call me old fashioned but, page-7

Hi Pecora

If you think you are old fashioned, then I must be antediluvian. In jest, but many a true word hides in jest, I have postulated that one can work out a person's IQ, and hence whether to take their opinions seriously or not, by the use of a few simple rules of thumb, which are:

* "Youse" as the plural of "you" – bottom 10%.
* Mixing up “borrow” and "lend" – bottom 20%.
* Saying “me” where “my” was required – bottom 20%
* Confusing the intransitive verb “lie” and the transitive verb “lay” – bottom 50%.
* Not understanding that “man” is a homonym with at least two meanings – a) mankind and b) adult male Homo sapiens – bottom 60%.
* Using “good” when the adverb “well” is required – bottom 80% (because it is so prevalent in Australia).

Then there is the use of filler words – words that add nothing to the sentence. Examples are:

* “way back in 1999”. The year 1999 does not recede more into the past because one proceeds it with “way back”.

In a similar vein, I find words like “crashes”, “plummets” and similar words used by financial journalists annoying, when all that I want to know are the facts. I recall once reading words to the effect that BHP's SP crashed, and on reading the facts learned the SP declined by about 1%, which is a fairly normal daily movement.

Then there are the strings of prepositions – such as “Come on down to Tuggeranong” as the spruiker at the Southern Cross Club in Woden used to often shout. The same guy would have to call out car registrations if parked cars had their lights on, and he insisted on calling “zed” as “zee” – obviously too much Sesame Street, followed by education that was no more substantial.

Some Americanisms are acceptable (no different to words from other countries that become useful denizens of English), but "gotten" and "dove" for "dived" are two best expunged from use.