"Malcolm Race" wrote in message
...
On 18/05/2015 23:18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Malcolm Race
wrote:

On 18/05/2015 20:37, Tim Watts wrote:
On 18/05/15 20:14, Jonno wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4pJAgWIUAEZb7p.jpg

I'm going to start a campaign to put the "ph" back into sulphur.

and the u back into colour.

I would also like to form a society for the correct use of the
apostrophe - e.g. a list of variety of coffee in the local B&Bs
headed Coffee's

Oh, goody, are we having a spelling/grammar rant?

Such as "it's" when "its" is meant, you mean? Or "who's" when "whose"
is meant, possibly?

Getting the incorrect extra "o" out of "loose" when what is meant is
"lose".

Why should we not try to protect the ENGLISH language.


And by 'protect' you mean try to stop any evolution of the language?

one of my pet hates id to listen to a football manager sayng that he
expects a 'result' There is always a result to a football match - why
can't he say he expects a win (or draw or defeat) ?

Because this is what 'result' now means in this context - a win.

Youngsters call each other 'gay', not meaning they are homosexual but 'lame'

On 19/05/15 14:53, Phil L wrote:
"Malcolm Race" wrote in message
...
On 18/05/2015 23:18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Malcolm Race
wrote:

On 18/05/2015 20:37, Tim Watts wrote:
On 18/05/15 20:14, Jonno wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4pJAgWIUAEZb7p.jpg

I'm going to start a campaign to put the "ph" back into sulphur.

and the u back into colour.

I would also like to form a society for the correct use of the
apostrophe - e.g. a list of variety of coffee in the local B&Bs
headed Coffee's

Oh, goody, are we having a spelling/grammar rant?

Such as "it's" when "its" is meant, you mean? Or "who's" when "whose"
is meant, possibly?

Getting the incorrect extra "o" out of "loose" when what is meant is
"lose".

Why should we not try to protect the ENGLISH language.


And by 'protect' you mean try to stop any evolution of the language?

one of my pet hates id to listen to a football manager sayng that he
expects a 'result' There is always a result to a football match - why
can't he say he expects a win (or draw or defeat) ?

Because this is what 'result' now means in this context - a win.

Youngsters call each other 'gay', not meaning they are homosexual but 'lame'


Well it used to make 'happy and carefree'

The important thi8ng abvout a language that you are actually using to
communicate, is that it be clear and unambigous.

The legal costs arising from 'to my eldest sons' children' when you
meant 'to my eldest son's children' ...

--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

In message , Phil L
writes

Youngsters call each other 'gay', not meaning they are homosexual but 'lame'

grin My son's favourite word. Anyone who is particularly lame (such
as his father, at times) is Gaylord.

--
Graeme

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 19/05/15 14:53, Phil L wrote:
"Malcolm Race" wrote in message
...
On 18/05/2015 23:18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Malcolm Race
wrote:

On 18/05/2015 20:37, Tim Watts wrote:
On 18/05/15 20:14, Jonno wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4pJAgWIUAEZb7p.jpg

I'm going to start a campaign to put the "ph" back into sulphur.

and the u back into colour.

I would also like to form a society for the correct use of the
apostrophe - e.g. a list of variety of coffee in the local B&Bs
headed Coffee's

Oh, goody, are we having a spelling/grammar rant?

Such as "it's" when "its" is meant, you mean? Or "who's" when "whose"
is meant, possibly?

Getting the incorrect extra "o" out of "loose" when what is meant is
"lose".

Why should we not try to protect the ENGLISH language.


And by 'protect' you mean try to stop any evolution of the language?

one of my pet hates id to listen to a football manager sayng that he
expects a 'result' There is always a result to a football match - why
can't he say he expects a win (or draw or defeat) ?

Because this is what 'result' now means in this context - a win.

Youngsters call each other 'gay', not meaning they are homosexual but
'lame'


Well it used to make 'happy and carefree'

It did mean that, then it meant homosexual, and now it means something else,
all in the space of fifty years.
This is how language tends to go


The important thi8ng abvout a language that you are actually using to
communicate, is that it be clear and unambigous.

The legal costs arising from 'to my eldest sons' children' when you meant
'to my eldest son's children' ...


That's not language, that's just punctuation

On 19/05/15 14:53, Phil L wrote:

Youngsters call each other 'gay', not meaning they are homosexual but 'lame'

I got lightly chastised at work for using said term - the other
listeners still regarded it as the previous meaning and not the current
one, which I was using it as.

I am going to start using it in its original meaning now just to wind
people up

On 19/05/15 15:35, News wrote:
In message , Phil L
writes

Youngsters call each other 'gay', not meaning they are homosexual but
'lame'

grin My son's favourite word. Anyone who is particularly lame (such
as his father, at times) is Gaylord.


Time for a screening of "Meet the Parents"?

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 19/05/15 14:53, Phil L wrote:
"Malcolm Race" wrote in message
...
On 18/05/2015 23:18, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Malcolm Race
wrote:

On 18/05/2015 20:37, Tim Watts wrote:
On 18/05/15 20:14, Jonno wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B4pJAgWIUAEZb7p.jpg

I'm going to start a campaign to put the "ph" back into sulphur.

and the u back into colour.

I would also like to form a society for the correct use of the
apostrophe - e.g. a list of variety of coffee in the local B&Bs
headed Coffee's

Oh, goody, are we having a spelling/grammar rant?

Such as "it's" when "its" is meant, you mean? Or "who's" when "whose"
is meant, possibly?

Getting the incorrect extra "o" out of "loose" when what is meant is
"lose".

Why should we not try to protect the ENGLISH language.


And by 'protect' you mean try to stop any evolution of the language?

one of my pet hates id to listen to a football manager sayng that he
expects a 'result' There is always a result to a football match - why
can't he say he expects a win (or draw or defeat) ?

Because this is what 'result' now means in this context - a win.

Youngsters call each other 'gay', not meaning they are homosexual but
'lame'


Well it used to make 'happy and carefree'

The important thi8ng abvout a language that you are actually using to
communicate, is that it be clear and unambigous.

In fact with much literary language, that is the last thing you want.

The legal costs arising from 'to my eldest sons' children' when you meant
'to my eldest son's children' ...

Yes, but that is a tiny subset of language use.