I think you must accept that language evolves, sometimes to your liking,
sometimes not.
We don't speak the language that people spoke 400 years ago either, which is
why it is such a nuisance to read Shakespeare in non-modernised versions.
Actually, English has changed less than many other languages--for example,
trying to read 400 year-old Danish is almost impossible for modern Danes.
The particular grammatical form that you cite may be technically incorrect, but
it is so widely used that it has, in effect, become correct. It is just a
matter of time before the "academie anglaise" recognises it.
Cheers,
Nathan
On 5 Jan 2014, at 08:36, Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In which case, Moose, I appreciate your humour :-)
>
> Usage in language is changing, but not all for the better. The wrong tense
> is what is grabbing my attention at the moment, on the radio for instance,
> "The Prime Minister reported that he is keen to preserve the State Pension."
> The change of time sounds ugly, to my ears, and defies logic as well as
> convention.
>
> Chris
>
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Image licensing: http://www.alamy.com/search-results.asp?qt=wajsman
Blog:
http://www.nathansmusings.eu/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|