<The language there is specialized, but as Josh said, it's not entirely formal. >
And it isn't, as Lazar claimed, informal, is it?
And it isn't, as Lazar claimed, informal, is it?
Is this acceptable English, IYO?
<<And it isn't, as Lazar claimed, informal, is it?>>
Just to be clear, I'm the person who wrote: <The language there is specialized, but as Josh said, it's not entirely formal.> Are you asking me? ;-)
Anyway...let me say once again, I think those websites are not entirely formal and not entirely informal. (The use of specialized jargon doesn't necessarily make something formal.) But in general, the middle voice is a feature of informal English. As Josh said, it's not generally used in news reports or academic writing.
Just to be clear, I'm the person who wrote: <The language there is specialized, but as Josh said, it's not entirely formal.> Are you asking me? ;-)
Anyway...let me say once again, I think those websites are not entirely formal and not entirely informal. (The use of specialized jargon doesn't necessarily make something formal.) But in general, the middle voice is a feature of informal English. As Josh said, it's not generally used in news reports or academic writing.
<But in general, the middle voice is a feature of informal English. As Josh said, it's not generally used in news reports or academic writing.>
But that doesn't mean it is informal.
But that doesn't mean it is informal.
<<But that doesn't mean it is informal.>>
Yes, it does. Let me state clearly:
The middle voice is informal.
Yes, it does. Let me state clearly:
The middle voice is informal.
<The middle voice is informal. >
As a teacher and linguist, I'd be interested to know where you got that information. Could you provide the source?
As a teacher and linguist, I'd be interested to know where you got that information. Could you provide the source?
<<What's informal about this?
"Wheat grows well on this farm.">>
In some instances, the middle voice usage has become so commonly used that it's now acceptable in all registers. Let me clarify and say that I was talking specifically about innovative uses of the middle voice - in verbs, like "eat" and "drink", that are almost always transitive. Mea maxima culpa.
<<As a teacher and linguist, I'd be interested to know where you got that information. Could you provide the source?>>
Gladly. The source is me, a native speaker of English. Sentences like "The 1972s are drinking so much better", and "This book reads like a thriller", and "It eats better, too!" (which I've heard in a commercial) are not acceptable in formal usage.
"Wheat grows well on this farm.">>
In some instances, the middle voice usage has become so commonly used that it's now acceptable in all registers. Let me clarify and say that I was talking specifically about innovative uses of the middle voice - in verbs, like "eat" and "drink", that are almost always transitive. Mea maxima culpa.
<<As a teacher and linguist, I'd be interested to know where you got that information. Could you provide the source?>>
Gladly. The source is me, a native speaker of English. Sentences like "The 1972s are drinking so much better", and "This book reads like a thriller", and "It eats better, too!" (which I've heard in a commercial) are not acceptable in formal usage.
In fact, this paper ( http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/Docs/NewObsAncGrkVc.pdf ) mentions a set of "middle verbs", including "fill, break, burn, cook". Middle verbs could be defined, I suppose, as verbs in which the middle usage is one of the basic meanings of the verb. So I would say that it's the use of the middle voice for non-middle verbs that is informal.
"The 1972s, at only $800 a bottle, are drinking so much better at the moment."
This is entirely acceptable English but used within a specialized field: the wine trade.
As an active oenophile* myself, I can tell you that the "is/are drinking" construction is commonplace for both spoken and written "wine talk" - even the most formal.
* A fancy way of saying I can knock back a bottle or two with the best of them. Ha ha!
This is entirely acceptable English but used within a specialized field: the wine trade.
As an active oenophile* myself, I can tell you that the "is/are drinking" construction is commonplace for both spoken and written "wine talk" - even the most formal.
* A fancy way of saying I can knock back a bottle or two with the best of them. Ha ha!
<Gladly. The source is me, a native speaker of English. Sentences like "The 1972s are drinking so much better", and "This book reads like a thriller", and "It eats better, too!" (which I've heard in a commercial) are not acceptable in formal usage. >
Does that mean all native speakers share the same idea of what is formal?
Does that mean all native speakers share the same idea of what is formal?
"Does that mean all native speakers share the same idea of what is formal?"
No, it clearly means all native speakers do not share a common idea of what is "formal."
As you would expect.
No, it clearly means all native speakers do not share a common idea of what is "formal."
As you would expect.
So would you agree with this, 03RB?
<"The 1972s are drinking so much better", and "This book reads like a thriller", and "It eats better, too!" (which I've heard in a commercial) are not acceptable in formal usage. >
<"The 1972s are drinking so much better", and "This book reads like a thriller", and "It eats better, too!" (which I've heard in a commercial) are not acceptable in formal usage. >
"So would you agree with this, 03RB?
<'The 1972s are drinking so much better', and 'This book reads like a thriller', and 'It eats better, too!' (which I've heard in a commercial) are not acceptable in formal usage. >'"
My answer would be yes for the wine and the book but no for the commercial.
Assuming here that by "formal," you mean English that you might expect to see in written form in an article or book or spoken from a prepared text.
<'The 1972s are drinking so much better', and 'This book reads like a thriller', and 'It eats better, too!' (which I've heard in a commercial) are not acceptable in formal usage. >'"
My answer would be yes for the wine and the book but no for the commercial.
Assuming here that by "formal," you mean English that you might expect to see in written form in an article or book or spoken from a prepared text.
Oops!
I meant:
My answer would be ACCEPTABLE formal usage for the wine and the book but NOT ACCEPTABLE for the commercial.
I meant:
My answer would be ACCEPTABLE formal usage for the wine and the book but NOT ACCEPTABLE for the commercial.
Okay, I'll defer to 03RX on the "drinking" issue, since it's a specialized area.