[mythtv-users] British vs. American English (was MythTV requires a better name)

Ryan Steffes rbsteffes at gmail.com
Thu Sep 20 18:36:48 UTC 2007

> same as "regardless."  And "utilize," which means the same as "use,"
> is another common one.

My wife, while she was an editor, informed me that utilize does NOT
mean the same thing as use, according to medical stylebooks.  For the
life of me, I can't remember which is which, but one of them implies
something is either used to full capacity, destroyed in the process of
it's use, or is being used for a purpose it wasn't originally intended

On 9/20/07, Robert Johnston <anaerin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/20/07, Ryan Steffes <rbsteffes at gmail.com> wrote:
> > If I'd've had more time, I'd've written more about the pairs of pants.
> > I think I explained it well enough, irregardless, and if you don't
> > understand now I could care less,
> That point notwithstanding, it's one pair of pants, many pairs of pants.
> Or, to SetCulture("en-gb")
> one pair of trousers, many pairs of trousers.
> Like fish, fish and fishes
> (One fish, many fish, many different fishes)

I have a pair of pants, you have a pair of pants.  I wrote about the
pairs of pants.

On 9/20/07, Dewey Smolka <dsmolka at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/20/07, Ryan Steffes <rbsteffes at gmail.com> wrote:
> Not to be a grammar nazi, but the correct form of the third
> conditional puts the conditional clause in the past perfect, and pairs
> the modal with the past participle. Your sentence should read: "If I
> had had more time, I would have written more . . .", or with
> contractions: "If I'd had more time, I'd have written more . . "

But then it wouldn't have annoyed anyone.  It's not my fault, really;
I am the son of an elementary school teacher with a masters in
teaching remedial reading, was born particularly gifted in pattern
recognition, became a computer programmer, and married an English
major who eventually became the editor of some medical journals.
Grammar and linguistics were inflicted obsessions throughout my life!

Incidentally, it's my personal mission to replace "grammar nazi" with
"grammar fascist".  It feels inappropriate to me for the title to have
an incorrect word in it, since Nazi's and Fascists were political
party members, while fascists is a word meaning someone who behaves
like Nazi or Fascist (specifically, right wing authoritarians).


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list