meltdown75
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2004
- 37,548
- 7
- 81
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
yeah, in all technicalities, the Russian's apparently have it correct, at least the way we've learned the true way of saying it.
5 of 9, technically speaking, would actually mean 8:05.
5 minutes of the 9th hour. 8 o'clock, speaking in terms of the 12 hour clock, is the 9th hour, since 12:00 to 1:00 equals the first hour.
Any reference toward time prior to 1:00 would require referencing 1:00. Thus, it may seem correct to say 5 of 1, but there are two styles of looking at that: 5 of the 1st hour? or 5 of 1 o'clock?
Saying 'of' thus also has two styles of referencing time. Again, because it's not an idiom used in Ohio, I have an outside observer stance on this, so I cannot really argue how it technically makes perfect sense since it has never been drilled into my head to just 'click'.
'Of', in my mind, would never mean "before". 'Of' is a preposition, and in modern english tends to represent a collective or a 'something'.
It has, however, been mutilated to represent before. So it has been included in definitions in relation of time. Do note, that many idioms are represented as fact in many of the worlds finest dictionaries, as well as slang and mutilated english that isn't true to form. A dictionary reference to mutilated english doesn't make it proper english, even if officially recognized due to how common of an idiom it may be.
Now, I don't want to argue proper English, as I'm far from a grammar nazi, and readily accept basically any idiom that is apart of the common language in the area I live.
However, I also enjoy being an ass on occasion, and thus wanted to rear that side in this thread.
End point: 'of' in reference to time, in the way it is used in localities that have accepted it as a common idiom, is completely butchered English.
So all of you that use it: you're wrong.
Contrary as to what the above may appear, I didn't exactly put effort in arguing the grammatical nature of the idiom and what have you. Just a warning to any grammar nazi who wants to try and rain on my parade, there was no parade, and I don't care. I just wanted - in an extremely long-winded attempt - to be the ass for once.
James Bond
Diamond Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 6,023
- 0
- 0
LTC8K6
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2004
- 28,520
- 1,576
- 126
5 of 9 means 8:55...
Merriam Webster:
Main Entry: 1of
Pronunciation: \?v, before consonants also ?; '?v, 'äv\
Function: preposition
Etymology: Middle English, off, of, from Old English, adverb & preposition; akin to Old High German aba off, away, Latin ab from, away, Greek apo
Date: before 12th century
1?used as a function word to indicate a point of reckoning <north of the lake>
2 a?used as a function word to indicate origin or derivation <a man of noble birth> b?used as a function word to indicate the cause, motive, or reason <died of flu> c: by <plays of Shakespeare> d: on the part of <very kind of you> e: occurring in <a fish of the western Atlantic>
3?used as a function word to indicate the component material, parts, or elements or the contents <throne of gold><cup of water>
4 a?used as a function word to indicate the whole that includes the part denoted by the preceding word <most of the army> b?used as a function word to indicate a whole or quantity from which a part is removed or expended <gave of his time>
5 a: relating to : about <stories of her travels> b: in respect to <slow of speech>
6 a?used as a function word to indicate belonging or a possessive relationship <king of England> b?used as a function word to indicate relationship between a result determined by a function or operation and a basic entity (as an independent variable) <a function of x><the product of two numbers>
7?used as a function word to indicate something from which a person or thing is delivered <eased of her pain> or with respect to which someone or something is made destitute <robbed of all their belongings>
8 a?used as a function word to indicate a particular example belonging to the class denoted by the preceding noun <the city of Rome> b?used as a function word to indicate apposition <that fool of a husband>
9 a?used as a function word to indicate the object of an action denoted or implied by the preceding noun <love of nature> b?used as a function word to indicate the application of a verb <cheats him of a dollar> or of an adjective <fond of candy>
10?used as a function word to indicate a characteristic or distinctive quality or possession <a woman of courage>
11 a?used as a function word to indicate the position in time of an action or occurrence <died of a Monday> b: before <quarter of ten>
12archaic : on <a plague of all cowards ? Shakespeare>
Merriam Webster:
Main Entry: 1of
Pronunciation: \?v, before consonants also ?; '?v, 'äv\
Function: preposition
Etymology: Middle English, off, of, from Old English, adverb & preposition; akin to Old High German aba off, away, Latin ab from, away, Greek apo
Date: before 12th century
1?used as a function word to indicate a point of reckoning <north of the lake>
2 a?used as a function word to indicate origin or derivation <a man of noble birth> b?used as a function word to indicate the cause, motive, or reason <died of flu> c: by <plays of Shakespeare> d: on the part of <very kind of you> e: occurring in <a fish of the western Atlantic>
3?used as a function word to indicate the component material, parts, or elements or the contents <throne of gold><cup of water>
4 a?used as a function word to indicate the whole that includes the part denoted by the preceding word <most of the army> b?used as a function word to indicate a whole or quantity from which a part is removed or expended <gave of his time>
5 a: relating to : about <stories of her travels> b: in respect to <slow of speech>
6 a?used as a function word to indicate belonging or a possessive relationship <king of England> b?used as a function word to indicate relationship between a result determined by a function or operation and a basic entity (as an independent variable) <a function of x><the product of two numbers>
7?used as a function word to indicate something from which a person or thing is delivered <eased of her pain> or with respect to which someone or something is made destitute <robbed of all their belongings>
8 a?used as a function word to indicate a particular example belonging to the class denoted by the preceding noun <the city of Rome> b?used as a function word to indicate apposition <that fool of a husband>
9 a?used as a function word to indicate the object of an action denoted or implied by the preceding noun <love of nature> b?used as a function word to indicate the application of a verb <cheats him of a dollar> or of an adjective <fond of candy>
10?used as a function word to indicate a characteristic or distinctive quality or possession <a woman of courage>
11 a?used as a function word to indicate the position in time of an action or occurrence <died of a Monday> b: before <quarter of ten>
12archaic : on <a plague of all cowards ? Shakespeare>
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 26,032
- 4,676
- 126
I knew what "5 of 9" meant, but it is a really stupid way to put things. Sure, if you are from the geography where that idiom is used, then it makes sense to you. But it doesn't necessarilly make sense to other people.
I say "Eight Fifty Five". That is clear to anyone anywhere. No math needed. No idioms needed. Everyone knows what you are saying. In extreme cases, you might want to add "am", "pm", "military", or similar, but that is it.
I've heard crap like "3 after 10 till 8". Sure, you can figure it out but why? Why do all that math? Just say the damn time. 7:53. So simple, yet few will do it.
I say "Eight Fifty Five". That is clear to anyone anywhere. No math needed. No idioms needed. Everyone knows what you are saying. In extreme cases, you might want to add "am", "pm", "military", or similar, but that is it.
I've heard crap like "3 after 10 till 8". Sure, you can figure it out but why? Why do all that math? Just say the damn time. 7:53. So simple, yet few will do it.
Aquila76
Diamond Member
Not for nothing, I'm a New Englander and it's always '5 of 9'. Everyone at any job I've ever worked says it this way. Most people I've spoken with (including AZ, CA, FL, TX, India, UK, Belgium, etc.) have never had a problem figuring this out. But somehow we're the sheltered ones for knowing more than you? Interesting.
LTC8K6
Lifer
- Mar 10, 2004
- 28,520
- 1,576
- 126
"5 of 9" is just the short version of "5 minutes of 9".
I've lived in the Northeast and in the South and "5 of 9" is a perfectly acceptable way to say what time it is in both areas.
Heard it all of my life. Never had any trouble figuring out what it meant.
Never occurred to me that it could possibly confuse anyone...
I've lived in the Northeast and in the South and "5 of 9" is a perfectly acceptable way to say what time it is in both areas.
Heard it all of my life. Never had any trouble figuring out what it meant.
Never occurred to me that it could possibly confuse anyone...
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
Originally posted by: JDub02
more importantly, what about "25 or 6 to 4"???
3:34 or 3:35 am?
ZV
That's just fucking stupid, pardon the expression. Even "7 til 8" would be a hell of a lot better.
DefDC
Golden Member
- Aug 28, 2003
- 1,858
- 1
- 81
Nobody's denying the axiom exists. However, unless you happened to be raised using that expression, it's not going to make any sense to anyone else. Even assuming it means "Five minutes of 9 O'clock", the word "Of" STILL makes no literal sense in reference to time telling. (To the point of it being included in the dictionary, which, as people have pointed out, doesn't make it any more correct.) It's definitely in the vast minority in the US as a whole.
Have we heard from any Canadians in this thread? Or any other countries for that matter...
God forbid an East Coaster is told his regional dialect makes no sense.
In fact, I think I could go for a nice glass of pop right now. It'll wash down my much superior Chicago-style pizza slice.
(Just kiddin' East Coasters, I love ya!)
Have we heard from any Canadians in this thread? Or any other countries for that matter...
God forbid an East Coaster is told his regional dialect makes no sense.
In fact, I think I could go for a nice glass of pop right now. It'll wash down my much superior Chicago-style pizza slice.
(Just kiddin' East Coasters, I love ya!)
So you're agreeing that 8:45 = 8:55?
Here's a lesson you need to learn : never agree with notsoManlymatt83.
Ever.
MotionMan
Lifer
- Jan 11, 2006
- 17,124
- 12
- 81
What is wrong with you idiots!?!?
Read the first line of the second paragraph of this. Then read this (Look at the DOB and DOD).
See also here starting at about page 15.
Just because you and your ignorant friends have never heard of it does not mean that you are right!!!!
On the contrary, it does exists and is a standard way of referring to time. Above is only a small fraction of the proof, undisputed facts, that shows you are wrong.
/thread
MotionMan
Read the first line of the second paragraph of this. Then read this (Look at the DOB and DOD).
See also here starting at about page 15.
Just because you and your ignorant friends have never heard of it does not mean that you are right!!!!
On the contrary, it does exists and is a standard way of referring to time. Above is only a small fraction of the proof, undisputed facts, that shows you are wrong.
/thread
MotionMan
Anubis
No Lifer
walkur
Senior member
- May 1, 2001
- 774
- 8
- 81
Well... you learn something new everyday it seems.
Never heard this type of time telling (the "of" kind that is)
Just a friendly reminder to those who use it; I think that almost no one outside the USA and UK has heard of the "of" method of time pronounciation, so expect puzzled looks when you use it
Never heard this type of time telling (the "of" kind that is)
Just a friendly reminder to those who use it; I think that almost no one outside the USA and UK has heard of the "of" method of time pronounciation, so expect puzzled looks when you use it
DefDC
Golden Member
- Aug 28, 2003
- 1,858
- 1
- 81
We acknowledge that you've found the existence of this idiom. Despite what you've found on the internet, this method of time telling is not taught anywhere in pubic or private schools in the United States. Is that not enough for you to understand that it's not the American Standard? Or are you going to cut and paste again?
It is NOT the standard, and as the polls, and testimony of people who travel and meet with a lot of people around the country, have proven. It is far from the norm, and makes no literal sense.
FYI, when you speak nonsense and get a blank look, it's not the OTHER person who is an idiot, regardless of how the internet may back you up.
- Jun 24, 2001
- 24,195
- 857
- 126
Well, random SoCal sampling #2 (Danielle): I asked my relief and not only did she not know what time "5 of 9" was, she said in no uncertain terms that she has NEVER heard anyone say "of" when expressing time. She uses "till."
Additional information:
She a 30-something African-American single-mom with a son
She, and her mother have lived in SoCal their entire lives and her grandmother lives here too
Her dialect uses "Axed" instead of "Asked," "Libary" instead of "Library," and "Fustrated" instead of "Frustrated," so I suspect that her family's origin is from the NE USA (I had a psychology professor who spoke the same way and explained idioms she encountered when she moved south after taking Finishing School; Futurama made it clear that "axed" is common in New York, etc).
ATOT is a public Internet-connected national and international forum with no preference for US regions that prefer any specific way to relate minutes before the hour. You'd better believe that it helps prove my point, as does my experience across the country and as does my sampling of those around me in contrast to my life within the region it supposedly dominates in (and, in reality, doesn't even EXISTS there). Notice that we have mention of a newsman and a linguist, both in the UK, and BOTH are wrong about the distribution in the US?
Regional use and understanding of "of" as it relates to minutes before the hour are not gender specific or exclusive, nerd-specific or exclusive, etc.
I preferred Kess (well, not the character).
Umm, no. I said that it was my first inclination but that I also suspected that it may be a regional thing, hence this thread seeking answers. If I simply thought it was just her without any thought otherwise, I would have just corrected her. Duh. How is his lifetime more relevant than any other modern use anyway? Did you really think that I was saying that it was newly introduced to the world by her and, therefore, a more recent use would not suffice? You people are really REACHING to try and make the rest of the country look like idiots just because they haven't heard the way your little clique expresses time. Poets use awkward, lesser-used, and obsolete ways to express things all the time. It's a tool for great, flexible, alternative writing that expresses things and one reason why I am glad to now know about this different way to relate time, unexplainable though it may be.
Are you kidding? It makes PERFECT sense. It's a COMPLETELY different and PROPER meaning for "of." Does it mean "before" in that context? NO! It's just like the dictionary's other definition for it as it relates to time: "Died of a Monday" means "Died sometime within Monday" just like "five minutes past nine of the clock" would relate those minutes to their occurrence within the hour marked by the number nine. "Died of a Monday" DOES NOT mean "Died BEFORE Monday" or "Died 2 Mondays before the end of August" (to logically relate named days of the week to months as you would seem to relate minutes to hours). Oh? So days are also numbered within months you say? OK, well then , the 5th of February DOES NOT MEAN FEBRUARY 23rd! As I've said all along, when you are "X" of the way "through" a distance, it refers to the ELAPSED distance/time and not the REMAINING distance/time. PERIOD. 5th of February relates the subject (a quantity) to what it belong in, just like "Princess of Wales" relates the subject (a princess) to her origin (the country of Wales).
The ONLY case where "of" means "before" is in limited regions in relation to minutes before the hour. That is where they OBLIVIOUSLY use it without understanding it and assume that people understand it when all they have to do is drive a few hundred miles away in any direction to find a place where people don't know what the hell they are talking about. It's as dumb as using "could of" and thinking that you know what it means and so does everyone else when what you meant was "could HAVE" in contraction form.
Might want to rethink that. Obviously, I believed that there was a chance that it had meaning elsewhere in the world, hence this thread rather than me not simply correcting my sister. Since it was immediately answered, that hasn't even been a question in this thread (we KNOW it is used in some areas). The question is, is it used in a large enough area and does it make enough sense that you can justify comments such as yours? The answer is, NO, and anyone who thinks so is simply sheltered enough to have not encountered and realized that most of the country does not understand them.
So, we know that the usage exists, so what is he trying to show with his links? His links do nothing but establish it as having been used for a long time (something we also know). It is NOT the dominant form in AmE nor is it anywhere CLOSE to it and the fact that he had to reference a poet from well over a hundred years ago rather than a popular, modern, national use in the media only goes to prove a point. If it is NEVER used in any form of popular, public, national media, nor is it used or understood in the majority of the country, nor does it make any sense when analyzed for the words that are used, there is NO WAY you can expect anyone outside of your little area to understand it.
In fact, even modern poets and writers prize their knowledge of obsolete or rarely used verbiage and sentence structures because of the flexibility and depth it adds to their writings. If you can find it in the modern media, it'll be there... not a CHANCE of it being remotely mainstream, popular, etc when it simply wouldn't be understood.
If you can't tell the difference between 11:a and 11:b, there's no helping you. "Died of Monday." is no different than saying "Died 5th of March." It doesn't relate how much time is remaining. It does not relate how much time has elapsed. It is not synonymous with "before." The only place where it is EVER used to mean "before" are in the VERY limited regions that use it to describe minutes before the hour, and the inclusion in the dictionary definition reflects ONLY that use. If it can't possibly be understood without a dictionary definition that was written in direct response to that use, it is CIRCULAR REASONING which DOES NOT JUSTIFY USING IT. Yes. People use words to mean things and those meanings get put into a dictionary. Are you just figuring out how this works? CRASH COURSE: Written words and words of spoken language have not always existed nor did they come into existence simultaneously with reference material.
Absolutely. The concept isn't that hard to "get." You see, you say you've been speaking this way with people in AZ, CA, FL, & TX, but either you have and yet haven't enough to have been challenged, or you haven't and have not yet discovered this gulf in inter-regional communication. Either way, YES. If you use it without restraint and have not encountered a problem yet DESPITE it only being understood in a narrow region, then YES: that is because you and your use are sheltered within a very narrow region within which it is understood. I can tell you right now that it is BULLSHIT that you could go into CA, AZ, TX, and FL and be understood that way by the general public. #1, I've spent a significant amount of time in each of those states except AZ and maintain constant contacts in all of them. I have friends and family from TX & FL who have never heard it... and one worked at the MAJOR TX *INTERNATIONAL* Delta Airlines hub before being transferred to Atlanta then moving back to TX with a different airline. Another's whole family came from TX and I have REPEATEDLY accompanied them on extended return trips, as well as traveled through it on my own by car and motorcycle. I had family in Jacksonville & Daytona, FL for about 15 years of my childhood and made repeated trips per year with significant stays in both cities, including the Jacksonville Naval base with recruits from ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. I now LIVE in CA and have aggressively polled random people in this area (I don't like being called an idiot and I'm happy to prove them wrong) and I've not found a single one other than the SOURCE of all this: my well-traveled sister who understand it and admits that she picked it up elsewhere in the country (though she can't recall where). My sister has lived here that long and never realized that people didn't understand it here, so it's entirely understandable that you have used it in these areas TO A LIMITED EXTENT without being understood or challenged. Therefore yes you are more sheltered than I, the one who went out and discovered the communication gulf that was right under our noses. Considering that those who have never heard it and don't understand it easily out-number you in all of those regions means that you would encounter the problem faster than I would if you TRULY interacted as you say you do. Now, despite having limited personal experience in AZ, (I've been to Phoenix by plane and I rode my motorcycle through Tuscon and the rest of the state), we already have a person from AZ in this thread who has not heard of it. Anyone in Tuscon or Phoenix want to go out on the street and prove it? I have family in Utah and a coworker from Nevada. NONE OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE EVER HEARD ANYONE USE "OF" IN THIS WAY BEFORE I BROUGHT IT TO THEIR ATTENTION IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. I and my circle of friends and family alone have the ENTIRE SW, South, SE and much of the East covered (up to WV and the forums here have IL, OH, IN, etc COVERED) with much stronger anecdotal evidence than you. Hell, I had two coworkers in GA from MI and my best friend's wife is from WI (another airline worker) and none of them have heard it either. You may think that anecdotal evidence vs. anecdotal evidence is worthless, but not if you'd actually get off your butt and ASK people like I did both in this thread and IN REAL LIFE and find for yourself that the results are the same. I have not seen one other person in this thread ask a stranger yet and yet you claim to have some insight that can "over power" my own. All it can do is anecdotally cancel out my casual encounters, but until you get off your butt and ASK, you have done nothing to directly contradict my direct questions to real people in the regions.
If you can believe that I am not lying and am telling the truth REGARDLESS of your personal experience, then you must see how easy it could be for you to have simply been misunderstood without being challenged. If what you say is true, it has already happened with YOU being oblivious to it, and it is for that very reason that you should stop using it. This is a pretty freakin' strong case here buddy.
Oh, and I'm being uncharacteristically nice to you because I didn't even MENTION how ridiculous it is that you actually think that they understand you in India, the UK, and Belgium. You are directly contradicting the only professional sources you have EVEN THOUGH they share your region's usage. The in-fighting is certainly entertaining.
At first, you simply quote the dictionary, which has already been done and been proven to be circular reasoning. Then, you come back and demonstrate the most hilarious application of circular reasoning I have ever witnessed in my life.
You returned to state that "5 of 9" is just the "short version" of "5 minutes of 9." OH MY FREAKING GOD! Do you not realize by now that "5 minutes of 9" is EVERY BIT THE AS UNRECOGNIZED AND NOT UNDERSTOOD OR USED AS [minute] of [hour]? It's THAT ignorance that PENETRATES this thread so deeply. It's almost impossible to drill down to that basic concept and convince you that EVEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT 5 MINUTES "OF" 9 MEANS. Just like an idiot using "could of" instead of "could have" doesn't know and can't explain what "of" means in their use of it. If your explanation is that "of" means "before," GUESS WHAT: It only means before IN THAT SPECIFIC USE and is therefore CIRCULAR REASONING to explain it that way. Jesus H. Christ. You're also a LIAR if you lived in the South and actually think that it is accepted or understood there. I can line up 30 people from all over the South RIGHT NOW and have every one tell you that they have never heard it in their entire lives. The fact that it never occurred to you that it could possibly confuse anyone is because of that base assumption AND because either you DIDN'T USE IT or you DID USE IT AND UNKNOWINGLY CONFUSED THE HELL OUT OF PEOPLE, which is EXACTLY my point for why this crap should stop as soon as you are aware of it.
Yes and no. East Coast STARTED this thread, baby (right here). The NORTH EAST is the only place it is commonly understood and this thread has shown it to be only marginally used even there. Despite three people saying that it is the only one used in NJ, one comes in and says that he's only ever heard it TWICE in years of living there. No matter how common it is in PARTS of the NE, if it can't even pervade more than that in NJ, it FAILS. We also have a report of it not being commonly understood in NY, which is certainly NE and actually borders NJ with millions of commuters every day.
THIS MAN GETS IT! Well, except for the whole NE=entire East thing, but you're not the only one. And, yes, we have heard from at least TWO Canadians, both of which claim to have never heard it.
Additional information:
She a 30-something African-American single-mom with a son
She, and her mother have lived in SoCal their entire lives and her grandmother lives here too
Her dialect uses "Axed" instead of "Asked," "Libary" instead of "Library," and "Fustrated" instead of "Frustrated," so I suspect that her family's origin is from the NE USA (I had a psychology professor who spoke the same way and explained idioms she encountered when she moved south after taking Finishing School; Futurama made it clear that "axed" is common in New York, etc).
ATOT is a public Internet-connected national and international forum with no preference for US regions that prefer any specific way to relate minutes before the hour. You'd better believe that it helps prove my point, as does my experience across the country and as does my sampling of those around me in contrast to my life within the region it supposedly dominates in (and, in reality, doesn't even EXISTS there). Notice that we have mention of a newsman and a linguist, both in the UK, and BOTH are wrong about the distribution in the US?
Regional use and understanding of "of" as it relates to minutes before the hour are not gender specific or exclusive, nerd-specific or exclusive, etc.
I preferred Kess (well, not the character).
Umm, no. I said that it was my first inclination but that I also suspected that it may be a regional thing, hence this thread seeking answers. If I simply thought it was just her without any thought otherwise, I would have just corrected her. Duh. How is his lifetime more relevant than any other modern use anyway? Did you really think that I was saying that it was newly introduced to the world by her and, therefore, a more recent use would not suffice? You people are really REACHING to try and make the rest of the country look like idiots just because they haven't heard the way your little clique expresses time. Poets use awkward, lesser-used, and obsolete ways to express things all the time. It's a tool for great, flexible, alternative writing that expresses things and one reason why I am glad to now know about this different way to relate time, unexplainable though it may be.
Originally posted by: geno
You know what the "o" in "o'clock" means, right? It means of. That makes no sense either, "It's 5 of the clock!" So, to anyone saying "5 of 9" is stupid, please stop saying "o'clock"
Are you kidding? It makes PERFECT sense. It's a COMPLETELY different and PROPER meaning for "of." Does it mean "before" in that context? NO! It's just like the dictionary's other definition for it as it relates to time: "Died of a Monday" means "Died sometime within Monday" just like "five minutes past nine of the clock" would relate those minutes to their occurrence within the hour marked by the number nine. "Died of a Monday" DOES NOT mean "Died BEFORE Monday" or "Died 2 Mondays before the end of August" (to logically relate named days of the week to months as you would seem to relate minutes to hours). Oh? So days are also numbered within months you say? OK, well then , the 5th of February DOES NOT MEAN FEBRUARY 23rd! As I've said all along, when you are "X" of the way "through" a distance, it refers to the ELAPSED distance/time and not the REMAINING distance/time. PERIOD. 5th of February relates the subject (a quantity) to what it belong in, just like "Princess of Wales" relates the subject (a princess) to her origin (the country of Wales).
The ONLY case where "of" means "before" is in limited regions in relation to minutes before the hour. That is where they OBLIVIOUSLY use it without understanding it and assume that people understand it when all they have to do is drive a few hundred miles away in any direction to find a place where people don't know what the hell they are talking about. It's as dumb as using "could of" and thinking that you know what it means and so does everyone else when what you meant was "could HAVE" in contraction form.
Might want to rethink that. Obviously, I believed that there was a chance that it had meaning elsewhere in the world, hence this thread rather than me not simply correcting my sister. Since it was immediately answered, that hasn't even been a question in this thread (we KNOW it is used in some areas). The question is, is it used in a large enough area and does it make enough sense that you can justify comments such as yours? The answer is, NO, and anyone who thinks so is simply sheltered enough to have not encountered and realized that most of the country does not understand them.
So, we know that the usage exists, so what is he trying to show with his links? His links do nothing but establish it as having been used for a long time (something we also know). It is NOT the dominant form in AmE nor is it anywhere CLOSE to it and the fact that he had to reference a poet from well over a hundred years ago rather than a popular, modern, national use in the media only goes to prove a point. If it is NEVER used in any form of popular, public, national media, nor is it used or understood in the majority of the country, nor does it make any sense when analyzed for the words that are used, there is NO WAY you can expect anyone outside of your little area to understand it.
In fact, even modern poets and writers prize their knowledge of obsolete or rarely used verbiage and sentence structures because of the flexibility and depth it adds to their writings. If you can find it in the modern media, it'll be there... not a CHANCE of it being remotely mainstream, popular, etc when it simply wouldn't be understood.
If you can't tell the difference between 11:a and 11:b, there's no helping you. "Died of Monday." is no different than saying "Died 5th of March." It doesn't relate how much time is remaining. It does not relate how much time has elapsed. It is not synonymous with "before." The only place where it is EVER used to mean "before" are in the VERY limited regions that use it to describe minutes before the hour, and the inclusion in the dictionary definition reflects ONLY that use. If it can't possibly be understood without a dictionary definition that was written in direct response to that use, it is CIRCULAR REASONING which DOES NOT JUSTIFY USING IT. Yes. People use words to mean things and those meanings get put into a dictionary. Are you just figuring out how this works? CRASH COURSE: Written words and words of spoken language have not always existed nor did they come into existence simultaneously with reference material.
Absolutely. The concept isn't that hard to "get." You see, you say you've been speaking this way with people in AZ, CA, FL, & TX, but either you have and yet haven't enough to have been challenged, or you haven't and have not yet discovered this gulf in inter-regional communication. Either way, YES. If you use it without restraint and have not encountered a problem yet DESPITE it only being understood in a narrow region, then YES: that is because you and your use are sheltered within a very narrow region within which it is understood. I can tell you right now that it is BULLSHIT that you could go into CA, AZ, TX, and FL and be understood that way by the general public. #1, I've spent a significant amount of time in each of those states except AZ and maintain constant contacts in all of them. I have friends and family from TX & FL who have never heard it... and one worked at the MAJOR TX *INTERNATIONAL* Delta Airlines hub before being transferred to Atlanta then moving back to TX with a different airline. Another's whole family came from TX and I have REPEATEDLY accompanied them on extended return trips, as well as traveled through it on my own by car and motorcycle. I had family in Jacksonville & Daytona, FL for about 15 years of my childhood and made repeated trips per year with significant stays in both cities, including the Jacksonville Naval base with recruits from ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. I now LIVE in CA and have aggressively polled random people in this area (I don't like being called an idiot and I'm happy to prove them wrong) and I've not found a single one other than the SOURCE of all this: my well-traveled sister who understand it and admits that she picked it up elsewhere in the country (though she can't recall where). My sister has lived here that long and never realized that people didn't understand it here, so it's entirely understandable that you have used it in these areas TO A LIMITED EXTENT without being understood or challenged. Therefore yes you are more sheltered than I, the one who went out and discovered the communication gulf that was right under our noses. Considering that those who have never heard it and don't understand it easily out-number you in all of those regions means that you would encounter the problem faster than I would if you TRULY interacted as you say you do. Now, despite having limited personal experience in AZ, (I've been to Phoenix by plane and I rode my motorcycle through Tuscon and the rest of the state), we already have a person from AZ in this thread who has not heard of it. Anyone in Tuscon or Phoenix want to go out on the street and prove it? I have family in Utah and a coworker from Nevada. NONE OF THESE PEOPLE HAVE EVER HEARD ANYONE USE "OF" IN THIS WAY BEFORE I BROUGHT IT TO THEIR ATTENTION IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. I and my circle of friends and family alone have the ENTIRE SW, South, SE and much of the East covered (up to WV and the forums here have IL, OH, IN, etc COVERED) with much stronger anecdotal evidence than you. Hell, I had two coworkers in GA from MI and my best friend's wife is from WI (another airline worker) and none of them have heard it either. You may think that anecdotal evidence vs. anecdotal evidence is worthless, but not if you'd actually get off your butt and ASK people like I did both in this thread and IN REAL LIFE and find for yourself that the results are the same. I have not seen one other person in this thread ask a stranger yet and yet you claim to have some insight that can "over power" my own. All it can do is anecdotally cancel out my casual encounters, but until you get off your butt and ASK, you have done nothing to directly contradict my direct questions to real people in the regions.
If you can believe that I am not lying and am telling the truth REGARDLESS of your personal experience, then you must see how easy it could be for you to have simply been misunderstood without being challenged. If what you say is true, it has already happened with YOU being oblivious to it, and it is for that very reason that you should stop using it. This is a pretty freakin' strong case here buddy.
Oh, and I'm being uncharacteristically nice to you because I didn't even MENTION how ridiculous it is that you actually think that they understand you in India, the UK, and Belgium. You are directly contradicting the only professional sources you have EVEN THOUGH they share your region's usage. The in-fighting is certainly entertaining.
At first, you simply quote the dictionary, which has already been done and been proven to be circular reasoning. Then, you come back and demonstrate the most hilarious application of circular reasoning I have ever witnessed in my life.
You returned to state that "5 of 9" is just the "short version" of "5 minutes of 9." OH MY FREAKING GOD! Do you not realize by now that "5 minutes of 9" is EVERY BIT THE AS UNRECOGNIZED AND NOT UNDERSTOOD OR USED AS [minute] of [hour]? It's THAT ignorance that PENETRATES this thread so deeply. It's almost impossible to drill down to that basic concept and convince you that EVEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT 5 MINUTES "OF" 9 MEANS. Just like an idiot using "could of" instead of "could have" doesn't know and can't explain what "of" means in their use of it. If your explanation is that "of" means "before," GUESS WHAT: It only means before IN THAT SPECIFIC USE and is therefore CIRCULAR REASONING to explain it that way. Jesus H. Christ. You're also a LIAR if you lived in the South and actually think that it is accepted or understood there. I can line up 30 people from all over the South RIGHT NOW and have every one tell you that they have never heard it in their entire lives. The fact that it never occurred to you that it could possibly confuse anyone is because of that base assumption AND because either you DIDN'T USE IT or you DID USE IT AND UNKNOWINGLY CONFUSED THE HELL OUT OF PEOPLE, which is EXACTLY my point for why this crap should stop as soon as you are aware of it.
Yes and no. East Coast STARTED this thread, baby (right here). The NORTH EAST is the only place it is commonly understood and this thread has shown it to be only marginally used even there. Despite three people saying that it is the only one used in NJ, one comes in and says that he's only ever heard it TWICE in years of living there. No matter how common it is in PARTS of the NE, if it can't even pervade more than that in NJ, it FAILS. We also have a report of it not being commonly understood in NY, which is certainly NE and actually borders NJ with millions of commuters every day.
Originally posted by: DefDC
Nobody's denying the axiom exists. However, unless you happened to be raised using that expression, it's not going to make any sense to anyone else. Even assuming it means "Five minutes of 9 O'clock", the word "Of" STILL makes no literal sense in reference to time telling. (To the point of it being included in the dictionary, which, as people have pointed out, doesn't make it any more correct.) It's definitely in the vast minority in the US as a whole.
Have we heard from any Canadians in this thread? Or any other countries for that matter...
God forbid an East Coaster is told his regional dialect makes no sense.
In fact, I think I could go for a nice glass of pop right now. It'll wash down my much superior Chicago-style pizza slice.
(Just kiddin' East Coasters, I love ya!)
THIS MAN GETS IT! Well, except for the whole NE=entire East thing, but you're not the only one. And, yes, we have heard from at least TWO Canadians, both of which claim to have never heard it.
- Jun 24, 2001
- 24,195
- 857
- 126
Originally posted by: Perknose
You are aware that, tossing out duplicates and non-responses, it's roughly 37-16 against him in this very thread and that his rejoinders are so chock full of basic errors in reading comprehension and logical lapses large enough to drive a truck through that it's not even worth further response?
Well, are you?
Are you aware that you can't just total up who understood and answered from people ENCOURAGED to answer my question? Especially when many of the answers were WRONG (9:05) and therefore many of the correct answers were lucky guesses. The argument here is: Can you EXPECT it to be understood across the country to claim that it is the more dominant idiom that SHOULD be used and understood by most? You and a minority of others believe that, yes, those who don't understand it are isolated, retarded, stupid, and in the minority. You are wrong, as are your tallying methods.
Read my tally. This is going to be tedious, but YOU ASKED FOR IT. Hell, because you think I'm improperly discounting certain responses and using dupes, I'll just have to re-do the entire thing. + is a point for me, - is a point for you , running tally between each unique user.
My point was that it was not nearly universal, whether you understood it or not, and so I made a "Supports that Point" and "Does not support that point" column and looked at all implications from each participant in the thread.
When determining criteria, I asked myself: What am I REALLY trying to prove to the assholes who believe that it is some measure of intelligence or exposure/isolation? Therefore, this is the criteria I came up with as stated in my post:
My issue with your view was that you believed it to be dominant and more widely understood. Therefore, my list was made to counter that view, not total up who uses it and who doesn't. My list is "those who think it's dominant/universal" vs. "those who don't" list. IOW, someone who uses "of" but understands that it doesn't make sense or isn't universal goes on one side, while those who think that you live in a cave or under a rock or haven't entered kindergarten because they wrongly think it's dominant, common-sense, and commonly understood, go on the other. THIS is the TRUE argument between you and me. Therefore, any response that simply answered my question, such as newb111 just answering "8:55," can't be applied to EITHER side of our argument. OBVIOUSLY, I know that the usage exists and now know how to understand it, and that was never the argument here, so I can't use a post like that in either column. I'm willing to bet that your tally used that to bolster your argument despite it not supporting it in any way. Obviously people who know the answer are more likely to respond, so I am NOT turning those responses into a poll and you should be ashamed if that is what you tried to do. In good conscience, you can't use a metric against me that's wrongfully bolstered by answers that I elicited.
I had no duplicates and I threw out any response that couldn't be determined. I believe that the majority in this thread either never heard it, rarely hear it, or simply don't use it regardless of their awareness, but I'm betting that you are totaling those who said they understand it but use something else as well as those who simply indicated that they understood it by answering my question. Your methodology, no doubt, is akin to asking a non-compulsory question, say, 2+2=?, and counting all the correct responses despite the unlikelihood of anyone who doesn't know 2+2 to answer AT ALL (newborns, people who use/understand a different symbol for addition, etc). Considering that this is a perfect analogy when you assume that the symbol may be something others don't understand with no incentive to respond if they weren't SURE, the sheer volume of incorrect answers proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is SO unfamiliar to people that they responded anyway, incorrectly, at the risk of seeming "stupid" to ignorant people like yourself.
+Myself - Though I had heard it when I made the thread, I was not aware of the meaning and therefore I go in the "It's not universal" column.
1
=wiredspider - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given). Simply understanding does not give us any conclusion.
1
+JulesMaximus - Guessed right (8:55) but was obviously unsure or did not think it was universal because he told me to ask her. Either way, it supports my view.
2
+Bulk Beef - Called the correct time incorrect, putting him squarely in the "in isn't universally understood" side. See why just answering correctly isn't enough to get in either side? There's a 50/50 chance of it someone like Bulk Beef guessing the other way, which proves nothing, and the ones who weren't guessing STILL may not believe that it is universal.
3
=Cyco - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given).
3
-spidey07 - Expressed surprise that I would have never heard this. Clearly goes in the "thought it was universal" side.
2
=newb111 - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given).
2
+amdhunter - Made a joke about her being a Borg because that is the more commonly understood "[number] of [number]" reference in the popular media. This post obviously supports the "not universal" side as well a the "not found in modern media" view.
3
+SlitheryDee - Thought it was 9:05. Of course, not understanding it is more fodder for the "it's not universally understood" column.
4
+mugs - Yes, mugs says that everyone in NJ uses it, but he also admits that people in other regions are confused by it and use "quarter till." OBVIOUSLY, it goes in the "not universal" column. He doesn't think that you had to live in a cave to be unaware. He traveled outside of his region and found the truth of things.
5
+Connoisseur - Has only heard it from two people in many years in the same region where mugs originally believed everyone used it. If mugs believed that everyone used in in NJ before leaving to Indiana and yet they weren't, obviously the regional differences are smaller than NJ.
6
-JEDIYoda - Acts like it is something everyone learns in kindergarten. Despite being dreadfully WRONG, he shares your view and goes in your column.
5
-Pernose - YOU. Obviously, you go in the "IT'S DOMINANT AND TO SUGGEST THAT I NOT USE IT IS UNFATHOMABLE!" column. Of course, you started your participation in this thread by pointing out that 9:01-9:59 is the tenth hour, despite it not being relevant because "5 minutes of the 9th hour" is not correct either "five minute of" any hour does not specify WHICH five minutes you are referencing nor whether they are elapsed or remaining, therefore not clarifying a damned thing. You weren't counted for that post, nor your next one ("Yup! :^: "), but rather for your THIRD where you finally explode with your narrow-minded tirade about it being dominant.
4
+meltdown75 - Expressed frustration with indirect and non-universal expressions of time. Obviously, this goes in the "not universal" column. I bet you missed that one! Note: He came back and clarified it beyond a shadow of a doubt after I posted my first tally. This point goes to me.
5
+maddogchen - Also subscribed to the Star Trek Borg reference. If it were universal, you wouldn't think of Star Trek any time someone relates a time that way. If you believe it to be dominant, don't you think that it's funny how a pop-culture reference to [number] of [number] is easy to find but popular national media pointing to [minutes] of [hour] are not?!
6
=JDub02 - Excluded. Makes a Chicago reference while expressing nothing useful for this metric.
6
-Anubis - Expresses the same incredulity as you, believing that being unaware of this would relate your experience level to that of a 5yr old.
5
=txrandom - Quotes Anubis to make a joke but doesn't give a clue as to what part of the column he fits or what he uses/understands.
5
+clamum - Never heard your "dominant" idiom. Clearly indicates that it isn't universally used or understood.
6
+Turin39789 - Uses "till" or "to" despite knowing and understanding "of." If even people that understand it don't use it, you had better not dare use them in your tally because it counters your claim of it being the "dominant" usage.
7
-manlymatt83 - "Agrees" with mugs even though he says he's never heard anyone use "till" and mugs has. He quotes mugs and says "This," (meaning he shares mugs' view). I'd say that this is an acknowledgement that it is not universal, but having never heard "till" means he's been living under a rock. Despite several stating that they have never heard "of," he is the ONLY one saying that he has not heard "till" yet uses "of" (just the opposite), so I will GLADLY give you this one. It doesn't help make you guys look smarter when he seems to think "quarter of nine" is 8:55.
6
+her209 - Gladly expresses preference for "'til" and distaste for "of" while demonstrating that 5 of 9 indicates division to her209's self.
7
-91TTZ - Expresses the same disbelief as you, having assumed that it was dominant and that you would have had to have lived in an ice cave to have not heard anyone say it.
6
-pontifex - Rather than assuming isolation to explain why the usage he assumes is dominant is not understood, he believes that I may be retarded. He says that it's used frequently, but relents that his perspective is limited to PA (clearly, not universal). Even so, because he still expresses disbelief that it could be "mixed up," I'm putting him in your column. Thinking that the problem is getting "mixed up" demonstrates how unaware he is of just how unknown it is outside of his region. It isn't even heard enough TO get "mixed up" and it has no inherent meaning to those who have not heard it.
5
+Kwatt - points out the meaning of "5 of 9" (division). clearly, he does NOT share your perspective.
6
-eits - Agrees with spidey07; thinks I'm an idiot for having not understood it and therefore thinks it's dominantly understood.
5
+Chiropteran - Shares Kwatt's POV, that "of" does not mean "before" and therefore that interpretation is not dominant/universally understood.
6
+RedSquirrel - Says that this is why he HATES people who say time in an indirect way. Clearly, he doesn't think it's universally understood.
7
+DrawninwarD - Never heard it in a conversation.
8
+Scouzer - Never heard it either and calls it "stupid." Obviously, he does not consider it the logical, accepted, universal way to relate time.
9
=irishScott - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given).
9
-JLee - Another person who thinks I must have lived in a cave. Obviously, he's one of the few who thinks it's common enough.
8
=WaTaGuMp - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given). Made a joke that used "TO" and not "OF."
8
-geno - No preference indicated at first and seems to think that the right answer needs a poll when we aren't arguing over what it means anymore.
Later, returns and thinks he's being sarcastic by saying that "5 of the clock" is stupid, but 5 of the clock make PERFECT sense. He's not leaning either way as far as broad understanding of it as it is used to relate minutes before the hour goes, but I'm giving it to you anyway.7
=bsobel - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given). Expresses extreme misunderstanding of contractions.
7
=Whisper - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given).
7
=cKGunslinger - Can't say what he's indicating with "forehead guy" but this whole situation reminded him of a friend in High School who thought he knew what "quarter til" meant despite failing spectacularly. If I had to guess, I'd say that this post should be +1 for me because it indicates that "'til" is used and understood by him and used and misunderstood by his friend, though that doesn't express dominance, so neither of us get the point.
7
=ConstipatedVigilante - Says it's used pretty often there in MA, but doesn't express national dominance or an expectation of universal understanding. Also leaves room for the other way being as often or more often.
7
+Dulanic - CLEARLY understands that it depends where in the country you are and does not believe it to be dominant or universal. His admittedly unsure estimate for how far it is used is extremely over-estimated (entire East Coast?! HA!). The fact that he was more sure about it being used in the North East than the East in general indicates that he is not resistant to the idea that it is not as wide-spread as he thought, and he started out by describing its use and understanding as being limited to specific areas. If you used his post to support your tally, for shame.
8
-nerp - Thinks that using terminology that others don't understand doesn't make things more complicated because he clearly thinks that all understand it. He's all yours. Do you really want these guys who are CLEARLY clueless?
7
=silverpig - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given).
7
=BladeVenom - Obviously doesn't believe it's universally understood if he suggest using military time (which I use on a daily basis), but because he did not express that specifically, I will not count it. Aren't I gracious?
7
+destrekor - Says that it's DEFINITELY a geography thing and he has never heard your so-called "dominant" usage. Mine.
8
+xcript - Except in rare cases, Canadians use AmE and are, well, Americans, so I put every bit as much weight in him saying "Ditto" to Scouzer as anyone else who has never heard of your usage until seeing it in this thread. I just just about to break into a double-digit lead, bitch!
9
+Whoozyerdaddy - DIRECTLY contradicts you and your assertion that it is the dominant American way of expressing minutes before the hour. "Not in any place I've ever lived." He believes that it must be a redneck thing, even though it is non-existant in The South.
10
=FrustratedUser - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given).
10
+Malfeas - Confirms that he has never heard it in OK, TX, FL, NY, CA, and WA. Wow. That covers NE, SE, MW, W, and NW. Just where IS it dominant? Understand that "used" does not equal "dominantly used: and then figure that, so far, this thread only reports MA, PA, and isolated areas of NJ (one reports says they've only heard it twice in NJ). How is that dominant?
11
+Schfifty Five - Never heard your so-called "dominant" usage and believes that it sounds completely "retarded." Should've expected the R-word after all the name-calling you've done, but luckily my side is keeping it impersonal and not calling the OP (me) or directing it personally/at anyone else in specific. Are you really a Moderator?! Funny that he should be the one to point out that I'm doing this without any of the name-calling when he returns much later.
12
+CallMeJoe - His experience was revealed when he, too, couldn't resist the Star Trek reference. He later revealed that he understood the time reference but STILL couldn't resist the Borg/ST reference, no doubt because it is a more universally understood "number of number" reference. If you think he belongs on your side, you are wrong: He indicates that I has lived in the South, North, Midwest, and UK with continuing visits to the US and is familiar with it and other idioms. You, on the other hand, argue that it is DOMINANT, which would imply that it is not idiomatic within the US and only idiomatic with other English-speaking populations. This flies in the face of your assumption, so +1 for me.
13
+Bibble - Understands all but would never use "of." Even if "of" could be universally understood (it can't), it can't be dominant if people don't use it! It's the same reason that no one is arguing that "before" is dominant in the US despite it being understood and sometimes heard in the media (whereas "of" is almost NEVER heard in the media; to the point where few have EVER heard it)
14
+funkymatt - What better argument for it not being universally used and understood is there than someone trying to answer and getting it wrong? There you go.
15
-Clair de Lune - Thinks that I'm the "noob of life" for not having heard of it. Clearly thinks it reflects experience, despite so many in this thread who have not heard of it despite having traversed the country as I have.
14
-RapidSnail - First poast, simply points out funkymatt's incorrect answer without giving an opinion that can go in either column. WAS excluded until he came back and said that "of" wasn't even an idiom because of its inclusion in the dictionary (circular reasoning!).
13
=DayLaPaul - Excluded ("Pics?")
13
=compuwiz1 - Could be calling your few or my many dumb. No clarification WOULD equal exclusion, but he came back and use a common line "Half past a monkey's ass - quarter to his balls." Because that is NEVER "...quarter OF his balls" and there are no examples of common lines that use "of" instead, his example is leaning toward another point for me. Even so, I will not accept this.
13
=Chaotic42 - "Answers" JDub02's Chicago reference. Can't go in either tally, thus, excluded.
13
=finite automaton - Excluded (No preference indicated; No explanation given).
13
+Ichinisan - Experienced in customer relation, technical writing, and scheduling has broad experience from coast-to-coast, and WORKS IN MEDIA (Cable Co) without ever hearing or experiencing your so-called "dominant" expressions until I brought it to his attention... NOT EVEN ONCE. Big win here.
14
THIS IS AS FAR AS MY LAST TOTAL REACHED. Let's continue.
=zerocool1 - Brings up another idiom but expresses nothing else. Excluded.
14
-JujuFish - Originally just says that he hears "quarter of" without the hour, therefore, only in reference to the next hour and not including numerics. He came back to argue that the English makes sense and is understood based on it's inclusion in the dictionary (circular reasoning!).
13
=lizardboy - Only corrects someone who got it wrong. Can only be excluded.
13
+Cattlegod - Another Star Trek reference. I don't care what you say, if it were the dominant use EVERYWHERE in AmE, it wouldn't matter where this person comes from: There would be REAL media references before obscure Star Trek Borg designations. On can assume, a we have confirmed with others, that any ST reference was made because it evoked that memory rather than a relation to time despite the DIRECT question, so I *WILL* claim this.
14
-nineball9 - *May* be expressing surprise at my inability to understand "5 of 9" without further explanation with his question about my understanding of "of the clock." "Nine of the clock" makes PERFECT sense where [minute] of [hour] does not. They are different meaning of the word "of" where "of" was perverted when it was mis-applied to minutes. Regardless, I believe his intentions were that someone who doesn't understand [minutes] of [hour] wouldn't understand that and was trying to make a point that it a basic understanding of telling time. Wrong as he may be, I'm giving it to you. Enjoy.
13
-SoulAssassin - Strangely, someone who quotes manlymatt83's error in agreement (?!) but, well, because I gave you manlymatt83, you'l get this one too.
12
=alkemyst - No way to tell WHICH group of people he thinks are sitting around trying to hash out something that's existed over the last century and works perfectly fine... well, ALL have existed but only the ones that are NOT "of" work "perfectly fine." If he thinks "of" works perfectly fine, he is as ignorant about it's disuse as the majority of the country is about it's usage even EXISTING. If he thinks the others work perfectly fine, well, he's right. Unless he clarifies, he must be excluded.
12
+mozirry - BORG / STAR TREK AGAIN!
13
+Nik - Means math to him to. Quarter of can mean .25* and 5 of can mean 5/. Neither apply to your understanding.
14
=MotionMan - Seems to think that we are still wondering if it is real or if my sister made it up and goes to great lengths to find a historical reference among a great many other obsolete English permutations. No one is arguing that the usage has and does exist, they are arguing that it is not understood my much of the population and is far from dominant or self-explanatory, thus, it should die.
14
=ironwing - MC Hammer joke. Can't touch this! Excluded, though perhaps it should be included for the same reason that Borg and Star Trek references could be deductively included, but it doesn't have the conclusive confirmation that one of the ST guys provided us.
14
=lyssword - Clearly liked the Star Trek references, but that doesn't imply what he forst thought of and can't be used on him like it was the others.
14
+BehindEnemyLines - NEVER HEARD IT. Also, claims it doesn't make much sense.
15
-BeauJangles - Says that he and everyone he knows uses it. Perhaps we can assume that this means that he assumes that it is dominant, but he didn't even list his region, much less his experience outside it, so it is likely that he knows it is not enough to draw that conclusion. Even so, for your sake, let's just imagine that he does believe that the majority communicates that way.
14
=BrokenVisage - Chicago reference. Only course of action is to exclude.
14
THIS IS WHERE YOU THROW IN YOUR BOGUS "37-16" numbers and IGNORE the "logical lapses" of the few who are in agreement with you.
+Snapster - Agrees with BehindEnemyLines
16
=dighn - Never heard of it, so, though it goes a long way to proving that it is not understood in the areas where it is not used (because it is not logical for "before"), it still does not tell you how well or poorly it is understood within AmE (though the same basic understanding applies because "of" is not used for "before" in normal English here or there).
16
+Howard is another Canadian-American that doesn't recall ever having heard it.
17
+DefDC - Has enough range and experience to mark off another large portion of your "majority" in the heartland and North. Supporting THOUSAND on an IT helpdesk and not seeing it EVEN ONCE. No need to interpret him: He out right give his input as a "vote" and agrees that you should use til/after if you care about how you are interpreted.
18
=drum - Explains the Chicago references but can't be added to either count. Excluded.
18
+nkgreen - Agrees with meltdown75. POINT FER MEE.
19
=JD50 - Asks for pics of sis. Excluded.
19
+rh71 - Whole-heartedly REJECTS "of."
20
+destrekor - Points out the Russian ways and then calls this "of" crap it what it is: BUTCHERED ENGLISH
21
+James Bond - Has NEVER heard it used that way ANYhWHERE. Lives in WA.
22
-LTC8K6 - At first, he doesn't imply understanding or pervasiveness in any way and simply quotes the dictionary, which has already been done (circular reasoning). This person does not even indicate which they are more likely to use and would be excluded except that he returns and states that "5 of 9" is just the "short version" of "5 minutes of 9." That is the most hilarious use of circular reasoning I have ever seen and is such a strong case AGAINST the entire justification and reasoning for allowing it to exist that it should be END OF THREAD right freakin' there.
21
+darkxshade - Demonstrates another way it could be misunderstood.
22
+dullard - Clearly understands it is a idiom with limited understanding and also suggest that it AND THE ALTERNATIVES not be used anywhere.
23
-Aquila76 - Assumes that other people he has used it on understood it when they almost certainly DID NOT without having to guess or look it up. Admitting to using something with such limited understanding with Arizonians, Californians, Floridians, Texans, AND PEOPLE FROM INDIA AND THE UK just goes to show how bone-headed it is to make such an assumption, and yet he ONCE AGAIN thinks that the ones who either understand that it shouldn't be used or have never heard it are the "sheltered" ones. Obviously, he hasn't talked to enough people to get challenged yet, so HE is the sheltered one. His so-called "point" DIRECTLY conflicts with your Oxford linguist living in the UK. He's clearly talking out of his ass and has NO IDEA how his conversations were understood or received. If he really even used it, the people who understood it PROBABLY HAD TO LOOK IT UP ON THE INTARWEBS LIKE I DID! Has he not noticed the trend starting in this thread with my sister where people using it are completely oblivious to the fact that they aren't understood, even when they are confronted with it? You can HAVE this idiot.
22
+WisMan - Never heard of it. Wrongly thinks it's an East Coast thing with it's only used in pockets of the North East.
23
=Zenmervolt - Chicago conversation. Excluded.
23
=Soundmanred - Can't draw a conclusion, even if he said to never agree with manlymatt83.
23
+TwiceOver - Seems to blow his mind too, for the opposite reason.
24
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter