Redundancy - Good for Data, Bad for Grammar. :0)

[kjv1611]

We received an email at work, and I thought you folks would get a kick out of it. It follows:
interesting statement: (text formats and bracketed changes by me)

We are doing a major upgrade to the system and will advise everyone when it is available and provide new access information.

We anticipate that we will be up-and-running on the new version of [AppName] next Tuesday [highlight]morning at the beginning of the day[/highlight].

Should you have any questions, please contact [JimBob] [blue]on[/blue] X[1234] or [GleefulSherry] [blue]on[/blue] X[4321]

Then after I shared that with my group at work, a supposed English major replied with:

Redundancy [highlight]abounds up[/highlight] in this piece.

Yeah, I pointed the same in her email, and she replied:

That’s actually correct – if you consider slang correct. Don’t get me started, IT nerd.

Yeah, feel the love. [WINK] The members of our department often pick at one another.

'Course, that does get me wondering: I don't even recall hearing "abounds up" as any form of slang. Any ideas what she's talking about?

Of course, I guess the other part she referred to was "next Tuesday", but I don't think that is NEAR as obvious as the other.

Another oddity, I think, is the "on" instead of "at" for listing phone extensions. Is either equally correct, or should it be "at", or am I just totally off my rocker?



--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me

 

[LizSara]

I think she probably meant Redundancy abounds, up in this place rather than redundancy abounds up, in this place.

As far as numbers go i would say on rather than at, i can be contacted on that number but i am not at a phone number i am at my desk.

"Whoever battles with monsters had better see that it does not turn him into a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you." ~ Nietzsche"

 

[p5wizard]

So, log on at 00:01 on tuesday and try the app, then start sending messages every half hour or so a la "Excuse me, is it going to take much longer?" You said it would be ready by now..." ;-)

p5

 

[AnotherHiggins]

The slang to which she refers is "up in this piece". Actually, piece would often be replaced with "the B word" (b*tch). Also "up in here", "up in your grill", etc.

In any of these examples, one could place "all" at the beginning. As in, "She's all up in his business".

Regardless of the slang, I don't see how "abounds up" is redundant. Perhaps you are thinking of rebound?

As far as numbers go i would say on rather than at, i can be contacted on that number but i am not at a phone number i am at my desk.

Funny. Maybe that's one of those British vs. US things. "I can be contacted on that number" sounds strange to my ear.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.

 

[Olaf Doschke]

Actually, the only good redundancy for data is backups.

Bye, Olaf.

 

[Michael52x]

Blame rap "music". It is where people get these ridiculous affectations of "lingo". When higher technology started out, there were only very smart people involved in it.
Now that it is rampant, and transmografied, the unwashed masses are equating "hip" with knowledgable "patois". Hah!

"Impatience will reward you with dissatisfaction" RMS Cosmics'97

 

[AnotherHiggins]

True. There was no slang before rap.


[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.

 

[EdwardMartinIII]

There was no slang before rap."

It's a little known fact that slang was invented by Jonah Rapp in 1968, based on his international best-selling book on grammer: "Sling, Slang, Slung -- How Verbs Need to be Fixed".



Edward

"Cut a hole in the door. Hang a flap. Criminy, why didn't I think of this earlier?!" -- inventor of the cat door

 

[traingamer]

And we can conjugate that:

faxed, fexed, fixed, foxed, f...
Oh, never mind.

Greg
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use. Kierkegaard

 

[mmerlinn]

[ ]

faxed, fexed, fixed, foxed, f...
Oh, never mind.

Or saxed, sexed,sixed,soxed, s...?

mmerlinn

http://mmerlinn.com

"Political correctness is the BADGE of a COWARD!"

 

[genomon]

What's "grammer"? The guy from "Frasier"?

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

 

[wahnula]

Well, technically speaking, Tuesday morning is 12:01 a.m. "The beginning of the business day", on the other hand, could be 8:00 a.m. or 9:00 a.m. depending when the workers arrive and start to work. Well, when the workers arrive, as there is quite a disparity between the time I "arrive" and the time I "start to work".

The better alternative would have been "Tuesday morning at the beginning of the business day".

My Bureau of Repetitive Redundancy Department pet peeve is "hot water heater"...

Tony

Users helping Users...

 

[kjv1611]

Regardless of the slang, I don't see how "abounds up" is redundant. Perhaps you are thinking of rebound?

Well, I wasn't sure at first, though it seemed that way to me. So I looked it up:

American Heritage Dictionary - (?-bound')
intr.v. a·bound·ed, a·bound·ing, a·bounds

1. To be great in number or amount.
2. To be fully supplied or filled; teem. See Synonyms at teem1.

So unless "to be great..." really does not mean a type of "up", then maybe I'm wrong on that. Or if "to be fully supplied or filled" does not imply some form of "up", then maybe I'm wrong.

I realize that to be "full" is not necessarily the same as "up", and to be "great" doesn't directly mean "up", but it sure seems they are at least very close.



--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me

 

[kjv1611]

anotherhiggens,

Thanks for the post about the slang. Now I recognize it, as I have heard it before, but it had been quite a while since I recall hearing that one.

--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me

 

[ncotton]

You were right in the first place.... there is no need for the word "Up" in the abounds reference. Infact, it doesn't actually make any sense.

As for the time of day reference.

The better alternative would have been "Tuesday morning at the beginning of the business day".

Here's a novel way of writing it.

8am Tuesday
Job done (or any appropriate time you invisage the job being completed)


As for, ON vs AT.
I agree with LizSara, you can ring me ON the phone, or come and see me AT my desk.

I have been known to get ON the phone, but I keep falling off.


Neil J Cotton
Technical Consultant
Anix

 

[kjv1611]

Regarding the on/at thing, I was thinking it should be "at", as in "at an address." I have always thought of a telephone number/extension as an address - not the physical phone itself. Frankly, it was the first time I remember seeing "on" used in that context.

--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me

 

[ncotton]

KJV,
Which side of the pond are you on? Int he UK, I've always heard/used ON.

Try this, commonly used sentence.


"I'm gonna be out of the office today, but if you need me, you can get me AT my phone"

"I'm gonna be out of the office today, but if you need me, you can get me ON my phone"


Neil J Cotton
Technical Consultant
Anix

 

[kjv1611]

I'm in the US.

I am familiar with the type phrase, "on the phone."
However, in context, it is "on x1234."
There, x1234 is acting as an address (just as an IP address is an address of a data connection, or can be the address of a telephone, network-wise, in an enterprise environment).

So, my whole point here is that it makes sense (I think) to say, "on the phone", but not "on address."

Does this not make any sense to anyone?

--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me

 

[ncotton]

I see what you are trying to get at, I just don't think it really seems to work in this scenario.

In TCP/IP.... I see an IP address as a route to my computers internal stack, so contact THROUGH or VIA an IP address.

A machines IP address sits ON a Subnet.

I only use the word AT when talking about the verb of going to somewhere.

"I'm going to see john Smith AT their London site"

however

if you are just talking ABOUT an addressable location

"The London site is ON Jasmine Avenue"

However this seems to be a general accepted difference in approach to language addopted by the US over the English.

Just like December 15th, 2008 (US) rather than 15th December 2008 (UK)

and others I notice, but cant think of right now


Neither is wrong, just common acceptance

Neil J Cotton
Technical Consultant
Anix

 

[kjv1611]

So, perhaps the author is British, and just happened to move here of late?

I suppose, then, it's more of a US perspective, but since I am in the US, and the company is in the US - no offices (at least directly connected that I am aware of) are in the UK.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this from a US perspective? Is there any rule to the usage difference, or is it purely just likes/dislikes?

--

"If to err is human, then I must be some kind of human!" -Me