Entertainment For Lively Minds

Word RSS FeedsWord Magazine on YouTubeWord Magazine on Last FMWord Magazine on Share My PlaylistsWord Spotify PlaylistsWord Magazine on FacebookWord Magazine on Twitter

A fine toothcomb

Captain Underpants's picture

Earlier today I was reading a page proof of the magazine I work for and one of the articles contained the phrase "a fine toothcomb."

I turned to the sub editor, who's paid to be a grammar snob, and said, that's wrong. It's fine-tooth comb, or if you really want to be pedantic, fine-toothed comb.

She said, "Well I thought so too, so I checked the dictionary." And she showed me - 'fine toothcomb' is in the OED. This was too much bear, and as I didn't have time to write a letter of protest to the editor of the Telegraph, I Googleised the phrase. Turns out it's now such a common mistake that the dictionaries have given the hell up and included it.

As I was explaining this, a young reporter who must be, I don't know, probably twelve, leaned over and said "Dude. Word Nerd."

So here's my dilemma. I still care that it's 'a hair's breadth' not 'a hare's breath.' But should I just, as it were, give the hell up too?

4

LOL

sorry, that's all

0
James Blast | 21 May 2010 - 9:14pm

My dear Captain ...

I am presently drafting a missive to my MP in protest. It is a fine-tooth comb, as you say and If the entire globe stands on one side and want to fight me, they will not break me on this ...

2
Steerpike | 21 May 2010 - 9:15pm

I am with you on the hair's breadth

Toothcomb is a word I would use though.

0
Uncle Wheaty | 21 May 2010 - 9:35pm

the concept of a toothcomb

- presumably one for the hair on your teeth - is rather grim isn't it?

0
Sheev | 22 May 2010 - 7:10am

Never give up

I fight these fights each day. I've got your back, man

0
IanP | 21 May 2010 - 9:21pm

It's corned beef

But everyone thinks it's corn beef. I had some last week and at least maintained another tradition by not getting the key to wrap round the metal strip properly and cutting my finger when I tried to sort it out.

1
Melville | 21 May 2010 - 9:22pm

I've never heard anyone say corn beef

Anyone who doesn't know it's "corned" has never heard of the disgusting rationing era foodstuff surely?

(well, I'll eat it sometimes obviously)

1
spt | 22 May 2010 - 6:58am

Never Surrender!

Fight this to the last.

English language will always be changing and that's fine. The glottal-stoppers are making alterations as we speak.

But it still belongs to my generation aswell as everone else too and we're not dead yet. It's a fine-toothed comb until we're not around to say otherwise.

(lights pipe, side-parts hair, has coronary)

0
Beezer | 21 May 2010 - 9:25pm

Starts

sentence with conjunction. Is shot at dawn.

3
Vulpes Vulpes | 22 May 2010 - 9:49am

*sigh*

Bang to rights. I'll come quietly.

Tell Penelope I love her. Goodbye cruel world.

3
Beezer | 23 May 2010 - 10:57pm

And why would anyone

want to comb their teeth?

1
happy harry | 21 May 2010 - 9:34pm

I've woken up on many mornings

when the toothbrush just didn't hack it and a toothcomb would've come in handy (see the "worst drink" thread).

1
spt | 22 May 2010 - 7:03am

Keep fighting the good fight

It is important.

We attempt to stay afloat in a sea of mediocrity, our hands gripping in desperation those few scraps of life-affirming flotsam that wobble past. At times, we are pulled under by the pneumatic charms of celebrity mermaids and the fatal undercurrents of mindless pap, yet we still manage to claw our way back to the surface for a brief glimpse of the clear, blue sky.

In these moments, filling our lungs with the air of enlightened discourse, we gaze frantically across the scum-tipped waves towards those few bobbing heads who we know, in our hearts, are just like us.

Yes, sometimes it is anal and reductive to cling to minor historico-linguistic details, but the act of clinging is what keeps those few, lonely heads afloat. The more of these small details we collect, the sooner we can build a raft, haul our fellow drowning mariners aboard, and set out for that mystic continent where we know we all belong.

10
Con Coleman | 21 May 2010 - 9:34pm

We are "all bound for Word Word Land"

Sung to the The Ancients of MuMu tune by KLF works well.

0
Uncle Wheaty | 21 May 2010 - 9:43pm

We're...

justified and we're ancient.

1
Patrick Crowther | 22 May 2010 - 6:35am

ancient

anyway...

0
Sheev | 22 May 2010 - 7:12am

What the fuck

is going on?

0
Vulpes Vulpes | 22 May 2010 - 9:50am

Ancient yes

Also ranged left

0
Glenbervie | 18 June 2010 - 12:08am

Rocking rolling riding

I'd even be happy to have it sung to this:

[but can't find Rowan Pelling's paean to the voice of Judith Durham anywhere on t'web-iirc she was nominating JD for the fourth plinth ...]

0
SpaceBoy | 22 May 2010 - 10:23am

On a similar theme

On the cover the version of The Word that is sent to subscribers it says Subscribers Edition.

I'm quite prepared - even willing - to be told that I'm wrong, but shouldn't that be Subscribers' Edition (or even, Subscriber's Edition, as it's my very own copy)...?

0
Red Umpire | 21 May 2010 - 9:36pm

Subscribers Edition is fine

Subscribers here is an adjective, as in Mothers Day

0
Stan Halen | 22 May 2010 - 3:15am

I am not an adjective

I am a free man

1
SpaceBoy | 22 May 2010 - 10:24am

No no no!

I cannot agree! It's clearly "the edition of the subscribers", and therefore Subscribers' Edition is the only correct usage. I can't see how "subscribers" could be anything other than a plural noun. The adjective from "subscriber", if there has to be one, would surely be something like "subscriberish". Possibly "subscriberesque".

Both abominations, natch, but nothing compared to a missing or misplaced apostrophe.

3
Bob | 22 May 2010 - 2:45pm

You're right - it's wrongity-wrong (ish)

The confusion arises because apostrophes are silent; we don't hear them, so possessive forms sound identical to the standard plural form. A neat test to check whether cases such as these are grammatically possessive or not is to see what happens if we use an irregular plural. So, what do we call a TV programme for children? Or clothing for women? Exactly. They're plural possessive, which is why it also should be members' lounge, players' entrance, shareholders' meeting... and subscribers' edition.

And, anyway, if it were adjectival, it'd most likely be singular. (That's why we don't say cigarettes packet or teethbrush.)

So, either subscribers' edition (possessive) or subscriber edition (adjectival) is what it has to be.

That's the theory, anyway. But this particular dead horse, flogged to within an inch of it's [sic] life, vaulted [sic] so many moons ago that any attempt to reign [sic] it in is fêted [sic] to turn into a wild goosechase [sic].*

It's stuff like this that's at the heart of the whole prescriptivist/descriptivist debate among lexicographers ("laying down the law" versus "telling it like it is"). Sometimes you just have to shrug and find other windmills to tilt at - much as the OED seems to have done in the case of the dental haircare.

(*Don't even get me started on dicky hyphenation.)

6
Archie Valparaiso | 22 May 2010 - 5:44pm

Thanks

Thanks for that crystal clear explanation, Archie.

When do we start the campaign for the good folks at The Word to change what appears on the cover to either Subscriber Edition or Subscribers' Edition, but definitely not Subscribers Edition...?

0
Red Umpire | 22 May 2010 - 5:45pm

I hadn't even noticed, to be honest

I'm too busy still raging over "Almadóvar" six months ago.

1
Archie Valparaiso | 22 May 2010 - 5:52pm

I Beg To Differ: Devil's Advocate Joins Devil

You see a lot apostrophe misuse, and sometimes, when it's done by someone of whom you expected better, you question yourself and check again: "Could it be correct if you look at it another way?". Applying this test here, I've now become convinced that the form "Subscribers Edition" can be justified...

You run a major publication, with several editions for different circumstances:

The first one that comes out is called the Early Edition
In the evening you produce the Evening Edition
Because they keep a copy, you produce a British Museum Edition
For your own records you produce an Archive Edition
To cope with the demand, via the web, of people who want one-off copies, you produce a Web Requests Edition
For your trusty subscribers you produce a Subscribers Edition.

Now you could look at it another way and produce an Evening's Edition (the edition belonging to the evening), British Museum's Edition, an Archive's Edition and a Web Requesters' Edition. In that case, Subscribers Edition would be wrong, but in the context I described above, it's perfectly correct.

0
Lucky Tiler | 26 May 2010 - 1:22pm

Good try, but, sorry, I'm not buying it

I suppose "Subscription Edition" might just about make the cut as adjectival, to go alongside "Early" or "British Museum", but not "Subscribers".

Otherwise you'd have to accept "children clothes" to go alongside "casual" and "formal", wouldn't you?

1
Archie Valparaiso | 26 May 2010 - 1:46pm

"Not buying it"!

Luckily, you're not the only customer, or sole arbiter

0
Lucky Tiler | 26 May 2010 - 2:55pm

I know what

Together with the CD, they could add a little pot of Tippex.

2
Archie Valparaiso | 26 May 2010 - 3:54pm

I'm with you too

It's the 'Edition for Subscribers', not the 'Edition of Subscribers': the subscribers don't edit it, or do they and I haven't had my invitation yet?

0
PeteWingrave | 26 May 2010 - 6:45pm

I don't know...

...that there's a grammatical distinction between "for" and "of" in this case. The issue is a possessive one: the edition belongs to the subscribers, so the subscribers have to be treated as a possessive noun (and I think "of" in your example means "issuing from", rather than "belonging to". When we said "the edition of the subscribers" earlier, it was a possessive "of").

Subscriber Edition or Subscribers' Edition are surely the only way to do it. I just can't see how the word "subscribers" in the plural can be used adjectivally.

God, I love this blog.

1
Bob | 26 May 2010 - 7:02pm

The former

I'd argue, as it's for all subscribers, not just you

0
IanP | 21 May 2010 - 9:49pm

It's all going off

like a damp squid

1
policybloke1 | 21 May 2010 - 10:13pm

Careful

It's a vicious cycle.

0
Austin | 22 May 2010 - 8:30am

and for the cynics who got it wrong

oh ye of little face

0
policybloke1 | 21 May 2010 - 10:15pm

how much bear?

Way too much.

0
Jitling | 21 May 2010 - 10:24pm

the world's

going to Hull in a handcart.

0
badartdog | 21 May 2010 - 10:26pm

Pah!

Your mother knits socks in hell!

(vomits)

1
itfc1959 | 21 May 2010 - 11:58pm

Never give up, Captain!

Fight the good fight on behalf of those of us who suffer physical pain on witnessing a misplaced apostrophe....

0
Fitter Stoke | 21 May 2010 - 10:27pm

Back at the toothcomb

It is 'fine toothcomb'. Tooth-comb is in the OED, where it's defined as "a small-tooth comb". Kingsley Amis in The King's English remembers it as "the sort that as well as fine teeth had an inches-long spike at one end".

This is acknowledged in the pronunciation: I've only heard fine TOOTH comb, never FINE tooth comb.

2
leszczuk | 21 May 2010 - 10:40pm

It's tricky.

The earliest quotation in the OED for 'fine-tooth comb' is from 1839, referring to an actual comb.

The earliest quotation for 'toothcomb' is from 1893, and, although the definition is 'a small-tooth comb', none of the quotations is for its literal sense.

And the Shorter Oxford has ‘[orig. an erron. use]’ in its entry on 'toothcomb’.

0
Inky Fingers | 22 May 2010 - 7:24am

Never surrender

The barbarians are at the gates. Let's all get up on the ramparts and pour boiling oil on their heads.

0
DC Eisenhower | 21 May 2010 - 10:50pm

Word Nerd

Come on, give the boy credit - that's really very good. That's a new merch t-shirt design if I'm not mistaken.

0
Leedsboy | 21 May 2010 - 11:03pm

I'm proud to be a Word Nerd

In both senses of the errm... word.

Here's one that makes me roll my eyes: "Off me own back". It's bat, you fools.

0
keefus | 21 May 2010 - 11:12pm

That's a real seed change

Only this week I have seen the use of the word sea change. Most dictionaries say that is correct. Huh?

Full fathom five thy father lies:
Of his bones are coral made:
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.

0
Beany | 21 May 2010 - 11:54pm

Eh?

Which one are you saying is right?

0
Bob | 22 May 2010 - 2:47pm

Sorry t'internet conked out

I would not have spoken either version. Did not really understand the meaning until I looked it up. I usually heard it as seed change.

0
Beany | 23 May 2010 - 12:20am

Ah!

I get you now. Shakespeare and Beck have always led me right on that one. It's much beloved of parliamentary correspondents:

HACK: "That's right, Huw. This fantastically uninspiring development which is only of interest to me and Andrew Marr marks a real sea change in British politics."

HUW EDWARDS: "Oh, do fuck off. Now, over to Laura Tobin for the fantastically nubile weather."

0
Bob | 23 May 2010 - 7:26am

Thanks for reminding me

of Laurie Anderson's Blue Lagoon (Shakespeare is about 2.30 in)

0
SpaceBoy | 22 May 2010 - 11:50pm

Might I say..

I am not aware of any implement within the dental œvre (did anyone notice the dipthong there.. classy or what?) which could be called a toothcomb. Matters dental can be removed from this debate.

Whilst we're at it..

Sliver. Slither. How many times do I see these words misused? The Telegraph is particularly guilty.

Saying that, I'm not a wordsmith by trade. I'd be a tad narked if some spotty hack told me how to do dentistry. By the same token, I should probably keep my half-baked attempts at pedantry under wraps.

0
Lenny Law | 21 May 2010 - 11:54pm

œuvre

Great thread but hard not to pick up on typos.

0
Los Aromas | 27 May 2010 - 1:14am

Since "typo" is short for "typographical error"

Shouldn't it be typo's?

0
Merv | 27 May 2010 - 6:01am

I'm flattered you think it's a typo..

Sadly not. Just my shitty spelling.

0
Lenny Law | 27 May 2010 - 10:56pm

Sp.

I believe it is "diphthong"?

I cannot believe that I have entered the fray here. I was perusing these posts with a superior smirk on my face wondering why on earth you are all getting so worked up about it. But now I feel like Silvio Dante - "just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in".

Completely off topic but here are Silvio's greatest hits. Contains swearing, violence etc. - all the good stuff.

0
Fazackerly | 10 June 2010 - 9:31am

Might I say..

I am not aware of any implement within the dental œvre (did anyone notice the dipthong there.. classy or what?) which could be called a toothcomb. Matters dental can be removed from this debate.

Whilst we're at it..

Sliver. Slither. How many times do I see these words misused? The Telegraph is particularly guilty.

Saying that, I'm not a wordsmith by trade. I'd be a tad narked if some spotty hack told me how to do dentistry. By the same token, I should probably keep my half-baked attempts at pedantry under wraps.

0
Lenny Law | 22 May 2010 - 12:02am

If you think grammar's important...

..you've got another thing coming.

No you haven't, you've got another think coming, you idiot. What is this *thing* you're suddenly talking about? Grrr.

1
Topical Tim | 22 May 2010 - 12:18am

I have always known the expression as 'thing',

I always assumed this was right as I believe this is the most common form used in English English.

A quick google search seems to suggest that the American English form is 'think' and it may be an American turn of phrase that has been adopted, but to my mind 'thing' is apt and proper and it is a 'thing', an idea or situation, that will shake your preconceptions and cause you to think again.

I am not an idiot.

4
phlanth | 22 May 2010 - 1:46am

um,

that rather destroys the beautty of the phrase doesn't it?

I associate it with slightly pompous teachers or parents and now I am a parent obviously am pumping up my pompous glands on a daily basis.

"I thought my homework didn't have to be in till tomorrow"

"If you think that you've got another think coming, young feller-me-lad"

How could substituting "thing" for "think" be anything other than an utter clunkfest and not to mention a non-sequitur?

4
Sheev | 22 May 2010 - 7:23am

Yes

it can't be a UK/US thing - "thing" simply makes no sense in that context

0
spt | 22 May 2010 - 8:42am

"Another thing coming" is popular among the Cousins

But, frankly, what else can you expect from people who think it's "process cheese".

1
Archie Valparaiso | 22 May 2010 - 9:24am

Process cheese

I get that, like, all the time? When dealing with colleagues in, like, other offices? Like, worldwide? Who speak Business Esperanto rather than anything resembling English as she is spoke like wot I does.

So - it's called "process" with the "pro" to rhyme with "raw", instea' o' uh,like, "toe"?

But it's not "prawcess" - it's mostly cheese. As in "I touched base with Franco and got a heads-up on status re: deliverables end-client side?"

0
Sheev | 22 May 2010 - 10:40am

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

I feel 'another think coming' is the clunky one - those two 'k' sounds colliding with each other, and the use of a 'think' in this context just seems wrong to me, the phrase doesn't have to follow 'thought' in a conversation or passage, a 'thing' can be anything; a re-think, a consequence, a surprise.

And another thing; we use this phrase to further an argument, the sense of 'thing' in this context is similar in my mind.

One more thing; English is a colourful language full of metaphor and simile and not everything always follows a strictly logical progression.

One final thing; I have always assumed it was 'thing' and this thread has certainly brought to my attention the fact that many people strongly believe it is 'think'. You learn something new every day, particularly round these parts.

1
phlanth | 22 May 2010 - 6:56pm

You can lead

a horse to water but you can't make it think, do you mean?

English is infinitely protean I agree - but an idiom or axiom in this case exists in its own terms. It is what it is. It means what it means.

Ironically, if you think "thing" is correct - then you have another think coming

1
Sheev | 22 May 2010 - 7:15pm

I would always say and write...

..."thing". Every time. "Think" looks really, really wrong.

2
Bob | 22 May 2010 - 8:18pm

perhaps -

but it's really, really right.

0
Sheev | 23 May 2010 - 8:57am

Sure?

I thought it was..."you can take a horse to water but a pencil has to be lead."

0
Beany | 23 May 2010 - 9:39am

You can lead a whore to culture

... but you can't make her think (Dorothy Parker)

0
FakeGeordie | 10 June 2010 - 8:56am

Double post

so deleting this one

0
FakeGeordie | 10 June 2010 - 8:57am

Well.

I think it's debatable, at best. The "thing isn't logical" argument is itself illogical, in that idioms in English are often odd, illogical or opaque in meaning.

Sad man that I am, I did a lot of googling on this one, and both sides are represented almost equally. Let's just agree to differ. :)

0
Bob | 28 May 2010 - 12:30pm

Let's agree to differ

as long as you agree I'm right...(wink/smile/chummy clap on shoulder)

The situation is not helped by the fact there is a Judas Priest song called "You've Got Another Thing Coming".

Mind you, very few situations are helped by a Judas Priest song.

Anyway, at the end of the night, a bird in the hand is better than two in the pear tree.

0
Sheev | 28 May 2010 - 3:49pm

Ah well

That's the thing about the Internet. It gives at least equal airtime to the wrong.

It's think. Cos that's what my mum says. I feel a central Govt edict coming on.

Oh, we don't do that any more...

0
spt | 29 May 2010 - 5:01am

You think you've got problems

I have just finished teaching a unit of History on slavery, after
describing the cramped conditions of tight packing,and that each slave only had a living space of five feet six inches in length, with a width of eighteen inches, I was asked (he's 13),"Did the slaves REALLY have five feet, sir?

0
stevieblunder | 26 May 2010 - 2:31pm

If you're reasonably skilled in numerous fields...

..but just don't shine at one thing in particular, my pal insists you are a Jack of all traits.

0
drakeygirl | 22 May 2010 - 12:41am

oh I like that

- a wistful twist - a happy accident.

0
Sheev | 22 May 2010 - 7:16am

Mrs Malaprop is

In The House !

and as regards above - fine-tooth is surely an adjective describing a type of comb, n'est-ce-pas?

0
Badlands | 22 May 2010 - 11:11am

I dunno...

If it's too much bear then I'm usually in the wrong gay bar. It happens; one moves on and gets over it.

1
daddyorchipsblog | 22 May 2010 - 1:35am

Reasonable Force

I think if someone who claims to be a "journalist" leans over you to in such circumstances and says 'Dude..Word Nerd' it is entirely acceptable to lamp the fucker.

4
Dr Volume | 22 May 2010 - 1:55am

Nah, he's alright

He doesn't know the difference between lose and loose, or flaunt and flout, and like most straight-outta-college scribes he thinks libel is something you find in the back of your shirt, but I've seen a lot worse.

1
Captain Underpants | 22 May 2010 - 10:06am

Are you sure...

...he isn't 'all right'?!

0
Merv | 25 May 2010 - 1:17am

Probably.

The problem with starting an expedition up Mount Pedant is that just when you think you're near the summit you find there's a whole bunch of people further up, looking down on you.

7
Captain Underpants | 25 May 2010 - 9:08am

Standing at the shoulder of the captain

What's got a spine but no backbone?

The OED, it would appear.

1
spt | 22 May 2010 - 7:05am

Kenny reckons

It's fine TOOTH comb, and that's enough for me.

0
milkybarnick | 22 May 2010 - 8:37am

Ten items or less

never fails to rankle at the supermarket.

0
DavidC | 22 May 2010 - 11:21am

Ten items or less

never fails to rankle at the supermarket.

0
DavidC | 22 May 2010 - 11:21am

Sorry Captain U,

but I think your post was a bit of a damp squid. I would even go so far as to say it was a bit cock-handed.

0
DougieJ | 22 May 2010 - 12:24pm
Captain Underpants | 22 May 2010 - 1:32pm

*thinks*

Did the Captain get my deliberate mis-spellings or...

By the way, you could have just said 'here's my butt'.

0
DougieJ | 22 May 2010 - 1:59pm

I got 'em

My reply probably wasn't as funny as I thought it was. D'oh!

0
Captain Underpants | 22 May 2010 - 2:22pm

The magazine I work for...

...or the magazine for which I work? Discuss ;-)

I have written acres of collateral which went to accountancy and law firms. They certainly notice any kind of solecism. Maintain the standards, say I.

0
Richie B | 22 May 2010 - 2:53pm

Oh dear

I don't know if I'll have the courage to post here ever again now...
What if my autodidactic hyphenation and slim grasp of english grammar - mainly picked up from the works of P G Wodehouse - will give one of you a brain haemorrhage ?
As I don't wish to see any of you slip into a coma; if you read an especially illwritten post by me in future, please take a deep breath and remind yourself that I am but a swede...dense but very good for your health !

0
Locust | 22 May 2010 - 6:16pm

Applause

You spelled "haemorrhage" correctly, which is more than The Daily Mail managed yesterday.

1
Archie Valparaiso | 22 May 2010 - 6:18pm

I may be a swede

but I'm definitely no journalist! ;-D

0
Locust | 22 May 2010 - 6:34pm

If you're being ultra-picky..

Shouldn't it be hæmorrhage?

0
Lenny Law | 22 May 2010 - 8:00pm

you can

get an ointment for those can't you?

0
Sheev | 22 May 2010 - 8:11pm

So nice . . .

So nice to sea so meny felow speling pednats on this bolg.

I'm reminded of that very silly schoolboy joke:

"Antidisestablishmentarianism is a very long word. Can you spell it?"
"I, T."

0
mikechurch | 22 May 2010 - 7:42pm

Sky have been playing trailers for a film this week

that they claim is called Ghosts of Girlfriend's Past.

I've seen it (trapped on a plane back from Turkey last year - don't watch it if you have a choice) and it's a riff on A Christmas Carol. Seemed like a pretty big clanger for a national broadcaster to drop I thought.

0
Lard | 22 May 2010 - 7:48pm

'I could care less'

... so you couldn't care more, eh?

0
halibut | 22 May 2010 - 7:48pm

Michael Quinlon has an interesting take on this...

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm

Whilst it is clearly 'wrong', it does make more sense if you think about it in the same sarcastic terms as "I should be so lucky" or "tell me about it".

I've always thought it was fine apart from the missing elipsis - i.e. it should be "I could care less..." with "but not much" being the implied/missing bit!

0
Merv | 25 May 2010 - 1:22am

Lakeside

I was at Lakeside shopping centre earlier today. An man passed us with the following slogan on his T-shirt:
'I'm drunk but your still ugly'

0
Gatz | 23 May 2010 - 4:45pm

Churchill spins in his grave

I hate T-shirt slogans that get things wrong/miss the point.
I saw one of a badly-drawn Victor Meldrew that said "Can You Believe It". No question mark, or even an exclamation mark. It's not even the right catchphrase.

0
Austin | 23 May 2010 - 11:33pm

Shoots you sir

Am I hovvered?
Loadsa Honey

Er...I'll get my boat...

2
drakeygirl | 23 May 2010 - 11:56pm

Possibly even worse....

Wobbling out of a bar in Tenerife I saw a woman , well into her seventies with a T-shirt proclaiming "Wine Me Dine Me Sixty Nine Me"

0
stevieblunder | 26 May 2010 - 2:41pm

That Joan Collins.

What is she like, eh?

3
Lenny Law | 26 May 2010 - 3:11pm

Missed my chance...

Like she's mistaken haemorrhoid cream for Ponds.

0
stevieblunder | 26 May 2010 - 3:21pm

What?

So do you have a really good comb for your teeth or not? Sometimes I struggle to keep up round here.

2
Dave Amitri | 24 May 2010 - 12:02am

All the music mags …

… use eponymous incorrectly, when referring to a band's self-titled album. (It should be homonymous.)

0
Brookster | 26 May 2010 - 4:54pm

The Shorter Oxford...

...says:

eponymous (adjective)-(of a person) giving his or her name to something; (of a thing) named after a particular person.

A homonym is 'each of two or more words having the same written form but of different meaning and origin', or 'a person or thing having the same name as another; a namesake'.

0
Inky Fingers | 27 May 2010 - 7:13am

The Captain raises his bat

and shamelessly milks the weak applause as the sun rises over the gasometer here at Lords. Marooned on 99 overnight, it's taken a 6.00am bumper from Merv to see him over the line. Only his second century in 18 months playing for The Word - not sure why he's making such a fuss of it, Bumble?

- No call for it, Aggers, and I must say, deliberately relocating the gasometer to Lord's to provoke an easy volley from the pedants, not to mention the missing apostrophe... it's poor form, is that.

- Quite right. The crowd hushes as Underpants hunches over his bat awaiting the next delivery. Double ton, do we think, Geoffrey?

- No.

0
Captain Underpants | 27 May 2010 - 7:30am

According to Dorothy Parker

You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think.

(Sorry - this was meant to be a reply to a post several spots above here...)

0
PaddyB | 27 May 2010 - 1:51pm

Which I did in fact do before seeing this

Sorry...

0
FakeGeordie | 10 June 2010 - 9:00am

How does anyone not a native of these isles

Ever learn such a complex language as English? 100 posts, and half of them from people who have English as a first language arguing the toss over the minutiae of grammar and punctuation. My admiration for anglophones from overseas knows no bounds.

0
Graham Johns | 28 May 2010 - 1:27am

even bankers...

I was with a financial advisor yesterday and the first time he referred to a entry level product as 'bob standard' , I thought it was my hearing.

...but by the third time in an hour, it was starting to become clear that he meant it. Everything else he said *seemed* right, but really...

0
Oscar Patterson | 28 May 2010 - 8:24am

Perhaps there's a guy in his team called Bob...

who does everything in a bare-minimum, no-frills kind-of-way!

0
Merv | 29 May 2010 - 1:05am

Impossible to underestimate the significance...

This common usage drives me mad. It is impossible to OVERestimate, its always very easy indeed to underestimate

0
FakeGeordie | 10 June 2010 - 9:02am

not always...

some might feel it's impossible to underestimate the importance of the many points raised in this thread.

1
spt | 12 June 2010 - 2:06pm

I admit...

... defeat!

0
FakeGeordie | 13 June 2010 - 10:39am

Here Here!

That really annoys me.

0
clivetemple | 13 June 2010 - 11:16am

To a certain type of mind...

To a certain type of mind, usually male, pedantry is highly addictive. My pet hate is the made-up word "intricle" ("intrical?"). I'm hearing that everywhere these days.

0
Mark Wallace | 18 June 2010 - 12:04am

Intricle

Is that a belly button that goes in, unlike an outricle?

1
Glenbervie | 18 June 2010 - 12:32am

Supposably

I've just realised that one of my colleagues says 'supposably' instead of 'supposedly'. Too late to correct her now.

0
Red Umpire | 21 June 2010 - 3:32pm
Privacy Statement    ©  2006 - 2012 Development Hell Ltd