Reputation
8,400
Next privilege 10,000 Rep.
Access moderator tools
Badges
2 24 31
Impact
~1.2m people reached

Dec
3
comment Can you chain / combine contractions in correct English?
@FumbleFingers Exactly. These are spoken only contractions, like "hafta" for "have to". They are never written except when trying to indicate the way a particular person talks.
Dec
2
answered Use of “conscience” as verb
Dec
2
comment Examples of spoken phrases where the tone used changes the meaning
My favorite: "These are the toys I have to play with." Depending on the way it's pronounced, it can mean the toys you must play with or the toys available for you to play with.
Dec
2
comment Is it incorrect to say, “Why cannot…?”
I believe the word you are looking for is "clitic". And that's exactly right -- contractions are words in their own right. They evolve their own rules over time.
Dec
2
comment Is it incorrect to say, “Why cannot…?”
It has never been the case that the contraction and the contracted phrase could be used equivalently. Consider, "Are you as sad as I am?" where you certainly can't use "I'm". And, of course "Don't you do that."
Nov
29
comment “Are they American?” or “Are they Americans?”
When used without qualification to refer to a person, yes, that's the main meaning. But if you negate them, the difference becomes clearer. You can say someone is "not American" if they act in unAmerican ways. But I don't think you'd say they're "not an American" except to mean that they aren't a native of America.
Nov
27
comment “Are they American?” or “Are they Americans?”
I don't think they're quite the same thing. One is "an American" if one is from the United States. One is "American" if one has the characteristics of those from the United States.
Nov
26
revised Why do I instinctively want to use the present tense with a conditional?
added 30 characters in body
Nov
26
answered Why do I instinctively want to use the present tense with a conditional?
Nov
23
comment Use of “it” and “its” for people and animals
It's not clear whether your example is supposed to be "of a human's nature" or "of human nature". As is, your example doesn't make sense.
Nov
16
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@Hellion The only difference between you and I is that I have presented valid arguments and refuted every argument you made while you have presented invalid arguments and questioned my honesty.
Nov
16
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@Hellion You can justify anything by saying "it's the rule that is supposed to be followed in these cases". But you'll wind up judging the vast majority of native speakers to be wrong, which should cause you to question yourself. There is no logical reason for this rule -- as I showed, all the 'reasons' collapse. All you have is, "It's a rule because I say it is, and all those native speakers are wrong."
Nov
16
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@Alex That subclause is part of the subject, just as "and I" is in "my wife and I".
Nov
15
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@Hellion Why should I do that? Every argument you've presented for why I should do that has been shown to be invalid. So far, your best argument was that "the correct pronoun to use in a subject is the subjective pronoun" but I showed that this argument leads to ridiculous results like "The woman who loves I is awesome". Do you have any arguments left? (And, again, I believe your claim is wrong. That's why you can't find any valid arguments to justify it. That's why people find it so hard not to say things like "Me and Jack went to the movies". They are right. Your rule is wrong.)
Nov
15
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@Hellion You are correct that the correct pronoun to use for an object is the objective pronoun. But we're not using the pronoun for an object, we're using it in one. Your argument that the correct pronoun to use in an object is the objective pronoun is just plain wrong. Consider: "The woman who loves me is awesome." By your argument, that should be "who loves I" since it's in a subject. (A lot of people think these simple rules make these structures wrong, but that is simply not true. Everyone else knows it -- that's why people so often get this 'wrong'.)
Nov
15
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@Hellion "Any element of a compound subject or object should be of the correct form." I agree. The question is, what's the correct form? So far as I know, there exists no argument that the correct form is the same as the form of the compound construction. If you know one, please share it. I've already presented an argument in the other direction -- the compound construction typically has properties different from its individual components, so there's no reason the individual components should have the same properties as the compound.
Nov
15
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@Alex I agree that it requires a subject. The question is not whether "me" is a valid subject but whether "me and my wife" is a valid subject. The argument I'm responding to is that "me and my wife" is not a valid subject because "me" is not a valid subject and they have to have the same properties. But if they have to have the same properties, then if "I am pleased" is correct, so is "My wife and I am pleased". So the argument leads to nonsensical results and should be rejected. If "me and my wife" is not a legal subject, it's not because "me" isn't one.
Nov
15
comment “Agree” vs. “concur”
@BarrieEngland Even if it's less than wholehearted support, concurring is more than simply agreeing. Agreeing can involve no action at all. Concurring requires one to actually do something.
Nov
15
comment “Me and my wife” or “my wife and me”
@RiMMERΨ By that logic, you shouldn't say "My wife and I are pleased with your response" because you're saying that "I are pleased".
Nov
14
comment “Agree” vs. “concur”
I think it's completely the reverse. One can "agree" with something without saying anything at all or expressing it in any way. An agreement can be completely passive. One cannot "concur" unless one expresses that agreement. If nobody says or does anything in response, the Chair may say "I'll just assume you all agree", but he cannot say "I'll assume you all concur", since they didn't concur.