Do we say "a man of many brains" or "a man of

<When I speak of a "safe" expression, I mean one that is sure not to create any wrong impressions. For instance, if I use "of much brain" in a conversation and the listener never heard this expression, they will probably assume I made an error. Of course, if I obviously appeared to be a non-native speaker, then errors would be expected, and then it's even more likely to be perceived as an error. >

Again you limit us to one register of English. There is more to life than speaking with your mates in a bar, you know?

If you used "Did you eat yet?" in my company, I would certainly consider it an error or an inability to use the present perfect. Life's full of folks who find errors in other people's speech and writing. This whole rejection approach of yours is, as others have said, based only on what YOU know. On that language that you are familair with. As said above, Go read Winnie the Pooh. Millions of us know just what is meant by "a bear of little brain". Millions of us have the intelligence to work out the opposite term. I vote for "a man/woman of much brain" and to h*ll with those who want to limit language use to that which they know or are comfortable with.

>>This foreign speaker would like to be able to use various registers well. You want to limit us to basic, literal expession. Don't forget that many of us have similar expressions to "much brain" in our own languages. We have formal and informal use. Many of us are skilled in using a mix of registers in our own language, so why do you want to reduce us to one or two base terms? I get tired of commentators such as you who treat nonnative speakers as children.<<

On that note, I would have to say that I would be very much impressed if a non-native speaker learned the dialect here in the Milwaukee area in even its most informal registers. However, though, I would not expect such at all unless one lived here in the Milwaukee a significant period of time, and I am not sure if a non-native speaker would particularly want to do such other than for the hell of it (as one is liable to sound funny to other English-speakers).

<<On that note, I would have to say that I would be very much impressed if a non-native speaker learned the dialect here in the Milwaukee area in even its most informal registers. >>

Nobody was talking about local dialects. Read all this thread and you will see that we are referring to Standard English when we mention registers. There is no point in limiting us to the Standard English that you are familar with. I've met so many native speakers who freak out if they think a nonnative speaker may be using a correct/idiomatic form of English that they themselves have never heard of. Kef is an example of someone who hasn't even read Pooh, or even Dickens, and so is not aware of the term "of much/little brain". He bases his advice to reject the term on not having heard the term. That's an odd strategy, IMO.

>>Nobody was talking about local dialects.<<

The matter is that there is no such thing as highly colloquial Standard English. Even more widespread and less basilectal colloquial forms such as "you guys" very often tend to be limited in geographical range rather than truly "standard" throughout the entire English-speaking world. The only truly *standard* English is literary/formal in nature and does not have any actual informal form outside of particular standardized clitics such as "'ll" and "'ve" (which are ubiquitous in spoken English in general).

>>Read all this thread and you will see that we are referring to Standard English when we mention registers. There is no point in limiting us to the Standard English that you are familar with. I've met so many native speakers who freak out if they think a nonnative speaker may be using a correct/idiomatic form of English that they themselves have never heard of.<<

The matter is that such is *not* correct to them; not all usages are equally grammatical in all dialects of English, and one cannot simply remove dialects from the picture and simply speak of some "Standard English", and such only really exists in writing and very formal speech.

>>Kef is an example of someone who hasn't even read Pooh, or even Dickens, and so is not aware of the term "of much/little brain". He bases his advice to reject the term on not having heard the term. That's an odd strategy, IMO.<<

Well, if you asked me offhand whether it was ungrammatical, I would probably have said just the same thing as Kef, as such is not particularly grammatical here either. And one cannot expect one to have read a whole raft of literature, especially older literature, and to automatically recognize usages that happen to have been used in particular books offhand and automatically consider them to be grammatical in normal use. Also, one must remember that such usages may be rather poetic in nature, and thus may come off as somewhat ungrammatical in everyday speech even if they happen to be used in writing or for effect at times.

<< The topic question was about grammar, not style. >>

Fair enough, but M56 dragged in the issue of expression, so I had to answer the point...

<< So, even in the definition of "an idiom", you don't think "much brain" is idiomatic? >>

I don't think it's a common expression. Let's drop the whole "idiom"/"idiomatic" thing, or at least the part where I had anything to do with it. I originally intended to say it's not a common expression, so that's how I'm saying it now.

<< This foreign speaker would like to be able to use various registers well. You want to limit us to basic, literal expession. Don't forget that many of us have similar expressions to "much brain" in our own languages. We have formal and informal use. Many of us are skilled in using a mix of registers in our own language, so why do you want to reduce us to one or two base terms? I get tired of commentators such as you who treat nonnative speakers as children. >>

You're misreading my intentions here. I'm not saying that foreign speakers shouldn't try to learn all the nuances of English... far from it. But foreign speakers need to have priorities, too. That's why I said things like "you need to learn to walk before you can run" -- I'm not saying you can't run, it's just that you need to walk first.

Now, I can't just assume for a fact that the original poster isn't ready for such things by that one post alone, but I think it's more likely that he isn't than that he is, so it's important to keep that possibility in mind. It probably hardly matters at this point anyway, considering that as far as we know, he hasn't even been following the discussion.

And let's not forget that if even native speakers don't have such a fine grip on all these nuances, it's not necessary for foreign speakers to have it either, no matter your literary aspirations. You don't have to know "of much brain" to write a great literary novel.

<< He bases his advice to reject the term on not having heard the term. That's an odd strategy, IMO. >>

I don't see what's odd about it. If I asked a Spanish-speaking friend about a Spanish expression and he told me it sounded weird, rather than consider that it might be a valid but rare expression and spending energy trying to understand the details of when and when not to use it, I'd forget it and direct my energies elsewhere, particularly considering that there are many other things I could learn that will prove more immediately useful and that I could be more sure about. There may come a time in the future when my Spanish is much better and I can worry about such things, but it isn't now. So I'm just treating others the way I'd want to be treated.

By the way, I'm curious... why is it when I get dragged into such debates, it's always the same three other people involved? Whenever M56 and I start debating, Pos always comes in (invariably on M56's side), and Bridget is usually involved one way or another... I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything, but it strikes me as odd.

- Kef

I've been wondering the exact same thing. Are M56, Pos, and Bridget a coalition, or are they all just alts of one person?

<M56, Pos, and Bridget a coalition, or are they all just alts of one person>

I think whether M56, Pos, and Bridget are a coalition or just alts of one person matters little. What really matters is what has been said by them (him, or her). AS furrykef said, I indeed was not ready for such things, or rather, I didn't expect it to have triggered such an exchange of briliant ideas. Having read all the threads, I think "a man of much brain" is the form I prefer. M56 has cartainly been very tenacious in arguing for his(her) points of view, some of which are refreshingly enlightening. I think he has a particularly compelling point in challenging the notion of "rare" being synonymous with "idiomatic English". With this in mind, I am firmly convinced that neither "google hits" or "the instinction of a particular native speaker" can prove or can be expected to be always right in language learning, for both native speakers and non-native speakers alike. furrykef is equally tenacious in arguing, an indispensable part in making the debate thought-provoking.

<The only truly *standard* English is literary/formal in nature and does not have any actual informal form outside of particular standardized clitics such as "'ll" and "'ve" (which are ubiquitous in spoken English in general). >

That's nonsense, if I may say so, Travis. There are registers in Standard English.

In your take on this, "much confidence" would be Standard English, but "a lot of confidence" would not.

I'd ask more about the nonsense Travis is trying to sput by using such a term as "highly colloquial".

More, in Travis' take, when we used the word "bust" for "broken" in speech, it will not be recognised internationally.

"bust" instead of "broken"? Do you mean "busted"?

Travis, is "I didn't use to like to like eggs" Standard, IYO?

If so, is it more, or less, formal than "I used not to like eggs"?

<<<Well, if you asked me offhand whether it was ungrammatical, I would probably have said just the same thing as Kef, as such is not particularly grammatical here either.>><

What would be ungrammatical about "to have much brain". I fail to see any ungrammaticality there.

<I originally intended to say it's not a common expression, so that's how I'm saying it now.>

Problem is, Kef, most of your posts follow that line. You don't think before you post and then set off a whole trail of questioning about your intended meaning. Much later in the threads, you finally decide what it is you wanted to say. Try to think before you post.

<Whenever M56 and I start debating, Pos always comes in (invariably on M56's side), and Bridget is usually involved one way or another... I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything, but it strikes me as odd.>

That's because there are at least 3 people here who wish you would think before answering.