While freely admitting my ability to mangle the English language at times, reading the ABC newsfeed article about the shark attack over in Sydney this morning floored me.

A very pretty marine biologist was quoted as saying " the shark has unfortunately had a negative interaction with a human " what?? there was nothing negative about that for the shark. Is our language changing and losing it's bite or getting harder to understand, losing it's clarity because of the PC brigade?

The other day I was speaking to people doing maintenance on an ocean pool.

The divers all wear shark deterrent devices. It attaches around their ankle. Has a 2.5 metre wire trailing in the water & sends out an electric current.

I suppose some take OH&S more seriously.

dogbox wrote:

---

i wonder what a positive interaction would look like

---

 A peck on the cheek!

This is one of the first generation Shark Shield which i still use.It straps to the leg, if you happen to come in contact with the tail, the shocks are enough to cause quite large muscle spasms. Some thing you wont do a second time. They arent cheap, when i purchase this unit they were $750. Back when i was young & invincble  in the early 70s i was working on the Cray boat in the avatar picture. I would dive with the Seals at Neptune Is in SA (home of White pointers especialy when theres baby seals) After a discusion with the light house keepers i did not dive there again. Back then there was no such thing as a shark shield.

-- Edited by DeBe on Friday 18th of February 2022 01:08:15 PM

Nature at its most powerful extreme.
Poor guy.
We were at Eden Wharf a few years back when a medical helicopter landed & an ambulance arrived just as an abalone boat pulled in.
They unloaded a diver onto a trolley bed bleeding prefusely from the face.
He had been swallowed head first by a Great White.
Luckily for him it bit his tanks/weight belt & spat him back out.
He looked stunned & very pale before he was flown out.

My son is a free diver spearfisher and occasionally meets up and dives with an Abalone diver who has been bitten twice by a Bronze Whaler and a Great White.

The second one was the other side of Esperance and the 5m Great White had his head in its mouth.

I said to my son, don't go diving with him, he attracts sharks, to which he said "its safer with him coz he will get bitten before me."  

https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa/veteran-perth-diver-back-in-the-water-despite-double-shark-attack-ng-04e98e8be9ee2d49ff9e02d700119f39

I haven't seen the shark attack victim but this reminds me of a Gary Larson cartoon.

Two sharks were talking about a scuba diver, who was unaware of the sharks. One shark said to the other, "Don't eat those things with those backpacks, they give you gas."

I love Garry Larson. 

The one I've seen:

Don't eat the hard bits they give you wind.

peter67 wrote:

---

While freely admitting my ability to mangle the English language at times, reading the ABC newsfeed article about the shark attack over in Sydney this morning floored me.

A very pretty marine biologist was quoted as saying " the shark has unfortunately had a negative interaction with a human " what?? there was nothing negative about that for the shark. Is our language changing and losing it's bite or getting harder to understand, losing it's clarity because of the PC brigade?

---

 Agreed.Far too many in the press use words,phrases and terminology that they don't really understand."Bill and myself" or "myself and Bill" is absolute garbage. "Bill and I" is correct."The reason why is because" also is rubbish,as all that is required to be said is "the reason is that". "Redid it again" also is incorrect unless perhaps the activity being referred to is being done for a third time,having already been "redone" once before. Mike Harding has a great command of the English language,and would likely have much to add,but I can't be bothered.Few people can speak properly English,(sic) and fewer can write it.C'est la vie.Cheers

yobarr wrote:

---

Mike Harding has a great command of the English language,and would likely have much to add

---

I always have much to add, whether it's wanted or not! :)

You flatter me inappropriately (my spelling is terrible) but someone who does have an outstanding knowledge of English syntax is Bill Bryson (a bloody Yank for God's sake!).

Anyway; I cannot recommend his "Dictionary of Troublesome Words" highly enough.

Edit:

In addition to Bill Bryson; as a guide to writing George Orwell's rules (suggestions) loom large:

Orwell

I must take this opportunity to thank Miss Gaynes who was my English teacher during my teenage years (I apologise Miss Gaynes) - I have always remembered debating with her an essay I submitted: "Well John Steinbeck wrote that!" I arrogantly stated regarding some text I'd penned with which she took offence. Her reply: "When you can write as well as John Steinbeck you can say it too otherwise correct it!"

I'm still trying Miss Gaynes :)

Mike Harding wrote:

---

yobarr wrote:

---

Mike Harding has a great command of the English language,and would likely have much to add

---

I always have much to add, whether it's wanted or not! :)

You flatter me inappropriately (my spelling is terrible) but someone who does have an outstanding knowledge of English syntax is Bill Bryson (a bloody Yank for God's sake!).

Anyway; I cannot recommend his "Dictionary of Troublesome Words" highly enough.

---

 I myself personally , fail to disagree.....    KB

Whenarewethere wrote:

---

The one I've seen:

Don't eat the hard bits they give you wind.

---

 That sounds like the one.

rgren2 wrote:

---

I myself personally , fail to disagree..... KB
Tautology.

---

 Tautology.Thanks for this post,Rod,as often I have wondered if there was a word that describes this bad habit that many have,where the same thing is said multiple times in the same sentence."The reason why is because" is a prime example,where three words have been used to correctly say what one word would have said.."The reason is that" .And each day we hear of accidents where "the car lost control".Utter rubbish.The car never was in control of anything,so lost control of nothing,rather the driver lost control of the car.Cheers

86GTS wrote:

---

A number of people were injured, a number of accidents have occurred in that area.
A number of police were in attendance, a number of people were interviewed & a number of charges are expected to be laid.

---

 Not sure what you're hoping to illustrate here,but the above is not an example of tautology.There are five separate statements,none of which repeats anything already said in that statement. Perhaps I have misunderstood your intention,but,as always,I'm happy to learn.Cheers

yobarr wrote:

---

 Agreed.Far too many in the press use words,phrases and terminology that they don't really understand."Bill and myself" or "myself and Bill" is absolute garbage. "Bill and I" is correct."The reason why is because" also is rubbish,as all that is required to be said is "the reason is that". "Redid it again" also is incorrect unless perhaps the activity being referred to is being done for a third time,having already been "redone" once before. Mike Harding has a great command of the English language,and would likely have much to add,but I can't be bothered.Few people can speak properly English,(sic) and fewer can write it.C'est la vie.Cheers

---

 When you are pointing out the grammatical errors of others, you should take extra care to ensure that you have not introduced any of your own. For example, there should be a space after each comma and period.

dorian wrote:

---

yobarr wrote:

---

 Agreed.Far too many in the press use words,phrases and terminology that they don't really understand."Bill and myself" or "myself and Bill" is absolute garbage. "Bill and I" is correct."The reason why is because" also is rubbish,as all that is required to be said is "the reason is that". "Redid it again" also is incorrect unless perhaps the activity being referred to is being done for a third time,having already been "redone" once before. Mike Harding has a great command of the English language,and would likely have much to add,but I can't be bothered.Few people can speak properly English,(sic) and fewer can write it.C'est la vie.Cheers

---

 When you are pointing out the grammatical errors of others, you should take extra care to ensure that you have not introduced any of your own. For example, there should be a space after each comma and period.

---

 Thanks Dorian. Not being too familiar with computer "etiquette", but having a reasonable command of the written language, this all seems foreign to me. Anyway, I'll see how I go, although changing what I've been doing for years may take a bit of doing, and is likely to be overlooked when I am concentrating on the content of the post, rather than whether the more delicate among us can easily read it. Cheers

I tend to stall with text when reading unexpected blocks of words.

It was a pain doing 3d rendering, I had to make sure every file name had no gaps or the render farm would spit the dummy. But then reading file names became more difficult. Often many multiple hundreds of files in a scene, so tried to have good file naming hierarchy to make reading a bit easier. Painful stuff.

dorian wrote:

 When you are pointing out the grammatical errors of others, you should take extra care to ensure that you have not introduced any of your own. For example, there should be a space after each comma and period.

---

 The number of spaces that should be inserted after a comma or Fullstop will depend on the Style Manual you are conforming with in a given situation.    My Uni, for example, demands APA formatting and style.    I set the Australian newspaper style manual for my writers back when I was doing a bit of publishing in a Defence setting.

Izabarack wrote:

---

 The number of spaces that should be inserted after a comma or Fullstop will depend on the Style Manual you are conforming with in a given situation.    My Uni, for example, demands APA formatting and style.    I set the Australian newspaper style manual for my writers back when I was doing a bit of publishing in a Defence setting.

---

I don't mind which style of writing people use providing they use it *consistently*.

I use the Oxford Style Manual as my guide.