<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>bwh Web Designs &#187; language</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bwhwebdesigns.com/category/language/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bwhwebdesigns.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 02:12:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Lost And Found</title>
		<link>http://bwhwebdesigns.com/2009/07/28/lost-and-found/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=lost-and-found</link>
		<comments>http://bwhwebdesigns.com/2009/07/28/lost-and-found/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:10:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>barbara</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bwhwebdesigns.com/?p=273</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently I&#8217;ve noticed that the word &#8216;of&#8217; seems to have gotten dropped from the English language. I see a lot of references to &#8220;a couple this&#8221; and &#8220;a couple that&#8221; rather than &#8220;a couple of this&#8221; or &#8220;a couple of that&#8221;. It seemed strange to me, and when I read it I find it rather [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recently I&#8217;ve noticed that the word &#8216;of&#8217; seems to have gotten dropped from the English language. I see a lot of references to &#8220;a couple this&#8221; and &#8220;a couple that&#8221; rather than &#8220;a couple of this&#8221; or &#8220;a couple of that&#8221;. It seemed strange to me, and when I read it I find it rather jarring. I have to stop and think about what was meant and then realize that they&#8217;ve left out a word. Is this just another short cut we take in today&#8217;s fast paced world? </p>
<p>But then I realized that the word &#8216;of&#8217; wasn&#8217;t really lost at all. I found it in sentences like this one, &#8220;I should of paid more attention in English class.&#8221; What they really meant to say was &#8220;I should&#8217;ve paid more attention in English class.&#8221; Do people just not realize what the actual words should be? </p>
<p>So, alas, the word &#8216;of&#8217; is not really lost. It&#8217;s just showing up in the wrong places. I suppose then that I need to call &#8220;Lost &#038; Found&#8221; and report that it is actually the word &#8216;have&#8217; or contractions of it that is lost. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://bwhwebdesigns.com/2009/07/28/lost-and-found/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
