| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
High Plains Drifter

Joined: 27 Jul 2004 Posts: 127 Location: Way Out There
|
Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| �such as yourself� This isn�t an emphatic pronoun anyway. An emphatic pronoun would be �such as you, yourself�. What you wrote is an example of an extremely common but nonstandard use of reflexive pronouns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Stephen Jones
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 Posts: 4124
|
Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
'Such as yourself' is given as an example of correct use in the CGEL, and there is no suggestion it is sub-standard.
"A University Grammar of English" by Quirk and Greenbaum, section 4.85, states "In variation with personal pronouns, reflexives often occur after ,as, like, but, except and in co-ordinated phrases. Again the examples do not suggest non-standard usage.
The American Heritage Dictionary tends to support the idea that the construction is best avoided:" The �self pronouns, such as myself, yourselves, and herself, are sometimes used as emphatic substitutes for personal pronouns, as in "Like yourself, I have no apologies to make". ..... Although these usages have been common in the writing of reputable authors for several centuries, they may sound overwrought". A significant majority of the usage panel disapproves of the usage, though that still leaves a sizeable minority which sees nothing wrong.
Combining the three sources given, I suspect this is another case where the construction is more acceptable in British English than in American English. I certainly have no objection to being in the same boat as "reputable authors for several centuries" and the two leading academic grammars of English - though if I were in the same boat as them I suspect they'd all put me down to bail out the water 
Last edited by Stephen Jones on Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Stephen Jones
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 Posts: 4124
|
Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I do not have the virtue of charity where you are concerned. |
It does not matter. I will lurk on the outskirts and bask in the radiance of your colossal humility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
While you're lurking, try learning to write.
Maybe that would allow you to communicate, instead of launching your snide gobbledegook from the sidelines. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zero Hero
Joined: 20 Mar 2005 Posts: 944
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| moonraven wrote: |
While you're lurking, try learning to write.
Maybe that would allow you to communicate |
This is certainly rich coming from someone who at:
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/job/viewtopic.php?p=233637&highlight=#233637
writes that they "have dedicated almost 40 years of [their] life to education � not indoctrination � and to empowering students, not indoctrinating them."
The repetition in this litany, part of speech change not withstanding (which is but a disguise of derivational morphology), reminds me of Walter in the Big Lebowski: "We know that this is your homework. We know that you stole a car ... and the f***ing money. And, we know that this is your homework."
I wonder if 'Moonraver' is about to behave as Walter did after making this statement? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
xxx
Last edited by moonraven on Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Moonraven is not a THEY, so could not have dedicated THEIR life to education. She is singular.
Twinkle, twinkle illiterate troll--and while you are at it, look up the difference between singular and plural personal pronouns and adjectives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zero Hero
Joined: 20 Mar 2005 Posts: 944
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, as all other posters will fully know, I employed "their" as I do not know your gender. It is a gender-neutral pronoun.
Besides, I do not necessarily believe you are female anymore than I necessarily believe you are a published polyglot Native American 60s-survivor dissident PhD.
Last edited by Zero Hero on Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:34 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moonraven
Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 3094
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Their is NOT an acceptable usage to refer to one person. That is why the usage that you claim to be acceptable appears in the grammar (locate the error) sections on all the international exams.
The usage is his/her.
And the word is SCRAPING.
Unless you mean I am throwing out the bottom of the barrel--that is to say, "scrapping" it.
Come to think of it, I am. No more attention for you, troll. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mskana
Joined: 14 Apr 2005 Posts: 5
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Next time I will ensure that I dot all my i's and cross my t's.I have never come across an egomaniac such as stephen jones.I do not have to impress anyone with my grammatical or spelling skillls in here.It is just a forum,so don't be so anal and uptight! This has now just become an opportunity for people to capitalise on one another's mistakes.The bottom line is there is racism in the industry,no matter how I spell or use grammar! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zero Hero
Joined: 20 Mar 2005 Posts: 944
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| moonraven wrote: |
Their is NOT an acceptable usage to refer to one person.
The usage is his/her. |
Your na�ve comments are prescriptive, they are in no way descriptive, and are certainly not stylistic.
When, after being 'advised' by a feminist that he should write 'he/she' and 'his/her', Richard Dawkins, in the preface to his superbly written popular science work The Blind Watchmaker, wrote:
"That is easy to do if you don't care about language, but then if you don't care about language you don't deserve readers of either sex."
Employing "their" makes me think of you as some form of plural being about as much as the definite article die makes a German speaker think of a clock as being female (when in the nominative case). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Zero Hero
Joined: 20 Mar 2005 Posts: 944
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| moonraven wrote: |
| When you learn as much about grammar as I know, maybe you'll realize it's time to stop making a fool of yourself. |
Such shenanigans! What's a grammar, 'Moonraver'? Anyway, I suppose you are one of those that go around parroting phrases such as 'pronouns replace nouns' and 'adjectives precede the noun they modify', and other such nonsense.
It is also highly noticeable that you, as a (self-evaluated) accomplished writer, are yet to comment on the repetition and redundancy inherent in your statement of:
"I have dedicated almost 40 years of my life to education � not indoctrination � and to empowering students, not indoctrinating them."
By the way, I see that not too long ago you were seeking employment with EF:
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/job/viewtopic.php?p=81093&highlight=#81093
Given all the qualifications, skills, and experience you claim to hold, would this not be something of a backward step? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ls650

Joined: 10 May 2003 Posts: 3484 Location: British Columbia
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Er, 13 months = "not too long ago" ?
And now, back to the flames... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Stephen Jones
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 Posts: 4124
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Er, 13 months = "not too long ago" ? |
A mere blink of the eye to us old timers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ls650

Joined: 10 May 2003 Posts: 3484 Location: British Columbia
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, I'm no spring chicken either (unfortunately) but 13 months still seems like a fair-sized chunk of time to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|