Torking Proply an' 'at

[Don Petter]

I am so sad this is a problem for you.

I think 'gography' would be a problem for me, too.

[mangerton]

There are other opinions similar from Fowler's.

vinteuil, please don't take that as a criticism of your interesting quote from Mr Fowler. I gave my copy to my daughter last week, and must look out for another. Perhaps it's how I was brought up, but "different to" just sounds wrong to me, and "different than" is quite beyond the pale!

[ahinton]

I think 'gography' would be a problem for me, too.

But that's a North Wales-ism, n'est-ce pas? - you know - speaking "Gog" an' all that (Anna will doubtless chip in and endorse or otherwise rubbish what I've written yurr from deepest darkest 'erefordistan near those Welsh Black, Welsh, Black so-called "mountains", look you, innit, see, Blodwen [plucks harp anxiously and awaits no doubt well-deserved contumelious abuse from the Ladies of Powys])...

[vinteuil]

vinteuil, please don't take that as a criticism of your interesting quote from Mr Fowler. I gave my copy to my daughter last week, and must look out for another. Perhaps it's how I was brought up, but "different to" just sounds wrong to me, and "different than" is quite beyond the pale!

... yes, I too was brung up to say 'different from', and still make a point of doing so - while also agreeing with Fowler's judgment on the acceptability of 'different to'. On the other hand - 'different than' I find hard to take, altho' I understand our American friends are happy with it...

[JFLL]

But that's a North Wales-ism, n'est-ce pas? - you know - speaking "Gog" an' all that (Anna will doubtless chip in and endorse or otherwise rubbish what I've written yurr from deepest darkest 'erefordistan ........

Careful, AH, they're out to take you over

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

seems that the Sun has aroused considerable ire for its mockery of Roy H

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

As HW Fowler put it - " That different can only be followed by from and not by to is a SUPERSTITION.
..... 'A Dictionary of Modern English Usage' , 1927 edition.

1927? Modern? Sound like a HIPP publication if it's that old.
Different "to" is a contradiction.

"Compared to" is another one, when the default is "compared with" though according to aforementioned Fowler (who is best ignored imo) it isn't that simple. What annoys me is when the BBC Andrew Davies production of Jane Austen's "Sense and Sensibility" actually changes Jane Austen's version from "I compare it with yours" to "I compare it to yours".

[Serial_Apologist]

"To" and "from" indicate directionality, surely? Different from indicates withdrawal, difference, [pulling apart from commonality; similar to convergence, mutuality in comparison terms. Comparing with sets two nouns beside each other... er, for comparison, no?

Seems logical therefore.

[Pabmusic]

As HW Fowler put it - " That different can only be followed by from and not by to is a SUPERSTITION..."

And thanks, Vinteuil, for pointing this out - it saved me doing so - though you might have listed the numerous authorities who agree with Fowler. It belongs to the large group of 'rules', such as 'don't begin a sentence with a conjunction' or 'don't split an infinitive', that are relics of the attempt of classical scholars to impose classical order on our unbridled tongue. They didn't succeed.

[jayne lee wilson]

As pabmusic implies, language evolves in the mouths, pens and keyboards of its users. if you disapprove on whatever moral or linguistic level of someone splitting an infinitive, or saying "to" where you prefer "from", all you are doing is glorifying, rather than purifying, the dialect of your particular tribe. The semantic distinction between "disinterested" and "uninterested" may be significant and useful; but if it dissolves through usage, there's not much you can do about it.

[Pabmusic]

..."Compared to" is another one, when the default is "compared with" though according to aforementioned Fowler (who is best ignored imo) it isn't that simple...

It will be difficult to find any authority to support your view. "Compared to" not only is acceptable, but is even given a subtle difference of meaning in several authorities - you compare something "to" something when you want to highlight similarities between things that are essentially different. You compare something "with" something that's essentially similar when you want to highlight the differences between them.

I'm surprised you reject Fowler because it's a 1927 publication. If any authority supported your view, it would be more likely to be an old one, I should have thought. Vinteuil's point may be that the superstition was debunked as long ago as 1927.

[Serial_Apologist]

It will be difficult to find any authority to support your view. "Compared to" not only is acceptable, but is even given a subtle difference of meaning in several authorities - you compare something "to" something when you want to highlight similarities between things that are essentially different. You compare something "with" something that's essentially similar when you want to highlight the differences between them.

I'm surprised you reject Fowler because it's a 1927 publication. If any authority supported your view, it would be more likely to be an old one, I should have thought. Vinteuil's point may be that the superstition was debunked as long ago as 1927.

"Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?"

Not today!

[Pabmusic]

"Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?"

Not today!

Shakespeare seems to agree.

Seriously, though, there are some real 'rules' of English grammar - often about syntax, because English is very reliant on the correct positioning of words (because we have got rid of almost all case endings). But most of the 'rules' people know are not real rules at all, and never were - they are false rules imposed on the language in the 18th and 19th Centuries a misguided attempt to make English conform to Latin. The most infamous one was the prohibition against splitting an infinitive (you can't do so in Latin, where the infinitive is one word, so you mustn't do so in English!), but there are many others. I just don't see any reason to persist with outdated, imposed 'rules' that few writers or authorities have ever agreed with anyway.

[mangerton]

Seriously, though, there are some real 'rules' of English grammar - often about syntax, because English is very reliant on the correct positioning of words (because we have got rid of almost all case endings).

Indeed. Notice in my workplace: Do not close this door for health and safety reasons

So presumably it's permitted to close it for other reasons, but I'm not sure that's what they meant.

[Panjandrum]

Indeed. Notice in my workplace: Do not close this door for health and safety reasons

So presumably it's permitted to close it for other reasons, but I'm not sure that's what they meant.

Or, "Dogs Must Be Carried on the Escalator". Anyone got a spare canine?