Words you think English should have or bring back.

For the discussion of language mechanics, grammar, vocabulary, trends, and other such linguistic topics, in english and other languages.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3060
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Qaanol » Mon Jun 01, 2009 11:10 pm UTC

Audition carries strong connotations of the performing arts, especially music and theatre.

Threb wrote:Is there a word for what you're doing when you submit a résumé to get a job as someone who professionally writes résumés, or rig the votes in an awards category for "best rigging of votes," or some other situation where the application process for the job, award, et cetera, is actually an exact measure of someone's ability to have that job, receive that award or what have you? (or something along those lines. It's kind of hard to explain for me.)

If not, one would be handy.

You are applying your skills in applying for a job. Now, if the job were to make artificial fruit flavors, and you sent in an apply one you made…

Also, what about the opposite situation, where the application process runs directly counter to the job requirements? Such as, shouting that you're a good mime or pick-pocketing to afford law school. And of course, we can't forget the middle case, where the application process has nothing whatsoever to do with the job. Any ideas?
wee free kings

User avatar
Link
Posts: 1362
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:33 am UTC
Location: ᘝᓄᘈᖉᐣ
Contact:

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Link » Sun Jun 14, 2009 10:10 pm UTC

Just thought of another useful word: bogojargon; meaningless jargon based on existing words, intended to make fictitious plot devices sound plausible. Especially applicable to science fiction, which often doesn't give a rat's behind about physics as "we" know it. E.g.: "as First Gravimetrics Technician Kulon injected the diphotonium condensate into the temporal displacement core, the probabilistic accelerator entered a state of closed-time hyperconductivity, and the display device produced the output that there was a 94.17% chance of the Eiffel Tower being destroyed in 2134 AD by a swarm of metallophagic nanopseudobiotes."

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby goofy » Sun Jun 14, 2009 11:12 pm UTC

Link wrote:Just thought of another useful word: bogojargon


technobabble

User avatar
sugarhyped
Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:16 am UTC
Location: california

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby sugarhyped » Mon Jun 15, 2009 2:25 am UTC

goofy wrote:
Link wrote:Just thought of another useful word: bogojargon


technobabble

yeah but technobabble is a real word.
bogojargon is bogojargon.
I wanted a signature. I don't know what to put here yet.

Voco
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:29 pm UTC
Location: A land of blind idealism.

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Voco » Mon Jun 15, 2009 2:34 am UTC

csam wrote:I'm sorry, but has everyone in the English-speaking world forgotten the word "one"? I know it sounds pretentious, but it fills the exact role you're looking to fill. It's gender-neutral and singular. One does what one can. See? Now stop whining.


"So, say there's a village, right, and in this village there is a blacksmith. One day the blacksmith decides one wants to open a second shop, so one goes to talk to one's apprentice."

That doesn't seem to work as well as you suggest. Perhaps I'm missing something?

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26518
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:14 am UTC

Voco wrote:Perhaps I'm missing something?

I don't think you're missing anything in your interpretation of the quote.

However, you did perhaps miss the six and a half pages of responses that have been posted since then? Some of those already address csam's mistake.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Voco
Posts: 285
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:29 pm UTC
Location: A land of blind idealism.

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Voco » Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:22 am UTC

Huh, yeah, well that's embarrassing. I'd edit, but now that you've quoted me my shame shall live eternally.

I could have sworn I clicked on the little number for the last page rather than the main link. Oh well, did anyone come up with an answer?

stefaniek99
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 1:30 am UTC

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby stefaniek99 » Tue Aug 25, 2009 2:06 am UTC

I've been trying to convince my friends we need an antonym of "preferences." Like when we decide where to go for dinner: "Does anyone have any preferences... or ... anti-preferences?" Maybe "aversions" but that just doesn't seem right.

I totally agree with needing a better word for boyfriend/girlfriend if its more serious than just that. Also, my fiance and I hate calling each other "fiance." I think we had an aversion to it (ahh that's a better usage of aversion!) after seeing that Seinfeld episode. Sounds so pretentious. Anyway, he uses "pre-wife" and I use "finance" (3 syllables, with the accent on the e) just to be funny. At least we think we're funny...

eekmeep
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:56 am UTC

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby eekmeep » Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:00 am UTC

I like "betrothed" for those who are affianced.

"Deal-breakers" is an okay option for non-preferences, but a bit too unofficial-sounding, maybe?

I also like "beloved" for bf/gf. In fact, I use it when talking about my husband, because I think "husband" and "spouse" both sound impersonal.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26518
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:45 pm UTC

The problem with deal-breakers for me is that it's absolute, whereas preference isn't. A deal-breaker is the opposite of a requirement, not of a mere preference.

And personally, I feel like "beloved" or "lover" has too many connotations of intense but fleeting romance without any real stability. As in, it's the sort of word someone might use during the early lust/infatuation stage, when people think they're in love but really they just want to bone all the time.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Velifer » Tue Aug 25, 2009 9:00 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:And personally, I feel like "beloved" or "lover" has too many connotations of intense but fleeting romance without any real stability.


Referencing pages two and three, I'm still unsatisfied. What do I call my more-than-girlfriend? Paramor? Meri fren? Bitch? Something that says "this person has the importance and status of a husband/wife, but without the property contract signed by the government and church."

Does this need to be spun off into a thread about relationship-words and culture? If anyone else wants to go there, start a thread and I'll edit this post to link to it.
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby GhostWolfe » Wed Aug 26, 2009 5:18 am UTC

Velifer wrote:Something that says "this person has the importance and status of a husband/wife, but without the property contract signed by the government and church."
De facto.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

eekmeep
Posts: 169
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 7:56 am UTC

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby eekmeep » Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:56 am UTC

Velifer wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:And personally, I feel like "beloved" or "lover" has too many connotations of intense but fleeting romance without any real stability.


Referencing pages two and three, I'm still unsatisfied. What do I call my more-than-girlfriend? Paramor? Meri fren? Bitch? Something that says "this person has the importance and status of a husband/wife, but without the property contract signed by the government and church."

Does this need to be spun off into a thread about relationship-words and culture? If anyone else wants to go there, start a thread and I'll edit this post to link to it.


I think I'll concur on the transient implications of "lover," but not "beloved." And I quite like "paramor" also. How about "my enamored"or "inamorata?"

User avatar
Ivora
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 3:18 am UTC
Location: Wandering the Crystal Blue.

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Ivora » Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:34 pm UTC

Talzifandoodle: To manipulate the way one lies.

TEE HEE! :D

de Quincey
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:56 pm UTC

Useful words that have died out and not been replaced

Postby de Quincey » Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:10 pm UTC

I find myself reaching for the word "lest" quite a lot at the moment for some reason.

"Don't run with those scissors lest you stab yourself".

I can't think of a good one-word alternative.

User avatar
TaintedDeity
Posts: 4002
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:22 pm UTC
Location: England;

Re: Useful words that have died out and not been replaced

Postby TaintedDeity » Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:13 pm UTC

I dare say that if a word was truly useful it would not have died out.
Similarly, if a word has died out, it is only through lack of use.
I hear 'lest' used quite regularly, by myself and others. It has certainly not died out.
Ⓞⓞ◯

de Quincey
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:56 pm UTC

Re: Useful words that have died out and not been replaced

Postby de Quincey » Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:22 pm UTC

TaintedDeity wrote:I hear 'lest' used quite regularly, by myself and others. It has certainly not died out.


Yes, but you also say "I dare say".

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: Useful words that have died out and not been replaced

Postby goofy » Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:13 pm UTC

I don't understand why we need a single lexical item for every conceivable definition. After all the number of words is finite, but there are an infinite number of concepts. The neat thing about language is that it is more than just words; we can combine words into phrases and clauses.

User avatar
TaintedDeity
Posts: 4002
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 7:22 pm UTC
Location: England;

Re: Useful words that have died out and not been replaced

Postby TaintedDeity » Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:13 pm UTC

I knew as soon as I typed 'dare say' you'd pick up on it.
What about words like 'hence' 'one'? Would you have picked up on those, also?

Yeah, it's just my experience, but I hear 'dare say' 'lest' and other sort of formal, sort of outdated words used regularly.
You say I use "I dare say" to excuse my use of these words as anomalous, but surely the fact there is a type of person who uses these words proves they have not died out.
Ⓞⓞ◯

User avatar
littlelj
Posts: 140
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:40 am UTC

Re: Useful words that have died out and not been replaced

Postby littlelj » Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:21 pm UTC

TaintedDeity wrote:I knew as soon as I typed 'dare say' you'd pick up on it.


I'd have said "I dare say" was regional - I hear it a lot in the North of England but not so much in the South.

I use "lest" professionally - hell, I use the subjunctive professionally - but not in normal speech.

I think one's use of apparently archaic words is also affected by one's knowledge of other languages. Sometimes I find myself thinking "Gah! If only I could properly express 'de peur que' in English without sounding like a bit of a dick."
Dudes, I'm a woman.

User avatar
Dibley
Posts: 1346
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:00 pm UTC
Location: Napa Valley, California
Contact:

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Dibley » Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:58 am UTC

gibberishtwist wrote:-The spots that some people get (Myself included): Too flat to be a mole, too big and not numerous enough to be freckles. My mom calls them "beauty marks" but that always sounded rather vain to me (Furthermore, I was always under the impression that so-called beauty marks were actually well-placed moles). Saying "I have freckles" brings a fairly specific look to mind, what the hell does "I have random small spots all over my body" say? I have sporadic melanin deposits? Arrgh.

You seem to be suffering from the (common) delusion that it has to be raised to be a mole. It doesn't. While those dots could well be something else, they're probably just moles.

And really, you never us the subjunctive casually? You never say "I would like a ____"?

I use "lest", "I dare say", "hence", and "shall" in informal speech, and I'm most certainly not from the north of england. They're a bit archaic, but certainly not gone yet.

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby goofy » Fri Sep 25, 2009 3:07 pm UTC

Dibley wrote:And really, you never us the subjunctive casually? You never say "I would like a ____"?


That's not the subjunctive. There are 3 forms that are commonly called the subjunctive (from MWDEU):

1. the frozen subjunctive, which exists in set phrases like "God save the queen" and "be that as it may". 

2. the uninflected form used in dependent clauses (called the "mandative subjunctive") often after verbs like ask, demand, recommend, suggest, insist, be advisable, be necessary.
...it was reccomended that the President not inform Congress

3. the were form used with first and third person singular in counterfactual clauses:
If I were younger and could see anything at all...
Were a war to break out...

User avatar
Dibley
Posts: 1346
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:00 pm UTC
Location: Napa Valley, California
Contact:

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Dibley » Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:25 pm UTC

Ah, never mind then. I was thinking of it in analogy to my Hebrew and German and Latin classes, in which the subjunctive was used to say "I would like ___", in contrast to the indicative, which was just "I like ___".

User avatar
Forum Viking
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 2:28 am UTC
Location: Coming soon to a misty shore near you!

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Forum Viking » Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:14 pm UTC

Dibley wrote:Ah, never mind then. I was thinking of it in analogy to my Hebrew and German and Latin classes, in which the subjunctive was used to say "I would like ___", in contrast to the indicative, which was just "I like ___".
I think you're thinking modal.

Also, I have recently been pondering the mid-sentence utility of the word "that:" eg, the above sentence ("I think you're thinking modal,") could also be written "I think that you're thinking modal," and make just as much sense. In fact, most people seem to insert more 'that's than are really necessary and I'm starting to question the logic. Is the 'non-that' really just an abbreviated form of the 'that'-included sentence? Or is the 'that' extraneous? I'm well aware that there are shades of grey involved here but I'm strangely curious.
Search engines: Helping you help yourself.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26518
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:18 pm UTC

I don't know offhand about the history of relative clauses, but I do know that in Spanish the "that" is not optional, and so I suspect that it's similarly mandatory in Latin.

There need not be any (formal) logic to it, since it's just there to tell you how the next clause relates to what's already been said. We can understand the sentence with or without it, but many times it's probably easier to do so with it.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

goofy
Posts: 911
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby goofy » Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:26 am UTC

contact clause

shorter MWDEU: The contact clause (a dependent clause attached to its antecedent without a relative pronoun) evolved from the combination of two independent clauses, not a relative clause with the relative pronoun omitted. In other words, it evolved separately from clauses introduced by that, who or which.

Vo2max
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:22 pm UTC

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Vo2max » Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:36 pm UTC

Re: opposite of dense, 'sparse' is the opposite of one sense of dense so why not appropriate it for the other? (dense growth/sparse growth; dense material/sparse material)

User avatar
BigBearBooth
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:43 am UTC
Location: Manchester, UK

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby BigBearBooth » Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:51 am UTC

I just really really wish Alexander Graham Bell had won the argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahoy_(greeting)

(edit: Booth can't handle url commands)

User avatar
Bobber
contains Disodium Phosphate
Posts: 1357
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Holme, Denmark.
Contact:

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Bobber » Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:48 am UTC

BigBearBooth wrote:I just really really wish Alexander Graham Bell had won the argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahoy_(greeting)
Ya'know, if Bell had won, you'd possibly be posting about how it would've been just hilarious if Edison had won, so that we would be greeting each other with the word "hello" on the phone :D
I don't twist the truth, I just make it complex.
mrbaggins wrote:There are two tools in life, duct tape and WD40. If it moves and shouldn't, use the tape. If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.

User avatar
BigBearBooth
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:43 am UTC
Location: Manchester, UK

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby BigBearBooth » Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:20 pm UTC

Bobber wrote:
BigBearBooth wrote:I just really really wish Alexander Graham Bell had won the argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahoy_(greeting)
Ya'know, if Bell had won, you'd possibly be posting about how it would've been just hilarious if Edison had won, so that we would be greeting each other with the word "hello" on the phone :D


Ahh, recursivity! Run, before it gets you too!

Anyway, I was pretty taken with 'findible' (adj., able to be cleft or split ). It sounds mathsy.

User avatar
Bobber
contains Disodium Phosphate
Posts: 1357
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Holme, Denmark.
Contact:

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Bobber » Wed Oct 21, 2009 3:59 am UTC

Sound an awful lot similar in meaning to 'divisible', I think.
I don't twist the truth, I just make it complex.
mrbaggins wrote:There are two tools in life, duct tape and WD40. If it moves and shouldn't, use the tape. If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.

User avatar
Shokk
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:52 pm UTC

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby Shokk » Fri Oct 23, 2009 2:18 pm UTC

Voco wrote:
csam wrote:I'm sorry, but has everyone in the English-speaking world forgotten the word "one"? I know it sounds pretentious, but it fills the exact role you're looking to fill. It's gender-neutral and singular. One does what one can. See? Now stop whining.


"So, say there's a village, right, and in this village there is a blacksmith. One day the blacksmith decides one wants to open a second shop, so one goes to talk to one's apprentice."

That doesn't seem to work as well as you suggest. Perhaps I'm missing something?

Well, the thing that one has to realise here is that one doesn't use the word "one" as if it's third-person. One can quite plainly see that "one" makes more sense as a second-person pronoun.
I have a pair of pants.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26518
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Oct 23, 2009 2:30 pm UTC

Shokk wrote:Well, the thing that one has to realise here is that one doesn't use the word "one" as if it's third-person. One can quite plainly see that "one" makes more sense as a second-person pronoun.

No, "one" is definitely third person. As evidenced by the fact that you conjugated your verbs that way. The fact that a more informal way to say much the same thing is in the generic second person is separate from this.

The point in the post you quoted was simply that it cannot be used for a *specific* third person. But it doesn't really work for specific second person, either.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
kernelpanic
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:26 am UTC
Location: 1.6180339x10^18 attoparsecs from Earth

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby kernelpanic » Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:51 pm UTC

Number3Pencils wrote: cookie, cracker, and biscuit. Or between hope and expect

galleta, cracker (Spain and S.America only-the proper is galleta salada), pan dulce
aspiro, espero
I'm not disorganized. My room has a high entropy.
Bhelliom wrote:Don't forget that the cat probably knows EXACTLY what it is doing is is most likely just screwing with you. You know, for CAT SCIENCE!

Image

User avatar
BrainMagMo
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 6:22 am UTC
Location: Southern California
Contact:

Re: Missing Words, Words You Think We Should Have

Postby BrainMagMo » Sun Oct 25, 2009 1:40 am UTC

MLConian wrote:Significant Other always makes me feel as if the person you're married to is better than you and you're not a complete being without them. It's screaming "DON'T LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT HIM/HER OVER THERE!".
Even worse is the Dutch version, "wederhelft", literally "fitting half", implying that you were only half a person until you got married... Which reminds me of "better half", is that still in use?
See, S.O. has all kinds of negative connotations if you ask me.

How does S.O. even have slightly the same connotation as better half?
It sounds completely neutral to me.
Significant =/= good/better.
Other =/= something was missing.

The Locutus of Borgnine
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:32 am UTC

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby The Locutus of Borgnine » Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:57 am UTC

My suggestion for the English language? Volupt.

From voluptuous+erupt. The act of breasts escaping unintentionally from undersized or inadequately restrictive clothing. As in "That girl needs to put on a different shirt, lest she volupt."

You're welcome

User avatar
Velifer
Posts: 1132
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:05 pm UTC
Location: 40ºN, 83ºW

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Velifer » Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:17 pm UTC

Volupt? Why not just call her June?
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies have nothing to lose but their chains -Marx

Sir Fluffum
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:37 am UTC

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Sir Fluffum » Wed Oct 28, 2009 4:30 am UTC

I think the prefix "yester-" could be used a lot more. Yesterday and (more rarely) yesteryear are the only places i can think of that it's used in modern English. Why aren't yesterweek, yestermonth, etc. used. They look weird, but they're fairly easy to pronounce. I do stumble over "yesterfortnight" though. Oh, and fortnight should be used more often.

User avatar
Bobber
contains Disodium Phosphate
Posts: 1357
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 2:09 pm UTC
Location: Holme, Denmark.
Contact:

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Bobber » Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:05 am UTC

Sir Fluffum wrote:Oh, and fortnight should be used more often.
Fortnight and "two weeks" both have two syllables, and when you say "in two weeks"/"in a fortnight" or "two weeks ago"/"a fortnight ago", you have to add an extra syllable in the "fortnight" sentence. (The "a", obviously).
So what I am saying is that it's ineffective, which makes fewer people use it.
I don't twist the truth, I just make it complex.
mrbaggins wrote:There are two tools in life, duct tape and WD40. If it moves and shouldn't, use the tape. If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.

Sharlos
Posts: 720
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 9:26 am UTC
Location: Straya

Re: Words you think modern English should have or bring back.

Postby Sharlos » Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:40 am UTC

Bobber wrote:
Sir Fluffum wrote:Oh, and fortnight should be used more often.
Fortnight and "two weeks" both have two syllables, and when you say "in two weeks"/"in a fortnight" or "two weeks ago"/"a fortnight ago", you have to add an extra syllable in the "fortnight" sentence. (The "a", obviously).
So what I am saying is that it's ineffective, which makes fewer people use it.


Next fortnight/last fortnight is how the term is usually used in my experience.


Return to “Language/Linguistics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests