English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

Johan Larsson

7:00 PM

@Mitch A woman saying that gets stars, a man would get stigma :)

meer2kat

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I live in Chicago. I live on the beach. I live at the University.

@Mitch I live in Chicago. I live on the beach. I live at the University.

tchrist

People don’t wear shoes at the beach.

meer2kat

@tchrist great point?

Mitch

@Cerberus OK. Those all seem British to me. It is an infelicity to refer to the city itself with 'at'. anything goes if the city is used as an adjective eg 'Chicago Library'

tchrist

Although they do tend to do so at the movies.

Cerberus

7:01 PM

@tchrist Are we the only ones in these halls to know it? I am saying "surprised" because I have seen it used many times.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@tchrist I dunno. maybe. Maybe if I were driving past a city on a freeway, I'd say "I'm only at Chicago now".

Cerberus

@Mitch "The construction of the Illinois and Michigan Canal, completed in 1848 and connecting the Great Lakes with the Illinois-Mississippi River waterway system at Chicago, further enhanced Chicago's symbiotic relationship with its rich farm ..."

tchrist

@Cerberus It just isn’t used.

Mitch

@JohanLarsson I know. A stigma in the eye.

Cerberus

I called it "formal / old fashioned".

tchrist

7:01 PM

@Cerberus No.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus That's different.

tchrist

That is not what is going on here.

Glen The Udderboat

"Sex at the City".

tchrist

When there is a route, each point along that route is somewhere you can be at.

Cerberus

@Mitch British, w'evs, at any rate it is possible.

tchrist

7:02 PM

@Cerberus No, you misunderstand it.

I’m sorry.

Glen The Udderboat

@tchrist I get that.

tchrist

And I will try to explain.

Cerberus

I know perfectly well how at can be used.

Mitch

@Cerberus That's the rare usage tchrist is thinking of. 'Chicago' is acting there like a surface, where the river system 'attaches to'

tchrist

It is not at all old-fashioned.

Cerberus

7:03 PM

It's just harder to find good examples for newer cities like Chicago.

tchrist

It merely has restricted currency.

These are not the same thing.

Mitch

@Cerberus You had me at "British w'evs".

meer2kat

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I would say "to" not "at"

Mitch

@Cerberus There are older? St. Louis? Philadelphia? Nope, just British cities.

meer2kat

@Cerberus That makes sense. Only in that context though.

Glen The Udderboat

7:04 PM

I'm Chicago.

2

meer2kat

@GlenTheUdderboat i like it. problem solved.

Mitch

@GlenTheUdderboat I'm Gunga Din!

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@meer2kat So if you're driving from city A to city C, and you're passing city B right now, you'd say "I'm only to B"? I don't find that grammatical.

tchrist

Suppose you are travelling Route 66. You stop at Santa Fe for a quick bite.

Do you see how that works?

Those are the only sorts of situations you can use at with a city.

Mitch

Depends on what you had. Grilled cheese? Did it have bacon?

Glen The Udderboat

7:05 PM

I'm Santa Fe. Or Fé?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

You can be "at" a point because points are small. You are "in" a city because cities are large.

meer2kat

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 That's what I've grown up saying.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@meer2kat Where are you from?

meer2kat

@tchrist I'd stop at the diner IN santa fe

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Virginia/Kentucky/Indiana

tchrist

@GlenTheUdderboat When founded, it was Santa Fé. Modern orthographic convention no longer uses an accent on the second word, be it Spanish or English.

I’m surprised you asked, however. Few know of that.

Cerberus

7:06 PM

@tchrist I disagree. Perhaps Americans are less familiar with this usage, then.

Johan Larsson

@Mitch or a trema jamming up your keyboard

tchrist

@Cerberus Disbelieve.

Show me three examples of at with a city name that are not of the sort that I have mentioned.

Cerberus

> President Harrison signed an act providing for an "international exhibition of arts, industries, manufactures, and the products of the soil, mine, and sea" to be held at Chicago.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@meer2kat hm. I find using "to" really really odd there. It just doesn't work for me.

Cerberus

This is not about the university.

Glen The Udderboat

7:07 PM

@tchrist I didn't know. Santa Fe sounds like Santa Fuh to me.

tchrist

@Cerberus We no longer speak that way.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus That just seems ungrammatical to me.

tchrist

@GlenTheUdderboat Huh?

Cerberus

As I said, old fashioned.

tchrist

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Likewise.

Cerberus

7:08 PM

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Well, it is good English.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus was, maybe. isn't.

tchrist

@Cerberus You’re having a tense problem.

Glen The Udderboat

@tchrist Huh, what? Fe = fuh (with moisture), fé = fay.

meer2kat

@Cerberus nah just doesn't work for cities. places. at the library, at the university, at the convention center IN Chicago, which is on the way to Canada passing through ___ (some city).

tchrist

@GlenTheUdderboat I think not.

Glen The Udderboat

7:10 PM

@tchrist Start now.

tchrist

The Brazilians still spell it Santa Fé but they have their own reasons.

@GlenTheUdderboat Don’t spout nonsense.

Cerberus

@meer2kat I disagree, you people are just not familiar with it.

meer2kat

@Cerberus where are you from?

Cerberus

Even for a city as hard as Chicago, I can find several examples.

oerkelens

@meer2kat You're asking all the cheeseheads today :P

Cerberus

7:11 PM

@meer2kat From Holland. But that doesn't matter, I know my literature.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus Aren't those instances of being on the move?

meer2kat

@Cerberus Maybe it works for formal writing purposes. But in conversational English and in informal, MODERN papers, the way I said is the way we use.

@Cerberus many dutch party up in here today :)

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus An army at Chicago isn't in Chicago.

Cerberus

@GlenTheUdderboat No? None of those sentences are about moving.

@meer2kat For the third time, I said "formal / old-fashioned".

meer2kat

@Cerberus Woops sorry. In that case, you are correct

Glen The Udderboat

7:14 PM

@Cerberus But armies are always moving, unless they are standing armies.

Cerberus

@GlenTheUdderboat There is a subtle difference in meaning, of course. Nobody said there wasn't.

@GlenTheUdderboat If an army is disbanded at Chicago, I would not call that moving.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus Point taken.

@Cerberus But still. ! :)

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus I think that is using the city to refer to the bases in the city.

Cerberus

So what?

You can say at Chicago.

Glen The Udderboat

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Ah, good point. At the base. Not in the city.

Cerberus

7:16 PM

And there are many other examples that aren't about armies.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus Pls give me one contemporaneous (?) example.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus If "Chicago" in that case means an army base, and not a city, it would not be the same thing. I can say "At Toronto" when I am referring to the Toronto Airport or the University of Toronto, if the context allows readers to infer that it is the airport or school that I am referring to.

Cerberus

@GlenTheUdderboat Why? I have given enough examples from the 20th century. With other cities, it's easier to find examples, but Chicago is harder.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus 21st century perhaps?

Cerberus

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 As I said, there is often a subtle difference in meaning. But the other examples are not about army bases or airports or rail road stations.

@GlenTheUdderboat No, there isn't enough literature. As I said, the examples are hard to find.

meer2kat

7:21 PM

You can say whatever you'd like. It doesn't make it appropriate and correct for modern grammatical rules. @Cerberus :P

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus But it's not a question of it being "formal/old-fashioned". The modern examples either refer to smaller-than-city places using the city's name, or treat the entire city like a point on a route.

It's simply ungrammatical to say something like "I'm visiting my grandmother at Chicago".

if you mean that your grandmother lives in the city of Chicago.

meer2kat

@GlenTheUdderboat *contemporary

Cerberus

@meer2kat I don't know what you mean.

meer2kat

@Cerberus something you said earlier. just playing around

Cerberus

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 No, that is formal/old-fashioned.

sighs

meer2kat

7:25 PM

Ya'll are a tough crowd haha

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus No. Formally, it would be ungrammatical.

Cerberus

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 You are mistaken. You just don't know this usage, apparently.

The difference between at and in, when made, is that of treating a city as a point one is at, as opposed to an area one is in.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus So what makes Chicago an exception?

Cerberus

This illustrates the difference in good prose.

@GlenTheUdderboat It is a newer city in the New World, and there are too many reference to the university to find the real examples. They get in the way.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus I've already allowed for the point usage above. It isn't allowable in situations like the sentence I've provided.

Cerberus

7:29 PM

What sentence have you provided?

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus Remaining is associated with moving, whereas a house address in a street is not.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

7 mins ago, by Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

It's simply ungrammatical to say something like "I'm visiting my grandmother at Chicago".

Cerberus

And, if you agree that at can be used as a point, then what's your problem with my saying that was at Chicago is possible, as in the original example?

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I think it is possible to look at Chicago as a point there. Again, formal/old-fashioned.

Don't let what you would say get in the way.

tchrist

At Vancouver, At Boise, At Duluth.

At Edmonton, At Milwaukee.

Enjoy.

meer2kat

@tchrist Boise is university ex

Cerberus

7:32 PM

@tchrist It's easier to find the right examples if you take a different city. This illustrates the usage rather well:

3 mins ago, by Cerberus

meer2kat

@tchrist in a place at another place works just fine too (regarding duluth)

tchrist

@meer2kat You have to winnow those out.

Glen The Udderboat

Is there any phrase where one lives at some city?

Cerberus

@tchrist I expect you here to be familiar with this usage!

Of all people!

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus At hominem.

3

meer2kat

7:33 PM

@tchrist edmonton looks like a sports show off. ___ at ___.

Cerberus

@GlenTheUdderboat Hahaha.

tchrist

@Cerberus It is not used by current speakers.

Cerberus

@tchrist Well, I said formal/old-fashioned.

And I didn't say anything about speakers.

tchrist

It simply sounds “wrong” to us.

meer2kat

@tchrist at milwaukee is a satellite campus. are you all familiar with that term?

tchrist

7:34 PM

Which is what we’ve all been trying to get across to you.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus You keep saying "formal". I'm telling you, as a native speaker, it would be just as wrong in formal contexts as informal.

Glen The Udderboat

@meer2kat 'milwaukee'?

meer2kat

@GlenTheUdderboat no "satellite campus"

tchrist

Of course.

Cerberus

@tchrist This isn't about sounding wrong, it is about what's possible in English. That quotation is from 1993 btw.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

7:34 PM

I'll allow old-fashioned, if by that you mean "archaic".

Cerberus

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 So you just happen to be unfamiliar with this usage, that's fine.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Because it's not used.

sorry.

tchrist

Ayup.

Cerberus

Look at my quotation.

And I assure you, I have seen this usage many times in various books.

20th-century books, or 21st.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

look, if we have to allow any sentence at all because you can find an example of someone using it, we'll be here all day rewriting the grammar books.

3

meer2kat

7:36 PM

hahahaha yes

Cerberus

sighs

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus I think the 'had' is suspicious.

Cerberus

Perhaps I encounter this usage more than you people, as an historian.

In academic literature.

tchrist

> His wife survived him nearly a quarter of a century, and died at Milwaukee in October, 1906.

Note well the date.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus At academic literature.

Cerberus

7:37 PM

I think it's silly to say something is "wrong" just because you are unfamiliar with it yourself, especially if it is of a higher register.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus Isn't that the whole point of saying something is 'wrong'?

tchrist

> On September 4, 1897, the Sporting News quoted an exchange: “There is no town in the league where the attendance reports are padded like they are at Milwaukee.”

Glen The Udderboat

@tchrist Old quotes are not going to make a contemporary point.

tchrist

Not higher register; dead register or extinct register.

> He afterward engaged in the drug business at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, but in 1881 entered St. Francis Seminary at Milwaukee in order to prepare for the priesthood and was ordained on the 24th of June, 1887.

Cerberus

> The Adamses remained at London until 2 Jan. 1784, when they set out for the Netherlands (JA, D&A, 3:146, 195; JQA, Diary, 1:196-197, 207).

tchrist

7:40 PM

All dead.

Cerberus

@GlenTheUdderboat From 2010.

@GlenTheUdderboat Haha no!

@tchrist In order to prove that something is possible, a couple of examples are enough, and counter-examples are irrelevant.

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus I think this is the "normal" usage of 'wrong'. Or 'no'.

tchrist

> It was not until 2 November 1950 that Protea left Naples on its next voyage to Australia, disembarking 1,096 passengers at Melbourne on 9 December.

Cerberus

> The king and queen remained at London, and made no attempt to conceal their vexation and chagrin. (2009)

meer2kat

@Cerberus When was that written? That would have been commonplace in that time period and for another 100-150 years

Cerberus

7:42 PM

@meer2kat 2010.

Glen The Udderboat

@tchrist You're not getting the logic. That isn't proving anything.

tchrist

> Account of the Building in progress of erection at Melbourne for the Great Telescope', Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 17: 328– 329 Ellery, R.L.J.1870.

meer2kat

@Cerberus Are these all pieces of British literature?

@Cerberus Perhaps it is a differentiation between British English and American English?

tchrist

> The move to Canberra complicated but at least initially did not enlarge this restricted configuration since most of the ANU's initial appointees had been trained at Melbourne or Sydney, sometimes bringing their rival intellectual traditions and ...

Cerberus

@meer2kat Not literature, academic literature.

meer2kat

7:43 PM

@Cerberus Yes, but are they all British?

Cerberus

Oh. I haven't looked.

Possible. But does it matter?

Will Hunting

Oh dear, my Ubuntu disc isn't loading properly, need to reburn it...

MετάEd

We're discussing this at the English.SE chatroom, right?

meer2kat

@Cerberus Yes because then we are arguing for no reason lol. If it is a different of British versus American English, then the rules and commonality of it are somewhat different.

tchrist

@MετάEd No, at a café.

meer2kat

7:45 PM

@Cerberus They all seem to be British English to me. Which means everyone in this room is right.

MετάEd

@tchrist I'm at a desk but I do have coffee at me.

Glen The Udderboat

My conclusion, thus far, is that 'at' combined with a city, nowadays, always refers to some institution or part of an itinerary, and that 'in' refers to everything else.

2

Cerberus

@meer2kat If it is British, it is possible in English, and it's silly say it's not possible. However, my last pair of quotations were printed in America.

tchrist

But does it play in Peoria?

meer2kat

@Cerberus Yes the last two make sense though. I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm saying both of us are correct. In American English, there are few exceptions to when that is acceptable, whereas in British English it is still more commonplace as it hasn't changed.

Will Hunting

7:47 PM

Very strange, there are white squares and black squares in this room and the math room too, at some point in time

MετάEd

@WillHunting in some point at time.

meer2kat

@MετάEd ouch. no.

MετάEd

@meer2kat Heh heh heh.

Will Hunting

@MετάEd Oh I am glad you don't look like Jesus anymore

meer2kat

@MετάEd that hurt

MετάEd

7:48 PM

@meer2kat I promise not to post it on the main site.

meer2kat

@WillHunting Jesus is an easter egg?

@MετάEd good hahaha

MετάEd

@WillHunting I still look like Jesus, I'm just inside a shell.

Will Hunting

@meer2kat No, he made a cartoon pic of himself which looked like Jesus, lol

tchrist

@MετάEd s/a s//

meer2kat

@WillHunting oh dear

MετάEd

7:49 PM

@tchrist Now you have two problems.

Cerberus

@meer2kat People said, "it is wrong" without qualification. That is incorrect, and I have the right to correct them.

tchrist

@MετάEd Give it three days.

meer2kat

@Cerberus free speech; go for it

lol

Here's a fun one. Merry Christmas or Happy Christmas?

tchrist

All around the mulberry bush,
The monkey chased the weasel;
The monkey thought it was all in fun,
Pop goes the weasel!

meer2kat

it's really a test of european roots from what i can tell hahaha

Cerberus

7:52 PM

> Warwick remained at London to maintain the government. (Smith College, 2002.)

I could go on forever, it's easy to find example for at London.

Johan Larsson

@Cerberus you want at the other guys want in?

Glen The Udderboat

@Cerberus But, somehow, they always allude to the possibility of moving or being elsewhere.

tchrist

@JohanLarsson That sounds positively wanton.

Will Hunting

So I reburned my Ubuntu disc and now it is OK

Cerberus

@JohanLarsson I was just saying at [city] is possible in formal and old-fashioned English, and everyone here was attacking me. And even after I told them I had read this usage many times and gave them many examples, they would not admit that they were simply unfamiliar with this usage.

@GlenTheUdderboat Possibly, but that doesn't matter. At is possible, and that was what I was saying.

Johan Larsson

7:54 PM

*I did not attack

Cerberus

If only you had been at here!

Johan Larsson

@tchrist too advanced, I think I get it but not sure

Cerberus

Especially in can be wanton...

Johan Larsson

@Cerberus You think you can use me vs tchrist?

Maybe I could have attacked Perls lack of type system

Cerberus

@JohanLarsson Haha. He was among my least ignorant detractors; he just kept posting examples and mostly ignored me, so that was fine.

Johan Larsson

8:00 PM

@cornbreadninja麵包忍者 ping

MετάEd

@tchrist Depending on who's counting.

tchrist

Duck, duck, goose.

MετάEd

@JohanLarsson Ping the duck?

Johan Larsson

what does it mean?

MετάEd

Johan Larsson

8:06 PM

oh

Pingy is a penguin?

Dunno if this is editing or if he feels guilt

Doc

This guy wont give up...
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/164540/whether-my-thinking-sir-conveys-more-respect-is-really-correct-or-not/164545#164545

MετάEd

8:32 PM

@Doc I suggested English Language Learners.

Will Hunting

I have installed Ubuntu 14.04, woo!

n11

!!define outplementation

KitSox

@n11 It means I ain't got time to learn your $5 words

@n11 No definition found.

n11

https://github.com/tinkerpop/blueprints/wiki/Sail-Ouplementation

aedia λ

Afternoon y'all!

Awwh it's Ping!

n11

8:53 PM

@WillHunting the Trusty Tahr?

!!wiki tahr

KitSox

Tahr

Tahrs are three species of large Asian ungulates related to the wild goat. Until recently the three species were believed to be closely related and were placed in a single genus, Hemitragus. Genetic studies have proven that the three tahrs are not as closely related as previously thought. Now they are considered as members of three separate monotypic genera; Hemitragus is now reserved for the Himalayan Tahr; Nilgiritragus for the Nilgiri Tahr; and Arabitragus for the Arabian Tahr.. The operating system Ubuntu uses the title "Trusty Tahr" for its 14.04 version, which was released in April...

n11

I wouldn't trust a goat, but a tahr yes

Robusto

So can we somehow discourage question titles like this:

0

Q: Is this sentence correct English?

I am not a native English speaker. But I would like to know if the following sentence is correct? "Choose a password at least 6 characters long." Or should it be something like "Choose a password that is at least 6 characters long."?

I mean, how many "Is this sentence correct" questions do we have now? Like, a gazillion?

n11

he could at least be more accurate in the title

Johan Larsson

what is 1 gazillion/F?

n11

9:04 PM

also, "something is correct English" might be correct grammatically, but "something is correct in English" sounds better to me

@JohanLarsson 10^3 billion

Johan Larsson

oh

n11

!!define trillion

KitSox

@n11 No definition found.

@n11 trillion (

Will Hunting

@n11 Yes

MετάEd

9:30 PM

@n11 I play the Gi Tahr, some folks play the Si Tahr

How come that article doesn't mention the rare hemidemisemitragus?

Or is that the Semitahr?

Mitch

10:14 PM

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 We already are here all day.

@Robusto All ELU questions are this. This one is just being honest.

@Cerberus Sure, we're all unfamiliar with it. Note that those who have responded with unfamiliarity are ELUers, and AmE/CanE speakers. That should lead you to believe that 'unfamiliarity' = 'not grammatical in their variety'. As opposed to just plain not well-read.

Sel

10:32 PM

Any tips on how to salvage english.stackexchange.com/questions/164327/… ?

Or would my edit suffice for re-opening?

Robusto

10:54 PM

@JohanLarsson Equivalent to a metric ass-ton.

n11

11:09 PM

!!urban metric ass ton

KitSox

@n11 [metric ass ton](http://metric-ass-ton.urbanup.com/1993939) In excess; a large amount, generally more than what is expected.

This term is not restricted to weight, but is more a quantitive factor.

n11

!!urban asston

KitSox

@n11 It means I ain't got time to learn your $5 words

@n11 asston Also known as [assload], an asston is actually a generic and undefined measure of capacity used when the amount is deemed excessive.

Robusto

11:59 PM

@MετάEd Not the Key Tahr?

Transcript for

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…