Jump to content
JWTalk - Jehovah's Witnesses Online Community

More off-topic non-sense


Recommended Posts

My math students maintained that all numbers (numerals) are odd. 

 

A quirky tidbit of developing language: two words separated by a hyphen are frequently on their way to becoming a compound word, depending (sometimes) on use frequency.  Melville's book was originally titled Moby-Dick.  Some hyphenated words revert to their original separate words. Others are not clearly one or the other like 'bumble-bee.' 

 

Many grammarians believe that one should not use the word 'entitled' unless referring to a privilege. When our brothers introduce an article and say it is entitled, "Be Loyal To God," are they wrong? No, a more careful check-up will disclose that it is historically correct to use 'entitled' when introducing the name of an expository work. Many editors cling to an incorrect belief in this matter.

 

I shall now give myself a time-out and work on a home-school exercise titled, "Why Is a Cling-Peach Similar To the Structure of the Earth?"

    

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Y-S

 

 


Edited by kejedo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My math students maintained that all numbers (numerals) are odd. 
 
A quirky tidbit of developing language: two words separated by a hyphen are frequently on their way to becoming a compound word, depending (sometimes) on use frequency.  Melville's book was originally titled Moby-Dick.  Some hyphenated words revert to their original separate words. Others are not clearly one or the other like 'bumble-bee.' 
 
Many grammarians believe that one should not use the word 'entitled' unless referring to a privilege. When our brothers introduce an article and say it is entitled, "Be Loyal To God," are they wrong? No, a more careful check-up will disclose that it is historically correct to use 'entitled' when introducing the name of an expository work. Many editors cling to an incorrect belief in this matter.
 
I shall now give myself a time-out and work on a home-school exercise titled, "Why Is a Cling-Peach Similar To the Structure of the Earth?"
    
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Y-S
 
 

In the simple definition, Merriam-Webster gives this meaning to the word entitle: "to give a title to (something, such as a book)."

Sample meaning is this: "He entitled his book 'My Life on Mars.'"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And why the term, "no-nonsense' approach? Doesn't that just mean sensible approach, in an oxymoronic style or syllable wasting? Unless, of course, one is talking about hosiery, in which case this OT post (and its poster) should be promptly redirected to the dress and grooming thread.  And why are "L'Eggs" pantyhose no longer packaged in those pressed cardboard egg shaped containers?  Shouldn't they be re-titled, "L'Plastic Pouch" panty hose? Going further out there on a limb, why is a very dear Sister in my cong offended by the term 'panty hose,' but not so with 'knee highs?' Ah, sweet mysteries of life.......

                                                                                                                     Y (not uncommon to be pondering such absurdities)S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never been in a pickle; I've never been in a stew; I've never been in a jam; I've never even been accused of being  one of two peas in a pod.  I'll spend about two seconds mourning this apparent culinary deficit in my life.

 

                                                                     Y (Hey, this isn't my first Antiques Roadshow,) S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 9/30/2016 at 4:27 PM, kejedo said:

 

Many grammarians believe that one should not use the word 'entitled' unless referring to a privilege. When our brothers introduce an article and say it is entitled, "Be Loyal To God," are they wrong? No, a more careful check-up will disclose that it is historically correct to use 'entitled' when introducing the name of an expository work. Many editors cling to an incorrect belief in this matter.

My, my, Sis. Pauline, you have pushed my button (one of many buttons from which I suffer :blink:)...

 

With regard to the word "entitle," may I mention this: In the early 1970s I became employed by one of the largest federal (US) agencies and was sent to their "school" (i.e., classroom instruction all day) for 3 months. During our first week of training, we spent 2 hours learning the meaning of "entitlement" from the agency's standpoint. The word had to do with becoming due an agency payment. "Entitlement" was contrasted with the word "eligibility," a word defined by the agency as having a potential for entitlement. A claimant (i.e., a person eligible for some sort of payment) could move from eligibility to establishing entitlement. That required submitting an application along with legal evidence (e.g., birth certificate, marriage certificate, tax return depending on the type of application) sufficient to result in approval. That led to payment(s).

 

When I finished my training and attacked the job, I experienced the importance of the distinction between the two words (eligibility and entitlement). Some folks would come into the office and merely discuss eligibility/entitlement (asking questions and getting answers), then leave without submitting a signed application. A month or three later, they'd call the office, saying (usually with attitude :angry:): "Where is my money!?"

 

It usually took all the patience and humility I could muster to deal with the misunderstanding at that point.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear brother Jimmy, I also am interested in and sometimes stymied by word usage.  I'm not  a language snob and do not correct anyone's English (except when I was teaching English grammar). Some here in the forum know that I am also a hobby writer. I was offered a contract for a book but was instructed to make some changes. I declined the contract. One of them was to stop separating two related clauses with a semi-colon. Another was to use entitled only as it referred to a right. Still another was to change the spelling of a specific person's name in the novel.  Actually, there was nothing grammatically wrong with my choices.  These were just her particular preferences. I am entitled to choose the name-spelling  of a character in my writing.

 

Another one I checked from a magazine was the use of the past tense "wreaked". I knew the word 'wrought' was the correct past tense of "wreak," but found "wreaked" was equally acceptable.

 

One day I heard a young man  say , "May I axe you a question?" The lady to whom he was speaking started making cutting motions by her hand on her neck and started mocking the young man,  "What, are you going to chop my head off with an axe?" I mentioned a little later that 'axe, aks, and ask' are all appropriate uses to convey the meaning 'to inquire.' Historically both 'ask' and 'axe' have been used through time in England and in the US with about a 50/50 split. The lady glared at me and added, "They never used 'axe'  in England." "Well, check it out, I could be wrong," I responded. She never got back to me.

 

Like yourself and Nehemiah, I worked for a US gov. agency (when I was reg pioneering.)  Interesting collection of experiences.

 

This one still keeps me laughing from the 'Beard and grooming' thread: .. page 101 post 2531"  I'm glad that one never made in to the change-a-letter' game.

 


Edited by kejedo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

About JWTalk.net - Jehovah's Witnesses Online Community

Since 2006, JWTalk has proved to be a well-moderated online community for real Jehovah's Witnesses on the web. However, our community is not an official website of Jehovah's Witnesses. It is not endorsed, sponsored, or maintained by any legal entity used by Jehovah's Witnesses. We are a pro-JW community maintained by brothers and sisters around the world. We expect all community members to be active publishers in their congregations, therefore, please do not apply for membership if you are not currently one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

JWTalk 22.10.29 (changelog)