And I should say my memory confused greavesy's catchphrase, which was, in fact, 'it's a funny old game'.

At the end of the day, though, it is indeed a funny old game.

Yes, but only after 5 P.M.

Do you prefer:

John Doe Jr. or John Doe, Jr.

I know that the comma is the more traditional way and according to some style book in the 90's, removing the comma is now ok.

What examples — my proposed rewritings of the posts I quoted? You're actually arguing that it is "behind the times" not to use "that being said" as those posters did? If yes, then you're inadvertently supporting my point, which is that the reason the phrase is used there is not that anyone affirmatively thinks it's better, but that it's fashionable. Give it a few more decades and if the winds haven't shifted, then you can sensibly argue that I'm behind the times.


The idea that I used the word "spots" because I got it on this board or from poker players is pretty amusing. I wanted a one-syllable word; there may be a better one available but none came to mind. It may not have been best but it certainly didn't result from adherence to convention.

My writing, and speech, is about as non-idiomatic and as little subject to fashion as that of anyone you'll see posting here, so it's an odd charge to level.

wow man there's one thing being a nit about errors in one's grammar but this is a whole new level. I am saying those phrases have been used in my world for as long as I can remember and to say there is something wrong with them or that they are used as a matter of fashion is absolutely laughable to be honest.

I stand by my opinion that you are, in fact, anti English.

English is a language developed and evolved through all of its users; not through nitty committees sitting rubbing each other's gonads in their high brow mansions talking to each other in Latin, just because they can.

non idiomatic = grey and dull to me. there's a time and a place, for sure, but to come out with a statement like that really is astonishing.

What's the joke in the MLK brunch poster?

It is "Prix Fixe", not "Pre Fixe". Although "Prix Fixe" is pronounced "Pre Fix". Ha ha!

"Those phrases" = one phrase that I've been talking about, but let's ignore that for a second. If "that being said" has been standard for as long as you can remember, then you cannot remember very far back.


Note, please, that I am not against nuanced phrasing; in fact, I am in favor of it. My objection to "that being said" is that, in my opinion, it carries no nuance at all. It is a fashionable version of "still". That's all.


At what point in this discussion have I said I am against idiomatic usages, or against any other aspect of English's subtly variable diction and structures? The answer: I have not done so. I said that my own phrasing is relatively non-idiomatic, and I said so only in opposition to your unsupported claim that I had used the word "spots" as a result of its being common on this poker-oriented board.

Your view on the phrase has been made clear, and your reasons for it are sensible even if I happen to disagree with their application to the instant phrase. But your reading comprehension seems to be sorely lacking.

From The American Heritage Dictionary entry on "that having been said / that being said / that said"

Notice that these phrases are not being treated as equivalent to "still" or "but." They do more work than either.

I agree with you, as I've been an abuser of buzz words and phrases. However, that's on the speaker though. Even though it's not pleasing to your ears, it at least makes the speaker happy. And at the end of the day, the fact that we have choices makes me happy, even if sometimes it's not the best choice. As long as the grammar is correct, conciseness is always a speaker's choice.

A correlation is food; when places such as McDonalds started taking out trans fats, I hated it. I'm strict with my diet, and when I choose to break it, I want full flavor. Now I don't eat Mickey D's french fries because there's no trans fat. <sigh>.

See? Obviously 2+2 is influencing all your word choices.

Wait, it's the shift away from trans fats that has made the fries less tasty? Damn health nuts.


lol

And the post that started this discussion:

True 'nuff. But that was an echo of someone else who had used that phrasing — I was picking up an extant thread in the conversation. (zomg he said thread, on an internet message board!) (zomg he said zomg!)

You wouldn't be 'going to do something' in Shakespearean times. Would you agree that the fact we use this construction probably evolved through some kind of misuse developing into a meme?

And serious question. What social class would you consider yourself?

I'm not at all unhappy about having "that being said" called to my attention. I had accepted it into my own idiomatic use to such an extent that I didn't realize it was a vogue phrase. But that is, indeed, the case. A search on Google books shows no uses of the phrase before 1992 and most of the occurrences coming after 2000. (I actually used, in the post that started this discussion--and prefer--the shorter form of "that said," but there are so many ways those two words get put together that I couldn't search for that phrase.)

My search also turned up William Safire's interesting discussion (in his book The Right Word in the Right Place at the Right Time) of what he calls this "voguism". Safire sees it as a rhetorical device similar to the to-be-sure gesture (as in "Yes, to be sure, there's another point of view but ..."). He suggests its use as a substitute for "however" is what most object to, but that it is effective when used in its stronger use, where it means "contrariwise."

I agree with the general principle of avoiding faddish words (especially neologisms) and phrases. They are often empty and substitute for real thought. Or they put the listener's or reader's mind into an empty space. But they were effective when they entered the discourse or they would never have become faddish.

[ ] reliable research method

At the end of the day, this is advice you can hang your hat on.

I think the above is a deplorable overcorrection driven by fear or foppishness or some species of misguided traditionalism and that master practitioners of the language should be leading the charge by vigorously welcoming "the new" and running it through its paces and mixing it in with "the established" and exploring interesting new phrasing in speech and prose.

Also, I deeply loathe 80% of this thread. But that's fodder for my therapist.

For all intensive purposes, yeah. That being said, we'll see if anyone actually takes that advice...the proof is in the pudding, ya know.

And I think you've misunderstood me. The repeated use of "At the end of the day" is a good example of empty speech. It once was effective. Many new phrases and words are, and, yes, those add to the vigour of a living language. But some become trite, stale, and exhausted through overuse and those need to be given a rest -- or used with care.

RT,

Sorry. My post was unwarranted claptrap. I don't think I'm capable of posting responsibly in this thread sans medication.

Those on medication perceive the probable reality of what happens in a distorted way.

You don't mean to imply that those who aren't don't, I hope.

No, I'm just referencing lagdonk's most famous sentence.