StanMac wrote:
I do realize that our language and word usage changes over time. Sometimes it makes sense, other times it just doesn't sound right.
When did the phrase "in connection with" change to "in connection to"? I have used the former all my life, but lately in articles I read the latter seems to have eclipsed the former as common usage, at least in the written news stories that I read.
For some reason it is bothersome to me that supposedly trained journalists are using a phrase that just doesn't make sense to me in the context in which it is used. It's kind of like the original phrase "I couldn't care less" has for some reason morphed into "I could care less", which changed the whole meaning of that original phrase.
Stan
I do realize that our language and word usage chan... (
show quote)
Actually, Stan, either makes perfect sense when you think about it. From a journalist’s standpoint, brevity is important. Therefore, by using “to,” he has saved two spaces.
The language, folks, it evolves. If it didn’t we’d be speaking like the Puritans, or Shakespeare, or even Beowulf. -- this from the old English teacher.
"...The Hip Bone is connected to the Thigh Bone, The Thigh Bone is connected to the..." That's the way the old song went.😜
rlv567
Loc: Baguio City, Philippines
StanMac wrote:
I do realize that our language and word usage changes over time. Sometimes it makes sense, other times it just doesn't sound right.
When did the phrase "in connection with" change to "in connection to"? I have used the former all my life, but lately in articles I read the latter seems to have eclipsed the former as common usage, at least in the written news stories that I read.
For some reason it is bothersome to me that supposedly trained journalists are using a phrase that just doesn't make sense to me in the context in which it is used. It's kind of like the original phrase "I couldn't care less" has for some reason morphed into "I could care less", which changed the whole meaning of that original phrase.
Stan
I do realize that our language and word usage chan... (
show quote)
The reason this sort of thing is occurring with increasing frequency: The rapid deterioration in understanding and using the English language correctly - and the fact that they "couldn't care less"!!! If it were not so painful, it would be funny.
Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City
rlv567
Loc: Baguio City, Philippines
kpmac wrote:
I get mad at times reading news articles. They have so many errors in grammar and spelling it causes me to have to read everything twice. Whatever happened to proofreaders?
What happened??? The proofreaders were "educated" at the same prestigious colleges and universities as the writers!!! There, it's much more important that they become proficient in assimilating the current (and ever-growing compilation of) words to be black-listed than how to use correctly those few remaining!!!
Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City
I love it when people begin pontificating about the English language. They remind me of my dad (I loved him dearly) who insisted that English was a Latin language because his Latin teacher in high school told him so in in the 1920s. Never mind that I had a master’s degree in English and had studied the language’s origins; I was wrong that it is Germanic in origin.
The most annoying change in common speech today is “ he or she said” changing to “ he goes or she goes”. IMHO. That grates in my ears.
jaymatt wrote:
The language, folks, it evolves. If it didn’t we’d be speaking like the Puritans, or Shakespeare, or even Beowulf. -- this from the old English teacher.
Who could read all three?
My High School Latin teacher insisted that we do Latin a la Vox Romani! (He studied the speech of the Ancient Romans for his PHD thesis. Vale. (Pronounced 'Wah!-lay') And never mind the elisions.
And current usage "different to" as opposed to "different from". The spoken language belongs to the speakers. If, however, you are writing, then you are communicating with educated people. These colloquialisms give away your (lack of) education.
kpmac wrote:
I get mad at times reading news articles. They have so many errors in grammar and spelling it causes me to have to read everything twice. Whatever happened to proofreaders?
A proofreader cost money and that cuts into corporate profits, and since profits rule all, it's bye bye proofreaders.
bobfitz
Loc: Kendall-Miami, Florida
I guess the young people think the new English is more gooder than it used to was.
Yes, wording does change over time, and not usually for the better. Of course, if you grew up in England, you would use slightly different wording: "a new lease of life," rather than our "a new lease on life."
I've always said that something is "covered with." Now, "covered in" seems to be preferred.
You wouldn't want to get me started on Grammar! LOL! When did "should have" become "should of"? When did "didn't" become "ditten"? (That's the one I hate the most!) I'll stop there. If I went on, it could take weeks/months!
jkm757 wrote:
A proofreader cost money and that cuts into corporate profits, and since profits rule all, it's bye bye proofreaders.
Who needs proofreaders. My teacher told me not to worry about words or spelling because in the future there will be autocorrect. And for that I am eternally grapefruit.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.