Problems with English? Questions? Vocabulary, grammar... Post here :)

brianL · 09-16-2011, 02:29 PM

My version avoids that "ex* ex*" contiguous alliteration.

Aquarius_Girl · 09-18-2011, 11:09 PM

Are

Code:

other's

and

Code:

others

same?
I think they are not, Firefox underlines other's.
What's the way to write it correctly?

Aquarius_Girl · 09-18-2011, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SL00b

I suppose in diplomatic terms, I'd rephrase, "I don't feel like looking at this picture" into, "This photo does not capture my attention."

Well, you and SigTerm were very correct.

When I look at your form of saying the same thing in a
different way, I realize how rude I have been all that
while.

The moment I removed that "I don't feel like" thing, and
started off by some good points about the pic, everything
seems to be normal and more pleasant ever since. Mods are
happy, so are the people! All I have been receiving are the
praises now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SL00b

This seems to be much more than an English question... it's a culture question. This is one of those places where East and West clash frequently.

Did realize this too after joining 1x. com. One of the
German Mods there, lives somewhere in India. He told me
that "everyone" in his company (in India) talks too rudely!

LOL, well, some people can be rude, of course, but saying
everyone is rude is like crossing the mark. I can understand
"now", how those poor people must be sounding while translating
Hindi into English, and that too without saying please and
thank you on "every" line! The informal environment there
must have added to the rudeness (for him).

catkin · 09-19-2011, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SL00b

Eww. If the previous style was too grandiose (spelled right, this time), this one has the opposite problem. It makes the writer sound like a monosyllabic neanderthal.

Here's a suggestion that's brief, direct, understated, but impressive... all the things I think a resume should be:

"My extensive experience would provide additional value to my students."

Agreed! I didn't like it when I wrote it. Was exhausted by composing what went before (am not in good health) but felt I should offer something. All the subsequent offerings are better than mine but I don't actually like any of them. Mmm ... could it be that the concept itself is untenable so no form of words to express it is going to sound right? As SL00b wrote: "Besides, experience teaches you the material, but it doesn't teach you to be a teacher".

catkin · 09-19-2011, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by odiseo77

As for the style, I was probably trying to sound formal. It's hard for me to differentiate a formal style from a pompous one in English (although I admit talking about the importance of teaching is grandiose... I guess I was running out of ideas about what to put at the end of the statement, I just hope the rest of it hasn't been grandiose too

).

A desire for clarity has reduced the use of formal style in written English especially over the last 40 years. In the UK, The Plain English Campaign epitomises the movement which began in government with The Complete Plain Words (1954).

Pompous style is characterised by language which is chosen to impress the reader/listener with the greatness (importance, competence, power etc.) of the speaker/author. "gained through the years" and "successfully accomplish" could be judged as pompous!

Formal style is characterised by language which is chosen for its (conventional) forms. At best it is very clear because each form informs the reader/listener who is familiar with the forms about the context of what follows. Diplomatic language and the language of legal agreements is usually highly formal.

How come formal style is at best very clear but a desire for clarity has reduced its use? The key is in "the reader/listener who is familiar with the forms"; for readers/listeners without that familiarity, formal style is less clear than plain language.

catkin · 09-19-2011, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul

Are

Code:

other's

and

Code:

others

same?
I think they are not, Firefox underlines other's.
What's the way to write it correctly?

No.

"other's" means "belonging to one other" and, stictly, is incorrectly underlined by FF (but "belonging to one other" is rarely used and many people incorrectly render "others" as "other's" so FF's underlining may be pragmatic).

"others" means "more than one other".

To complete the set, "others'" means "belonging to more than one other".

Compare with woman, woman's, women, women's.

Aquarius_Girl · 09-19-2011, 12:48 AM

I actually guessed that difference often,
but used to trust the Firefox blindly.
So, the verdict is, that other's is
"correct". Thanks.

SigTerm · 09-19-2011, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul

I actually guessed that difference often,
but used to trust the Firefox blindly.
So, the verdict is, that other's is
"correct". Thanks.

You shouldn't blindly trust the spellchecker:

Quote:

Eye halve a spelling chequer
It came with my pea sea,
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.

Eye strike a key and type a word
And weight for it two say,
Weather eye and wring oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.

As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long,
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.

To rite with care is quite a feet
Of witch won should bee proud,
And wee mussed dew the best wee can,
Sew flaw's are knot aloud.

Eye have run this poem threw it
Your sure reel glad two no,
Its letter perfect awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.

Aquarius_Girl · 09-19-2011, 05:26 AM

deleted

Aquarius_Girl · 09-19-2011, 05:42 AM

Code:

I don't think there's any harm in talking him to the sea and be shown the depth!

Code:

I don't think there's any harm in talking him to the sea and showing him the depth!

Of course second one is correct.

How should I frame the remaining part of the first statement,
such that be shown the depth, fits correctly?

SigTerm · 09-19-2011, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul

Code:

I don't think there's any harm in talking him to the sea and be shown the depth!

Are you sure there's no typo?

Aquarius_Girl · 09-19-2011, 08:17 AM

T-H-A-N-K-S for correcting.

But, still I am not sure if remaining sentence is fully
correct or not.

SigTerm · 09-19-2011, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul

T-H-A-N-K-S for correcting.

But, still I am not sure if remaining sentence is fully
correct or not.

1st sentence doesn't "sound" right ("be shown" part - imo, it is unclear who is shown to whom - depth to you or you to depth, and your original intent was probably to show "depths" to "him").

I'd say it completely differently:
"I think there will be no harm if I take him to the sea and show him the depths." (or "show him its depths"). By the way, (to me) the whole thing sounds like you want to dive - at the sea - with somebody, possibly using aqualung. I'm not sure if this is what you wanted to say.

Native speakers are free to correct me, of course....

sycamorex · 09-19-2011, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anisha Kaul

Code:

I don't think there's any harm in talking him to the sea and be shown the depth!

Code:

I don't think there's any harm in talking him to the sea and showing him the depth!

Of course second one is correct.

How should I frame the remaining part of the first statement,
such that be shown the depth, fits correctly?

Another thing is that you need to be consistent in choosing correct verb forms after certain expressions.
The phrase "there's no harm in...." should be followed by the -ing form of a verb:
There's no harm in taking.... and showing....

If you were to talk about yourself, you'd probably have to use:
There's no harm in being shown what to do.
There's no harm in being criticised....

HTH

SL00b · 09-19-2011, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sycamorex

Another thing is that you need to be consistent in choosing correct verb forms after certain expressions.
The phrase "there's no harm in...." should be followed by the -ing form of a verb:
There's no harm in taking.... and showing....

If you were to talk about yourself, you'd probably have to use:
There's no harm in being shown what to do.
There's no harm in being criticised....

HTH

Indeed. The problem is that the verbs do not agree on tense.

taking: present
be shown: past participle