Yep, that's the only one I find annoying too.
Oh, and 'that smarts', because it makes no sense!
Have vs. of
- Thread starter SeeKified
- Start date
Yep, that's the only one I find annoying too.
Oh, and 'that smarts', because it makes no sense!
Agreed and you certainly wouldn't want to be doing that in certain pubs in Glasgow.
I can just picture it
"Hoi, you there! Yes, you, the chap with the tatoos you aren't speaking the queen's english my good fellow."
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,783
- Location
- Falling...
My guilty pleasure is editing a post and correcting the grammar 
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,783
- Location
- Falling...
It does matter though, and if you struggle with it, learn to improve it.
Thank you.
Does my entire school life count?
Missed breaks at primary school and extra classes, extra study and tuition at secondary school.
So are you sure it's as easy as that?
IIRC, that would signify "ownership" which is not the correct vernacular for the sentence.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,783
- Location
- Falling...
Try French grammar! It's hellish!
It's entirely down to my personal feeling though, an irrational disdain if you wish. It shouldn't matter, and in the grand scheme of things it doesn't affect me directly. However, I do pick up on bad spelling and poor basic grammar (I'm not talking about split infinitives, or poor use of declensions etc...). I tut to myself and, sometimes actually judge what I see as well as, the person involved. It's unfair, and in most cases, has no relevance to how able or clever that person is.
I guess I'm like this owing to the amount of fuss that I went through as a child to ensure my grammar was correct in numerous languages.
It's entirely down to my personal feeling though, an irrational disdain if you wish. It shouldn't matter, and in the grand scheme of things it doesn't affect me directly. However, I do pick up on bad spelling and poor basic grammar (I'm not talking about split infinitives, or poor use of declensions etc...). I tut to myself and, sometimes actually judge what I see as well as, the person involved. It's unfair, and in most cases, has no relevance to how able or clever that person is.
I guess I'm like this owing to the amount of fuss that I went through as a child to ensure my grammar was correct in numerous languages.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 May 2007
- Posts
- 877
Why doesn't it make sense?
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 23,897
- Location
- South East
Because one is wrong and the other is right.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 16,043
- Location
- The land of milk & beans
Because it's said when something hurts. 'Smart' is not interchangeable with 'hurt'.
He's crying because he's smart.
Give me the money or I'll smart your dog.
It makes no sense.
*edit*
Actually I just checked the dictionary and apparently I'm wrong and smart is a synonym of hurt. When did that happen. An Americanism I guess?
Associate
- Joined
- 8 May 2007
- Posts
- 877
But that's exactly what smart as a verb means.
Edit:
No... It's been used that way since at least as far back as the 13th century. In fact it had that use before it ever meant "clever".
smart (v.)
O.E. smeortan "be painful," from W.Gmc. *smert- (cf. M.Du. smerten, Du. smarten, O.H.G. smerzan, Ger. schmerzen "to pain," originally "to bite"), from PIE base *(s)merd-, from base *(s)mer- "to rub, pound" (cf. Gk. smerdnos "terrible, dreadful," Skt. mardayati "grinds, rubs, crushes," L. mordere to bite").
smart (adj.)
late O.E. smeart "sharp, severe, stinging," related to smeortan (see smart (v.)). Meaning "quick, active, clever" is attested from c.1300, probably from the notion of "cutting" wit, words, etc.; meaning "trim in attire" first attested 1718, "ascending from the kitchen to the drawing-room c.1880." [Weekley] In ref. to devices, "behaving as though guided by intelligence" (e.g. smart bomb) first attested 1972. Smarts "good sense, intelligence," is first recorded 1968. Smart cookie is from 1948; smarty-pants first attested 1941.
-etymonline.com
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 1 May 2007
- Posts
- 1,150
Just pay attention in class?
So you should also be able to do the same level of maths now as you did when studying it in school? Or be able to explain in detail the process of photosynthesis?
Not necessarily... I do very little maths on a day to day basis and have nothing to do with photosynthesis anymore so my abilities with either would be far from acceptable in a mathematic of biological situation but I do use the English language all day everyday.
It doesn't matter whether you say "should have", or write it, it's still wrong.