Search results for 'tag:Nouns tag:Common errors' matching tags 'Nouns' and 'Common errors'

Re: "about", "at the thought of" or nothing?

Raen — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:25:09 GMT

HI Thomas,

Thanks for sharig your thoughts. I don't think neither of us (Marvin and I) dispute the importance of garmmar, you made a generalization that seems to allude that we don't observe (or at least try to) the general rules of English grammar, and that therefore become the product of "uneducated speech". We wouldn't have been here if we don't understand that grammar is an esential part of a language.

Thomas Tompion
think the question raised in this thread is about distinguishing between plural and singular; that's a pretty basic distinction.

It's unfair and somewhat condescending to suggest that our concern is the use of "a pretty basic distinction" betwen plural/singular nouns, I would have expected a ststement that wnet beyond the basics. I certainy didn't see a discussion on whether "flower" (singular noun) or "flowers" (plural noun) should be used or not, rather on the desireable/undesirable use of "something" and it's relation to plurity/singularity. It's not unsual to ask why "somthing" should be an exclusive use for singular noun since native speakers, educated or uneducated, use it all the time undiscriminatingly. Often we hear it used something like this,

Flowers are something you definitely see in a botanical garden. (unoffensive to my non-native unsensitive, dull ears)

Rarely we hear,

Flowers are things (or somethings?!) you definitely see in a botanical garden. (this would definitely stops me midway in my track of putting the hamburgur in my mouth)

Should the stringent rule be applied, the construct of the first sentence above should never exist (but it does for many native speakers). Instead the sentence ought to be constructed as such:

What you definitely see in a botanical garden is flowers.

In practicality, does this particular rule really matter, apart from being self-distinguished educated speech? Does the first sentence reduce the meaning in any way? Does the construct of the last add to?

Make no mistakes that I respect your knowledge of the English language, and in any way am I challenging it (And who am I to ever want to do that? I am just a learner learning English as a 2nd language). But it is just a little unkind to reduce our frustration to "common errors of uneducated speech" in "plurals and singulars, between past and present, even between subjunctive and indicative forms", isn't clear Marvin and I have paid attention to, and observed and applied those rules, and perhaps are good at them?

In any case, I apprecite your sharing your knowledge in this particular rule ("something" for singular nouns), it's certainly something I had not learned of before. Thanks.

Raen

Re: the vaccine is the case

Avangi — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 05:17:59 GMT

Heck no, this is a term I learned from CJ and Marius. "Educated" people speak with very precisely correct (higher register) English. "Uneducated" people tend to use the vernacular and make many common errors, speaking in English of a lower register. (I don't know how many registers there are, or exactly how they're designated. It's probably just qualitative.)

I see it used as both a countable and uncountable noun. I believe your usage is a verb.

Sometimes "low[er] register" sounds like a compound adjective, if such there be.

Re: pastime

nona the brit — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:39:16 GMT

Vincent, your sentences are not correct, as you are not using the word pastime correctly.

Pastime is a synonym for hobby/leisure interest. Even though it contains 'time' its meaning isn't directly related to time. (well, I would imagine it comes from how you 'pass' your 'time'?, but you see what I mean).

My favourite hobby/pastime is reading. - correct use.

For example, two of your sentences mean: She uses her hobby for gardening every week. Her hobby hobby is gardening. incorrect use.

You are also STILL mixing up your pronouns: He fills her. This is really one of the most simplest things to learn yet it is probably your most common error. We keep reminding you. Try to make an effort to overcome this problem. It is so important as it turns your sentences into nonsense.

Re: Us people are very happy.

Bokeh — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:14:23 GMT

Kooyeen,

I think you are right about the object pronoun being used in place of the subject but these are common errors rather than a formal/informal issue. For example you might hear someone say: "Me and my mates are going to the pictures".

Whatever you do though, don't make a conscious effort to reproduce these barbarisms.

Re: i want to know...

Grammar Geek — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:08:13 GMT

Yes, effect can indeed be a verb. But the common error is when people say things like "How will this effect you?" when what they MEAN is "How will the affect you?"

They also do the reverse - "You can see the affects of time on how this rock has eroded." (I believe that only the field of psychology uses "affect" as noun.)

It's not that effect cannot function as a perfectly good verb. It's that people mix up affect and effect and forget which one is which.

Re: How much abstract an abstract noun is?

Clive — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 22:20:17 GMT

Hi,

"Because of a confusion with that type of sentence, it is a curiously common error to put a comma in the absolute construction"
Should not we use "beacause of confusion..."? Confusion is an abstract noun and can't take 'a' before it.Yes, 'a confusion' is wrong. Your following examples, with 'a', are correct.

Best wishes, Clive

How much abstract an abstract noun is?

elcid — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 21:47:06 GMT

Hi, I was reading some resource of grammar on internet and came across this sentence.
"Because of a confusion with that type of sentence, it is a curiously common error to put a comma in the absolute construction"
Should not we use "beacause of confusion..."? Confusion is an abstract noun and can't take 'a' before it.

Similarly for sentences like:
"what a beautiful day!" 'A' refers to day right? so it's okay to use it here.
and for "what a nuisance!" Nuisace, can it be counted? If no then why use 'A'?
and for many more sentences similar to "what a mystery!", "what a beauty!" Or is it that my understanding is wrong and we should use "what nuisance!", "what msytery!" , "what beauty!".

Hope to get some comments soon.

kind of

Teo — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:10:13 GMT

Casual/Old I hate these knid of mistake!

Formal I hate these knids of mistakes!

Formal I hate this knid of mistake!

1. Some grammar books say only these kind of + singular noun is correct. These kind of mistake? If it sounds strange to your ears, you are probably right. Well, it is an old pattern, occurring in the writings of Shakespeare and other writers a long time ago.

2. In modern English, especially in formal writing, the plurals - kinds/sorts/types of - are preceded by these, those, all, many, and different and followed by plural countable nounsor (singular) uncountable nouns.

3.Use this kind, that kind, these kinds, or those kinds (but not these kinds or those kinds). The same distinctions hold for class, type, and sort. However, these kind of is still in use, especially in informal speech and writing, but we advise you not to use it.

Common Errors in English from A to Z, written by Dennis James Le Boeuf and Liming Jing, published in 2003.

Re: at anytime/anytime

MrPedantic — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 01:08:07 GMT

Pieanne wrote:

I would have thought the preposition "at" requires a noun, hence "at any time"? "Anytime" is an adverb.

"Call me anytime you want", but "call me at any time"

This is correct, for the reason Pieanne gives. "At anytime" is a common error.

The entry for "anytime" in M-W relates to the adverb: it doesn't relate to "any" + "time", which can be found separately, like any other adjective and noun.

MrP

Anyway, any way, and so forth :I

Denis the Menace — Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:57:40 GMT

I'm new here and probably quite qualified to help out when I can.

There is a common error that many people make in written English that compels me to comment. It's the mistaken use of one word where two are intended, or vice versa.

When I registered on EnglishForums.com, one particular sentence said:

"The email you enter is not public, shared in anyway, or displayed on this site."

What's the problem? It was probably a typo of some overworked webmaster, but in fact it should have said "shared in any way". This kind of error has appeared in so many places in recent years that new speakers of English are probably very confused. Even native speakers are confused! Which of the following sentences are correct?

1. They have the lowest prices everyday.
2. Big sales are an everyday event.

3. Let's go in to the restaurant.
4. I'm glad that you talked me into sushi.

Numbers 1 and 3 are NOT correct. If you think about it, many compounded words are adjectives or prepositions. In number 1, "every" and "day" belong apart because they are not describing a noun. In number 3, "into" was the preposition intended, just as it's shown in number 4. Word pairs also get romantic and hook together when their combined meaning is a noun -- such as "workout" or "landmark" and thousands of others that are recognized by all of the best dictionaries.

For some people, it's tempting to write with liberties that corrupt the logic of English. I note that "Please login" has become conventional. This new 'verb' is highly anomalous to the patterns of sentence structure because sensibly there would be a "login" which is defined as the syntax you use when you "log in".

It's hard to stop the grinding of wheels that force the language to be more and more complicated, fraught with rules for which there are no explanations, but we can make life easier by sticking to our guns. I go through life with the hope that I can encourage at least the occasional person to practise simple logic.

I have a free handout on the one-word/two-word problem that I'm pleased to provide to anyone who asks.