Grammar that makes you cringe

[clarion]

Daughter, who is at a (supposedly) good university has been given an essay in which she is asked to describe how a situation has been 'problematized'. WTF does that mean?

Presumably, as in: how has this situation become a problem?  That always used to work.

No.  Problematise has a specific meaning, so the question is 'Why has the situation been perceived to be a problem?'

[ian]

....I'm not sure American grammar nazis are any worse than British ones, at least they tend not to get their jackboots in a twist over 'crude Americanisms' and the like.

P.S. "Problematize" is, of course, a crude Americanism, unlike our own dear 'problematise'.

Unless, of course, you're of the Oxford persuasion, in which case -ize away.

[jsabine]

Daughter, who is at a (supposedly) good university has been given an essay in which she is asked to describe how a situation has been 'problematized'. WTF does that mean?

Presumably, as in: how has this situation become a problem?  That always used to work.

No.  Problematise has a specific meaning, so the question is 'Why has the situation been perceived to be a problem?'

Perceived to be a problem or made into a problem?

I'd have assumed the latter.

[Bledlow]

....I'm not sure American grammar nazis are any worse than British ones, at least they tend not to get their jackboots in a twist over 'crude Americanisms' and the like.

P.S. "Problematize" is, of course, a crude Americanism, unlike our own dear 'problematise'.

Unless, of course, you're of the Oxford persuasion, in which case -ize away.

Bah! They're inconsistent! You'll never find one writing 'cruizer', or 'cruizing'.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Or Beatrix Potter or, I think, Penguin. At any rate ISTR -ize spellings in the books I read as a kid and most of them were Puffins.

[ian]

....I'm not sure American grammar nazis are any worse than British ones, at least they tend not to get their jackboots in a twist over 'crude Americanisms' and the like.

P.S. "Problematize" is, of course, a crude Americanism, unlike our own dear 'problematise'.

Unless, of course, you're of the Oxford persuasion, in which case -ize away.

Bah! They're inconsistent! You'll never find one writing 'cruizer', or 'cruizing'.

I'm sure Webster would have gone with 'cruzer'. Be gone, pesky excess vowels.

I have to alternate between American and British English. Oddly, I use to -ize in British English, but I know -ise for distinctiveness.

[T42]

It's a common misconception among our translation clients that -ise is English and  -ize American.  Not true: both are UK English. Dr. Johnson clouded the issue with his dictionary because he had the idea that all words ending in -ize were derived from French and so should be spelt the French way, with -ise.  In the end, he was as bad as Webster.  And had weapons-grade halitosis to boot.

Anyway, our clients often ask for translation into UK or US English, and get all hissy if we put an -ize in what they think is the wrong place.

Tiresome bugger, Johnson.

[Nuncio]

Keep up everyone.  We settled the -ize -ise debate a mere 4-and-a-half years and 110 pages ago.

[T42]

Before my time.

[Mr Larrington]

Contrafibularities

[a lower gear]

Contrafibularities

Sir, I apprehend, nay fear that you may have caused a degree of pericombobulation, risking even frasmotic siezures.

[Dez]

 

[Cudzoziemiec]

It's not wrong though. Well, it might be "wrong" but it's not grammatically incorrect. Many is the subject, so the verb is plural.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Meanwhile, this is from the bumf for a children's paintballing event:

I understand that I am leaving my child in the care of the responsible adult named above, whom will remain on the premises to ensure the above conditions are adhered to throughout the session.

[T42]

"Anyways".

[Steph]

I have already mentioned the trains that are "arriving into" stations. The other day I had both "When you alight the train" and "When you alight the station", both of which meant "When you alight from the train and get off at the station"

[T42]

The one I loved was "Passengers are requested to adhere to platform staff".

[hellymedic]

The one I loved was "Passengers are requested to adhere to platform staff".

 

[Cudzoziemiec]

"Anyways".

I like that one. I use it from time to time, though only for forum posts and similar, rather than in speech or actual writing. In my mind, I hear it in a Yorkshire-ish accent with a cross between a laugh and a sigh, to indicate that the topic has changed but it is just as inconsequential as before.

Bad grammar? Yes, because it's not 'correct', but no, because it's not meant to be 'correct'. Bad style? Almost certainly! Sorry if it makes you cringe.

[T42]

"Anyways" rings on my ear as American Illiterate: one of those errors born of ignorance that have come to dominate Murkin and gradually diffused into English, such as using "would of" instead of "would have", "lay" instead of "lie", or "way" instead of "away".  Borderline OK in speech if you're being wantonly droll but bloody 'orrible in print.

I know a Floridian who affects surprise with "Egads".  Jeez (saving your presence).

[Cudzoziemiec]

Pythonesque cod-Yorkshire to me. I think "would of" is born of universal ignorance rather than being specifically American, though lay for lie might well have drifted across the pond. I'm not sure I've come across way for away.

[Exit Stage Left]

Daughter, who is at a (supposedly) good university has been given an essay in which she is asked to describe how a situation has been 'problematized'. WTF does that mean?

I suppose an example would be where language conveys meaning to the reader, but a caste of 'experts' attempts to occupy the space between the writer and the reader, by identifying 'problems', which only they can solve.

Once a problem has been created, there's a market for a solution. I believe universities would term this 'the dialectic', and it's a con-job that's been running for a while.

[T42]

Pythonesque cod-Yorkshire to me. I think "would of" is born of universal ignorance rather than being specifically American, though lay for lie might well have drifted across the pond. I'm not sure I've come across way for away.

I first noticed these on US sites, although "would of" does look like something a vocal recognition prog might come up with.  I used one when I broke my collar-bone and spent more time correcting than dictating.

Way for away has a long history - think "Old Folks at Home".  Although it used to be written with a preceding apostrophe.

[Kim]

I've said before - probably in this thread - that I only discovered "would of" was wrong after I learned to read/write.  In some accents the difference is undetectable.

[T42]

Daughter, who is at a (supposedly) good university has been given an essay in which she is asked to describe how a situation has been 'problematized'. WTF does that mean?

I suppose an example would be where language conveys meaning to the reader, but a caste of 'experts' attempts to occupy the space between the writer and the reader, by identifying 'problems', which only they can solve.

Once a problem has been created, there's a market for a solution. I believe universities would term this 'the dialectic', and it's a con-job that's been running for a while.

Some years ago Carrefour came up with an ad in which a woman proclaimed "Avec Carrefour, je positive" - meaning, supposedly, "with Carrefour I benefit". It was a feeble message but the Académie Française burst a few arteries and several members died of shock (although in their case it was some time before any difference was noticed).  After that it had to pass into everyday use.  Nowadays you hear people saying "il faut positiver", meaning make the best of it.

I could imagine "positivize" making into everyday English.