to be

This is the place to post questions and discussions on usage and style. The members of the Wordwizard Clubhouse will also often be able to help you to formulate that difficult letter.

to be

Post by GrannyJules » Wed Mar 21, 2007 2:56 pm

Lately, I've heard a lot of people saying things like "needs replaced" rather than "needs replacing". This sounds wrong to me. I'm not a grammar major so I don't know the proper terminology. Is this just another new phrase, like "gone missing" or "the both of you" (which are two other phrases that make me crazy)?

What ever happened to the words "to be", as in "needs TO BE replaced"?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Jules

to be

Post by gdwdwrkr » Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:28 pm

Welcome Granny
Haleluia. Halleluiah. You wrote "what ever" (rather than whatever).
Hold fast. Never give up.
You are loved.
-Jammaw's little peachy pie
(who needed corrected):)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by dalehileman » Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:29 pm

Welcome indeed, Granny
Yes; though I don't remember having heard it myself--nor had Laverne who is far more savvy than I-- evidently "needs replaced" is becoming more and more common as it gets 60,000 Ghits
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by Edwin Ashworth » Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:14 am

It seems to be a Scottish trait to substitute the past for the present participle in such constructions, though at http://www.linguapax.org/pdf/LpaxComr.pdf it is also claimed to be Geordie.

There is a lengthier discussion - informative if not authoritative - at nugget.livejournal.com/95916.html

(sorry, this needs hotlinked)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by Erik_Kowal » Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:41 am

Edwin, I followed that Livejournal link to a blog entry titled 'Grammar Police' in which this construction was roundly condemned, purely on the basis that it was hitherto unfamiliar to the blogger in question and, in a paradoxical twist of logic, thus exemplified the ignorance of those who were using it. His rant was followed by numerous equally vituperative condemnations of the same phenomenon from visitors to his blog who were commenting on his entry.

There appears to be no shortage of people who much prefer to criticise unfamiliar or 'wrong' usages of English than to acknowledge the diversity of the ways in which different groups of people speak the language.

For me, one of the fascinations of other people's use of English is observing how it diverges from the Standard English forms that I tend to use. Apart from anything else, the way they speak reflects the ways in which they view the world differently from me; it is much more constructive to make the effort to understand them on their own terms rather than to regard their linguistic differences merely as an excuse to make oneself seem superior.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: -- Looking up a word? Try OneLook's metadictionary (--> definitions) and reverse dictionary (--> terms based on your definitions)8-- Contribute favourite diary entries, quotations and more here8 -- Find new postings easily with Active Topics8-- Want to research a word? Get essential tips from experienced researcher Ken Greenwald

to be

Post by Edwin Ashworth » Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:41 pm

Insegreviously.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by Erik_Kowal » Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:46 am

I am overcome -- no, overwhelmed -- with a tremendous sense of epanorthosis.

Still, needs must.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: -- Looking up a word? Try OneLook's metadictionary (--> definitions) and reverse dictionary (--> terms based on your definitions)8-- Contribute favourite diary entries, quotations and more here8 -- Find new postings easily with Active Topics8-- Want to research a word? Get essential tips from experienced researcher Ken Greenwald

to be

Post by gdwdwrkr » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:44 pm

Maybe you should see a doctor, no, a psychiatrist, Erik.
Could be from not enough Wite-out sniffed ;-)
That one needs looked up in a book.. No, a dictionary!
It's sufficiently musty.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by Edwin Ashworth » Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:15 pm

Make it a comma.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by GrannyJules » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:47 pm

Forgive me, I thought maybe I'd get an actual answer! You people are a strange bunch! Must be British humor???
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Jules

to be

Post by gdwdwrkr » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:28 pm

Perhaps if you'd asked an actual question...? [To which you did not already know the answer!!....Lazy, ignorant majorities of people needing knowing how to talk right.] There is room for one more! Hang in there, you'll see.
You are forgiven!
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by Erik_Kowal » Tue Mar 27, 2007 3:31 am

An actual answer as an alternative to comma relief?

Well, that would be a no-brainerd.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: -- Looking up a word? Try OneLook's metadictionary (--> definitions) and reverse dictionary (--> terms based on your definitions)8-- Contribute favourite diary entries, quotations and more here8 -- Find new postings easily with Active Topics8-- Want to research a word? Get essential tips from experienced researcher Ken Greenwald

to be

Post by gdwdwrkr » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:22 am

GrannyJules wrote: Must be British humor???
There ya go...calling names.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by coxie » Sun Apr 29, 2007 12:35 am

Jules, I'm widjoo.

The way I seen it, the world's gone crayzie. Know won can spel, let alone speek propper, ennee moor.

Mind you, regardless of the amusing soodo, siko anallittics of the Georgian cab'nit mayker, I think Erik's postulation is a sound perspective, although I do'n agree.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

to be

Post by NogaNote » Sun Apr 29, 2007 2:22 am

According to this link: http://www.trans4mind.com/personal_deve ... EPrime.htm

The verb "To be" is nothing but a trouble maker and an obfuscator and should be extirpated from the English language.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Post Reply