Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

PS - let's face it - either you are educated or you are not! There is no 'very' about it!

Fjgrogan wrote:More to the point, Neill - the verb 'to be' takes a complement rather than an object, therefore the nominative rather than the accusative case, because the person doing the being is the same as the person being been - sort that lot out!! I usually say 'it is I' on the 'phone. Do any of you pedants out there know who it was who replied (when told that it was wrong to put prepositions at the end of a sentence)'this is nonsense up with which I will not put!' ? My money is on Winston Churchill.

I'd have said Churchill too, but I googled it and the first two "finds" both said (though not in so many words) that there's no evidence he actually said it, and it's a bit of an urban myth.

"Very educated" in this case meant he had a long education i.e. has a lot of letters after his name including Ph.D.

My former milkman used to boast that "my son the doctor" had 8 letters after his name. That was because he had failed MBBS and took the conjoint board exams as a second chance.

I wonder if anyone here can beat mine, I am sure there are former forces folk who have earned them in a much harder place than a lecture theatre.
These are as I would do them now, when I actually gained one qualification it had three letters. I think the last three sets would now be replaced by an MSc (or MA). perhaps someone current in health service education can enlighten me.
BSc, RGN, RM, ADM, PGCEA, MTD.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/ne ... 983697.stm


I think this may be a step too far. I know the difference between "I shall" and I will " but I would not think less of someone who used them incorrectly and I wouldn't correct my children. We don't use English as Chaucer and Shakespeare used it, or even as it was used when I was at school, newspaper reports from the time (1960s) seem antiquated, language evolves, like fashion.

Jo wrote:

Fjgrogan wrote:More to the point, Neill - the verb 'to be' takes a complement rather than an object, therefore the nominative rather than the accusative case, because the person doing the being is the same as the person being been - sort that lot out!! I usually say 'it is I' on the 'phone. Do any of you pedants out there know who it was who replied (when told that it was wrong to put prepositions at the end of a sentence)'this is nonsense up with which I will not put!' ? My money is on Winston Churchill.

I'd have said Churchill too, but I googled it and the first two "finds" both said (though not in so many words) that there's no evidence he actually said it, and it's a bit of an urban myth.

As this is the Pedant's Revolt thread it is only right and proper for me to remind you that something either IS an urban myth or IS NOT an urban myth. What is this "bit of an urban myth" to which you refer?

I just LOVE this Topic --------
and I am delighted when I put something in, which engenders such an altruistic debate.

I wonder if the enthusiasm derives from a particular Age Group --------?

I suspect, that readers under the age of, say, 50, will have no knowledge, or interest, in the matter -----


(See what THAT produces --- Tin Hat and Body Armour donned !)

Mid A 15 wrote:

Jo wrote:

Fjgrogan wrote:More to the point, Neill - the verb 'to be' takes a complement rather than an object, therefore the nominative rather than the accusative case, because the person doing the being is the same as the person being been - sort that lot out!! I usually say 'it is I' on the 'phone. Do any of you pedants out there know who it was who replied (when told that it was wrong to put prepositions at the end of a sentence)'this is nonsense up with which I will not put!' ? My money is on Winston Churchill.

I'd have said Churchill too, but I googled it and the first two "finds" both said (though not in so many words) that there's no evidence he actually said it, and it's a bit of an urban myth.

As this is the Pedant's Revolt thread it is only right and proper for me to remind you that something either IS an urban myth or IS NOT an urban myth. What is this "bit of an urban myth" to which you refer?

It's a fair cop, guv Just hedging my bets

I've always understood that an errant priest should be unfrocked!

The verb "to defrock" seems to be used now (and very frequently!)

Which is correct, fellow pedants?

Angela Woodford wrote:I've always understood that an errant priest should be unfrocked!

The verb "to defrock" seems to be used now (and very frequently!)

Which is correct, fellow pedants?

The trending term seems to be "laicised" (especially on C4 news), but I've noticed too that "de-frocked" is used far more than "unfrocked". Perhaps it's one of those evolutionary-English things?

Angela Woodford wrote:I've always understood that an errant priest should be unfrocked!

The verb "to defrock" seems to be used now (and very frequently!)

Which is correct, fellow pedants?

I understand that 'defrock' is especially preferable in the Catholic faith. Then again, with their track-record on kiddy-fiddling.............

I don't care, whether it is unfrocked or defrocked --------

CHARGED is what I want to hear !!!!

NEILL THE NOTORIOUS wrote:I don't care, whether it is unfrocked or defrocked --------

CHARGED is what I want to hear !!!!

....... Preferably with 5,000 volts !

anniexf wrote:The trending term seems to be "laicised" (especially on C4 news), but I've noticed too that "de-frocked" is used far more than "unfrocked". Perhaps it's one of those evolutionary-English things?

"Laicised"! Thanks, Ann - that would apply to nuns too - I'm thinking of the horrible cruelty of the nuns who ran those terrible Magdalen homes for girls - taking their babies away? - forcing them to toil at laundry work + beatings + compulsory silence + other awful punishments? I saw a documentary ages ago, and remember being moved to tears. I might be wrong but didn't these dreadful penitentiaries exist even in the 70's? Accounts of priestly scandals are currently rife, but I think those poor girls should be remembered as well.

Anyway, those nuns make one shudder with their cold-blooded inhumanity. They should have been laicised and exposed for their deeds.