An article to put grammar nazis in their place

When I look at my calender the week is.
Sunday : Monday: Tuesday: Wednesday: Thursday: Friday: Saturday.
The weekdays[midweek?] are :
Monday: Tuesday: Wednesday: Thursday: Friday
The weekends are:
Sunday and Saturday
They are at opposite ends of the week attached to the midweek days.
So there must be two week ends in one week; one at each end.
So they must be weekends.
The Saturday butts up against the next Sunday but that's a different week and it's the first end of the next week.
You can put those two together and call them a weekend; however what it really is is a week connector, because it's a separate entity that consists of the ends of two separate weeks.
So should be call this (week connecter) weekend a plural because it consists of more than one day or should we just call it weekends because it consists of two weekends one from each separate week.

Now after following my Weak argument; I hope you can understand why I feel this discussion is digressing .
 
See the Christmas one is tricksy. Christmas Day specifically would be on. But Christmas period would be at. So we do loads of shopping/go out a lod and get drunk at Christmas. Compared to we eat a massive dinner on Christmas Day.

So time periods (multiple days) would be at and specific (one day) would be on. Hence at the weekend and on Tuesday. ;)
 
tinkerdan said:
When I look at my calender the week is.
Sunday : Monday: Tuesday: Wednesday: Thursday: Friday: Saturday.
Click to expand...

I can't believe I'm getting into this, but ...

My diary runs Monday to Sunday, as I suspect everyone else's does. So which should be used to define "weekend", a calendar or a diary? Or maybe a dictionary. Mine gives "the end of the week, esp. the period from Friday night until the end of Sunday".
 
On the seventh day He rested. I'm no Christian but would suggest that as Sunday is the day of rest therefore, the empirical answer to when it starts and ends is as Harebrain has said. Mon-Fri = week Sat & Sun = weekend.

Naughty Cathbad... You have a shotgun in the UK? You know firearms are illegal over here? I've just had to counsel a mother whose 18 year old son was dragged out of bed this morning in Brixton by ten (!) police officers... Don't make me have to come and counsel your family, too ;)

pH
 
tinkerdan said:
When I look at my calender the week is.
Sunday : Monday: Tuesday: Wednesday: Thursday: Friday: Saturday.
The weekdays[midweek?] are :
Monday: Tuesday: Wednesday: Thursday: Friday
The weekends are:
Sunday and Saturday
They are at opposite ends of the week attached to the midweek days.
So there must be two week ends in one week; one at each end.
So they must be weekends.
The Saturday butts up against the next Sunday but that's a different week and it's the first end of the next week.
You can put those two together and call them a weekend; however what it really is is a week connector, because it's a separate entity that consists of the ends of two separate weeks.
So should be call this (week connecter) weekend a plural because it consists of more than one day or should we just call it weekends because it consists of two weekends one from each separate week.

Now after following my Weak argument; I hope you can understand why I feel this discussion is digressing .
Click to expand...

Logically this falls over because if each week had two "ends" then there would be 104 week "ends" in a year. I would argue there is one week "end" (Saturday and Sunday) and one week "start"

It's odd. I would do things in the evening, or at night time, never on the evening. Likewise I would do things at the weekend, but an event could be happening on the weekend.

All seems week sauce to me. :)

Also I love how an article about grammar nazis being put in their place has resulted in a grammatical argument - I just need my Brown Shirt and Cudgel - now where are those voting booths?
 
Well I wouldn't sleep at the weekend
I wouldn't sleep on the weekend
and
I wouldn't sleep in the weekend

Sleeping in the weekend wouldn't be as comfortable and as warm as sleeping in a sleeping bag.
Sleeping on a weekend would be as troubling as sleeping on air or a cloud.
And sleeping at the weekend would be fine; could you give me it's GPS co-ordinates.

I think I could manage sleeping during the weekend--sometime, after all its a whole two day.

You know some people think that Saturday is the Sabbath that makes Friday and Saturday the weekend. [Although it starts from sundown on Friday to sundown on Sunday] So it really covers portions of three days. And not entirely all of two of those.
 
Last edited:
As a person with no grammar skills at all these debates make me stand back in awe. There's a reason why I have street urchin in my tag line.

I'll keep an eye on how the Minnesota Vernacular handles this weekend conundrum.
 
Well, I suppose I am a grammar fascist, in the name of continuous comprehension (any document containing words or phrases which are used, very hip (or cool) for a few months and then disappear is doomed to early obsolescence - even more so than a work which invents new terms internally defined). No character of mine would split an infinitive, and only an evil one would attempt to terminate a proposition with a preposition.

Still, those of you who have been red penned by me (and survived the experience) will know I recognise that a language which is unchanging is no longer a living one l'Académie Français fighting a desperate rear-guard action to prevent anglicisms immigrating into the Hexagone, or even more extreme, classical Arabic not tolerating any word that does not appear in the Koran - I used to dub training films about bulldozers, and the number of occidental words that were essential for the understanding inserted into the text was amazing. So, I'm not trying to block change into complete stasis - all I (and the majority of pedants) are trying for is local stability, try to make sure three successive generations can understand each other's productions, and that the various dialects and geekspeaks do not completely block comprehension (I include legalese among these, as well as text speech and various professional and sporting speciality tongues). I might be old fashioned myself, and prefer 'would it were so' to 'I wish it was', but do not require - nay, do not even desire - that others go by my rules and preferences, merely that there be enough common ground that everyone can follow a book written a few decades earlier, and who knows? Maybe even a television or radio program. Keeping my foot firmly on the brake is only necessary because I've no contact with the steering wheel.
 
I maintain that there are no rules in the American English language.

A "Rule" is something mandatory - that is virtually always true (barring that well-known "the exception that proves the rule", of course). There are no such rules in American English grammar.

And we place our adjectives backward.

;)
 
Cathbad said:
And we place our adjectives backward.
Click to expand...
That may be the most suorcidul** thing I've ever read on this website. [/US English]



** - That does sound a bit as if I think it's dead wrong, doesn't it? :rolleyes::)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J Consequences/applications of "negative time evidence" article in the news, like time-loop computers breaking most of current ciphers? Science & Nature 45
Toby Frost Yet another depressing article involving SFF publishing Publishing 48
M A light article on centenarians being outlying data points and survivor bias in data Science & Nature 2
M Comparing Substack and Wattpad - an article on Substack by someone who moved over Publishing 12
J Book about building a electromagnetic shield to deflect a particle stream heading to earth. Book Search 0

Similar threads


Back
Top