I followed a link to an article by Lynn Coady about Stephen King in the Globe and Mail and was struck by the sloppiness of the English. I'm not one of these decline-of-the-language people at all, but this was too down-homey for my taste. I don't know this paper; my guess is that it's a middlebrow tabloid, equivalent to Britain's Daily Mail or Express, in which case I should be grateful that literary issues are being discussed at all, I suppose.

Here's an example of the prose style:
King: Fess up. There is too a difference between popular and literary fiction, you write the former, not the latter, and you know it. Who cares? You worked your ass off, overcame poverty, alcoholism and some yahoo barrelling down the wrong side of the highway. You managed to get rich and entertain millions of people in the offering. Good for you, here's a lifetime achievement award. All we ask is that you don't go griping that the "snobs" are keeping poor little Johnny Grisham from his true props.
"There is too a difference": is that expression often found in written form?

And I can't quite understand "entertain millions of people in the offering", which could, I suppose, be an Americanism. Does that mean "in the process"?

Don't even get me started on the punctuation.
Peasemarch.
 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10
I followed a link to an article by Lynn Coady about Stephen King in the Globe and Mail and was ... Mail or Express, in which case I should be grateful that literary issues are being discussed at all, I suppose.

In terms of quality, I think it views itself as Canada's answer to The Times in its golden era.
Here's an example of the prose style: King: Fess up. There is too a difference between popular and literary fiction, ... little Johnny Grisham from his true props. "There is too a difference": is that expression often found in written form?

It's certainly conversational, but since this sounds like it came from a column rather than a feature article, I'd say that was acceptable.
And I can't quite understand "entertain millions of people in the offering", which could, I suppose, be an Americanism. Does that mean "in the process"? Don't even get me started on the punctuation.

Agreed: dire.

Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)
I followed a link to an article by Lynn Coady about Stephen King in the Globe and Mail and was ... ask is that you don't go griping that the "snobs" are keeping poor little Johnny Grisham from his true props.

I think it's what's known as 'homage'

John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
I followed a link to an article by Lynn Coady about Stephen King in the Globe and Mail and was ... little Johnny Grisham from his true props. "There is too a difference": is that expression often found in written form?

It looks okay to me. Back in the days when people used commas, it would have been "There is, too, a difference."
Isn't there some US/UK difference regarding "too"? I forget what it is, but there's something the UK is unlikely to say that the US finds commonplace. And I think it may be this contradictory "did so" use.

I see that Cicero used the phrase, so to speak:
There is, too, a difference between justice and considerateness in one's relations to one's fellow-men.
That's from:
DE OFFICIIS
Marcus Tullius Cicero
Translated by Walter Miller.
Loeb edn.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

1913.

I found quite a few interposed "too"s in Cicero while looking for that one, such as:
Then, too, those very wrongs which people try to inflict

and as men, too, are born for the sake of men,
There is extant, too, a letter of the elder Marcus Cato

Do you find those jarring as well?
And I can't quite understand "entertain millions of people in the offering", which could, I suppose, be an Americanism. Does that mean "in the process"?

Maybe the writer was thinking of "in the offing"? But M-W defines that as "the near or foreseeable future" so that doesn't fit, either.

On the other hand, M-W has for "offering":
2 : something offered for sale or patronage
So maybe she was just thinking it meant "books you've offered." Sounds odd, though.

Best Donna Richoux
An American living in the Netherlands
...I don't know this paper; my guess is that it's ... that literary issues are being discussed at all, I suppose.

The Globe & Mail is a higher-end broadsheet, about the level of the (UK) Times or Telegraph.
... I found quite a few interposed "too"s in Cicero while looking for that one, such as: Then, too, those ... of men, There is extant, too, a letter of the elder Marcus Cato Do you find those jarring as well?

To my ear, some of these 'too's have the sense of 'also', whereas the US 'too' earlier seems to be a (non-functioning) filler.

(BTW I'm an ex-Brit)

John W Hall (Email Removed)
Cochrane, Alberta, Canada.
"Helping People Prosper in the Information Age"
To my ear, some of these 'too's have the sense of 'also', whereas the US 'too' earlier seems to be a (non-functioning) filler.

No, it isn't, either.
That "too" means "contrary to what you or someone else has said, or to the opinion I impute to you or someone else".
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
The Globe & Mail is a higher-end broadsheet, about the level of the (UK) Times or Telegraph.

... I found quite a few interposed "too"s in Cicero ... elder Marcus Cato Do you find those jarring as well?

To my ear, some of these 'too's have the sense of 'also', whereas the US 'too' earlier seems to be a (non-functioning) filler. (BTW I'm an ex-Brit)

I don't think it's non-functional; as Donna said, it's contradictory. (Kids) "Is not!" ..."Is too!!" ... and so on. But it is distinct from the 'also' sense.

john
{snipped}
And I can't quite understand "entertain millions of people in the offering", which could, I suppose, be an Americanism. Does that mean "in the process"?

Maybe the writer was thinking of "in the offing"? But M-W defines that as "the near or foreseeable future" so ... So maybe she was just thinking it meant "books you've offered." Sounds odd, though.

Well, for all his books - ouevring?

john
Isn't there some US/UK difference regarding "too"? I forget what it is, but there's something the UK is unlikely to say that the US finds commonplace. And I think it may be this contradictory "did so" use.

"I didn't say she was an old witch!"
"You did too!"
We'd say "Oh yes you did*!", or "You certainly *did!"

Matti
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Show more