Grammar and Usage

MayorSimpleton

MayorSimpleton

#41
#41
The use of "literally" is bad but "like" can make me literally suicidal. Ride the LIRR near female twenty somethings in a conversation and I defy anyone to not dry heave when they use "like" more than twice in a single sentence.
I once counted this chick's likes and I stopped after 30.
I chose to poke my eardrums with my keys and stop the torture.
 
Waterclone

Waterclone

Go ahead. Try me.
#42
#42
Monty_monty said:
Good for them, as most don't know the proper usage, or when they should use 'figuratively' vs 'literally'
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to be money that you have it wrong as well. The dictionary actually says, as a secondary definition...
The Dictionary said:
  • informal
    used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true.
    "I have received literally thousands of letters"
Click to expand...
So, what you think is incorrect, while annoying, is actually proper usage.
 
genius

genius

#43
#43
Waterclone said:
I'd be willing to be money that you have it wrong as well. The dictionary actually says, as a secondary definition...


So, what you think is incorrect, while annoying, is actually proper usage.
Click to expand...
I have two things to say about your post:
1. The word "actually" in your sentence, "The dictionary actually says, as a secondary definition", is superfluous.
2. Informal does not mean proper, e.g., ain't is listed as informal (although perhaps it is formal in the Cockney dialect).
 
WizardOfAhhs

WizardOfAhhs

#44
#44
Waterclone said:
I'd be willing to be money that you have it wrong as well. The dictionary actually says, as a secondary definition...
So, what you think is incorrect, while annoying, is actually proper usage.
Click to expand...
And that's a beautiful example of the dumbing down of America (along with several other previous examples in this thread). One of the first things you learn in elementary school English is that you can't use the word to define the word. And here we have Oxford dictionary saying "the definition of literally is...not literally..."
 
vad1

vad1

#45
#45
In conversations, it is common to use word-fillers, while thinking of what one is going to say next . Words, and non-words, like 'you know, like,' (no, I no like), 'well, to be honest with you,' (bastard, so you've been lying to me all this time?), 'errrrr' (it is human to err), etc.

Words in parentheses are my defence, stuff I say to myself, while the conversation goes on. I'm easily amused, yes!

Even swear words are word-fillers, most of the time. Especially 'fucking', especially the long drawn out one. 'I was, you know, like, fuucckkiiiing, just walking ...' (interesting. Pick one.)

Less excusable in writing, I think.

But in informal venues like here, there should be lot of latitude. Conversation can otherwise be stilted, even needlessly formal.

It's funny - while writing this, I realized how badly my style sucks, lol! I'm a commaphiliac!

V
 
vad1

vad1

#46
#46
WizardOfAhhs said:
And that's a beautiful example of the dumbing down of America (along with several other previous examples in this thread). One of the first things you learn in elementary school English is that you can't use the word to define the word. And here we have Oxford dictionary saying "the definition of literally is...not literally..."
Click to expand...
Wiiiizzzz!! Where the heck did you go??!!

Welcome back from HazelDaze, Lol!

V
 
Mr. Joyboy

Mr. Joyboy

#49
#49
With respect to the “Literally” argument, I have to agree that just because the Oxford cites a definition as informal doesn’t mean it’s a proper usage. In the case at hand, the use of literally to mean virtually or figuratively is debated and discouraged by most experts. It seems to me that its use in that sense nullifies the word of any meaning at all, since it is the exact opposite of its original intended definition. We might as well just decide to operationally define tall as actually meaning short. Take for instance the following example (since, once again, this is a whore board): “The foreplay became so intense that she literally soaked right through her pants before we got to the main event.” Does that mean left a wet spot when she got up off the sofa, or that she just got excited? I believe you do a disservice to the language if you don’t read it as the former.

A programmer, fed up with the improper use of the word, actually developed a Chrome browser extension that literally does nothing more than change the word literally to figuratively. Of course, not understanding the author’s intent, the previous sentence, after a parse through that extension would read, “… a Chrome browser extension that figuratively does nothing more than change the word figuratively to figuratively,” so I don’t suggest you go out of your way to download that one.

As long as we’re talking usage, something that seems to have recently become popular is the practice of starting opening sentences with, “So…” I can’t quite understand why anyone would take a perfectly good sentence and simply tack to the front of it a totally useless “So.” It never adds anything to the sentence’s meaning and it doesn’t seem to simply be a typical space filler such as like, umm or you know, because I hear it used by intelligent and learned pundits who are otherwise very well-spoken.
 
genius

genius

#50
#50
Mr. Joyboy said:
With respect to the “Literally” argument, I have to agree that just because the Oxford cites a definition as informal doesn’t mean it’s a proper usage. In the case at hand, the use of literally to mean virtually or figuratively is debated and discouraged by most experts. It seems to me that its use in that sense nullifies the word of any meaning at all, since it is the exact opposite of its original intended definition. ......
Click to expand...
There are many words cited in dictionaries as informal that are used to give a more casual post (after all this is a whoreboard) but few would consider them proper words. Some examples are gonna, ain't, gotta. I use them in quick short posts that I hope imply a casual response to another's post.

Another pet peeve of mine is superfluous words (I assume they are added for emphasis). For example in your post you say (say is used here figuratively of course) "It seems to me that its use in that sense nullifies the word of any meaning at all, since it is the exact opposite of its original intended definition."
 
genius

genius

#52
#52
vad1 said:
I think I often do that.

My informal equivalent of 'therefore'.

Grammatically wrong?

V
Click to expand...
Nah, it is just fine.
I even found a grammar guide that started off a chapter on the subject that said "So how can you make sure you’re using a coordinating conjunction and not a subordinating conjunction?".

So feel free to use "So" to start a sentence.

Ps. The period I put at end of the sentence with the quote sure looks funny.
 
vad1

vad1

#53
#53
genius said:
...
Ps. The period I put at end of the sentence with the quote sure looks funny.
Click to expand...
Yea, with the question mark within the quote.

But appropriate, right? I run into this problem all the time.

Btw, whoever thought that this thread would be one of the fastest moving threads on UG in recent memory, lol!

V
 
h50

h50

#54
#54
vad1 said:
I think I often do that.

My informal equivalent of 'therefore'.

Grammatically wrong?

V
Click to expand...
There is kind of two issues here. One is grammar. It can be grammatically correct to begin a sentence with so. That's dealing with it lexically and syntactically. There is also semantics and other things such as redundancy which may be wrong, weak, awkward, vacuous, etc. I tend to try to avoid using therefore too much and might change it up with consequentially, thus, and so. Other uses of so as filler I usually try to avoid. So there :)
 
h50

h50

#55
#55
It is my understanding that in "....?". that the suffixed . is not needed. I believe though that I've seen some documents saying it is ok and some saying even to definitely put it in. However, whatever is formally right or not IMO the best resolution is to reorient the sentence to avoid that situation from happening.
 
Mr. Joyboy

Mr. Joyboy

#56
#56
vad1 said:
I think I often do that.

My informal equivalent of 'therefore'.

Grammatically wrong?

V
Click to expand...
No, not grammatically wrong at all, especially in conversation, but I think we're talking about two different usages. Using "So" as a link to an earlier thought (as a replacement for "Therefore" or "Hence") is entirely proper.

The "So" usage I'm referring to is mostly as a filler, coming at the beginning of the sentence, usually in response to a question or statement, perhaps allowing the speaker time to organize his or her thoughts and judge the questioner so as to properly shape the answer. Take this example; Question: “I wonder if she does bareback full service?" Answer: “So, if you look at Joyboy's post, he said everything is covered." The preceding “So” is totally superfluous; it adds no meaning to the sentence. Apparently, this usage has been going on for some time, but the practice seems to have gained popularity and acceptance recently. I only bring it up because I've been listening to the news shows lately and the prefixed "So" suddenly seemed to be in more frequent use now than I had remembered. Thinking about it, I couldn't understand why it should be since, in my estimation, it added nothing to the context and it was being used by well-spoken people who didn’t need fillers in their speech. It is one of those usages, like literally for figuratively that gets some people's goats and grammarians advise against it in formal use, but it's seems to be legitimate in informal conversation.
 
h50

h50

#57
#57
Mr. Joyboy said:
The "So" usage I'm referring to is mostly as a filler....
Click to expand...
Here's what I think happened. So is usually used as a discourse marker. It can kind of put a line in the sand and I think that use is valid and appropriate in many contexts. There is also another situation where folks are saying um and er. Those are also discourse markers of a different beast. And in the heat of the moment of nervous speakers, thinking off the top of one's head, etc. instead of uttering the um et al the use of so has become a more professional substitute (sic). But as with the other comment I made, an actual pause, or some other approach or utterance can usually have an even better impact for what the so speaker is trying to communicate, and then becoming less tedious, less robotic, more varied, etc. and especially unnoticed by the listener or reader.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top