Once again I say, I've not heard that kind of pronunciation. I have lived on the west coast for 41 years and am not familiar of what you speak.
There's no aboot or aboat. It's about. The only time I've heard the aboot business was on a bloody beer commercial poking fun at Newfies. When I watch national American TV news, I hear no accent whatsoever in the anchorperson.
Where are these assumptions coming from? Wait a minute, that's right, Second City and South Park. Great, we're reduced to low budget humour and a couple of guys with their heads cut in half. Oh man...
Canadians are conservationists. That's why we punt on third down. Actually we do that 'cause you just never know when it's going to snow, so we try and speed the game up.
Noo doot aboot it eh.
There is much to learn in this world and I think I have done some in this thread.
Calhoun from the great white north.
There's no aboot or aboat. It's about. The only time I've heard the aboot business was on a bloody beer commercial poking fun at Newfies. When I watch national American TV news, I hear no accent whatsoever in the anchorperson.
Where are these assumptions coming from? Wait a minute, that's right, Second City and South Park. Great, we're reduced to low budget humour and a couple of guys with their heads cut in half. Oh man...
Canadians are conservationists. That's why we punt on third down. Actually we do that 'cause you just never know when it's going to snow, so we try and speed the game up.
Noo doot aboot it eh.
There is much to learn in this world and I think I have done some in this thread.
Calhoun from the great white north.
We gave Jeff Garcia back to you. He's from your state. Even played there if I remember correctly.
We gave you Alex Trebek.
I thought of a pronunciation difference: We say route as in root. You say route as in rout.
How about these. last three letters the same but
sour
pour
tour
What gives?
Cal
We gave you Alex Trebek.
I thought of a pronunciation difference: We say route as in root. You say route as in rout.
How about these. last three letters the same but
sour
pour
tour
What gives?
Cal
Actually, I was raised (East Coast) to say "route" as "root." Same with the theme song to "Route 66."
Correct. East Coast, route rhymes with hoot. Unless we are cutting a groove into wood, in which case it rhymes with out.
...doesn't have the "e" on the end. Or if we use it as a verb, as in "I need to route that shipment via Bridgeport." Then it's pronounced to rhyme with "out."
One - wun
Won - wun
Tough - tuff
Through - threw
Thorough - therow or thorow
Thought - thot (I like this one the most, because the letters you remove spell 'ugh')
Cal
Won - wun
Tough - tuff
Through - threw
Thorough - therow or thorow
Thought - thot (I like this one the most, because the letters you remove spell 'ugh')
Cal
Just a tiny thing, but I find it annoying beyond all reasonable proportion;
What happened to the letter "L" in solder? The whole of the North American continent seems to pronounce it as "sowder"
ARGHHHHH!
What happened to the letter "L" in solder? The whole of the North American continent seems to pronounce it as "sowder"
ARGHHHHH!
What happened to the second r in "rather"? The inhabitants of your quaint little island insist on pronouncing it "rawthuh".
And don't get me started on "worcestershire".
And don't get me started on "worcestershire".
Worcestershire
I love it.
It's simple you see,
Worce
Ster
Shire
Or if you're from jolly old: "wooster"
My Pappy told me that
What about; incorrect punctuation! Does that bother anyone?.
SY said:
I love it.
It's simple you see,
Worce
Ster
Shire
Or if you're from jolly old: "wooster"
My Pappy told me that
What about; incorrect punctuation! Does that bother anyone?.
No, most people handle those punctuation mark's pretty good.
The insidious thing is the encroachment of text messaging jargon/abbreviations into written English. I see the effect on the ability of the kids in my neighborhood to write and spell correctly. Not that things were perfect B4...
SY said:
I had an old gentleman living at the end of the block when I was a kid.
He used to say "2+2 B4"
Best math teacher I ever had.
Cal
How 'bout banning the ubiquitous i-t-s word that is invariably miss-spelt:
It's (it is)
Its (possessive)
In all fariness, this is probably due to MS Word's always insisting on/ accepting the former, never correcting.
It's (it is)
Its (possessive)
In all fariness, this is probably due to MS Word's always insisting on/ accepting the former, never correcting.
Gregm said:
This is great
Miss - a young lady
Spelt - a type of wheat
No wonder people have such trouble with English
Gee, I hope I don't misspell something.
Also on my mind:
When they have finished constructing a building, shouldn't it be called a "built"
If that "built" is an apartment it further confuses me. They call it an apartment even though the units are all stuck together
Gregm said:
I make a point of "misspelling" it on purpose.
I looked it up in Webster's, and sure enough, "its" is supposed to be used for the possessive.
However, that is a violation of the simple rule that "s" or "es" denotes plural while " 's" denotes possession. Too many times, we see the apostrophe added when people want to make a plural. How many times have we read, whether on the internet or in a note, about how someone has to return "two videotape's", or something similar?
Looking further, I found that "it's" used to be the correct form, but about 100 years ago it got "simplified" to "its".
Well, perhaps 100 years ago people knew enough not to use the apostrophe when making plurals, and to use the apostrophe when making possessives. Not today.
Today, we need a nice, simple rule for people to pay attention to, because obviously many people do not have a clue when to use the apostrophe and when not to.
Therefore, I have made it a policy to use "it's" when something belong to "it", just as I use the apostrophe in "Joe's" when something belongs to Joe, "Maria's" when something belongs to Maria, etc.
Besides, a return to the older form is not really the same as incorrect usage, is it? Especially since in this case, the older "it's" form follows the general rule for apostrophes and possessives, and the present form does not.
As far as I'm concerned, in this case older is better. 🙂
Re: Je pense qui le français cette une langue merveilleuse, pour mois est musique.
The spell as it sounds more or less. You don't have to know any German in order to read it perfectly.... they have even longer words than swedish though.
Gold star to english, short words!
Tape was called in swedish klisterband from the german Klebeband. Now we say tejp.
German is wonderfuldestroyer X said:
The spell as it sounds more or less. You don't have to know any German in order to read it perfectly.... they have even longer words than swedish though.Gold star to english, short words!
Tape was called in swedish klisterband from the german Klebeband. Now we say tejp.
At school I learnt "its" for possesive and "it's" when "it is" is meant. I recently read an english woman had started a kind of language club that writes angry letters to newspapers and such if they do it wrong. Reading this confirmed my education of this grammar, maybe I should mention we learn Oxford ( GB ) english over here 😉
The apostrophe is used when letters are omitted that should be there. When "its" is used no letters are omitted, hence no need for an apostrophe. This use of the apostrophe is quite common in various languages, your interpretation seems non standard and at least confusing.
In the case of Joe's originally "Joe his" was meant AFAIK. That is why the apostrophe is there, some letters are omitted.
jean-paul said:
I am unaware that "Joe's" is short for "Joe his". Perhaps you are correct and that is it's derivation, but that has fallen far into the mists of time. Maybe they said that back in the Middle Ages, I don't know. They certainly never said it as recently as the Revolutionary War.
Here is an excerpt from the Declaration of Independence, signed July 4, 1776:
Are you or your English teacher trying to say that "Nature's" is short for "Nature his"?
So considering that the use of " 's" for possession goes as far back as the late 1700s, and probably farther than that, I think it is fair to say that it has become a rule in and of itself, and not just an abbreviation.
Therefore, "it's" makes sense because it is the possessive of "it". Which is why it was considered correct well into the 1800s, but then got "simplified" to "its".
Considering the widespread misuse of " 's" denoting plurals, I think we should go back to the old way and revive "it's" for possession. Then we can make it a nice hard and fast rule that:
A) "s" or "es" means more than one
B) " 's" means belonging to. You can use just the apostrophe if the word ends in "s". For instance, if the book belongs to Joe Fields, it is "Joe's book" or "Joe Fields' book". Either way is correct.