Compliment VERSUS Complement

[2cats]

I love it! I didn't know about this site. Thanks for the link!!
--
2cats



'The only thing that will make a soufflé fall is if it knows you are afraid of it.'--James Beard

 

[CharlieDIY]

But it always has been, of course, because that's how language stays alive.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[Murray McCulloch]

I was just thinking the same.

I enjoy listening to radio interviews of various people in the fields of politics, science, and others. Often they are foreign or foreign-born, and speak English with strong accents, and yet are far more articulate and eloquently spoken than I am. I would be hard-pressed to formulate a sentence in any other languge. Anyone who can communicate in multiple languages amazes me, but especially when they are so adept in tongues foreign to them.

Quite the reverse. I am often humbled, sometimes to the point of
shame, at the ability of others to converse in a second language.
I confess to speaking only a very little French and certainly could
not conduct the discussions, as witnessed here, in anything other
than English.
I have the greatest admiration for you and all of your similarly
gifted contemporaries.

--
http://www.pbase.com/mmcculloch

 

[Murray McCulloch]

Thus the wink.
--
http://www.pbase.com/mmcculloch

 

[Tristan Cope]

poor grama and speling is bad enuf but wat really irritates me is people who think that any form of electronic communication does not require punctuation this is not only deeply irritating but a misplaced belief because people just will not bother to read such posts they look awful and just trying to read them is actually painful I think its supposed to be some part of "youf" culture but as far as I can make out all it demonstrates is ignorance and stupidity there have certainly been people on these forums who write like this even more annoyingly ive actually had emails from people that look like this the other thing that really annoys me is people who write huge great long posts who don't break them up into smaller paragraphs again it seems they dont realise how difficult to read this is on a screen i think many people are completely put of by very long paragraphs that just look like a mush of words on the screen

In short, for legibility, try to use correct punctuation, use capitals where appropriate and use nice bite-sized paragraphs containing perhaps ony two or three sentences.

See how much easier to read that is?

 

[Gordon S Walker]

Spelt the same (or should that be spelled) but different pronunciations depending where in the world you are.

Yet again an invlauabelwaste of bandwifft iff u asq me opinyin, guv'nah !

I'll get my coat on the way out.

--
It's an L of a life, this photography lark

http://gordon-walker.fotopic.net/

 

[Tristan Cope]

Idiomatic as it may be, it just doesn't make any sense at all.

"I could care less" clearly implies that you do care about it, as you could care less than you do.

The meaning of "I couldn't care less" is clear to everyone.

I don't buy the theory about the phrase arising out of irony.

 

[Tristan Cope]

The word aggravate means to make worse, never to annoy!

As in, by scratching the sore on my arm I aggravated the injury.
Or, the financial position was aggravated by poor investments.
I have no idea why so many people use completely the wrong word
when there are perfectly good ones already in existence.

Aggravate (verb)
....
To exasperate; to provoke; to irritate. [Colloq.]

 

[richardplondon]

Taking one example: the placing of punctuation marks, e.g. with quote marks or brackets, should first clarify the meaning.

He asks whether good grammar is "just for geeks?" (He's curious.)

Is good grammar "just for geeks"? Now I'm asking the same question (but using his words).

No single rote rule could possibly work for all sentences; language and meaning are too rich to be tied down that way.

Clarity requires a reasonable working knowledge of the toolkit: symbols, spellings and sentence constructions. This is a gap in many people's formal education - not their fault; within their power to rectify.

If following a rule can lead to a confusing result, it's a bad idea to follow it blindly. Taking the widespread rule that punctuation 'always' goes inside the quote:

Is learning to spell "a waste of time?"

Here I don't know if the quoted person asked this same question too. If not, perhaps he just used those same four words in some other context, in which case the question mark may be a misquote. The rule has now muddied the water.

'Rules of convention' are an unsatisfactory substitute for understanding the task at hand. If you are able to apply the rule properly in all circumstances, you have no need of the rule in the first place!

As in sentence syntax, so in photography.

RP

 

[Pyogenes]

Adding apostrophes to acronyms to make them plural e.g. CD's should
be CDs (though I'm guilty of that once in a while out of a bad
habit). Apostrophes should only be used when the acronym is
pronouced as in "NATO's forces"

Where did this rule come from? I never heard of this rule.
Rationale?

Avoiding the use of the apostrophe eliminates the chances someone will accidentally interpret the pluralization as a possessive. Best example the comes to mind: "This plays CD's well." This could be mistake to mean someone named CD owns a well that can be played. Drop the apostrophe and no chance of ambiguity.

I only learned that one relatively recently (3-4 years ago). I know some journalism schools still teach it, but I think this is one of those debatable points since most people make use of the apostrophe.

Then there is the New York Times rule for punctuating acronyms:
I.B.M., etc. Has this rule escaped beyond the NYT?

I believe IBM's official name is simply "IBM" now, so I.B.M. would be inaccurate even by New York Times standards. ;-)

In all seriousness, that is one rule I'm glad has all but gone away. I can't go more than 5 minutes without typing an acronym at work. My right ring finger would fall off if I had to type that many periods.

While we're at it, any comments on the new habit of using
apostrophes for simple plurals? i.e., "We will see many new
camera's announced at Phtokina."

I can't even figure out a single rational reason why anybody would think that was correct! Yet we see it all the time... I blame MTV. hehehe

a/an - Decision to use a or an is based on the pronunication, not
the spelling, of the word it modifies. "A european" and "an mp3
player" are grammatically correct.

This rule I know about but have forgotten all the nuances. If I
remember correctly, it is based on a ground rule of "Use "an" if
the word that it precedes starts with a vowel, except in these
cases...." It is the "except in these cases...." part that I'd
like more detail, please.

Forget that rule - it causes more problems than it solves. Just say the word aloud. If it starts with a vowel sound, use "an." The word "an" exists to separate vowels and make the words distinct.

Odd thing about this rule is that accents come into play. A person with a Cockney accent usually drops the "H" sound from the beginning of words. It is correct for them to write "An happy couple."

A/an can also give clues on how to pronounce acronyms. For example "SCSI" is pronounced "scuzzy" so you'd say "a SCSI cable." In contrast, SOB is pronounced by saying the letters so you'd write, "What an SOB! He stole a SCSI cable from me!"

--
Joe

Any perceived rudeness, condescending tone, or insults are not intended, but rather the result of my inability to properly express myself with the written word.

 

[richardplondon]

a/an - Decision to use a or an is based on the pronunication, not

the spelling, of the word it modifies. "A european" and "an mp3
player" are grammatically correct.

This rule I know about but have forgotten all the nuances. If I
remember correctly, it is based on a ground rule of "Use "an" if
the word that it precedes starts with a vowel, except in these
cases...." It is the "except in these cases...." part that I'd
like more detail, please.

Forget vowels etc, it's completely phonetic (write it as you would say it).

an EM PEE THREE (mp3) player - the EH sound at the beginning of "mp3" just fades in without a clear start. "An" marks it as a separate syllable.

a European - there's a Y beginning sound here, a definite "start". UH YEEooropEEan has distinct enough syllables to let you say it cleanly. AN is not necessary here, in fact it would make it harder to say.

general principle:

If the following word has a definite 'beginning' sound, like "camera", use A. If it doesn't, like "eel", AN makes it easier to say the two words together smoothly and recognisably.

Classic example: if you are old-fashioned, a French speaker or very aristocratic, you might pronounce "Hotel" in the French way - 'otel. This needs "AN" - which is much crisper than blurting UH...OTEL.

If you happen to say "Hotel" with an audible H, like most English speakers, this has a definite beginning sound - so "A" is fine - UH H'OTEL.

RP

 

[richardplondon]

THIS KIND OF THING HURTS THE EYES TO READ AND IS USUALLY NOT WORTH THE TROUBLE WHEN YOU HAVE DONE SO

The big problem is that incoherence takes no effort to express - the more chaotic, the more eloquent.

Clarity of thought relies on clarity of expression (and vice versa), a powerful but delicate system!

RP

 

[Pyogenes]

Hopefully and presently - I almost never see these words used correctly.

"Hopefully" always modifies the verb. That means whatever action is occurring, it is ocurring full of hope. It should never be used in place of "I hope"

Incorrect: Hopefully, a better camera will be announced soon.
Correct: I hope a better camera will be announced soon.
Correct: I checked the winning lotto numbers hopefully.

"Presently" means "soon" and should not be used to mean "now."

Incorrect: You are learning some grammar presently.
Correct: You are learning some grammar now.
Correct: The train will arrive presently.

--
Joe

Any perceived rudeness, condescending tone, or insults are not intended, but rather the result of my inability to properly express myself with the written word.

 

[lovingtheview]

Murray,

You and many others on this forum, when judged by your photos rather by your words, are blessed with the eyes and souls of the artist.

None of us find perfect satisfaction in our lives, true enough, and might see other careers and settings as possibly being more desirable than our own. Nevertheless, I am confident that those who have at least a glimpse of the world of art, are the most fortunate of all.

All of the enthusiasm shown in this forum could be about Chevys and Fords. And yes, we have something similar in our Canon/Nikon bouts, but the love of capturing nature to savor and share with others, makes the photography forum very much unlike a forum on cars, bikes, boats, etc. Theirs is one-dimensional in that discussions are about equipment and machines only. Ours has all of that grown up little boy's toys fascination, but far more important, we seek to inspire the eye, heart, and soul.

Keep up those great bird shots and the flower macros!

 

[Phrank]

Murray and mac:
"Grin and bare/bear it."

Methinks both of you are wrong - whichever you settle on should have an exclamation mark (!) at the end.

Greengrocers, CD retailers and other High Street retailers in the UK have a lot to answer for. Their products become possessive at the drop of a hat, so we have "CD's for sale", "cabbage's only 40p", etc. on their signery.

 

[echelon2004]

but I am afraid that the level of the language used in discussions about technical matters affects the credibility quite much. So does grammar and spelling.

I try to shy away from most of the traps associated with having a limited vocabulary, but even though I am familiar with the psycology of this problem, I still venture far away from the roads most travelled in my efforts to be taken seriously and not simply being discarded due to poor language capabilities.

It is not easy.

And thank you all for being as considerate and understanding as you normally are, it must be difficult at times, watching ones language being butchered...

Cheers
--
Anders

Some of my pictures can be seen at;
http://teamexcalibur.se/US/usindex.html

event photography and photo journalism

 

[CharlieDIY]

Murray and mac:
"Grin and bare/bear it."
Methinks both of you are wrong - whichever you settle on should
have an exclamation mark (!) at the end.

Greengrocers, CD retailers and other High Street retailers in the
UK have a lot to answer for. Their products become possessive at
the drop of a hat, so we have "CD's for sale", "cabbage's only
40p", etc. on their signery.

Country stores in the U.S. have their own problems: "No check's cashed".
--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[CharlieDIY]

worse than that was the guy who double spaced between words and used ..... mid-line and elsewhere for no discernible reason

And it is HARD to type that way!

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[BIJ001]

Bogdan, there is nothing wrong with your English. IMO,
often people who don't speak English natively are more precise
than people who speak English natively.
I'm guessing because they need to concentrate on the language more.

Also maybe they have learned written ("proper") English and not the kitchen language so to say. There are several layers of a language. A native speaker is likely to beat them in slang.

 

[Wayne Larmon]

Adding apostrophes to acronyms to make them plural e.g. CD's should
be CDs (though I'm guilty of that once in a while out of a bad
habit). Apostrophes should only be used when the acronym is
pronouced as in "NATO's forces"

Where did this rule come from? I never heard of this rule.
Rationale?

Avoiding the use of the apostrophe eliminates the chances someone
will accidentally interpret the pluralization as a possessive.
Best example the comes to mind: "This plays CD's well." This could
be mistake to mean someone named CD owns a well that can be played.
Drop the apostrophe and no chance of ambiguity.

I only learned that one relatively recently (3-4 years ago). I
know some journalism schools still teach it, but I think this is
one of those debatable points since most people make use of the
apostrophe.

Actually, I was asking about it the other way: why use apostrophes at all to indicate plural with acronyms? I didn't know that it was an issue, other than as part of the general problem of people using incorrectly apostrophes to indicate plural. I'd never use an apostrophe if I was referring to "my collection of CDs and DVDs."

Then there is the New York Times rule for punctuating acronyms:
I.B.M., etc. Has this rule escaped beyond the NYT?

I believe IBM's official name is simply "IBM" now, so I.B.M. would
be inaccurate even by New York Times standards. ;-)

The NYT uses this to this day.

Hoping to Be a Model, I.B.M. Will Put Its Patent Filings Online
By STEVE LOHR
Published: September 26, 2006

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/26/technology/26patent.html?ex=1316923200&en=fc65e7ee30c4fb61&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Well, as of yesterday anyway, but I don't think they changed the policy overnight.

You politely didn't point out the error I made in the subject line. It should be "Ohh, a rant...." I don't think you were conducting multiple rants.

I don't know if there is any browser based grammar checker, but the Google Toolbar has a great built in spelling checker that I depend on heavily.
http://toolbar.google.com/
For both IE and FireFox. Not sure about other browsers.

IE users can use ieSpell, if they object to the Google Toolbar.
http://www.iespell.com/

Wayne