrote, despite the fact that it doesn’t address the point of your post:

As a customer, I want it all. I would like documentation to be relevant and intelligible. That means that I don’t want to be distracted or confused by spelling/grammatical mistakes AND I want the documentation to be comprehensive, pertinent and well-conceived.

It is certainly true that there are currently different “correct” spellings and grammatical constructs in English, and probably only editors and “old-school” educators care that these constructs are applied consistently. That is, I don’t really care if an author writes “organized” or “organised,” as long as she doesn't do both in the same document; however, the average Canadian probably wouldn’t care or even notice, since we use both—and are taught both—rather unsystematically.

I do care when someone writes “its” when he means “it’s” or “their” when he means “they’re” because it can obfuscate the meaning. For the same reason, I care when I read a sentence like “High-resolution images contain more pixels than low-resolution images when printed, therefore they’re smaller.” Seriously? Obviously, grammar matters here.

I care equally, however, when a manual’s index tells me I can find solutions to my overheating laptop issues by referring to the “overheating” topic in the “Troubleshooting” section, only to find that said entry reads: “Beware of the dangers of overheating. If your computer overheats, permanent damage may result.” While I’m sure that’s true, it’s not particularly useful 

Just a thought.

quote:

Originally posted by JohnFromAus:

quote:

Punctuation is make or break tool,it is amazing what different constructions can be placed on words written without using even the rudimentary skills taught today.

I agree that punctuation can make a difference to meaning; but not always. Punctuation is useful in those instances. In other cases variations do not make or break the meaning.

I have been to too many system specification reviews where the reviewers have caught the spelling and punctuation mistakes but have missed the fact it does not meet the requirements. I am sure that the customer prefers a product that does what he wants rather than one that does something else but has a specification with good grammar and punctuation.

Also, if "correct" spelling and grammar change over time when does incorrect become correct and vice versa? Who/what are your authorities?

1.The fact that puctuation does not always affect meaning does not negate its function. In many of those cases it will affect the sense of understanding, many times this means that the prose needs to be re-read to arrive at an intelligible meaning. Correctly punctuated articulate prose should not require this.

2. Being able to spell and puctuate does not automatically equip you for every job, obviously other qualities apply. I would suggest that in the situations you describe, it is a lack of those other skills, such as interpretation of instructions,empathy with a client's needs and of course technical ability that are the problem. Surely it should be possible to find both sets of skills in one candiate? Also in the scenario you outline the spec is just that...an initial and often internal document not sent to customers, but used to produce a product or service, hence the requiremnets of such a document may not be scrutinised too closely by the customer. Equally, someone charged with producing a mailshot should certainly try to ensure that such an item is written correctly before issue,because most employers would want to present their company in a positive and competent light to a prospective client base. The point being that on the whole, most employers would prefer to employ someone who can do the job AND speak and write good English/French/japanese (whatever the home language is..) I have never yet seen a job ad state that good written skills were not essential as training will be given....because candidates should already possess those skills from school. Sadly this is less and less common, but we do our children a disservice by saying it does not matter, to me and many others...though obviously not to you!....it matters a great deal.

3. The changes in spellings are historical,words have lost their olde worlde spellings and modern versions have evolved. The correct spelling is as used/taught by the wordsmiths of the day, and as defined by that accepted authority "The Oxford English Dictionary". With regard to grammar, the evolution of this is less noticeable, therefore right and wrong are easily distinguishable by those who have an understanding of the subject. Again, even basic understanfng of grammar is a dying art.

Eats, shoots, and leaves:
Eats shoots and leaves.

definitive explanation of the importance of puntuation!!!and a wonderful book.

The tale of Roger Casement also illustrates the far reaching effects of punctuation. He was tried for treason but because his crimes were committed on foreign soil, the Treason Act was thought to be invalid. However,by followinfg the letter of the Act(from an unpuctuated document) rather than the implied sense, he was tried and sentenced to hang. Hence, he is said to have been hung by a comma(or lack thereof!)