Another grammatical wonder of Metro

PT – Saw this and had to read it twice cos it just didn’t scan. Then realised the error and went onto the next line thinking – is the Metro the new Guardian?

Posted about 1 year ago by cobo04

You can also be bored BY something. Hope that helps

zzz

Posted about 1 year ago by iSleepDiagonal

ISD – true ‘With’ or ‘by’ are both acceptable but never ‘of’.

PT it’s extremely minor in the great scheme of things yes but… it’s all those extremely minor things that make the great scheme of things. miss out too many ‘extremely minor things’ and the ‘great scheme of things’ falls apart.

I sometimes wonder just how close we are to a total collapse of the great scheme of things.

i am bored

Posted about 1 year ago by cobo04

So I’m sure I’m note the only one who finds this intensely irritating.

typos always happen at the most inopportune moments

Posted about 1 year ago by Floatykatja

I’m bored of this thread

Posted about 1 year ago by Ben

Are any grammar Nazis descriptivists rather than prescriptivists? Or to flip the question around … if everyone reading “Are you bored of it?” pretty much gets the gist of the question, why does it matter?

(Here’s a nice starting point when it comes to modern usage, if anyone can really be bothered (it’s long): http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/DFW_present_tense.html)

cat v pigeon

Posted about 1 year ago by comradem

So I’m sure I’m note the only one who finds this intensely irritating.

Bugger the rest of the thread, that one word alone has made my day.

Posted about 1 year ago by CarmenM

I’m bored from this thread

ablative

Posted about 1 year ago by SFULG

I had no idea this was the case, so I guess that makes me a grammar non-Aryan. It seems a bit open to abuse.

For example if I go to the cinema with a friend and together we are bored by “The Golden Compass” (bored is being a bit kind but I’m trying to stay on topic), then together he and I became bored. In that sense, I became bored with him. That’s totally different to me being bored by him, or in the improper usage of him.

So collectively speaking, how do you get bored alongside someone, where the object of your boredom is some third unfortunate object (like, say, “The Golden Compass”) ?

I guess this is just proper usage of verbs in general. You can be pleased with or pleased by, but not pleased of, and people should just be careful how they use their conjunctions.

There must be some literate folks out there who can explain why this is the case. Perhaps bored used to be used reflexively ? You can rid yourself of something. Nah that doesn’t sound right either: “I bored myself of it”. Frenchies amuse themselves though. It’s all so confusing.

My main annoyance with Metro is it never has the news I want to see like “Cure for cancer: Found !” or “All reality TV show contestants to be fired into the sun”

grammar nazi failure

Posted about 1 year ago by MarkE

What I hate is the McDonald’s inspired use of the present continuous in place of the present perfect

in fact i am hating’ it

aieee

Posted about 1 year ago by iSleepDiagonal

Relax. Breathe gently. This is simply the evolution of a beautiful language.

Decimate never is, foresooth has, oft, to much dismay, been reft. In Victoriana, most characters announce, at some stage, they are gay. In modernity, few are cleft in twain, rascals are rarely hoisted by their own petard, few politicians are discovered with their legs akimbo and rarely shall ne’er the twain now meet. Aforehand, thou, thus, wherefore, verily and hitherto have now gone thither. e-mail became email, ‘phone has dropped her apostraphe, skype me please, clubbing isn’t, going for an indian won’t mean a jail sentance, U R Gr8, C U 2morrow, phat, flickr, fish ‘n chips etc etc etc ad infinitum.

Language and structure evolve. Grammar is the kindly old fashioned spinster that you turn to for guidance. Or ignore. As you please.

Word. To yo’ mamas.

adds another metro sub editor to the fire

Posted about 1 year ago by UncleGeorge

Uncle George: I love you and could never be bored by, with or, indeed, of you.

Posted about 1 year ago by Floatykatja

Your beautiful blather has just verily warmed my cockles, Uncle George, and more than made up for how much I’ve missed your grey matter. xx

educated ectoplasm really rocks my soul

Posted about 1 year ago by CarmenM

Did the Metro writer also spell Phill Jupitus’s name wrong or was that just you?

celeb spelling nazi

Posted about 1 year ago by I_Love_Your_Shoes

English is a living thing; a wonderful, breathing, evolving, Darwinian organism that for centuries has been able to adapt to and absorb from other influences. This, of course, is what separates it from all other languages, none of which can do these things. More importantly, it allows lazy and/or ignorant writers to foul up a point of spelling, grammar or syntax and meet protests with a shrug and the comment “it’s evolving, innit. Besides, most people will know what I mean.”

Posted about 1 year ago by BraveNewMalden

Tossers.

Posted about 1 year ago by Juvey

Tossers

Innit?

Posted about 1 year ago by Babb

“note” is actually dialectical. Mrs PT is a Geordie and she was typing it.

Honest.

Uncle George, I always appreciate your sage wisdom but in order to rescue my pedantry after my typo (yes, yes, I know), I feel I must point out some errors in your post: “apostraphe”, “sentance” and “Metro” with a lower case “m”.

It’s an age thing. I understand. Like me mispelling Phill.

dump the apostrophe no dont - irony

Posted about 1 year ago by pottytime

Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!

speling

Posted about 1 year ago by Suman

Fight? I would never strike an elderly gentleman. What’s more, he may have a knobkerry or such like hidden about his person. Or a blunderbus hidden in his bathchair.

Posted about 1 year ago by pottytime