Author Topic: Grammar that makes you cringe (Read 856714 times)

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #3775 on:** 30 September, 2015, 04:08:59 pm »

That's why you need jargoff too.

Anyway, I'd say that although "to camera" doubtless originated with film and tv jargon, it's fairly mainstream now. This is a reminder for us that even mainstreamized jargon can need explanation.

mattc · « **Reply #3776 on:** 30 September, 2015, 04:34:54 pm »

Quote from: Nuncio on 30 September, 2015, 12:58:02 pm

The -ise -ize debate on here predates the spelling one. I'm not sure how that affects the rules.

Bah!

blah blah ... predates .. yada yada.

I am quite sure. Wrong is wrong, and spelling is spelling, not grammar.

You people would agree that black is white if shown an old enough citation.

Hrumph ...

citoyen · « **Reply #3777 on:** 30 September, 2015, 05:18:49 pm »

Is "to camera" the opposite of "in camera"?

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #3778 on:** 30 September, 2015, 06:52:43 pm »

Quote from: citoyen on 30 September, 2015, 05:18:49 pm

Is "to camera" the opposite of "in camera"?

Wowbagger · « **Reply #3779 on:** 30 September, 2015, 09:22:19 pm »

And is a tattoo artiste an ink-hammerer?

Mr Larrington · « **Reply #3780 on:** 01 October, 2015, 02:51:59 am »

Quote from: Ian H on 30 September, 2015, 03:55:25 pm

Jargon is fine when you're speaking to fellow jargs.

But "jarg" is already a well-known¹ adjective, meaning "fake" or "counterfeit".

1: On Merseyside

T42 · « **Reply #3781 on:** 01 October, 2015, 07:32:36 am »

Quote from: Cudzoziemiec on 30 September, 2015, 04:08:59 pm

That's why you need jargoff too.

Anyway, I'd say that although "to camera" doubtless originated with film and tv jargon, it's fairly mainstream now. This is a reminder for us that even mainstreamized jargon can need explanation.

Especially for long-term dwellers in furrinitude.

Legs · « **Reply #3782 on:** 01 October, 2015, 09:02:13 am »

Quote from: T42 on 30 September, 2015, 01:19:01 pm

... the excellent Dorothy Sayers ...

All respect lost

Tried reading a Lord Peter Wimsey novel about 10 years ago and it was utter tripe. I would rather read DLT than any more DLS.

Wowbagger · « **Reply #3783 on:** 01 October, 2015, 09:10:39 am »

Quote from: Wowbagger on 30 September, 2015, 09:22:19 pm

And is a tattoo artiste an ink-hammerer?

Afterthought: or would that be a dot-matrix printer?

T42 · « **Reply #3784 on:** 01 October, 2015, 09:20:16 am »

Quote from: Legs on 01 October, 2015, 09:02:13 am

Quote from: T42 on 30 September, 2015, 01:19:01 pm
... the excellent Dorothy Sayers ...

All respect lost Tried reading a Lord Peter Wimsey novel about 10 years ago and it was utter tripe. I would rather read DLT than any more DLS.

Oh, come now. I've dusted off all those old bottles and set them up straight is the most poignant line in English literature. And her translation of the Inferno gave the word buglebreech to the language.

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #3785 on:** 01 October, 2015, 09:24:26 am »

Quote from: T42 on 01 October, 2015, 07:32:36 am

Quote from: Cudzoziemiec on 30 September, 2015, 04:08:59 pm
That's why you need jargoff too.

Anyway, I'd say that although "to camera" doubtless originated with film and tv jargon, it's fairly mainstream now. This is a reminder for us that even mainstreamized jargon can need explanation.

Especially for long-term dwellers in furrinitude.

True. Been there done that and taken the T-shirt off.

clarion · « **Reply #3786 on:** 01 October, 2015, 02:47:13 pm »

Quote from: Cudzoziemiec on 30 September, 2015, 02:43:07 pm

Basically, yes, but it's rather more literal than "to music". It could be thought of as a stage direction, I suppose.

Though I'm sure "to camera" as a verb could catch on. "We camera Scene 1 tomorrow but we won't mike the dialogue till later."

'Mic', or, if you will, 'mike', is already a verb. You can mic a drumkit by pointing appropriate microphones at appropriate bits, or mic up a presenter (usually refers to radio mics).

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #3787 on:** 01 October, 2015, 02:58:02 pm »

Yep, which makes the possibility of "camera" becoming a verb seem more real. However, I can't see what it could mean that isn't already covered by "film" – though perhaps those in the industry could see a use – and it does sound a bit ugly as a verb.

citoyen · « **Reply #3788 on:** 01 October, 2015, 02:59:07 pm »

'camera' as a verb is hardly likely to oust the snappier* 'shoot' or 'film'

*pun intended

T42 · « **Reply #3789 on:** 01 October, 2015, 03:15:23 pm »

Quote from: clarion on 01 October, 2015, 02:47:13 pm

Quote from: Cudzoziemiec on 30 September, 2015, 02:43:07 pm
Basically, yes, but it's rather more literal than "to music". It could be thought of as a stage direction, I suppose.

Though I'm sure "to camera" as a verb could catch on. "We camera Scene 1 tomorrow but we won't mike the dialogue till later."
'Mic', or, if you will, 'mike', is already a verb. You can mic a drumkit by pointing appropriate microphones at appropriate bits, or mic up a presenter (usually refers to radio mics).

Concerning that presenter at the start of PBP, I could happily have shoved his mike up him.

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #3790 on:** 01 October, 2015, 03:31:31 pm »

Camera as a verb would probably only make sense where you wanted to emphasise the device over the action: "I've bought a GoPro so I can cam my commute and youtube it every day."

PhilO · « **Reply #3791 on:** 01 October, 2015, 04:07:28 pm »

I believe that 'to helmet-cam' is already in use. $:-\$

Mr Larrington · « **Reply #3792 on:** 02 October, 2015, 12:04:36 am »

Quote from: PhilO on 01 October, 2015, 04:07:28 pm

I believe that 'to helmet-cam' is already in use. $:-\$

Neologisms containing more syllables than the words they purport to replace ought by rights to be taken behind the barn and given the treatment with a sawn-off.

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #3793 on:** 05 October, 2015, 05:11:18 pm »

Continuing the theme of using other parts of speech as verbs, today I (belatedly) saw this poster:

clarion · « **Reply #3794 on:** 06 October, 2015, 10:06:12 am »

*****C-r-i-n-g-e*****

mattc · « **Reply #3795 on:** 06 October, 2015, 10:16:40 am »

That one's horrendous. They could have simply dropped the "your" and it would have made just as much sense, without abusing the english language.

Cudzoziemiec · « **Reply #3796 on:** 06 October, 2015, 10:40:41 am »

Or 'Make your September organic' or even just 'Your organic September'. I'm not usually too bothered by nouns, adjectives etc used as verbs and most of the examples here make me laugh rather than cringe, but that one's just ugly. It's appropriate I didn't see it till October!

Ian H · « **Reply #3797 on:** 06 October, 2015, 12:20:09 pm »

Is advertising. English grammar doesn't apply.

Nuncio · « **Reply #3798 on:** 06 October, 2015, 12:58:35 pm »

I'm more concerned that the 'Choose' comes after the 'eat' and 'drink'.

T42 · « **Reply #3799 on:** 06 October, 2015, 01:22:19 pm »

What did you expect? They got the rest ass-backwards.

(Funny expression, that, ass-backwards. Surely the wrong way round would be ass-forwards.)