News1 min ago
Why do some people (in the South) say 'Ofof him'
36 Answers
It's wiered a friend in London and another one in Reading say this, even a presenter said this on TV.. 'Get it ofof him"
Where did this come from and what's it about, more importantly why?
Where did this come from and what's it about, more importantly why?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by boogieboogie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No Ludwig I will not get off of my horse, hobby though, not high.
I could be reasonably rebuked for my uncessarily aggressive tone towards O and N,
but I do have a chip on my shoulder about the intellectual and academic snobbery that is part of British culture.
University education may be a fine thing, having grammatical rules may be useful, but not having been to University, not speaking with certain types of accent, nor being able to comphrened grammar, should not be a reason for people to be looked down upon or laughed at.
In this country and I shouldn't assume it possibly, of O and N, those who are the elite, distinguish themselves, and patronise others who are not part of the 'in' group. Wilful ignorance possibly is a problem, but lack of ability or exposure shouldn't be perceived as a deficit, just different in my self opinionated view.
I could be reasonably rebuked for my uncessarily aggressive tone towards O and N,
but I do have a chip on my shoulder about the intellectual and academic snobbery that is part of British culture.
University education may be a fine thing, having grammatical rules may be useful, but not having been to University, not speaking with certain types of accent, nor being able to comphrened grammar, should not be a reason for people to be looked down upon or laughed at.
In this country and I shouldn't assume it possibly, of O and N, those who are the elite, distinguish themselves, and patronise others who are not part of the 'in' group. Wilful ignorance possibly is a problem, but lack of ability or exposure shouldn't be perceived as a deficit, just different in my self opinionated view.
Your perception by my post is that I was looking down and laughing at people? And this on the basis that you (not me) consider I am of the AB elite and some sort of 'in group'?
You furthermore accuse me of wilful ignorance and patronising?
Crikey, thats a bit heavy for a Friday. Ruby I think I'll leave you dwell in your own misconceptions of me and erroneous beliefs of my Answerbank contribution.
Good day.
You furthermore accuse me of wilful ignorance and patronising?
Crikey, thats a bit heavy for a Friday. Ruby I think I'll leave you dwell in your own misconceptions of me and erroneous beliefs of my Answerbank contribution.
Good day.
Octavius
No, I was not reffering in my last post to AB at all but the wider world where intellectual snobbery in my opinion backed up by my experince does exist. It is against people who struggle and I mean struggle to understand why language written and spoken is constructed the way it is, for those of us who can not comphrened the rules that seem so easy for others.
In terms of wilful ignorance I refer to anyone who refuses to learn or to change or to reflect to choose to be ignorant, this was to explain my views, certainly not directed at anyone, rather to support the view that we are all different with differing abilities and capabilities, some of which we can not change however hard someone might try.
No, I was not reffering in my last post to AB at all but the wider world where intellectual snobbery in my opinion backed up by my experince does exist. It is against people who struggle and I mean struggle to understand why language written and spoken is constructed the way it is, for those of us who can not comphrened the rules that seem so easy for others.
In terms of wilful ignorance I refer to anyone who refuses to learn or to change or to reflect to choose to be ignorant, this was to explain my views, certainly not directed at anyone, rather to support the view that we are all different with differing abilities and capabilities, some of which we can not change however hard someone might try.
To continue from where I left off earlier...
Shakespeare in King Henry VI writes about "a fall off of a tree."
Richard Steele in The Spectator writes, "I could not keep my eyes off of her."
Mark Twain in Huckleberry Finn writes, "I'll borrow two or three dollars off of the judge."
Clearly, off of was a common structure in the past and on both sides of the Atlantic. Nowadays it may just be a colloquial or dialectal form here in Britain, but it is obviously still going strong. It may not be 'standard', but it is perfectly acceptable.
Shakespeare in King Henry VI writes about "a fall off of a tree."
Richard Steele in The Spectator writes, "I could not keep my eyes off of her."
Mark Twain in Huckleberry Finn writes, "I'll borrow two or three dollars off of the judge."
Clearly, off of was a common structure in the past and on both sides of the Atlantic. Nowadays it may just be a colloquial or dialectal form here in Britain, but it is obviously still going strong. It may not be 'standard', but it is perfectly acceptable.
Ethel
I am tempted to say lucky you. I realise that understanding grammar is not dependant on accent or university, that was just part of my rant about the wider issue of intellectual/academic snobbery that exists in this country.
Ours is a hierarchical system, class divide works very well for the haves, intellectual divisions, with intelligence afforded higher value than say ability to care for others, is effective.
The excluded not surprisingly feel devalued and resentful.
But, how anyone can understand something that is so slippery and changeable is beyond me. I know that some people laugh about dyslexia, others claim that this is a made up difficulty. But, for those always lagging behind in incomprehension, not being able to read the rules is hard work.
Besides, how does anyone understand the rules, look at Quizmonsters answer - the rules keep changing.
I am tempted to say lucky you. I realise that understanding grammar is not dependant on accent or university, that was just part of my rant about the wider issue of intellectual/academic snobbery that exists in this country.
Ours is a hierarchical system, class divide works very well for the haves, intellectual divisions, with intelligence afforded higher value than say ability to care for others, is effective.
The excluded not surprisingly feel devalued and resentful.
But, how anyone can understand something that is so slippery and changeable is beyond me. I know that some people laugh about dyslexia, others claim that this is a made up difficulty. But, for those always lagging behind in incomprehension, not being able to read the rules is hard work.
Besides, how does anyone understand the rules, look at Quizmonsters answer - the rules keep changing.
Ruby the rules really don't matter. Some of the most fluid and articulate speakers and writers actually have no comprehension of the rules in their truest form.
what matters is that we express ourselves, naturally with passion, flair and that we allow the language to evolve. Language is almost like a living animal, it twists and changes with each influx of immigrannts and each generation of people who choose to use it differently.
It's nice to have had the opportunity to have listened at length to somone who knows how to speak ' proper' English, but it's time that all people with a brain and a dialect understood that it's THEIR language , it does not belong to some elite.
All that being said I do like to see good grammar used if at all possible. Hypocrite aren't I?
what matters is that we express ourselves, naturally with passion, flair and that we allow the language to evolve. Language is almost like a living animal, it twists and changes with each influx of immigrannts and each generation of people who choose to use it differently.
It's nice to have had the opportunity to have listened at length to somone who knows how to speak ' proper' English, but it's time that all people with a brain and a dialect understood that it's THEIR language , it does not belong to some elite.
All that being said I do like to see good grammar used if at all possible. Hypocrite aren't I?
QM, perhaps including the 'of' is actually the more 'correct' thing to do, but it's been dropped over the years just through through a sort of natural laziness and tendency to drop superfluous words.
Consider the the instruction 'Get out of the way', this sounds more correct than 'Get out the way' which is also said.
Consider the the instruction 'Get out of the way', this sounds more correct than 'Get out the way' which is also said.
enough already..
This is the first time I've come across duplicating a word for no apparent reason.
Maybe it began as you demonstrate Ludwig with
"As just through through a natural"
why duplicte the word through?
Maybe the 'off of' was an initial typo/error that was taken quite literal. And didn't Shakespeare make words up..
This is the first time I've come across duplicating a word for no apparent reason.
Maybe it began as you demonstrate Ludwig with
"As just through through a natural"
why duplicte the word through?
Maybe the 'off of' was an initial typo/error that was taken quite literal. And didn't Shakespeare make words up..
<Boogie, there is, in modern terms, not really a 'duplication' involved here. Your original question contained ofof, by which we all assumed you meant off of..ie two different and separate words which you had abbreviated and tacked together.
I referred above to 'modern terms' because the two words were actually the same word originally, with two different spellings! It was not until about 1600 that they separated out into their modern meanings. Perhaps that is why they often were - and still are in places - presented together.
Ludwig, if you look at my first contribution to this thread on Page 1, you'll see that I had already commented on the out the window as opposed to out of the window structure you mention. You may well, therefore, be right.
I referred above to 'modern terms' because the two words were actually the same word originally, with two different spellings! It was not until about 1600 that they separated out into their modern meanings. Perhaps that is why they often were - and still are in places - presented together.
Ludwig, if you look at my first contribution to this thread on Page 1, you'll see that I had already commented on the out the window as opposed to out of the window structure you mention. You may well, therefore, be right.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
Strands #260 “Coming Up For...
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
Are We Heading Towards Another...
Politics17 mins ago
ChatterBank21 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.