Back on topic. Slightly related, and interesting... Betting has been suspended by paddy power on CELTICS New manager.
Actually it wasn't, as I am 'English' (actually, my nationality is British) and I most certainly do not use 'BBC' as a collective noun, as grammatically it cannot be, irrespective of assertions or your own mistaken, or common, usage. Common usage does not make it correct. Referring to a football club by its name does not constitute usage as a collective noun, regardless of whether referencing the organisation itself or as a representation of a collection of individuals. In 'US English' there is sometimes a distinction made but not in Standard English - the US usage intended as a qualifier of a collective noun being singular or plural. Perhaps, you could cite even one example of BBC formally describing itself in the sense of being a collective noun. They do not, They instead use the expression "we at the BBC'. You are wrong, whether out of ignorance or misinformation, I will not pass judgement. But apparently you believe "you can do what you want with them'. Ignoring the fact that the bottom paragraph of your post is non-sequiturial, it is again totally incorrect. In formal English - and the original post was related to someone's role as an editor - there are strict rules relating to grammar and syntax, including the usage of what you mistakenly call 'quotation marks'. I write and edit academic texts and books every day - including the custodian of spoken and written English Language, OED publications - technical and esoteric expressions have to be placed in inverted commas. Grammatically all colloquialisms, slang, cliches, aphorisms etc likewise have to be contained within inverted commas but this is based upon standard English ('The Queen''s English') not journalistic convention.
That's essentially what I said: Is how Rich's post should be read. Dropping superfluous words is common in English. There are, "quite literally", thousands of cliches in the English language. "At the end of the day", "it would be a waste of my time" if I were to put quotation marks over "every single last one" of them. And difficult to read, "to say the very least". Putting quotation marks is entirely stylistic - as you say, it is the style of the OED and whatever other "big swinging dick" publications you throw at me, but it is not a universal convention nor is it a rule. There are conventions, yes (especially in academia, which you clearly are struggling to snap out of), but there is very little wrong with Rich's original post beyond a few typos and the odd missed possessive apostrophe. Nothing we all aren't guilty of (note your own errors in an additional full stop, missing commas, double quotation mark instead of possessive apostrophe etc) and certainly nothing that justified your ridiculous (and broadly false) attack on him in the first place. So let's just drop it all shall we?
Right. Firstly, I think I speak for everyone when I say, "I don't care" (did I get that right?). Secondly, I did English Language at A-Level and there was a phrase often used called 'colloquial English'. This is informal English. English that you might find, say, on an internet football forum. In colloquial English stupidly long words are rarely used to make the point of how clever you are, cliches are never put in bleeding quotes and organisations such as 'Norwich City' can be followed by the word 'are'. Now leave it out, it doesn't ****ing matter...
Whilst I'm sure that to some this debate is redefining the meaning of "riveting", this is a football forum and the topic of this discussion is the new manager of NCFC, rather than whether the BBC should be considered singular or plural. As far as I'm concerned, this is an informal discussion board to light-heartedly discuss football. Whilst there's a time and a place for proper, grammatically perfect English, I really don't think this is it. If you can communicate well enough to make your point, I think that's all that is required on a football forum. There's no entrance exam! If we could return to the topic at hand, that'd be great. If you want an off-topic thread to discuss the finer points of written English, then that's your prerogative.
This is the crux for me, totally uncalled for and ridiculous. EDIT: Yes, back on topic would be good!
I thought it is normal and acceptable when there is no other news about Norwich City to speak about that we argue pointlessly
Malky was as short as 1/7 yesterday, that has come in to 1/4 today with Lennon moving in from 5/1 to 11/4 Malky is still heavy favourite with the bookies at least. I heard a rumour the other day he'd recently bought a house in Wymondham, probably the usual load of old squit though
The word in the golf clubhouse this morning - probably about as accurate as the official handicap of the cowboy who made up our foursome this morning - is that Tim Sherwood interviewed on Monday and greatly impressed.
I am hearing more rumours of Hypia being connected. I mentioned him a will ago, and then Carrabuh mentioned him the other night. Has anybody else heard anything else about Hypia being a possibility?
