As I've always suspected ...

[Mike Reed]

Aye is a noun, as is no - the ayes to the right the noes to the left; ha ha is not.

Yes and no are exclamations, though they can be used as nouns ('is that a yes, then?') A ha-ha is a ditch or made-made gulley (except in Thai, possibly). Could the affirmative in Thai be 'yes Siam?', I wonder.

 

[merlin]

Just a note, re apostrophes.

Just a note to say that, regarding your use of the preposition "re" there, traditionalists would suggest that it was inappropriate Steve.

 

[merlin]

Could the affirmative in Thai be 'yes Siam?', I wonder.

Probably not Mike as the Thai pronunciation of the word sounds more like See-am.

 

[monstrous lie]

younger people who are evolving the language for their contextual requirement.

Is this serious !?
Grammar is the road map of language. Trying to say anything to anyone without knowing how a sentence fits together is like trying to give directions without the use of words like "right", "left", "north" and "south". It just makes everything so much harder. This is so obvious when you try and decipher the intended meaning of many posts on forums and the like. You must have noticed, surely?
ML

 

[merlin]

Aye (or yes) seems to have acquired noun status somewhere along the way, though, which 'ha' hasn't. Think of "That's a 'yes' from me" or "Three 'yesses', you're through to the next round" ( (c) The X Factor). Ditto 'no'.

Interesting. We are still left with the terms "Aye Aye", "Aye Aye Aye" (as in - what have we here then!) and of course the fabled "Nay Nay and thrice Nay!" So as an exclamation, reduplication is accepted in place of pluralisation whereas in Thai, reduplication is used (primarily it seems) for nouns. Any form of reduplication must, I imagine, originate from a common language? Is there a link that has been discovered?

 

[gintonic]

Is this serious !?
Grammar is the road map of language. Trying to say anything to anyone without knowing how a sentence fits together is like trying to give directions without the use of words like "right", "left", "north" and "south". It just makes everything so much harder. This is so obvious when you try and decipher the intended meaning of many posts on forums and the like. You must have noticed, surely?
ML

totally serious.

 

[darrenyeats]

Similarly, adverbs of time invariably or always split the auxiliary and particle. E.g.' I have never been late', or 'I never have been late.

Really? Are those infinitives?

 

[Joe Hutch]

As an aside, I wonder how long it will be before The Daily Mash becomes the most sensible of newspapers? Wait! We're already there.

I do worry that some might have thought that a) I was citing a serious news report as opposed to a spoof and b) that I actually agree with the sentiments expressed in the said spoof.

 

[Mike Reed]

Really? Are those infinitives

Nope, present perfect in that case, but they are treated similarly to split infinitives, both having an alternative position adverb. This latter's position does, in effect, change the meaning or at least, emphasis.

Here's a conundrum; easy for a native English speaker, tricky for most (?) foreigners learning English.

Which is correct? 'Did you have lunch?' or 'Have you had lunch?'

 

[merlin]

I do worry that some might have thought that a) I was citing a serious news report as opposed to a spoof and b) that I actually agree with the sentiments expressed in the said spoof.

To be fair Joe, I think the thread is meandering is a quite interesting ( and at time amusing) way. There's lots of special people on PFM. Give them a chance to express themselves.

 

[Joe Hutch]

Here's a conundrum; easy for a native English speaker, tricky for most (?) foreigners learning English.

Which is correct? 'Did you have lunch?' or 'Have you had lunch?'

Surely either is correct, depending on the context. For instance, I might have been to visit my sister, and on returning home, my wife might ask 'Did you have lunch?' Alternatively, she might ask 'Have you had lunch?' (If she was Scottish, she might even ask, rhetorically, 'You'll have had your lunch?')

 

[Mike Reed]

Only one is correct as a simple question with no other qualifying text.

 

[Joe Hutch]

To be fair Joe, I think the thread is meandering is a quite interesting ( and at time amusing) way. There's lots of special people on PFM. Give them a chance to express themselves.

Oh, I enjoy these type of discussions, and I'm sure most on here regard them in a (relatively) light-hearted way.

An example of 'taking things too far/too seriously is provided in today's Torygraph, in which a number of people have taken the trouble to write in and complain about anachronisms in the BBC adaptation of E M Forster's 'Howard's End'. One of them is exercised by the fact that a motor car in one episode has a number plate which contains a sequence of letters not used until some ten years later than the supposed year in which the events portrayed took place. None of them seems concerned, or indeed interested in the artistic merit of the adaptation.

(Mind you, they could all be just having a laugh, and parodying their own pedantry).

And I've just wondered whether Howards End has an apostrophe <Googles>. It would appear not. I'm off to the study with a glass of whisky and my Army revolver. I may be gone some time.

 

[Cav]

Yes and no are exclamations, though they can be used as nouns ('is that a yes, then?') A ha-ha is a ditch or made-made gulley (except in Thai, possibly). Could the affirmative in Thai be 'yes Siam?', I wonder.

No, they are not exclamations they are nouns and adverbs. Ha-ha (noun) is a ditch; ha (exclamation!) is not half a ditch...

 

[Marchbanks]

555!!!

Wasn't that the number after 'State Express' cigarettes once upon a smoke?

If you want a glimpse into my private hell, it made me think -r-xr-xr-x.

 

[merlin]

Oh, I enjoy these type of discussions, and I'm sure most on here regard them in a (relatively) light-hearted way.

Ah me too. They allow me to visit PFM without the risk of automatisms leading to my repeated head butting of the laptop screen.

The use of the word "some" was interesting of course. Even the intonation is remarkably similar to that used in the phrase "well have I some money" but the meaning is very different. No wonder friends of mine in the East struggle with the subtleties of the English language.

 

[Mike Reed]

No, they are not exclamations they are nouns and adverbs

'No' can be an adverb and a noun, like 'yes' but the latter can't be an adverb, and both are exclamations when used as simple answers. Depends upon use as to part of speech.

 

[Mike Reed]

Which is correct? 'Did you have lunch?' or 'Have you had lunch?'

The latter is correct (present perfect does not specify a time as the action is the important bit; not the 'when') The former is the past tense (simple past) and must have a stated or implied/obvious time. E.G. 'When did Shakespeare die?' (everybody knows he's long dead), not 'When has Shakespeare died?'

This difference between a finished past and a past which may even extend into the present in the continuous form puzzles even higher level E.F.L. students

 

[Joe Hutch]

The latter is correct (present perfect does not specify a time as the action is the important bit; not the 'when') The former is the past tense (simple past) and must have a stated or implied/obvious time. E.G. 'When did Shakespeare die?' (everybody knows he's long dead), not 'When has Shakespeare died?'

E.G.?

 

[Mike Reed]

E.G.?

E.G.zactly. Gee but I mistyped; capital offence ! I do apologise for going off on grammatical bandwagons during these quasi linguistic threads, Joe, but I guess it's in the blood after all those years at the chalk-face. Time for a transfusion, maybe? I do, like others here, enjoy them immensely, though. I'll leave it to you to initiate them, however !