No, usage is correct.



So if you're going to use the English language, be sure to practice the correct usage.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/usage

With the possible exception of a missing comma after the introductory conjunction, the sentence above is grammatically correct, but, as I wrote in post # 70, "use" can be used as either a verb or a noun. In the sentence above, "use" is a verb, not a noun. Thus, it is not an example of "use" as a noun, as was the case in Geo's sentence.

I want to be corrected on spelling and grammar use.

Also, as I wrote in post #70, Geo's sentence was (and is) grammatically correct. It would also be grammatically correct to substitute "usage" for "use" as the last word in the sentence. And, as I previously pointed out, it would have been a more precise word choice, but that is a matter of semantics, not grammar.

 

With the possible exception of a missing comma after the introductory conjunction, the sentence above is grammatically correct

Commas are not to be used after an introductory conjunction that preceeds a clause that is comma seperated. So, there is no missing comma in my sentance.

as I wrote in post # 70, "use" can be used as either a verb or a noun. In the sentence above, "use" is a verb, not a noun. Thus, it is not an example of "use" as a noun, as was the case in Geo's sentence.

It isn't a matter of if the word is a noun or verb. It's a matter of using the correct word.

Also, as I wrote in post #70, Geo's sentence was (and is) grammatically correct. It would also be grammatically correct to substitute "usage" for "use" as the last word in the sentence. And, as I previously pointed out, it would have been a more precise word choice, but that is a matter of semantics, not grammar.

Let's again consult Merriam-Webster

Definition of use

1
a : the act or practice of employing something : employment, application <he made good use of his spare time>
b : the fact or state of being used <a dish in daily use>
c : a method or manner of employing or applying something <gained practice in the use of the camera>

2
a (1) : habitual or customary usage (2) : an individual habit or group custom
b : a liturgical form or observance; especially : a liturgy having modifications peculiar to a local church or religious order

So "use" refers to the application or employment of something, while "usage" refers to the correct way to use words and phrases in language, as shown in post #72.

Go ahead and encourage Georacer to write English as an uneducated gomer if you please. I don't think that's what he wanted though.

Here is something interesting for the grammer nazis. A website devoted to English language and usage. Note the correct word choice in the title.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions

 

I want to be corrected on spelling and grammar use. The English language is a vital skill that I want to hone.

Well, to be frank, if I did proper grammar usage I wouldn't need to refine my grammar use.

 

Well, to be frank, if I did proper grammar usage I wouldn't need to refine my grammar use.

I think your grammar is excellent, but then what do I know? I only taught English for five years, and was a technical writer for five more. At least you spell "grammar" correctly.

 

Spell cheek also works wonders, sometimes.

 

Sooooo true.

 

The spell utility suks. I copy/paste my posts in a word doc and check, that is, what I give a hoot enough to check.

PS: the problem could be the way my browser is set up.

 

The Firefox embedded spell-checker isn't half-bad.

 

Originally Posted by Georacer
Well, to be frank, if I did proper grammar usage I wouldn't need to refine my grammar use.


I think your grammar is excellent, but then what do I know? I only taught English for five years, and was a technical writer for five more. At least you spell "grammar" correctly.

So are you saying the above "execellent" statement you quoted contains no grammatical erorrs? I only ask because I want to know if we are going to treat the subject of grammer objectively or not.

 

So are you saying the above "execellent" statement you quoted contains no grammatical erorrs? I only ask because I want to know if we are going to treat the subject of grammer objectively or not.

I took Geo's post #84 as a joke, just as I took Mr. Chips' post # 85.

But, you have worn me out. I have said all I have to say on this issue.

 

you have worn me out. I have said all I have to say on this issue.

Ok, well I don't recall you being forced to respond to my posts. Have a nice day.

 

You can also insist that your name is "Step-hen".

I'm a little late coming to the party, but I couldn't resist:
There are some people named Anushen. I suppose they could insist that it be pronounced Anus-hen.

 

Names generally fall outside the rules of grammar, this is an old fact. It is not fair to force someone to twist their identity into someone elses rules. Didn't stop them from doing it on Ellis Island for new immigrants, but it was still wrong.

 

I was just being facetious. But the difference between Staton and Strantor is to the same degree the difference between Smith and Jones, in my book. I was trying to make the point about people who insist on their names being pronounced in a way that is inconsistent with its spelling. For example, the guy who recently sold me my car had the surname Deatherage. He pronounced it "Deethridge". I'm sorry, but your name is DEATHeRAGE. the "e" in the middle is phonetically insignificant; it does not change entire the sound of a 10 letter name. His name is as close to Deethridge as it is to Smith.

One of my favorites:
Featherstonehaugh

 

One of my favorites:
Featherstonehaugh

Is someone pulling someone else's leg?

 

"Do not insert in reversed polarity, do not charge or dispose of in fire."

Now maybe it's just me, but it appears they are telling me "do not charge the battery in a fire".

The one that I see around here all the time is on the signs in the median on highways intended for certain vehicles to make U-turns but are not supposed to be used by just anyone. So the signs read, "Emergency and authorized vehicles only." To which I always wonder, "Well, why don't you just authorize emergency vehicles to use them, too?"

And it starts a whole chain of convoluted logic.

If Emergency vehicles, which apparently are not authorized since they have to be specifically stated separately, can use it, then doesn't that mean that they are authorized? And if they are authorized, then why do they have to be specifically stated separately?

 

The one that I see around here all the time is on the signs in the median on highways intended for certain vehicles to make U-turns but are not supposed to be used by just anyone. So the signs read, "Emergency and authorized vehicles only." To which I always wonder, "Well, why don't you just authorize emergency vehicles to use them, too?"

And it starts a whole chain of convoluted logic.

If Emergency vehicles, which apparently are not authorized since they have to be specifically stated separately, can use it, then doesn't that mean that they are authorized? And if they are authorized, then why do they have to be specifically stated separately?

It should state, "Authorized Emergency Vehicles Only".

 

Is someone pulling someone else's leg?

Google "Featherstonehaugh pronunciation".

 

The one that I see around here all the time is on the signs in the median on highways intended for certain vehicles to make U-turns but are not supposed to be used by just anyone. So the signs read, "Emergency and authorized vehicles only." To which I always wonder, "Well, why don't you just authorize emergency vehicles to use them, too?"
...

Well the correct sign would read simply "Authorised vehicles only", but that would be a stumbing block for stupid people...

"Hey, I'm an author... I can drive that way!"

By putting the word "Emergency" first, even the stupidest of people understand the basic concept. After that they are kind of forced into adding "and authorised" to allow roadworks and maintenance vehicles etc.

 

Speaking of highway signs:
Some of you know that, on dirt roads in the mountains of the western US, you will occasionally see signs that read "LUMBER TRUCKS USING THIS ROAD". Circa 1963, I was driving such a road in California. I came upon a sign that read "TIMBER HARVESTING VEHICLES UTILIZING THIS THOROUGHFARE".
I was pleased to see that someone in CalTrans had a sense of humor.