# A gentle grammar nudge from your friend Podkayne: "Intensive Purposes" **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [August 6, 2004, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635 "2004-08-06T15:53:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/101 "2004-08-12T02:52:17Z")
One that I find very annoying (and it’s common here) is the phrase “the thin \*edge \* of the wedge” instead of “the thin \*end \* of the wedge”. ---
**Author:** ![rinni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f6c823/32.png) [@rinni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rinni)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/102 "2004-08-12T03:38:18Z")
Thanks **Usram** and **Cardinal**! It makes sense now. I’m pretty good with language, but that has always eluded me for some reason. And once again, a member walks away from the SDMB a little more educated! Now I’m going to go lie down before I lay some carpet. ;j\* - Smiley added for no reason. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/103 "2004-08-12T16:21:28Z")
Speaking of Greek singulars vs. plurals, I had a boss who used to say “parenthese” (pronounced pa-REN-thuh-see.) I guess he figured that if more than one of the things are called parentheses, one must be a parenthese. Reminds me of an exchange I had on this board (forget which thread). I gave someone a “kudo” and got jumped on. Now I was actually trying to be funny and clever and give a kudo because the perceived accomplishment wasn’t big enough to deserve a full kudos. Yes I do know it wasn’t actually funny but lets not go there. After I got slammed for my purposeful missuse of the word I decided to look it up. To my surprise I found this: > [@](#): > > Usage Note: Kudos is one of those words like congeries that look like plurals but are etymologically singular. Acknowledging the Greek history of the term requires Kudos is (not are) due her for her brilliant work on the score. But kudos has often been treated as a plural, especially in the popular press, as in She received many kudos for her work. This plural use has given rise to the singular form kudo. These innovations follow the pattern whereby the English words pea and cherry were shortened from nouns ending in an (s) sound (English pease and French cerise), that were mistakenly thought to be plural. The singular kudo remains far less common than the plural use; both are often viewed as incorrect in more formal contexts. ·It is worth noting that even people who are careful to treat kudos only as a singular often pronounce it as if it were a plural. Etymology would require that the final consonant be pronounced as a voiceless (s), as we do in pathos, another word derived from Greek, rather than as a voiced (z). The word is being adapted into English and kudo is a proper singular form of the word now. Another expample of the language changing in spite of the language police. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/104 "2004-08-12T16:24:30Z")
Sorry, in my above post this: > [@](#): > > Speaking of Greek singulars vs. plurals, I had a boss who used to say “parenthese” (pronounced pa-REN-thuh-see.) I guess he figured that if more than one of the things are called parentheses, one must be a parenthese. should have been in quotes from the post by **KarlWinslow**. ---
**Author:** ![TellMeI\_mNotCrazy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tellmei_mnotcrazy/32/3419_2.png) [@TellMeI\_mNotCrazy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TellMeI_mNotCrazy)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/105 "2004-08-12T16:38:42Z")
It drives me crazy to see “I would of gone,” “She could of had that” or “We should of picked that one”. Just one of my big pet peeves. Quick poll: Comfortable: Comf-ter-bull or com-fer-ta-bull? ---
**Author:** ![Sean\_Factotum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/50afbb/32.png) [@Sean\_Factotum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sean_Factotum)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/106 "2004-08-12T17:56:32Z")
I know its allowed, but tacking “wise” onto the back end of a word should not be allowed. As far as I can see, this is just people being lazy. > [@TellMeI'mNotCrazy](#): > > Quick poll: Comfortable: Comf-ter-bull or com-fer-ta-bull? I must be completely clueless on this one. I go with com-fort-a-bull. ---
**Author:** ![TellMeI\_mNotCrazy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tellmei_mnotcrazy/32/3419_2.png) [@TellMeI\_mNotCrazy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TellMeI_mNotCrazy)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/107 "2004-08-12T18:19:07Z")
Well I did stick the “t” in the wrong spot, but most of the time I hear it either “comf-ter-bull” or “com-fert-a-bull” (as opposed to “com-fort-a-bull”, assuming you mean: rhyming somewhat with “affordable”) ---
**Author:** ![Cardinal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cardinal/32/4000_2.png) [@Cardinal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardinal)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2004, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/108 "2004-08-12T22:08:04Z")
I can’t find it now, but yesterday’s L.A. Times had a small headline that used an apostrophe to make a plural noun. Every time I see that, I ask, “Didn’t this person go to fourth grade?” ---
**Author:** ![Kaitlyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/73ab20/32.png) [@Kaitlyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kaitlyn)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2004, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/109 "2004-08-13T03:57:43Z")
media/medium “Media” is plural; it takes a plural verb. It has a singular form, medium, which should be used when referring to a single means of communication or news organization. I have no problem with the use of “media” to mean the various news gathering and reporting organizations. As such, it has a useful meaning that cannot be precisely conveyed with any other word. However, when used in this manner, it shoud always refer to more than one form, and should take a plural verb: “The media _have_ not been covering the convention extensively enough.” If one is referring only to one form of communication, the singular form “medium” should be used: “The newspaper medium is better suited to in-depth coverage, while the television medium is better for on the spot reporting.” Or, if you mean the news organizations that use newspapers and television as their means for reporting the news: “The newspaper media are better suited to in-depth covereage, while the television media are better at on the spot reporting.” A subtle, but useful distinction. data/datum The data _show_. (not shows). criteria/criterion A single standard for judging something is a _criterion_, standands for judging are _criteria_. The use of “agenda” with a singular verb is a lost cause, and it no longer bothers me to hear or read it used that way. However, and I realize this is entirely irrational, it still grates to hear “agendas”. The word is already plural; adding an -s is unnecessary. Summary: Agenda as a plural has long been a lost cause, and it doesn’t bother me in the least. Data and media as plurals are fading fast, but I will persist in using them as plurals myself, even if such usage does earn me strange reactions. I hold out a possibly irrational hope that the distinction between criteria and criterion can be saved, and will campaign vigorously to do so. I propose that we should set aside 1/10 of the federal budget for a massive educational campaign, that teaching this distinction should be a required, semester long course in every high school in this country, that federal laws should be passed requiring stiff fines and possibly censure for television stations or print media that do not observe this distinction, that all media should clear and provided prime ad space for public service announcements extolling the virtures of having one’s subjects and verbs agree, and that grammar police be appointed with the power to issue summons to and levy fines on those who use the wrong verb in everyday speech. Doing so will no doubt eliminate the misuse, just as the archaic and seldom heard “ain’t” has all but been eradicated from common use in both speech and print, and has been relegated to being used only in the lowest form of English language usage–country music lyrics. If that is successful, we should move on to teaching that fantastic, incredible, and ultimate are not extreme forms of excellent, that comprise does not equal compose, and that fortuitous and fortunate are not synonyms ---
**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2004, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/110 "2004-08-19T10:58:00Z")
> [@Harriet the Spry](#): > > My personal non-favorite is “tow the line” for “toe the line.” In case there is any ignorance out there to be fought, the imagery is of a line in the sand. When being asked to toe the line, you are being asked to obey the rule and keep your toes exactly on the line, without crossing it. A usage example: Since I report to the CFO, I am expected to toe the line in submitting proper expense reports. — I despise “tow the line”, too. **But** , the way I always understood it, **toeing** the line goes back to the days on one-room schoolhouses. When a class was called on to recite or whatever, they were supposed to stand in a row along a line on the floor. Good students kept their toes right up against the line. If not, they got switched, I guess. Meanwhile, lines in the sand are drawn when someone challenges someone else to a fight. You either cross the line and accept the challenge, or back away entirely. **Or** , do the “toe” thing by staying just on your side of the line and continuing to taunt the other person. But that’s hardly compliance, and not what’s implied by “toeing the line”. And that’s not even taking into account the people who don’t use the phrase properly, regardless of how they spell it. Like saying they’re “ **really** toeing the line.” No: you’re either cooperating or you’re not. Or using it to mean working hard, or long hours or something. But of course it’s easy to misinterpret the phrase when you use “tow”, which implies effort rather than obedience. — It’s **rein** in, not **reign** in. — “I’m starting a new diet regime.” No, you are starting a **regimen**. Atkins might be classified as a diet regime, but if you’re on the Atkins diet, you are following a regimen. ---
**Author:** ![Mycroft\_Holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a5b964/32.png) [@Mycroft\_Holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mycroft_Holmes)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2004, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/111 "2004-08-19T11:18:12Z")
> [@Cardinal](#): > > [coming : Dictionary / Wörterbuch (BEOLINGUS, TU Chemnitz)](http://dict.tu-chemnitz.de/dings.cgi?o=3001&service=en-de&query=coming) > > There seems to be an equivalent phrase in German, and I’m betting a hundred dollars it says it translates as “think coming”. German speakers? Well, it actually has nothing to do with thinks coming or going. The literal translation of “Da sind Sie auf dem Holzweg…” would be “Then you are on the logging path…”. So I guess it can’t really be used to confirm “another think coming”, other than the fact that that translation is given on the page you cited. A closer match would be “Wenn du denkst dass …, denk lieber noch einmal nach.” Which would translate as “If you think that …, then think again.” In my opinion “another think coming” is just a quainter or more colloquial way of saying “think again”. That’s why I think “another think coming” is correct and “another thing coming” is incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![Genghis\_Bob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/45deac/32.png) [@Genghis\_Bob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Genghis_Bob)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2004, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/112 "2004-08-19T13:43:33Z")
> [@Cardinal](#): > > When I was tutoring the SAT II Writing test, I told kids that “lie” is “to recline”, and “lay” is “to set down”. > > I’m going to lie down. > > Lay that anywhere. > > Don’t let the dog lie in the mud! > > I’m helping to lay some carpet. > The real confusion comes in using the other tenses. > > Conjugation of LIE: > > I lie down today. (present tense) > The money **lay** there yesterday. (past tense) > Sarah will lie down there tomorrow. (future tense) > The book has lain here many times before. (use perfect tense with have, had, has) > > Conjugation of LAY: > > I lay the book down. (present tense) > I laid it down yesterday. (past tense) > I will lay it down again tomorrow. (future tense) > I have laid it here many times before. (use perfect tense with have, had, has) Let me see if I have this right: I laid my money down; the money lay there. After I have laid my money down, then Sarah will lie down, and then I will lie down. Then the money, Sarah, and I will all have been laid. ---
**Author:** ![fishbicycle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@fishbicycle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fishbicycle)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/113 "2004-08-22T12:57:53Z")
If your interest in something has **peaked** , then at some point you reached your moment of maximum interest in it, after which your level of interest waned. However, if something has made you want to learn more about a subject, your interest has been **piqued**. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/114 "2004-08-22T16:22:35Z")
My personal favorite, and I seem to be fighting a losing battle on this one, is “try and …”. “I will try and come see you on Saturday.” No, NO, **NO**!!! You can “try _to_ come see me on Saturday”, as in attempt to come see me. “Try and” makes no sense, at least to me. Who else HATES this one??? ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/115 "2004-08-22T16:26:24Z")
On the interminable “another thing/think coming”, put me down for “thing” The “thing” in question is an outcome. i.e. “If you expect that outcome, you’ve got another (different) outcome coming”. Having lived in 8 US States spread well across the country I can say I’ve never heard a single human being say this idiom with “think” and I’ve only ever read it with “think” on threads on this board _whose purpose is to discuss the thing/think controversy_. IOW, the “think” version is apparently held to be correct by some, but actually used by none. I’ll grant that _if_ the first part of the phrase is included: “If you think that …”, _then_ the “think” version of the predicate phrase makes at least a little sense. But where & when I grew up (Southern California 40 years ago) the usual usage was just the second half of the idiom, wherein “think” is particularly inappropriate. e.g. something like this: He: I’m going to play poker with the boys on Friday night. She: No you’re not; we’re going to the movies together! He: I’m playing poker, period. You can go to the movies with Sally. she: Just keep treating me that way; you’ve got another thing coming. In that setup, without the first part of the idiom even said, putting “think” in the final sentence would be truly weird, at least to my eyes/ears. ---
**Author:** ![picunurse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7bcc69/32.png) [@picunurse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/picunurse)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/116 "2004-08-22T17:10:56Z")
The title of this[thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=272341)Hurt my brain. Maybe he was using a laptop from the hospital to post the thread? Bring/take took/brought. Its always seemed so simple to me… I guess not. ---
**Author:** ![picunurse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7bcc69/32.png) [@picunurse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/picunurse)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/117 "2004-08-22T17:12:11Z")
> [@picunurse](#): > > The title of this[thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=272341)Hurt my brain. Maybe he was using a laptop from the hospital to post the thread? > Bring/take took/brought. Its always seemed so simple to me… I guess not. Now I suppose you’d like me to use punctuation and spaces? :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/118 "2004-08-22T17:20:06Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > IOW, the “think” version is apparently held to be correct by some, but actually used by none. Just because you _hear_ “thing” doesn’t mean that’s what people are saying. Which is how this whole mess got started in the first place. There is little doubt that the original phrase was “think” (see my cite early in this thread). You’ve probably heard “think” more often than you know. ---
**Author:** ![rjk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ed655f/32.png) [@rjk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjk)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/119 "2004-08-22T20:07:36Z")
It’s ‘think’, dammit! Just to avoid joining the controversy, I’ll mention a peeve of mine I saw in the breakfast thread: “wheat bread” (as opposed to “_white_ bread”). Almost all bread is made of wheat, so “wheat bread” is just about meaningless. I’ll have “whole wheat”, please! In context, ‘thing’ makes no sense. ---
**Author:** ![TellMeI\_mNotCrazy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tellmei_mnotcrazy/32/3419_2.png) [@TellMeI\_mNotCrazy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TellMeI_mNotCrazy)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2004, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635/120 "2004-08-22T21:40:08Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Just because you _hear_ “thing” doesn’t mean that’s what people are saying. Which is how this whole mess got started in the first place. There is little doubt that the original phrase was “think” (see my cite early in this thread). You’ve probably heard “think” more often than you know. I agree. It’s near impossible to distinguish between whether someone is saying “thing coming” or “think coming” and so you’ll tend to hear whichever it is you’re expecting to hear. I have never “heard” anyone say “…another thing coming”, but clearly someone has likely said it to me. I just find it amusing that there can be cites up the wazoo showing that it’s “think” and it can still be hotly contested. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-gentle-grammar-nudge-from-your-friend-podkayne-intensive-purposes/258635.md?page=7)