Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
I just read this article on Mental Floss titled "11 Grammar Rules That Make No Sense."
Totally agree with all of them but #6, which I'd never heard before. I've been using "over" and "under" both spatially and numerically all my life. Of course, as the article states, these aren't really "rules" in a strict sense. They're more a matter of style. This is what it says:
6. DON’T USE OVER TO MEAN MORE THAN.
This rule states that over is only to be used for spatial position and not for numbers. You do not spend over $5 on coffee, but more than $5. Stylebooks have recently been giving up on this rule. After all, we do talk about numbers in spatial terms. If it’s OK to say a price is higher or lower, why not over $5 or under $5?
Anyone else on this forum bothered by that? Anyone else ever hear of this so-called rule?
I recall reading something similar regarding the use of "farther" and "further." Use "farther" when speaking of distance, as in "I had to drive farther than expected." But use "further" when speaking about an excess, as in "It required further thought before I could answer the question." So that's the way I use those words, but in practice I see them used mostly interchangeably.
Hey Heimhenge,
I've just registered with this forum so that I could reply to your question: yes! I have encountered this 'rule' in the wild.
I learned it when working as a reporter in Hong Kong in the early 1990s, from my elderly subeditor (I believe that's 'copy editor' on your side of the Atlantic).
He was a mercurial character and constantly let loose a string of obscenities at us about our poor educations ("What the &*&%ing *#% are they teaching you back in the motherland these days?"); one of the main things he scared me into obedience about was to "never, EVER use 'over' when you &#^%*&ing mean 'more than', on pain of your mother's life, you bloody idiot."
He had been born around 1920 and was the product of a private British education during the 1930s, but had been isolated from the evolution of English-in-England for half a century by dint of having arrived in Hong Kong as a soldier in 1942, marrying a local woman, and never having left. (All that said, he had a heart of gold and was loved by everyone who worked with him.)
He was wrong - or at least outdated - about so many things, but I just can't shake that particular one. Now that I'm working as a part-time copy editor myself, I 'correct' this usage myself all the time because I think it sounds more precise, even though I know it doesn't really need to be done.
Clark's law: the less authority one has, the greater the tendency to exert it. He must have been overjoyed when he retired and could yell at kids to get off his lawn.
I admit to a related crotchet. I read of people saving 135% on their auto insurance. If they were paying $100 before, and they saved 100%, the insurance, it'd be free. To save 135%, the insurance company would start paying customers $35 to take the insurance. Not very likely, I'd say.
Hiya Inghilterra, and welcome to the forum. Appreciate your response. If you browse around the threads here, you'll see a lot of differences between British and American English have been discussed. Didn't think this was one of them though.
FYI, we just call them "editors" on this side of the pond, but I've also heard "copy editor" on occasion. I had an editor not unlike you describe. In fact, he once incorrected my use of "further" vs. "farther" and I had to refer him to this. But as I said in my first post, since then, I've seen the two used interchangeably so they're probably heading down the same usage path as "over" and "under".
Doesn't bother me all that much. I tend to fall into the descriptivist camp more often than not. I've never seen any polls, but I suspect the majority of forum members are also descriptivists. Part of the fun of language is watching how it evolves and adjusts. Hence my use of "incorrected" (which spell check of course flags).
Robert said
See Orion? The bright thing further south is Sirius.
Which is obviously wrong. South is a two-dimensional concept. When you start using it in 3-D, things go south straightaway.
Ask someone and they'll tell you the sun is somewhat East in the morning and somewhat ewst at night. At neen, it'll be pretty much "up". But what direction is it at midnight? It's not "down" because down means "closer to the center of the earth"....
How far can a dog run into a circular woods of one-mile diameter? Only half a mile, because after that, it's running out of the woods. (Time flies you can't they fly too fast.)
deaconB asked: But what direction is it at midnight? It’s not “down” because down means “closer to the center of the earth”
Technically, you would describe the position of the Sun at midnight as "at the nadir" (opposite of the "zenith").
I agree that the meaning of "down" depends on your frame of reference. In the horizon (local) frame of reference, "down" does indeed mean "closer to the center of the Earth." But when you're talking about the celestial sphere, "down" means "below the horizon." Like you said, it's all about 2D vs. 3D.
On the 2D celestial sphere, "south" means "in the direction radially away from the north celestial pole" (approximately = Polaris). In a 3D model of the sky, "south" doesn't really have any meaning.
deaconB also said: When you start using it in 3-D, things go south straightaway.
Nice wordplay. 🙂
Heimhenge said
deaconB asked: But what direction is it at midnight? It’s not “down” because down means “closer to the center of the earth”
Technically, you would describe the position of the Sun at midnight as "at the nadir" (opposite of the "zenith").
Which ius answering a different question. South is a direction, and Miami is a position. If you say the sun is at its nadir, you still haven't answered "which direction is the sun?"
It is generally the consensus that "siimultaneity" is a meaningless concept over great distances, and it would be imprecise at small distances. I think "what direction is the sun" is a meaningless concept for similar reasons. If you want to fly to the sun, you need to take off upward, regardless of the tiime of day/night, and once you are out of the earth's shadow, you can "go thataway" allowing for windage.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)