Disputed English grammar

Verena   Fri Sep 02, 2005 5:42 pm GMT
Hi y'all!
I just found a nice page on English grammar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputed_English_grammar

So, It is I is correct?!
I'm puzzled.
JJM   Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:58 pm GMT
"It is I" is one of those great icons of Latinate pedantry which just won't go away.

When I hear someone use "it is I" in speech, I sense melodramatic puffery. Native English speakers more naturally say "it's me."
Mandy   Fri Sep 02, 2005 7:48 pm GMT
yeah, native english speakers also use ain't and that AIN'T correct
JJM   Sat Sep 03, 2005 12:02 pm GMT
You're absolutely "correct" - "ain't" is not "correct."

But then, what the term "correct" means in terms of grammar is a highly subjective issue.
engtense   Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:39 pm GMT
Disputed English grammars? What about some grammar that they don't even want to dispute?

I have always pointed out the following:

In supporting a theory that Present Perfect doesn't stay with past time adverbials:
Ex: *They have worked here yesterday.
== It should have been Simple Past instead.
English grammars have been avoiding to talk about the Past Family, time adverbials containing the adjective 'past': in the past, in the past year, for the past two years, over the past three months, etc., because these past time adverbials can stay with Present Perfect:
Ex: They have worked there within the past few years.

No grammar books or websites will display the use of these past time adverbials, for displaying them will undermine the golden theory above.

Is this disputed English grammar or not?
Geoff_One   Fri Sep 09, 2005 1:55 am GMT
Ex: Ex: They have worked there within the past few years.

I would say - They have worked there during the past few years.
Somewhat the same as - They worked there at time(s), during the past few years.

I know that this has a different meaning to -
They worked there during the past few years.
entense   Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:02 am GMT
If there is any explanation at all, why don't they ever put it in the books or websites?

Is "within the past few years" impossible? Try to search for the phrase and you know. We have used it so naturally that we don't even remember it is natural English.

On the other hand, is "during the PAST few years" not a past time adverbial? If not past, why PAST?

www.englishtense.com
Damian in Dun Eidann   Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:03 am GMT
If anyone I know says "It is I" in response to my question "Who's that?" or "Who's there?" I'd think they were rehearsing a part in a Shakespeare or Jane Austen play. Nobody but nobody says "It is I" in ordinary day to day chat however grammatically correct it may be.

I would guess that anybody who is learning our Language (English) will initially "speak proper" according to the rules of the grammar and text book. Once out and about among "us natives" then they will soon be just as lackadaisical as we are. It's like learning any subject or learning any job or whatever.....you adhere to the guidelines quite conscientiously to start off with but you soon start to cut corners, and verge on sloppiness.

English is a beautiful Language but the British generally are experts at mutiliating it. It's a national pastime.

Very few of us speak in the same way as we write, especially in this forum. Maybe I'm reasonably well understood in here but face to face I'd probably leave many of you wondering what the fcuk I'm on about. Like when you go to Glasgow and "speak proper"....they'd wonder what the fcuk you're on about.
Geoff_One   Fri Sep 09, 2005 11:24 am GMT
Regarding - "within the past few years". This is understandable
and there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with it. "During the
past few years" sounds a little better to me. Others may have
different opinions. My knowledge of grammatical terms such as
present perfect etc is rusty (not so good).
Kenna D   Fri Sep 09, 2005 1:58 pm GMT
within the past few years OR

within the last few years


Which is correct?
engtense   Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:28 pm GMT
>>within the past few years OR
within the last few years
Which is correct?<<

This question is asking whether Tiger or Lion is correct. They are both correct, but not the same. Tiger is not Lion; Past is not Last. We have time phrase "in the past", but not "in the last", for example.

www.englishtense.com
Gils   Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:42 pm GMT
There are many things or

There's many things?


Which is correct?
Everyone I know says THERE'S MANY THINGS, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS...

If everyone uses this, I think this should be considered correct.
Med Guest   Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:31 pm GMT
I am an Italian med student. My teacher asked me to write a short text about edema. I do not speak English very well. Thus, I ask someone of you to correct my text in grammar and language. The text is at http://digilander.libero.it/hales/oedema.htm Make your correction and send me an e-mail.
Adam   Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:52 pm GMT
"English is a beautiful Language but the British generally are experts at mutiliating it. It's a national pastime"

No. That's the Americans.

The British usually treat English with more respect - and, of course, can actually speak it better than the Americans.
Al   Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:57 pm GMT
<<The British usually treat English with more respect - and, of course, can actually speak it better than the Americans.>>

I beg to differ. ''I wish I was'', for example, is more frequently heard in Britain than America and many people consider ''I wish I was'' as ''incorrect''.