OK, but it does not necessarily agree with what Casiopea wrote, does it? Sameer wrote a wise thing - we, non-native English speakers, need strict rules. Where there are not such, it is very easy for a native speaker to show we are wrong, and any our attempts to defend our choices are foredoomed to failure: simply because our knowledge will likely never be deep enough to convince him/her we are right and he/she is wrong, even if we are right. This is especially the case when the native speaker is to evaluate our knowledge of or a work in English (it may be an exam, a piece of writing, or something like that), so I assume he/she has a deep knowledge of the English language, and is strict in how he/she evaluates - "no discussion" is how I would call such kind of evaluating. Unfortunately, this is quite often nowadays. And the thing is that two learned native persons may have different opinions on the thing, and it is possible they are not able to agree, so how come I would be able to convince such a person that I am right and he/she is wrong? This is how I see it. (And, by the way, I hope I expressed my thoughts comprehensibly.)Not incorrect - at least in BE; just rather old-fashioned (obeying a prescriptive rule that is no longer widely applied).
b
I know that, but the problem appears when some people say that only one option is correct, others say that it's not, that another option is correct, and in addition there is a third group, that of those who say both options are correct. And imagine how I, a poor non-native English speaker, feel then: which way should I go? Not having strict rules is simply a problem for me when it comes to using the language although this is what makes, in my eyes, the language rich and beautiful.We can only do so much, nyggus. Students have the right to accept or reject what's offered. There is more than one option. ;-)
I know that, but the problem appears when some people say that only one option is correct, others say that it's not, that another option is correct, and in addition there is a third group, that of those who say both options are correct. And imagine how I, a poor non-native English speaker, feel then: which way should I go? Not having strict rules is simply a problem for me when it comes to using the language although this is what makes, in my eyes, the language rich and beautiful.
Thanks!
Nyggus
The issue isn't black and white: there is no definitive answer. That's why knowing the whole picture helps. Knowledge is power, true, but it's up to the reader to know how to use that knowledge in order to excerise that power. ;-)I know that, but the problem appears when some people say that only one option is correct, others say that it's not, that another option is correct, and in addition there is a third group, that of those who say both options are correct.
Thanks for all your comments. This one quoted from Casiopea's post is very, well, encouraging. I think the whole has no direct solution - when a native English speaker points me out that I am wrong, I usually (in situations when I know this person is learned in the language) simply will have to say "OK" even though it doesn't have to be the case. Entering the discussion then would usually end with a huge failure of mine. But I am pleased to know there are teachers like you, who are not that "objective".We are observing language in change.
RE: Psst. Indeed, that's why I put this objective into quotation marks as I wanted to use a kind of irony. But I see it wasn't that clear... By "objective" guys I meant here those who claimed to be objective, which basically made them more strict that it was needed. Ooooops... ;-)Psst. I kind of thought we were objective--open minded, not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. ;-)
OK, but please remember that both camps, A. and B., agree on one thing. Consistency. In other words, there are two choices, A. or B., not three:
A. First, second, third, ...
B. Firstly, secondly, thirdly,...
Not incorrect - at least in BE; just rather old-fashioned (obeying a prescriptive rule that is no longer widely applied).
b
Hey folks,
I started this thread to get my querry sorted .Do all agre that there are only 2 options. A. and B. Isn't it traditionally right to say First ,secondly....
From Jack Lynch's Guide to Grammar and Style:
The jury is still out on whether to use first or firstly, second or secondly, &c. Traditional usage had first, secondly, thirdly, but this is too inconsistent for modern taste. Most guides prefer just plain old first, second, third, and so forth, without the -ly ending.
American source: Lynch, Guide to Grammar and Style — F
I wasn't able to find a UK source for firstly, secondly, thirdly, ...Most EFL teachers in most countries advise and teach the use of 'First, second, third...' or 'Firstly, secondly, thirdly...'; a majority of teachers here (including me) prefer the former.
From Jack Lynch's Guide to Grammar and Style:
The jury is still out on whether to use first or firstly, second or secondly, &c. Traditional usage had first, secondly, thirdly, but this is too inconsistent for modern taste. Most guides prefer just plain old first, second, third, and so forth, without the -ly ending.
American source: Lynch, Guide to Grammar and Style — F
You're most welcome, Bob. I didn't know we clashed, though. How so? (What does clash/coincide mean in British English?)
If you have a question about the English language and would like to ask one of our many English teachers and language experts, please click the button below to let us know: