09-17-2010, 11:46 AM | #1 (permalink) |
Functionally Appropriate
Location: Toronto
|
On vs. Upon
Are there strong rules for the use of either "on" or "upon" in a sentence?
Is it just a matter of style and formality or is there a concrete reason to use one or the other? I know you can't start a story "Once on a time..." However, these examples don't quite have the same dissonance to my ear: "I can make adjustments based on/upon your suggestions." "The cat is on/upon my head!" "On/upon reflection, I'm going to side with the watermelon." What are your thoughts on/upon this?
__________________
Building an artificial intelligence that appreciates Mozart is easy. Building an A.I. that appreciates a theme restaurant is the real challenge - Kit Roebuck - Nine Planets Without Intelligent Life |
09-17-2010, 11:53 AM | #2 (permalink) |
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Both on and upon are prepositions meaning essentially the same thing.
Upon is merely more formal; however, uses such as "once upon a time," "row upon row," and "the autumn is upon us" are idiomatic and thus the alternative seems unnatural and jarring. In all your examples, either word would work fine, but you will notice that upon sounds more formal. With files from the Canadian Oxford Dictionary.
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot |
09-17-2010, 11:57 AM | #3 (permalink) | |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
I was raised to speak (proper / homeland) English, so upon was engrained within my early vocabularium.
Now, living in North America for some time, it's become more of a personal preference, and as you were wise to point out, a matter of perceived agreeable dissonance. To make it easy though, the resident desktop encyclo- offered me (you, us all) this definition for upon: Quote:
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
|
09-17-2010, 11:58 AM | #4 (permalink) |
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Tell that to Winnie the Pooh author, A. A. Milne, who wrote a book entitled Once on a Time....
EDIT: As an aside: language and how usage evolves is kinda funny. For example, we all know that (now cheap) phrasing used in mysteries and thrillers: "...when all of a sudden...." What if I told you that older texts used something different? Try this on for size: "...when of a sudden...." The all crept in there and now all of us use and know it.
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot Last edited by Baraka_Guru; 09-17-2010 at 12:03 PM.. |
09-17-2010, 12:17 PM | #5 (permalink) | |
Functionally Appropriate
Location: Toronto
|
Quote:
__________________
Building an artificial intelligence that appreciates Mozart is easy. Building an A.I. that appreciates a theme restaurant is the real challenge - Kit Roebuck - Nine Planets Without Intelligent Life |
|
09-17-2010, 09:36 PM | #6 (permalink) |
Junkie
|
Which I like because it is perfectly gender neutral.
It jars me when someone (like a waiter) says "You guys ready to order?" to a mixed gender group. I know it's become common, but it still derails me. Here's a clue: If it has tits, it's not a guy. Guys have balls. Some more than others, but you get the idea. Lindy |
09-18-2010, 05:37 AM | #7 (permalink) | |
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Quote:
See, that's the thing: I don't know of anyone who refers to the female gender as "dolls." Could you imagine a waiter approaching a table of women and saying, "You dolls ready to order?" Or even a mixed table with, "You guys & dolls ready to order?" I might on a very rare occasion hear someone use "gals," but it hardly ever registers on the radar anymore. "Guys" applied even to a group of females only doesn't jar me at all. I've accepted it as a gender-neutral term (colloquially anyway), which is interesting now that I think of it. What's not so much the case is when someone refers to a female using man: "Oh, man, did you see that?" or "Hey, man, what's up?" I hear it all the time. In many cases, I don't really think about it, but sometimes I think to myself, "Why did she just call her a man?" Gotta love language!
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot |
|
09-18-2010, 07:47 AM | #8 (permalink) | |
Kick Ass Kunoichi
Location: Oregon
|
Quote:
I love how language lives.
__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau |
|
09-18-2010, 01:12 PM | #9 (permalink) | |
Upright
Location: Great Britain
|
Quote:
Strange, strange place. |
|
09-18-2010, 06:26 PM | #10 (permalink) | |||||
Junkie
|
Quote:
Nobody uses "dolls" anymore except to describe a child's plaything or a collectible. Or maybe a waiter at a dinner theater?Guys and Dolls - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Or the diner style places with the real or pseudo Southern Belle waitress, where every customer is doll, or hun, or sweetie or something similar. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And in the long run, of course, usage will trump all! Lindy |
|||||
09-18-2010, 07:21 PM | #11 (permalink) | ||
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot |
||
09-19-2010, 05:22 PM | #12 (permalink) | |
Junkie
|
Quote:
Men never accept being called by a formerly female term. "Hey guys, gals is now officially gender neutral. We men are now OK with being called gals, right?" Lindy |
|
09-19-2010, 05:25 PM | #13 (permalink) | |
Functionally Appropriate
Location: Toronto
|
Quote:
It's still derogatory but who knows where we'll be in 20 years.
__________________
Building an artificial intelligence that appreciates Mozart is easy. Building an A.I. that appreciates a theme restaurant is the real challenge - Kit Roebuck - Nine Planets Without Intelligent Life |
|
09-19-2010, 06:38 PM | #14 (permalink) | |||
warrior bodhisattva
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
|
Quote:
But as far as a feminine term becoming a neutral term, I can't think of any. However, perhaps we can consider changes in terms for political correctness, such as stewardess. Not only was the femininity of the term problematic, but now there are males who hold these jobs, which makes the title "flight attendant" more apt. The same goes for seamstress, I imagine, and other terms like it. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot |
|||
09-22-2010, 01:06 PM | #15 (permalink) | ||
On the lam
Location: northern va
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
oh baby oh baby, i like gravy. Last edited by rsl12; 09-22-2010 at 01:09 PM.. |
||
Tags |
grammar |
|
|