| Author |
Message |
FB
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:34 am
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 15:03:29 +0100, Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | FB <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote:
[...]
2) Do you think I could use "oftener"? You say it's no longer mainstream:
do you mean it's mostly used by some inveterate fogeys or is it just less
common than "more often" but then perfectly acceptable?
Which continent are you writing for?
|
Europe.
| Quote: | The American Heritage Dictionary
lists "oftener" as a word, and the Oxford dictionary at
www.AskOxford.com says:
-- USAGE The comparative and superlative forms
oftener and oftenest are not incorrect, but are
rarely used now in British English, the more usual
constructions being more often and most often.
However oftener and oftenest do occur more
frequently in North American English.
|
I hadn't checked those dictionaries. The CALD, for example, doesn't seem to
mention "oftener". Not even the SOED, as far as I remember: I looked
"oftener" up in it yesterday, it did show the entry for "often", but didn't
give any advice as to its usage.
| Quote: | I'm North American in origin myself, and I'd say, use it if you have
some special reason to.
|
That is?
[...]
| Quote: | What more could you want?
|
Er, many things, but I'll be content with my "oftener" for now.
| Quote: | Best -- Donna Richoux
An American living in the Netherlands
|
I didn't know. Well, goede nacht.
Bye, FB
--
In any case, if you say 'I gotta go' at an important job interview you're
contributing to being allowed just that privilege.
(Tony the ice man on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jess Askin
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:01 pm
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
"FB" <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote in message
news:9ivb7b7z122x.4xvq7695nzmj.dlg@40tude.net...
| Quote: | On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 15:03:29 +0100, Donna Richoux wrote:
In any case, if you say 'I gotta go' at an important job interview you're
contributing to being allowed just that privilege.
(Tony the ice man on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)
|
Don't say "I'm outta here" either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:02 pm
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
Jess Askin <nospam@dontbother.net> wrote:
| Quote: | "FB" <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote in message
news:9ivb7b7z122x.4xvq7695nzmj.dlg@40tude.net...
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 15:03:29 +0100, Donna Richoux wrote:
In any case, if you say 'I gotta go' at an important job interview you're
contributing to being allowed just that privilege.
(Tony the ice man on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)
|
Except I didn't say that or quote it. I don't even find it in any of the
recent posts on this branch of the thread.
| Quote: |
Don't say "I'm outta here" either.
|
Best -- Donna Richoux
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2004 6:02 pm
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
FB <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote:
[re "oftener"]
| Quote: |
I'm North American in origin myself, and I'd say, use it if you have
some special reason to.
That is?
|
I don't know, *I'm* not asking if I should use it. A reason might be, to
make a poem scan or rhyme, for example. To make the rhythm of a sentence
better. To convey a certain atmosphere or flavor of dialog. To act out
of fondness for the sound.
But it also follows that, if you have no particular reason to use it,
don't use it. Not because it's impossible or forbidden, but to keep life
simple.
Did you ever explain why you were asking? Were you criticized for using
this word yourself, or wishing to criticize someone else who did?
--
Best -- Donna Richoux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adrian Bailey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:01 am
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
FB <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote in message news:<zymsjtaicxov$.14nbbwpasqbsl.dlg@40tude.net>...
| Quote: | On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:55:30 GMT, Adrian Bailey wrote:
Anyway, in re: "oftener"... I like such words, but it's fair to say they're
no longer mainstream. The tendency is towards using "more ..." rather than
"...er" as the comparative. Thus you'll find many instances of "more happy"
(or, in the vulgar tongue "more happier") instead of "happier". Google
throws up many hits for "oftener" but most of them are in computer-generated
texts.
2) Do you think I could use "oftener"? You say it's no longer mainstream:
do you mean it's mostly used by some inveterate fogeys or is it just less
common than "more often" but then perfectly acceptable?
|
A problem one has, in using "oftener" in writing or speech, is that
some idiots will just mark it as incorrect and thus assume you're an
illiterate. (Where in fact the opposite is the case.) To give a
parallel example, there are children at schools I've taught at who
have criticised me for pronouncing "ate" as /et/, even though that is
the traditional pronunciation in England.
Adrian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don A. Gilmore
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:01 am
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
"Jess Askin" <nospam@dontbother.net> wrote in message
news:cnd3qg$4sk$1@news.netins.net...
| Quote: |
" is still current in some Br dialects.
Do people still load their shotguns with double-aught buckshot?
|
I still do. The use of "aught" as a variant of "naught" or "zero" is
actually rather common in some fields. As you mention, there is a size of
buckshot known as "double-aught buck", denoting size "00". It is also used
in the gun industry for some caliber notations, such as the high-powered
rifle of 30-06 caliber, which is still referred to as a "thirty-aught-six".
It is also used in the electrical industry for multiple-zero gauges of wire,
much like buckshot. So 6/0 sized copper wire is often referred to as
"six-aught".
Don
Kansas City |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alan Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:02 am
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
"Adrian Bailey" <dadge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:91c106fc.0411181230.3f8099f3@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | FB <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote in message
news:<zymsjtaicxov$.14nbbwpasqbsl.dlg@40tude.net>...
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:55:30 GMT, Adrian Bailey wrote:
Anyway, in re: "oftener"... I like such words, but it's fair to say
they're
no longer mainstream. The tendency is towards using "more ..." rather
than
"...er" as the comparative. Thus you'll find many instances of "more
happy"
(or, in the vulgar tongue "more happier") instead of "happier". Google
throws up many hits for "oftener" but most of them are in
computer-generated
texts.
2) Do you think I could use "oftener"? You say it's no longer mainstream:
do you mean it's mostly used by some inveterate fogeys or is it just less
common than "more often" but then perfectly acceptable?
A problem one has, in using "oftener" in writing or speech, is that
some idiots will just mark it as incorrect and thus assume you're an
illiterate. (Where in fact the opposite is the case.) To give a
parallel example, there are children at schools I've taught at who
have criticised me for pronouncing "ate" as /et/, even though that is
the traditional pronunciation in England.
|
Yes, my teaching experience was the same! It's an opportunity to talk about
changes in the language and the idea of "spelling pronunciations". ( I've
used "forehead" and "waistcoat" as indicative words, and "ate" must be
another.) Then (in a later lesson) one can look with the class at the
pronunciations given in various dictionaries, and the various methods of
conveying sounds by symbols. (Oh, I almost forgot: "Majorca" and the Dons
"Juan" and "Quixote" - good for half a lesson at least!)
Alan Jones |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:02 am
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
Alan Jones wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | Yes, my teaching experience was the same! It's an opportunity to
talk
about changes in the language and the idea of "spelling
pronunciations". ( I've used "forehead" and "waistcoat" as
indicative
words, and "ate" must be another.)[...]
|
Ah, a "wesc't" man! Glad to hear it.
Quite apart from that, it's clear from your message you're a fine
teacher, Alan.
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FB
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:01 pm
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 17:06:27 +0100, Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | FB <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote:
[re "oftener"]
I'm North American in origin myself, and I'd say, use it if you have
some special reason to.
That is?
I don't know, *I'm* not asking if I should use it.
|
I just like it better, but I wouldn't want to use an obsolete word. It
appears not to be, so I think I'll use it.
[...]
| Quote: | Did you ever explain why you were asking? Were you criticized for using
this word yourself, or wishing to criticize someone else who did?
|
Preventive war, if you will. Actually, I haven't used it so far, if I
remember rightly, because I assumed it wasn't by native speakers. Then I
googled it up and found out many instances; some of them were not valid,
though, so the question seemed controversial, and I thought I'd ask a.u.e.
Bye, FB
--
Io ho deciso di rifiutarmi di vederlo: Ettore con la faccia di Eric Banana
mi fa venire i conati.
(commento sul film "Troy" apparso su it.fan.scrittori.tolkien) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FB
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:01 pm
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
On 18 Nov 2004 12:30:58 -0800, Adrian Bailey wrote:
| Quote: | A problem one has, in using "oftener" in writing or speech, is that
some idiots will just mark it as incorrect and thus assume you're an
illiterate. (Where in fact the opposite is the case.)
|
It'll be funny. O.K., I'll use it.
| Quote: | To give a parallel example, there are children at schools I've taught at who
have criticised me for pronouncing "ate" as /et/, even though that is
the traditional pronunciation in England.
|
That's understandable, I'd say: English pronunciation is such a mess
sometimes.
Bye, FB
--
Conversation like television set on honeymoon: unnecessary.
(Murder by Death) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adrian Bailey
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:03 pm
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
"Alan Jones" <atj@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:<q%8nd.3828$08.902@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
| Quote: | "Adrian Bailey" <dadge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:91c106fc.0411181230.3f8099f3@posting.google.com...
FB <fam.balducciNOSPAM@tin.it> wrote in message
news:<zymsjtaicxov$.14nbbwpasqbsl.dlg@40tude.net>...
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:55:30 GMT, Adrian Bailey wrote:
Anyway, in re: "oftener"... I like such words, but it's fair to say
they're
no longer mainstream. The tendency is towards using "more ..." rather
than
"...er" as the comparative. Thus you'll find many instances of "more
happy"
(or, in the vulgar tongue "more happier") instead of "happier". Google
throws up many hits for "oftener" but most of them are in
computer-generated
texts.
2) Do you think I could use "oftener"? You say it's no longer mainstream:
do you mean it's mostly used by some inveterate fogeys or is it just less
common than "more often" but then perfectly acceptable?
A problem one has, in using "oftener" in writing or speech, is that
some idiots will just mark it as incorrect and thus assume you're an
illiterate. (Where in fact the opposite is the case.) To give a
parallel example, there are children at schools I've taught at who
have criticised me for pronouncing "ate" as /et/, even though that is
the traditional pronunciation in England.
Yes, my teaching experience was the same! It's an opportunity to talk about
changes in the language and the idea of "spelling pronunciations". ( I've
used "forehead" and "waistcoat" as indicative words, and "ate" must be
another.) Then (in a later lesson) one can look with the class at the
pronunciations given in various dictionaries, and the various methods of
conveying sounds by symbols. (Oh, I almost forgot: "Majorca" and the Dons
"Juan" and "Quixote" - good for half a lesson at least!)
|
That's great, if you can get pupils interested in understanding their
language. Do you find children of all, er, types can get into this
kind of stuff?
Other words which seem to have gone down the spelling-pronunciation
route (more or less) are: the days of the week, "cinema" (cinemaaah),
counties (Chesheer) and, to return to our pretty baa-lambs, "often".
Adrian |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alan Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:03 pm
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
"Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:304kv2F2qvvi9U1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | Alan Jones wrote:
[...]
Yes, my teaching experience was the same! It's an opportunity to
talk
about changes in the language and the idea of "spelling
pronunciations". ( I've used "forehead" and "waistcoat" as
indicative
words, and "ate" must be another.)[...]
Ah, a "wesc't" man! Glad to hear it.
Quite apart from that, it's clear from your message you're a fine
teacher, Alan.
|
A kind remark, but it should have been in the past tense!
Alan Jones |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alan Jones
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2004 12:01 am
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
"Adrian Bailey" <dadge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:91c106fc.0411190733.328e91fe@posting.google.com...
| Quote: | "Alan Jones" <atj@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<q%8nd.3828$08.902@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
"Adrian Bailey" <dadge@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:91c106fc.0411181230.3f8099f3@posting.google.com...
[...]
A problem one has, in using "oftener" in writing or speech, is that
some idiots will just mark it as incorrect and thus assume you're an
illiterate. (Where in fact the opposite is the case.) To give a
parallel example, there are children at schools I've taught at who
have criticised me for pronouncing "ate" as /et/, even though that is
the traditional pronunciation in England.
Yes, my teaching experience was the same! It's an opportunity to talk
about
changes in the language and the idea of "spelling pronunciations". ( I've
used "forehead" and "waistcoat" as indicative words, and "ate" must be
another.) Then (in a later lesson) one can look with the class at the
pronunciations given in various dictionaries, and the various methods of
conveying sounds by symbols. (Oh, I almost forgot: "Majorca" and the
Dons
"Juan" and "Quixote" - good for half a lesson at least!)
That's great, if you can get pupils interested in understanding their
language. Do you find children of all, er, types can get into this
kind of stuff?
|
Ah, there you have me. I've taught only in highly selective schools . . .
Even so, one has to use some guile: one trick is to make the "linguistics"
bit seem a digression from a more tedious ostensible topic. Of course,
anything of this pseudo-improvised kind would be impracticable in a school
governed by regulations and assessments.
| Quote: | Other words which seem to have gone down the spelling-pronunciation
route (more or less) are: the days of the week, "cinema" (cinemaaah),
counties (Chesheer) and, to return to our pretty baa-lambs, "often".
|
Alan Jones |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jess Askin
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:01 am
Post subject: Re: "Aught" and "oftener" |
|
|
"Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:304kv2F2qvvi9U1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | Alan Jones wrote:
[...]
Yes, my teaching experience was the same! It's an opportunity to
talk
about changes in the language and the idea of "spelling
pronunciations". ( I've used "forehead" and "waistcoat" as
indicative
words, and "ate" must be another.)[...]
Ah, a "wesc't" man! Glad to hear it.
|
No doubt this has been threaded to death, but I was under the impression
that only Americans still say "weskit," the Brits having moved on some time
ago to "waistcoat." T or F? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in