Pedants' Paradise

[Roehre]

...the commonest forms of which are Dim parkio and Dim smokio

Hmmmm, Welsh doen't have a k, hence: Dim parcio and Dim smocio
For the no-smoking sign you are more likely to see Dim ysmygu

As far as differences between Goggy and Hwntw Welsh:
Now is Rwan in northern, Nawr in southern Welsh.
Nevertheless all road signs and road paintings urging to slow down in the North are Nawr, to dismay of the purists.

For the purists to drive is gurry, but drifio is fine.
To Fly is hedfan, but hardly anyone is cringing by fflio (as the ff is the English f, the Welsh f the English v}

but there are differences in meaning too:
Llaith (a latin derived word: Lactum) has got the meaning of milk in south wales, but buttermilk in the north e.g..

[Roehre]

..... (Much was made of the Argentine Welsh connection.)

recently there were guests from Patagonia staying in the area, visiting the places where their forefathers came from. They didn't speak much English and there aren't many Spanish speakers around here, but the communication went very well through Welsh (and the Argentine-Spanish influence on Patagonian Welsh and the English one on Welsh Welsh sometimes caused some misunderstandings which all were laughed at loudly eventually)

[Despina dello Stagno]

As an unreconstructed sais I seem to be able to make myself understood, both North and South. Particularly if I wish to watch snooker in the pink pavilion.

[Richard Tarleton]

Hmmmm, Welsh doen't have a k, hence: Dim parcio and Dim smocio
For the no-smoking sign you are more likely to see Dim ysmygu

Apologies for my phonetic mangling, Roehre! My first-language Welsh grandmother, and great-grandparents, would be appalled.

[Nick Armstrong]

May I suggest that pedants and more particularly anti-pedants might like to bear in mind the publication in February 2015 of this book?

http://www.janklowandnesbit.co.uk/oliver-kamm/accidence-will-happen-non-pedantic-guide-english-usage

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Accidence-Will-Happen-Non-Pedantic-English/dp/0297871935

[gurnemanz]

That book looks up my street. The blurb statement: "We learn language by instinct, but good English, we are told, requires rules" opens a can of worms. Children acquiring a language have an instinct for rules, ie regularities, but frequently have to contend with irregularities that seem arbitrary. I remember reading Steven Pinker's fascinating book on irregular verbs. Anyone having brought up children and paid attention to their linguistic development will be able to give their own examples.

[Alain Maréchal]

May I ask for guidance about the use of the verb "to reference"? I have just read the phrase "A referenced the XXX three times in his opening paragraph". I am not a pedant, I am content that English be an evolving language, but this seems ugly to me: I would have written " A referred to the XXX". Any thoughts, pedantic or otherwise, would be welcome.

[JFLL]

May I ask for guidance about the use of the verb "to reference"? I have just read the phrase "A referenced the XXX three times in his opening paragraph". I am not a pedant, I am content that English be an evolving language, but this seems ugly to me: I would have written " A referred to the XXX". Any thoughts, pedantic or otherwise, would be welcome.

It's what the linguists call 'conversion' or 'zero-derivation', whereby a word of one class (say a noun) is converted into a word of another class (say a verb) without any change of form. The specific case you mention is sometimes called 'verbification' (ugly word, I know). An example which I really dislike is 'to showcase', beloved of R3 announcers, unfortunately. As you say, there seems to be little justification in using 'to reference' rather than 'to refer', but journalists in particular have to chase novelty, don't they?

[gurnemanz]

May I ask for guidance about the use of the verb "to reference"? I have just read the phrase "A referenced the XXX three times in his opening paragraph". I am not a pedant, I am content that English be an evolving language, but this seems ugly to me: I would have written " A referred to the XXX". Any thoughts, pedantic or otherwise, would be welcome.

I agree that it appears ugly but it is probably valid as an example of a noun being used as a verb, which happens all the time - audition an actor, oil the hinge etc etc. I presume it is distinct from the more general verb "refer" in being derived from the noun "reference", by which writers point to a specific cited source.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

A similar tooth-enamel-peeling usage is "to evidence". "Have you evidenced this?" I was asked a couple of months ago. I wardrobed him.

[jean]

I think the problem may be that referring has an ordinary everyday casual meaning, but the writer wants to say that the author he's citing is indicating a more precise sort of referring, as in an academic paper.

Verbification is indeed an ugly word - I prefer the simple verbing, which neatly illustrates the process it describes.

[Cross-posting with gurnemanz -yes, I agree]

[Pabmusic]

It's what the linguists call 'conversion' or 'zero-derivation', whereby a word of one class (say a noun) is converted into a word of another class (say a verb) without any change of form. The specific case you mention is sometimes called 'verbification' (ugly word, I know). An example which I really dislike is 'to showcase', beloved of R3 announcers, unfortunately. As you say, there seems to be little justification in using 'to reference' rather than 'to refer', but journalists in particular have to chase novelty, don't they?

You're right, but it's very old in English. To damage something, to flood a pasture, to control a situation, to light the way, to measure the difference, to silence the opposition, to shampoo your hair, to whisper instructions, to photograph an event and to race against time were all nouns adapted as verbs (some as long ago as 1000 years). It all depends upon which modern ones last.

[amateur51]

A similar tooth-enamel-peeling usage is "to evidence". "Have you evidenced this?" I was asked a couple of months ago. I wardrobed him.

Truly awful. ferney

'To incentivise' has been the subject of an aesthetic tussle elsewhere - I think it's appalling.

And then there's 'to capacity build' - "whatever happened to 'training'" I growled?!

[Alain Maréchal]

I think the problem may be that referring has an ordinary everyday casual meaning, but the writer wants to say that the author he's citing is indicating a more precise sort of referring, as in an academic paper.

jean, I can tell you it was not a citation. The actual sentence was "Wirth referenced the Petain regime three times in his opening paragraph, in a book that claims to be an impartial history of the town". (In this thread let's all try to keep a distance from the subject).

Thanks to everybody for those insights; it isn't as straightforward as I had assumed.

[jean]

'To incentivise' has been the subject of an aesthetic tussle elsewhere - I think it's appalling.

But your opponent was right - it doesn't mean the same as encourage. He was also right (I secretly checked) that it has found its way into dictionaries - even into the OED, which revealed to me that it's been around since 1968.