The presenter on a daytime property program on TV described a house, apparently approvingly, as "grandiose". People often seem to not have much idea of the conventional usage of words. "Grandiose" is almost exclusively a disapproving term meaning "unnecessarily large and pretentious".
I find it mildly amusing that such a negative term can be substituted for the simpler and far more positive "grand" giving the completely wrong impression of the place.
"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
June 01, 2011, 08:14
arnie
quote:
I find it mildly amusing that such a negative term can be substituted
That's because "grandiose" is a much more grandiose word. Slightly to my surprise, the "grand" meaning is also given in dictionaries; for example, Wordnik.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
June 01, 2011, 13:41
<Proofreader>
I heard a cnvoluted snentence for a travel promotion. A woman says "I used to didn't travel very much."
June 04, 2011, 20:03
Kalleh
You're being generous, Proof. I'd probably call it "unintelligible."
She may have made some editing changes from "used to" (missing the "not") to "didn't." Or, English maybe her second language (a far second!).
June 04, 2011, 21:16
tinman
quote:
"I used to didn't travel very much."
It sounds perfectly intelligible to me, though perhaps non-standard. I would probably say "I used to not ..." or "I didn't use to ...," but "I used to didn't ..." sounds to me like a regionalism, perhaps a southernism.
June 05, 2011, 00:34
Guy Barry
The negative of "used to" has always caused me problems. I was taught that the correct version is "used not to", but that sounds impossibly pompous and formal. There's always been a prescription against "didn't use to" which makes me avoid using it. I tend to get round the problem with "never used to" or something similar.
June 05, 2011, 06:06
zmježd
There's always been a prescription against "didn't use to" which makes me avoid using it.
I had never heard that. I wonder why. I shall look in the MWDEU. (Looking at the entry on [url=http://books.google.com/books?id=2yJusP0vrdgC&lpg=PA934&vq=didn't%20use%20to&pg=PA933#v=onepage&q&f=false]used to[/url].) I see some British usage advisers say that "didn't use to" is non-standard. I find nothing objectionable about it though.
—Ceci n'est pas un seing.
June 05, 2011, 09:06
<Proofreader>
I should have been more speicific. This was an actual commercial for a travel ticket agency. I would have said, "I once (upon a time) didn't travel much," or "...didn't used to travel..." But I've never heard this particular assemblage of words spoken in that manner.
— adj 1. made familiar with; accustomed to: I am used to hitchhiking.
— vb 2. (takes an infinitive or implied infinitive) used as an auxiliary to express habitual or accustomed actions, states, etc, taking place in the past but not continuing into the present: I don't drink these days, but I used to ; I used to fish here every day.
usage The most common negative form of used to is didn't used to (or didn't use to), but in formal contexts used not to is preferred.
used to Used to expresses the idea of something we did in the past but no longer do: When I was a child, we used to go to Scarborough for our holidays.
Using used to in questions and negative sentences can present problems. The usual way of turning a sentence like He used to snore into a question is with the word did. This is straightforward in spoken English, but there are two possible ways of writing it. The more logical is: Did he use to snore? The alternative, Did he used to snore?, is becoming more accepted, but it still strikes many people as odd. You can also make a question by reversing the word order: Used he to snore? But this is becoming less common.
The usual way of making used to negative is with didn't. But again, there's a problem with how to write it. He didn't use to snore is more widely acceptable than He didn't used to snore. You can also put not after used, although this is becoming less common: He used not to snore. The contracted written form is usedn't, not usen't. You can avoid any difficulty by using never: He never used to snore.
For negative questions, you can say: Didn't he use (or used) to snore? or Usedn't he to snore? (the uncontracted form of this, Used he not to snore?, is rather pompous and old-fashioned).
Used to is usually followed by an infinitive: We used to swim in the river. But sometimes the following infinitive is left out: I don’t play golf now, but I used to. Used to only exists as a past tense.
Questions and negatives are usually formed with ‘did’ + use to (with no ‘d’): Did you use to work here? ♦ We didn’t use to earn much. The spelling ‘did used to’ is sometimes used, but many people think that this is wrong.
In formal English, negatives are often formed with used not to: They used not to allow shops to be open on Sundays. The short forms usen’t to and usedn’t to are sometimes used, but they sound rather formal and old-fashioned.
I don't remember ever hearing used not to, usen’t to or usedn’t to.This message has been edited. Last edited by: tinman,
June 05, 2011, 17:14
Geoff
Me, I just say, "I'm homely."
It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. -J. Krishnamurti
June 05, 2011, 20:20
Kalleh
quote:
It sounds perfectly intelligible to me, though perhaps non-standard.
Really, Tinman? Because it is so awkwardly stated, I could see people trying to figure out what was meant, being completely wrong. For example, perhaps a period was missing: "I used to. Didn't travel very much." I.e., I used to work there, but I didn't travel in my job. I'm just saying...some of us have quite a linguistic imagination!
June 06, 2011, 06:18
zmježd
I think this usage thing only comes up when writing down didn't use to or use(d) to. Basically the -d in used elides with the t- in to.
—Ceci n'est pas un seing.
June 14, 2011, 13:25
Alphabet Soup
I'd rather like to have an unnecessarily large and pretentious house. I think it would be quite amusing.