English Chess Forum

MJMcCready wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:55 am

I came across 'I have lived there for all my life'. Do we need for + all in the same sentence? Doesn't seem so.

Agree about the redundancy - often seen also in getting something 'for free'.

'I have lived there for all my life'.

Yes - I recall my father being asked, "Have you lived all your life in Surrey?" "Not yet."

But the problem is even starting from Bishop Louth, prescriptivists couldn't agree on anything at all and since then standardization has taken something of a back seat so where does this leave it. David Crystal states in his 'The Story of English in 100 words' that the shift away form beginning sentences with conjunctions only came about because in Victorian times teachers became fed up of hearing in in the playground, even though they continued to do so themselves. Some adverb clauses begin with them and are accepted. 'Because it was raining, I brought my umbrella', and interchangeably, 'I brought my umbrella because it was raining'.

John Saunders (in another thread) wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 17, 2020 2:12 am

It is nigh on 50 years since I played him. Neither of us had much appetite for the game, it being the third game on the Saturday of an Islington weekender (round 4, Islington Major, 12 December 1970 to be precise). Draw in 17 moves. Like Roger, I recognised the face. I can't remember what I had for lunch today but faces of one-time chess opponents still linger in the memory half a century later. RIP.

Most of us don't have lunch between midnight and 0212.

David, that's truly in the nitpicking spirit of this thread. Yes, his post in the Woolley obituary was timed at 0212. It's a fair bet he can remember what he had for lunch on any given day, but that's journalistic licence for you.

While I'm here: '...Labour voters had only leant Mr Johnson their support...' (Times, 17 Nov., p.23). Not one to be picked up by a spellchecker.

Not sure this is pedantry, but I was amused to read that ChessBase has a sale on today where they say you can buy products at "premium prices".

Perhaps something has been lost in translation.

Not particularly part of this but I didn't want to open a separate thread.

The BBC Website today announced three special Vicar of Dibley episodes over Christmas which included appearances by cast members James Fleet as Hugo Horton and Roger Lloyd Pack as Owen Newitt.

I did send an e-mail saying this would be a remarkable reappearance by Roger who died in 2014.

I see the website has been amended and the above co-star references have disappeared.

Just heard it again: 'lingerie' - not that I need to buy any - but how should you pronounce it?

So many people say 'longeray' getting the soft g right but not much else, in my opinion. The first syllable should surely be like the first in tangerine (as in vingt-et-un in French). The final syllable should rhyme with bee not bay. I'm not saying we should say Paree instead of Paris, but longeray is an unnecessary mangling of the French word.

Lingerie - I assumed was langeree, where the "g" is sort of "zh"...

Can't think why I didn't mention these two before. Possibly because they aren't actually pedantry, they are just things that are continually used wrongly.

1. Things that would be "cheap at half the price", which is used to mean excellent value, when it actually means they are over-priced. Cheap at twice the price is surely correct.

2. And I read in my paper today that the importance of Kane and Son to Spurs cannot be underestimated, which actually means the writer thinks they have no importance at all.

Oh, I think we can allow "cheap at half the price" - generally thought to be deliberately humorous. "How are you?" "Not too bad!".

And it's "lingerie" - starting at in "singer", "ringer" - because it remains on.

Andy Stoker wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 17, 2020 11:29 am

Oh, I think we can allow "cheap at half the price" - generally thought to be deliberately humorous. "How are you?" "Not too bad!".

That never occurred to me, though Google supports your view. I still think most people who say "cheap at half the price" are just getting it wrong.

A similar one that always amuses me is when someone describes something as a curate's egg. Usually they actually do mean that it's good in parts, but if they thought of the phrase's origin, what they are really saying is that it's rotten through and through but they are too polite or scared to tell the truth.

"2. And I read in my paper today that the importance of Kane and Son to Spurs cannot be underestimated, which actually means the writer thinks they have no importance at all."

For a moment I thought there was a father and son playing for Spurs! You're right about the misuse of "underestimate". I recall one of the more erudite comedians commenting, "It is impossible to underestimate X." The laughter grew as people picked up the meaning (or realized other people were laughing).

Too many people think that "anticipate" and "expect" mean the same thing. You can expect rain, but if you anticipate it, you put a coat on or carry an umbrella.

How about the word innumerable. That raises a few question marks doesn't it?

MJMcCready wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 25, 2020 5:02 pm

How about the word innumerable. That raises a few question marks doesn't it?

I can't count how many times people have said that.