[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]That's because they are wrong as well. It is then the use of the word 'we' that is wrong, so to make it sound right, 'is' is used. Still wrong though. Accepted speech and grammatical rules are different animals. I think the grammatical rule is still accepted, so go on, prove me wrong.
Sorry, Vfr, I asked in American English where a team name is deemed to be singular.
There is no bloody language called American English (feck off Bill Gates), JUST ENGLISH - It's our language, we developed it, speak it proper like the queen what what!
American English - Pet hate of mine!
Disagree. They have a whole lot of different vocabulary e.g. the word in my last post.
Does it actually matter ? Language serves no other purpose other than communication. Did we understand what our esteemed Amercan contributor meant ? Yes we did. Getting tied up in knots abouts a missing letter or apostrophe is futile in a language which is evolving all the time. Would we feel comfortable and fully understand the common parlance of 100 years ago ? I doubt it. Do we fully get what our teenagers speak, I doubt that also. The english language is a broad and flexible church and will be completely changed in another 100 years.
[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]That's because they are wrong as well. It is then the use of the word 'we' that is wrong, so to make it sound right, 'is' is used. Still wrong though. Accepted speech and grammatical rules are different animals. I think the grammatical rule is still accepted, so go on, prove me wrong.
Don't worry........... he'll try!!
You could say that the use of the word 'we' is wrong when referring to a team, as a team is a singular entity. However if you are a part of that team, and as an individual want to refer to the performance in the dressing room after the match, what do you say?
'We played well'
'We are a good team' are both correct
'The team is well balanced'
The team is better than last year' are both correct
The question is that in referring to your team do you replace the words 'we' or 'the team' in the above sentences with the name of the team.
In other words:
'Charlton played well'
'Charlton are a good team'
'Charlton is well balanced'
'Charlton is better than last year'
I think that arguably the American way is more grammatically correct but:
1. Is more open to misunderstandings e.g. the fourth sentence if not heard in the context of conversation could be taken to mean that the village has undergone renovation.
2. The English way psychologically communicates a greater togetherness between the individuals that together form 'we' outside of those just in the team e.g. fans, board members. 'Charlton are doing well' therefore therefore uses the word 'Charlton' to mean a 'we' comprising of everyone at the club even though grammatically speaking it is, I think, wrong.
[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]Does it actually matter ? Language serves no other purpose other than communication. Did we understand what our esteemed Amercan contributor meant ? Yes we did. Getting tied up in knots abouts a missing letter or apostrophe is futile in a language which is evolving all the time. Would we feel comfortable and fully understand the common parlance of 100 years ago ? I doubt it. Do we fully get what our teenagers speak, I doubt that also. The english language is a broad and flexible church and will be completely changed in another 100 years.
Agree 100% SHG and that is a point I have to argue all the time myself within a very very rigid educational system.
However I find it interesting to discuss, as it does, I think, suggest a difference between attitude of togetherness in different cultures. You may too think that's crap and you may be right. I'd like to hear what American Addict thinks.
[cite]Posted By: American_Addick[/cite]Given the size of the club, and where it has been recently, I still view Charlton in a bottom half Premier/top half Championship club.
A lot of poor decisions contributed to putting the club where it is now. Charlton are a third tier club right now on (de)merit, but it is like putting an underachieving big boy back a couple of grades in school.
Leeds has proven that you can't just bully your way out of this division. But while it was convenient to explain that Charlton were punching above their weight for many solid seasons in the Premier League, it appears that they are punching against opposition below their weight now.
That is one of the reasons why I have asked how much of this excellent start is down to Charlton being good and/or the opposition being poor.
Is this not a slightly pointless argument though? So we're punching below our weight - so what? We're winning FFS. Absoulutely pointless worrying about how we're going to cope with punching at/above our weight just 5 games into this season - that's to be worried about if/when we get promoted.
My computers and BlackBerry spell checkers can be set to American English or British English. Is the same option available in the UK?
Having spent three decades as a sports journalist in the US, if I didn't write "Charlton is ..." rather than "Charlton are ..." a copy editor (or sub editor, in the UK) would have changed it for me.
So I wouldn't even give it a second thought.
On one hand, the British invented the language. On the other hand, a lot more people speak and write the American version.
So I can see how the originators can be a bit pissed off about a bastardized (bastardised?) version of their language.
Nous devrions être reconnaissants que nous pas tout parlent du Français.
Au contraire Monsieur, dans les vestiaires, il est la langue la plus populaire.
Still love Bush though for his comment, 'The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur'. Plus he really knew how to massacre the English language!
Comments
Don't worry........... he'll try!!
Well, don't. This is a UK website. Whatever next......soon you'll be wanting us to eat your rotten 'ham'burgers.
Disagree. They have a whole lot of different vocabulary e.g. the word in my last post.
You could say that the use of the word 'we' is wrong when referring to a team, as a team is a singular entity. However if you are a part of that team, and as an individual want to refer to the performance in the dressing room after the match, what do you say?
'We played well'
'We are a good team' are both correct
'The team is well balanced'
The team is better than last year' are both correct
The question is that in referring to your team do you replace the words 'we' or 'the team' in the above sentences with the name of the team.
In other words:
'Charlton played well'
'Charlton are a good team'
'Charlton is well balanced'
'Charlton is better than last year'
I think that arguably the American way is more grammatically correct but:
1. Is more open to misunderstandings e.g. the fourth sentence if not heard in the context of conversation could be taken to mean that the village has undergone renovation.
2. The English way psychologically communicates a greater togetherness between the individuals that together form 'we' outside of those just in the team e.g. fans, board members. 'Charlton are doing well' therefore therefore uses the word 'Charlton' to mean a 'we' comprising of everyone at the club even though grammatically speaking it is, I think, wrong.
Agree 100% SHG and that is a point I have to argue all the time myself within a very very rigid educational system.
However I find it interesting to discuss, as it does, I think, suggest a difference between attitude of togetherness in different cultures. You may too think that's crap and you may be right. I'd like to hear what American Addict thinks.
How good are Charlton players would be correct, but I think you've butchered that sentence.
When the noun is in the singular, we use 'is'.
When the noun is in plural, we use are.
*Wanders off shaking head*
Sorry if linky thing does not work.
www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2007/August/20070820162210eaifas0.2194788.html
She failed with me.
Anyway, how good or bad are we?
We are the best league one has to offer and we will be promoted by March.
Is this not a slightly pointless argument though? So we're punching below our weight - so what? We're winning FFS. Absoulutely pointless worrying about how we're going to cope with punching at/above our weight just 5 games into this season - that's to be worried about if/when we get promoted.
Having spent three decades as a sports journalist in the US, if I didn't write "Charlton is ..." rather than "Charlton are ..." a copy editor (or sub editor, in the UK) would have changed it for me.
So I wouldn't even give it a second thought.
On one hand, the British invented the language. On the other hand, a lot more people speak and write the American version.
So I can see how the originators can be a bit pissed off about a bastardized (bastardised?) version of their language.
Nous devrions être reconnaissants que nous pas tout parlent du Français.
Still love Bush though for his comment, 'The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur'. Plus he really knew how to massacre the English language!
..........
We prefer to call it "Oxford English", despite what the geeks at Microsoft think...