Misused English words in EU publications (General discussion) Language Learning Forum

Misused English words in EU publications
Tags: False friends \| English
Share with: Delicious Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon
Language Learning Forum : General discussion

37 messages over 5 pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Serpent
Octoglot
Senior Member
Russian Federation
serpent-849.livejour
Joined 6597 days ago
9753 posts - 15779 votes

4 sounds
Speaks: Russian*, English, Finnish^C1, Latin, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese
Studies: Danish, Romanian, Polish, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Croatian, Slovenian, Catalan, Czech, Galician, Dutch, Swedish

Message 33 of 37

23 May 2014 at 3:51pm | IP Logged

s_allard wrote:

I don't even understand why we are discussing this. As I said, if it's good enough for the Guardian and the BBC, it's good enough for me.

It's good enough as a quote. I challenge you to find a similar example in an actual editorial text, like an article etc.

edit: as a football fan I've always had the impression that the Guardian makes a big thing out of quoting accurately, even if it's not grammatical.

Edited by Serpent on 23 May 2014 at 4:53pm
1 person has voted this message useful

dampingwire
Bilingual Triglot
Senior Member
United Kingdom
Joined 4665 days ago
1185 posts - 1513 votes

Speaks: English*, Italian*, French
Studies: Japanese

Message 34 of 37

23 May 2014 at 7:47pm | IP Logged

s_allard wrote:

I"m always amused when people make themselves into arbiters of proper linguistic taste.
When I
look at usage, I
don't consider myself the authority. I prefer to observe what other people, especially
respected
authors and good
sources, are saying.

Glad to have amazed you and amuse you :-)

I'm not really setting myself up as an arbiter - I'm just pointing out that, to me,
they sound
wrong (or stilted in some cases). I doubt I'm alone in this.

s_allard wrote:

Who cares if (1) sounds completely wrong to you or to me?

Well, I, for one, do care.

s_allard wrote:

I note for example that The
Guardian newspaper,

I remember them - they (famously) managed to incorrectly render their own name on at
least one
occasion!

s_allard wrote:

which is not exactly some foreign rag, writes:

" Can I specify other targeting?
We recommend you avoid applying targeting to activity in the first instance – our
optimisation
strategy is goal-
seeking against your KPI."
platform">The
Guardian FAQ

The full quote is clearer:

Quote:

"It is a particular challenge for BBC World News because it isn't a rights holder and
is under
the same restrictions as Sky News, for example. It is not allowed to use much stuff
shot on
Olympics premises," said a BBC source.

Here "it" means "BBC World News". So the "It is not allowed to use ..." here means "BBC
World
News is not allowed to use ..." which is perfectly acceptable usage. In the original
example
quoted in the article the "it" means "one" (in the general sense).

EDIT: OK, I thought I was quoting from your other post that mentioned "It is not
allowed ..." ...

Edited by dampingwire on 23 May 2014 at 7:52pm
3 persons have voted this message useful

s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5430 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes

Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

Message 35 of 37

24 May 2014 at 12:51am | IP Logged

I think that dampingwire's clarification on the use of "it is not allowed to" is correct. I do note that the construction
"il is allowed that" is quite common. Here for example is a quote from the Guardian as well:

"The Church of England as a whole wants female bishops by an overwhelming margin. Once it is allowed that
women can be priests, and thus can represent Jesus at all, the idea that they can't be promoted within the
organisation becomes absurd and repugnant."

In this quote, "it" is quite clearly the impersonal pronoun.
1 person has voted this message useful

Gemuse
Senior Member
Germany
Joined 4082 days ago
818 posts - 1189 votes

Speaks: English
Studies: German

Message 36 of 37

24 May 2014 at 1:43am | IP Logged

tastyonions wrote:

I think it's just a question of common usage here, not grammar.
What's even stranger is that "Look at the sky. It will rain." does indeed sound awkward
to me,

Does this sound awkward:
Look at the sky. It will rain today.
or
Look at the sky. It will not rain today.
1 person has voted this message useful

Iversen
Super Polyglot
Moderator
Denmark
berejst.dk
Joined 6703 days ago
9078 posts - 16473 votes

Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan
Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian
Personal Language Map

Message 37 of 37

24 May 2014 at 2:31pm | IP Logged

Maybe we should return to the theme of this thread - misused English words in EU publications?

3 persons have voted this message useful

This discussion contains 37 messages over 5 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5

If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register

Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum

This page was generated in 0.4219 seconds.