To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.

Discussion:Vocabulary II: spelling and punctuation and grammar and usage and whatever...

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> General Chat --> Vocabulary II: spelling and punctuation and grammar and usage and whatever...


Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

3 March 2013
The superfluous and redundant use of "both" is really starting to aggravate me.

"Larry and Mary both agreed to meet at six o'clock."
NO, NO, NO.
"Larry and Mary agreed to meet at six o'clock."

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

3 March 2013
And so is the use of the accents aigus in the English word "résumé". I'm not sure why it's pissing me off. Just because, I guess.

I can tell the difference between "resume" the verb, and "resume" the noun.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

3 March 2013
What do you have against Vocabulary, which perhaps now is Vocabulary I?

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

3 March 2013
vocabulaire

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

3 March 2013
no accent aigu on that last e

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

3 March 2013
Which last e, Kevin?

Fiancée and fiancé are both *affectées*.

Vocabule I [credit Norm Crosby] had gotten so big, computerwiseish, my hamster-powered PC couldn't deal with it. But I assure you, it should *still* be mandatory reading for all neophytical 'Manackers.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

3 March 2013
To each his own bitch. I get pissed off when I see people behind the wheel not knowing how to negotiate a traffic circle ('roundabout' for UKBones).....you have to be ballsy to drive a circle and so many are not.

But SC reminds me of the signage on the GS Parkway: "Upgrade Ahead" What is wrong with 'hill' except that such features are not known in our flatland.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
Oral vs. verbal.

I appreciate you your being available.

Bracket Creep (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
You're right, Len. Telling someone that they have great oral skills may get you slapped in the face.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
BC, there are many words and phrases that can be misunderstood in our wonderful English language. For example, look at D&T's sentence above: "To each his own bitch." Do you have yours?

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
Some more of my bêtes noires:

"Different than" vs. "different from"
"Can not" vs. "cannot"
"Should of" vs. "should have"
Writers who insist on using foreign words and phrases - especially in the plural - that I then have to look up...

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
But D&T, wouldn't "hill" also be a warning about a *downgrade*...?

"Flatland" - Where is Snuffy Smith these days?

PHIL MOODY (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
Didn't you say that before?

Did you say that before?

I still say one should be yes, and the other no.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
"Did you or did you not say that before?" Answer: "Yes."

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
quell dommageaux

JAD (talk|edits) said:

4 March 2013
I want to share something with you all that I've been using in my office for the last couple of weeks, and this seems as good a thread as any to hijack. I purchased dictation software – Dragon Naturally Speaking 12 – and am using it now to write this post. It is so cool.

So how does this relate to a thread about vocabulary? It's been interesting to see in print the errors in how I speak. For example, I didn't realize that I change tenses often.

Seriously though, I highly recommend it. I've been doing emails and research memos with it. Preparing a memo is easier and more efficient when I can focus on the idea that I'm working on without the distraction of typing.

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2013
During an appointment today, a client said "OK, I'm ready. Just put your thing in my thing and give me what you've got."

MP-JD-LLM (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2013
Mr. Spell Czeck, "superfluous and redundant?" I am afraid that most readers don't realize how funny you are.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2013
Ukbones, how was it for you?

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

5 March 2013
"Ukbones, how was it for you?"

It was exactly like watching a progress bar on a monitor with the hope that if I stare hard enough it will progress more quickly.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

7 March 2013
Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook, in a 60 Minutes interview with Charlie Rose, said, "I say unequivocally and unapologetically, the data is clear."

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

7 March 2013
When listening to business leaders my thoughts quickly shift to George Orwell turning in his grave.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

9 March 2013
"Your" vs. "you're"
and
Accommodate-with-only-one-m.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

9 March 2013
http://www.grammarerrors.com/grammar/different-from-than/

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

17 March 2013
I have read this review http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/20130317_To_improve_writing__pay_attention.html and it causes me to be conflicted. Do I follow my usual practice by refusing to buy a book that I can borrow from my local free library (emphasis on "free")? Or do I break down and spend the $10 or so? Either way, I just gotta read this one. Note the title.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

19 March 2013
Cite. Site. Can you cite the site where you saw the sight?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

21 March 2013
Radio commercial. Voice of salesman, telling how he shops around for best life insurance rates.

"Today Mr. X called me who had prostate cancer to find out if I could ..." Exactly who had prostate cancer?

Harry Boscoe (talk|edits) said:

22 March 2013
NO, NO, NO. "Exactly whom had prostate cancer..."

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

22 March 2013
And what course of treatment did he elect, and how did it all work out, and is the salesman OK, and if not, was his commission reported as IRD, and him who liveth in glass houses should watch out for whom, and did he prostate himself before the altar, and was his prostrate cancer cured, and for who doth the bell toll?

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

28 March 2013
Survey of usage, attitude, expectations and other things: **transition** as a *verb*...

1. Is "transition" a verb?
2. Should it be?
3. When did it become a verb?
4. Are you over fifty years old?
5. Are you a native English-speaker?

MWPXYZ (talk|edits) said:

28 March 2013
It transitioned to a verb at the beginning of the century, did you get the list?

When you say native English-speaker do you mean native American or native Englander?

I transitioned to 50-plus recently.

MWPXYZ (talk|edits) said:

28 March 2013
Or does native now refer to language as well as geography?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

29 March 2013
Beginning of which century? The one we transitioned into 12-plus years ago? Now that I think about it, exactly when did the 21st century begin? Did the transition impact you? Did you not post, on another thread, a statement that you were very busy today? Apparently you have transitioned into r & r.

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

29 March 2013
Like so many other abominations we owe thanks to businesses and politicians for the ever-quickening transition from good language to bad.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

29 March 2013
We need to man up and transition to the new language, for not doing so will impact our ability to do business in this millennium. There, I used three nouns as verbs in one sentence.

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

29 March 2013
Objective considerations of contemporary business compel the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits a tendency to be commensurate with elements of confusion distributed through selective channels of communication.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

31 March 2013
Heard on NPR or PBS radio station: Sportscaster talking about Women's NCAA, I forget which team, says they have done a good job in fooling their opponents by switching from zone to man defense. Really?

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

7 April 2013
"CPA" and "IRS"

These are the plurals: CPAs and IRSs
These are the *possessives*, singular: CPA's and IRS's
These are the possessives, plural: CPAs' and IRSs'

Okay, it's not likely that you'll find the plural or plural possessive of IRS in just ordinary everyday reading, but if you were to find either of them, that's how it *should* be.

And before you start trying to remember the rules you *think* you remember from grade school about using an apostrophe to make possessives of words ending with "s", try *looking up* the rule about adding "apostrophe-s" when the possessive *adds a syllable* to how the word is said. Don't get back to me on this unless you have consulted competent resources on that specific topic. This is too important to let *amateurs* take charge. Consult your resources, *then* put on the gloves...

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

26 April 2013
Here is one that confuses me - not as to whether it is correct, but why it is. " Joe is a friend of Jack's." Why isn't it "Joe is a friend of Jack."?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

26 April 2013
In a news report on TV this morning, a discussion about Rosie Napravnik, a female jockey who will ride in the Kentucky Derby, a reporter asked: "How many women are jockeys?" Somehow, it seemed she should have asked "How many jockeys are women?" I think the answer would be the same either way, but ...

OK, here is why it struck me as odd. The number of humans who are jockeys is very small, whether male or female. The number of female humans who are jockeys is pretty small, too, but I think more meaningful in the context of the report.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
I just learned (really!) that "minuscule" is the preferred spelling of what I have always written as "miniscule".

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
Howsabout "One out of five dentists clean their gums with caustic abrasives."

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
Len, you can always catch some lawyer writing "de minimus." The Latin [and the English, too] is "de minimis."

Did you see the article - I can't remember where it was, now - reporting that several big-name dictionaries have, recently, reluctantly and descriptively, begun to allow that the word "hopefully" can may be used as meaning "It's to be hoped that..." or "We hope that..." even though the activity apparently modified by the adverb is clearly not being - indeed can't be - done in a hopeful manner. "Hopefully, the car won't break down." What car can do anything hopefully? One out of three grammarians buried in Late Writers' Cemetery just rolled over in their graves.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
"...have went."

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
Hopefully, after her and me have went to da movies, we can visit the one dentist which cleans their gums wit' costly abrasives.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
This really happened to me about six months ago. I accept full blame. I called the doctor's office to change my appointment to a particular day. Receptionist said, "He's not here." I said, "So what, can't you make the appointment?" Was she correct? She obviously meant that he would not be there on the day I selected. If she had said "He won't be here" or even "He's not here that day" I'd have figured it out a bit faster.

MP-JD-LLM (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
Headline - "Fewer Americans now think it’s possible for anyone to work their way out of poverty."

"Anyone" is singular and "their" is plural. This elevation of political correctness over grammar drives me mad. It is typical of everything that is wrong with today's America.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
MP, I agree, but what would you have used? ...to work his or her way out...? ...for people to work their way out...? And at least the headline writer did not say "Less Americans..."

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

3 May 2013
Sign at the farmer's market today:

Broccolis 99 cents


Hey, at least it wasn't Broccoli's 99 cents, it was someone else's.

Uncle Sam (talk|edits) said:

4 May 2013
One of the most famous signs I ever saw - was a billboard sign advertising a famous (at that time) restaurant that was half-way between NYC and the Catskill Mountain resort area.

It was in the days before the NYS Thruway was built.

It Read: Eat Here and Get Gas

MP-JD-LLM (talk|edits) said:

4 May 2013
Leonard, yes, we used to use his or her where we use their today. A legal document often used only the masculine, sometimes reciting at the beginning that the masculine may refer to masculine and/or feminine.

Grammatically, this and the loss of the subjunctive bother me more than anything. Actually, me and him went is almost painful. What is taught in our high schools today? Has use of the subjunctive disappeared?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

4 May 2013
I'm really not in the mood to deal with the subjunctive, but if I was, which I ain't, it would be imperative that I re-write this.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 May 2013
What I'd like Spell Czech to explain to me is why, if man can split an atom, can't he split an infinitive?

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

5 May 2013
As Shake's Peer said "To literally be, or not to f'ing be."

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

5 May 2013
In The Washington Post this morning, a reporter writes that her subject said, first, "Where's he coach at?" and then, just a few paragraphs later, quotes her as saying "...having one [a gun] is more dangerous then not having one."

Are these two quotes sufficient for us to convict the reporter of not paying enough attention, or of paying too much attention, in highlighting the speaker's regional dialect?

I would like to think that a reporter who's empathetic with her subject would be able to find quotes that don't have grammatical gaffes buried in them.

[Or maybe the reporter just doesn't know any better, anyway.]

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

7 May 2013
From IRS Q & A on earned income credit:

What is Earned Income?

Earned income includes all the taxable income and wages you get from working for someone else or you own or run a business or farm.

Have at it, Spell.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

8 May 2013
Would a gun control law be an ordinance about ordnance?

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

8 May 2013
Admit to is mostly wrong.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

8 May 2013
From an IRS article:

Examples of how the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 may effect taxpayers who are single, file as head of household and have children who qualify for the child tax credit payment:

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

26 May 2013
I wish I could link the entire ad. A car dealer took out a full-page ad for a Memorial Day used-car sale in the local paper. A quick scan reveals:

YOUR INVITED

MINUTES FROM ALL BRIDGES (but nowhere in the ad does it say the address or even which state!)

Price on one of the cars listed as $15,9995.00

One of the cars is a 2103 Mustang (well, at least we know they will still be making them in 2103)

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

26 May 2013
"Larry and Mary both agreed to meet at six o'clock."

NO, NO, NO. "Larry and Mary agreed to meet at six o'clock."

Larry and Mary both agreed with one another that each of the two of them would meet at six o'clock.

What's missing now? Answer - Meet where? AM or PM?

Szptax (talk|edits) said:

30 May 2013
Where are the characters located on the keyboard that are used to add accents above letters? From all the posts above, I just can't figure out how to put an accent over the "e". Thus I avoid words and phrases where this is required.

Fr. Mackelhenry (talk|edits) said:

30 May 2013
é I changed my keyboard preferences to US International with dead keys. Then typing apostrophe + e at the same time gives me this é

Generally you should just plow ahead though and let the reader supply the marks. Reading is a passive activity anyway for most people and I dont mind requiring them to do a little work. Sorry I left out the apostrophe in dont but those are the compromises that must be made with the international keyboard with dead keys. I guess I should make the effort to write do not instead of dont, but again, let the reader do it.

The new world order is not for the faint of heart. Get your mule headed in the right direction and plow forward; take the approach James Joyce did with Ulysses.

Deback (talk|edits) said:

May 30, 2013
To get é, press the alt key and then type 130. If anyone wants a real handy DOS version of an ASCII table, send me an email and I'll send it to you.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

30 May 2013
ASCII and ye shall receivie. Right Deback?

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

30 May 2013
"Larry and Mary both agreed to meet Sally at six o'clock."

Unfortunately for the both of them, that was when Harry met Sally, and she was quite satiated afterwards.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

30 May 2013
Or maybe she was quite satiated after words.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

30 May 2013
If words alone will satiate her, I'll have what she's having.

Szptax (talk|edits) said:

30 May 2013
yes, YES, YES

I'll have what she's having.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

31 May 2013
One of the definitions of satiate: to supply with anything to excess, so as to disgust or weary; surfeit. Guilty.

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

31 May 2013
Give me excess and I'll tell you when I've had enough.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2013
This week's theme: Words that *appear* to be misspellings

This week's words

calyculus
swoopstake
theocrasy
agrement
jargoon

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2013
Damn! You made me look up all of them! Now I have to think up some others to list. But this does refocus me on the word checker in my computer (or is it a spell checker?) that changes my words without asking me. Annoying.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2013
http://www.dilemna.info/index.php Is it dilemna or dilemma?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

7 June 2013
nale

rought

maik

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

9 June 2013
Quote attributed to Sen. Lindsey Graham: "This is the world in which we live in:…"

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

9 June 2013
Who was it who said "That is something up with which I will not put"?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

9 June 2013
I don't remember, but it sounds like something Pat Moynihan would have said.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

16 June 2013
From another thread: "How come the spell checker on the computer tells me 'unrecaptured' is not a word?"

Clearly, "the spell checker on the computer" hasn't been upgraded to LingDing's ProSpelChek Mod 8.03 yet, which allows for the unique spellings that we find in the income tax lexicon.

Yet it allows supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

16 June 2013
Yeah, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.

That would've been ProSpelChek Mod 7.22 from last summer.

Natalie (talk|edits) said:

June 16, 2013
I've lost track. Did we already discuss the whole "myself" issue, as in, "Please send the letter to myself" when writing to someone else?

Kevinh5 (talk|edits) said:

16 June 2013
I don't remember, myself.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

17 June 2013
K5, you did not need the comma.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

17 June 2013
Just a mention of it, Natalie, is enough to trigger a flood of adrenaline in those of us who care enough to care.

"Myself and her was havin' drinks, and..."

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

17 June 2013
Spell, cut it out. Correct sentence is "Me and her was havin' drinks, and…"

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

17 June 2013
"A Fairfax County Police cruiser hit a 60-year-old pedestrian Tuesday afternoon while crossing Richmond Highway." Interesting. There's probably a really snarky bon mot that should jump right out for us here.

Please don't start some lecture/discussion about how the distinction between adverbial clause and prepositional descriptor is getting more and more blurred nowadays, okay?

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

29 June 2013
http://mentalfloss.com/article/51362/4-changes-english-so-subtle-we-hardly-notice-theyre-happening

Your thoughts, SC?

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

29 June 2013
Very interesting in a pretty much useless way. I would have to agree with the author that "we" hardly noticed some of the changes that happened to our pronunciation and spelling over the past 350 years.

Meanwhile, here at TaxAlmanac we're still struggling with "It's not it's, it's its."

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

13 July 2013
One who hires workers is an employer. One who leases space is a lessor. Yet, one who goes to a meeting is an attendee, not an attender or attendor. How come? I need this answer before the White Sox/Phillies double-header starts in an hour or so. With or without a left-handed catcher.

Fr. Mackelhenry (talk|edits) said:

16 July 2013
Here is a poem I am using in my ESL class, it has been used by NATO.

Dearest creature in creation,

Study English pronunciation.

I will teach you in my verse

Sounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse.

I will keep you, Suzy, busy,

Make your head with heat grow dizzy.

Tear in eye, your dress will tear.

So shall I! Oh hear my prayer.

Just compare heart, beard, and heard,

Dies and diet, lord and word,

Sword and sward, retain and Britain.

(Mind the latter, how it's written)


There is more to it.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

18 July 2013
How many time *in one document* can the subject and the verb disagree? Does this make your teeth hurt?

Click here: ...if any of the following statements are true.

Markb29 (talk|edits) said:

19 July 2013
Len, you can always catch some lawyer writing "de minimus." The Latin [and the English, too] is "de minimis."

I saw the entire phrase in a case once with the translation:

de minimis non curat lex ("the law cares not for trifles") - AWESOME !

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

20 July 2013
"de minimis non curat lex ("the law cares not for trifles") - AWESOME !"

Awesome, yes, but what kind of case and what is a "trifle"? Was it a tax case? Is it a trifle when you file a return 1 day late? Or the wording on your 170(f)(8) acknowledgment is not "just so"?

See, e.g., "subsidized" and "eligible" in the Tax Questions thread about 162(l).

Markb29 (talk|edits) said:

20 July 2013
Who cares - just love the expression. Latin is cool - Is it me or other languages seem cooler than english ?

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

20 July 2013
I get a whole lot more done in English than I do in Latin.

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

21 July 2013
More of the NATO poem to help foreign generals and flunkies pronounce English, paid for with your tax dollars:
Now I surely will not plague you

With such words as plaque and ague.

But be careful how you speak:

Say break and steak, but bleak and streak;

Cloven, oven, how and low,

Script, receipt, show, poem, and toe.

Hear me say, devoid of trickery,

Daughter, laughter, and Terpsichore,

Typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles,

Exiles, similes, and reviles;

Scholar, vicar, and cigar,

Solar, mica, war and far;

One, anemone, Balmoral,

Kitchen, lichen, laundry, laurel;

Gertrude, German, wind and mind,

Scene, Melpomene, mankind.


This gives me some sympathy for the Mexican explorer (what we now call an "illegal" and I call an explorer. e.g. Cortez, Ponce de Leon, Lewis, Clark, etc.), who is required to learn the English tongue (tung).

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

22 July 2013
The caption of an online photo of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge: "Be careful crossing: The bridge strikes fear in the hearts of drivers who have to maneuver it's dogleg curves, steep suspensions and a claustrophobic cantilever."

Dontcha think that someone who can write "steep suspensions" and "claustrophobic cantilever" could get its/it's right?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

23 July 2013
We all know how flexible and changeable is the English language. We invent, create, and modify words to adapt to our needs and our culture. But how come we still say "dial" and "roll down"? Just "dial" 123-456-7890 to reach our customer-service line. Just "roll down" your window when the cop walks over to see your license. I have not seen a rotary phone for many years. I have not seen a car without power windows for many years.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

23 July 2013
My kitchen phone is a black rotary-dial telephone. It's on my land line. I dial that phone, literally. And it still works.

On a completely unrelated note, is there anyone here bold enough and foolish enough to try to defend the absence of a comma after the year, and after the state, in the following examples?

Examples:

September 15, 1936 is my birthday.

Oxford, Ohio is where I live.

MWPXYZ (talk|edits) said:

23 July 2013
Pickup truck still has windows to roll down - but the crank-out window vent is no longer.

Still use a dial phone for when the power "goes out". But if you tell a kid to dial clockwise, that creates another puzzle, albeit a kodak moment.

Spell Czech's comments are like a broken record, a carbon copy of most curmudgeons I know. The $64,000 question is: how come old people get that way?

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

23 July 2013
Well done, MWP, well done!!

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

24 July 2013
On a completely unrelated note, is there anyone here bold enough and foolish enough to try to defend the absence of a comma after the year, and after the state, in the following examples? No, not I. But all the sources I found make it clear that omitting the comma is wrong. Only one gave a reason, namely, that it separates an "adverbial phrase". Others just said it is the "American style". I like the latter reason.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

24 July 2013
cough, rough

toothless, ruthless

peak, break

peak, peek

leak, leek

wreak, reek

wreak, wreck

ate, eight

weight, wait

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

24 July 2013
bow, bough, beau

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

24 July 2013
Sew watt? I mean, so what? Enough, already.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

26 July 2013
ghoti

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

26 July 2013
I completely forgot to feed my ghotis (ghoties?) yesterday.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

26 July 2013
If it follows 'the regular rule' then wouldn't the plural be the same as the singular, ghoti ?

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

27 July 2013
Yes. I failed to point out that I have multiple species of them. I have several pairs of pants, too. I rarely call them trousers, and never knickers.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

29 July 2013
Meaning of suffixes -able, -ible, and -ed.

Precision in language is discussed accurately and a bit amusingly in Venture Funding, http://www.legalbitstream.com/scripts/isyswebext.dll?op=get&uri=/isysquery/irl9cfe/19/doc , footnote 3 of the Discussion, reproduced here: "3 We also note that the drafters of sec. 83 knew the difference between the suffixes "-able" and "-ible", on the one hand, and "-ed" on the other. Sec. 83 includes both "transfer able" and "transferr ed" in many places, and it is clear that those words are not interchangeable. Moreover, sec. 83 was added to the Code by sec. 321(a) of the Tax Reform Act of 1969 (the Act), Pub. L. 91-172, 83 Stat. 588; and sec. 321(b)(3) of the Act, 83 Stat. 591, which provides similar but not identical rules for nonexempt trusts and nonqualified annuities, amended sec. 404(a)(5) to provide for deductibility "in the taxable year in which an amount attributable to the contribution is includ ible in the gross income". (Emphasis added.) When we find, as we do here, that different words are used in the same section of the same act, we do not impute to Congress the intent to express the same meaning through the different words. See United States v. Olympic Radio & Television, 349 U.S. 232 (1955); Estate of Cuddihy v. Commissioner, 32 T.C. 1171, 1176 (1959); Root Glass Co. v. Commissioner, 1 T.C. 475, 477 (1943). "[L]egal documents are for the most part nonemotive, [and] it is presumed that the author's language has been used, not for its artistic or emotional effect, but for its ability to convey ideas. Accordingly, it is presumed that the author has not varied his terminology unless he has changed his meaning, and has not changed his meaning unless he has varied his terminology". Zuanich v. Commissioner, 77 T.C. 428, 443 n.26 (1981) (quoting R. Dickerson, The Interpretation and Application of Statutes 224 (1975))."

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

6 August 2013
If give and take are opposites, how come a caregiver and a caretaker are pretty much the same?

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

9 August 2013
From the IRS's webpage about the Expatriation Tax:

Expatriation on or after June 16, 2008
If you expatriated after June 16, 2008, the new IRC 877A expatriation rules apply to you if any of the following statements apply.

Well, okay, but is it "on or after" or is it "after"? Doesn't this just jump off the page at most of us? ...some of us? Please tell me I'm not the only one!!

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

10 August 2013
The effective date of the law was for expatriations on or after June 17, 2008, but you already knew that. Yes, it jumps out, like the 51 times Professor Maule used "forego" or "foregone" when he meant "forgo" or "forgone" in this treatise http://law.bepress.com/context/villanovalwps/article/1058/viewcontent .

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

10 August 2013
Thank you, Lenny, not just for this one, but also for *all* the other times you've let me know that I'm not the only one....

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

13 August 2013
Or some guy in Forbes Magazine online telling us about how the NIIT taxes the lessor of investment income or MAGI over the threshold... But only twice, not 51 times!

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

14 August 2013
Maybe he meant the lessee. Bettor than nuttin'.

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

15 August 2013
The etymology of "ampersand".


Traditionally, in English-speaking schools when reciting the alphabet, any letter that could also be used as a word in itself ("A", "I", and, at one point, "O") was preceded by the Latin expression per se ("by itself").[3][4][5] Also, it was common practice to add at the end of the alphabet the "&" sign as if it were the 27th letter, pronounced and. As a result, the recitation of the alphabet would end in "X, Y, Z, and per se and". WIKI

& now you know the rest of the story.

(If someone has already covered this curiousity above, my apologies.)

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

15 August 2013
Point of order. I imagine the listing of the letters and symbol of our alphabet would have ended---X, Y, Z, and per se &. After all, the young scholars would have known that "&" stood for and was pronounced as the three letter word "and". So they would recite "&" by saying "and", but they would mean "&", otherwise the spirit of the old timey alphabet recitin' would have been violated.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

15 August 2013
The Latin/Italian word "et" means "and". If you look at this page http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ampersand, you will see the similarity to the "&" symbol.

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

16 August 2013
Here I have another one for the board. And I should say as aside that SC has made a new man of me. I am a grammar, spelling and usage nut now. I feel likeas if I've been to a boot camp with a bunch of old Kansas school marms as the drill sargeants.

Here is one from the new Fowler's (which does not have the ding or the ring of the old Fowler's by a long dong):

________________________________

misapprehensions. (and what follows is a list of misapprehensions, I shall elucidate but one.)

That more honoured in the breach than the observance means more often broken than kept.

_________________________________

Au contraire. New Fowler's: In context (Hamlet) it means a custom that one deserves more honour for breaking than keeping; but it is often quoted in the mistaken and very different sense of dead letter or rule more often broken than kept.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

16 August 2013
Soldier, you will spell that "sergeants"!

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

16 August 2013
Yes, sir!

Yes, sergeant!  :)

Harry Boscoe (talk|edits) said:

16 August 2013
We all know that et is the past tense of eat:
I eat; I done et.

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

17 August 2013
I came et I et then I conquered. (I tip my hat to Podolin.) These words were uttered by Kaiser when he conquered London and added 500 subjects to the Empire.

Since I've turned a corner with my grammar, I would now say---I came and I ate (and after a four hour nap) I conquered.

Well, everyone wish me luck on the written test I will have to pass to teach ESL at the volunteer center. They are required to check my sexual past and my English skills in order for me to teach the great unwashed who seem to regularly wash up on our shores.

I went in last week to be screened with an oral test in order to exempt myself from the written exam, but I flunked the oral. The head volunteer bureaucrat who administered the oral exam bore a striking (one might say remarkable) resemblance to Susan B. Anthony, and I don't need to tell anyone that her appearance unsettled me greatly, and I started to split infinitives left and right to the point that I thought her office would go nuclear. After the test, she gave me a smart look and asked me if I was there to take the class or to teach it. I returned her smart look and raised her an eyebrow, and then I mumbled something about impertenance. So I'm scheduled to take the written test in two weeks and I think the lady is determined to weed me out, but my wife says I'm being paranoid.

Spell Czech (talk|edits) said:

17 August 2013
Maybe the head volunteer bureaucrab *heard* the double-misspelling of "impertinence." Nah....

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

17 August 2013
One world did me in. Spelling is my Waterloo.

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

26 August 2013
When Why did "No problem" and "You got it" replace "You're welcome"? I did not think whatever he/she did for me as part of the job was a problem. And I certainly knew that I "got it".

Podolin (talk|edits) said:

31 August 2013
The opportunities are endless. In a column in today's Philadelphia Inquirer, ostensibly by a professional writer, there is a discussion about a woman who was a graduate student in historical preservation. As she "peddled" her bicycle around town, she noticed a building that was about to be destroyed and replaced. She started a successful effort to save it and have it designated as historically significant. Happy ending. But one would hope a writer could tell (and spell) the difference between "peddle" and "pedal".

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools