Forum: Author Hangout

There is a lot more wrong with this sentence than "The".

How did John use his gun on the target?

If he used the gun in the normal sense of how a gun is intended to be used why not say "John shot the target"? It's not even necessary to write "with his gun" because shooting is what you do with a gun.

*shrug*
It was a particularly memorable sentence I read some days ago and remembered today again when I read another novel with a use like that and a dozen times before that, in other novels.
So, nothing that happens often but enough to make me wonder. Especially because I also read it in a novel from an author who is otherwise nearly error-free and well-spoken.

If he used the gun in the normal sense of how a gun is intended to be used why not say "John shot the target"? It's not even necessary to write "with his gun" because shooting is what you do with a gun.

Because he may have shot the target with a bow, slingshot, rubberband, or even a spitball.

Because he may have shot the target with a bow, slingshot, rubberband, or even a spitball.

If he had a gun but not any of those other things, it's not necessary to specify.

Sometimes John is a toilet.

A "John" can also be a client for persons providing services of ill repute(typically prostitutes). Not to be confused with a "Mark" who has been targeted by a criminal for victimization.

So in the right context, "The John" could shoot someone, or "The Mark" could respond in anger.

So in the right context, "The John" could shoot someone, or "The Mark" could respond in anger.

I would use lowercase for both 'john' and 'mark' in those contexts.

I would use lower for both 'john' and 'mark' in those contexts.

Honestly, it depends on my book. If a prostitute is speaking generically then the answer is yes. But if they're speaking about a specific one then that john becomes John until another proper name is identified. Because in that line of work, where names are to be avoided, "everybody is named John."

But if they're speaking about a specific one then that john becomes John until another proper name is identified.

I would use 'John' in place of a name, but also use 'the john' or 'a john'.

I've never seen this type of error.

The same as sunkuwan I've often encountered this error, and also as he, I wondered if it only sounds strange to non native English speakers. I just never dared to ask the question myself, because I'm already accused of nitpicking too often.

Or an earlier version of the sentence was "The man used..." and he decided to switch "man" to "John" and left the "The."

I wonder if the story involves prostitution. The men who use prostitutes are referred to as "johns", so the error could be in capitalizing John.

The men who use prostitutes are referred to as "johns"

A curiosity in my Oxford Dictionary: if you look up "john" it provides the definition "a toilet", but if you click on 'word origin' it then mentions "Early 20th cent. (meaning a prostitute's client)".

"john", meaning a prostitute's client.

I used it in my new story, with exactly that meaning. Sadly I had to realize I can't use it, because the name John is unknown in that world. So I had to fall back on 'customer'. A tragedy!

I used it in my new story

Where can I find your stories? I searched using your name, in vain.

Strange, should have been easyy enough. https://storiesonline.net/a/Robberhands

So I had to fall back on 'customer'. A tragedy!

Surely you can find something with a more derogatory connotation.
How about chance, mark, sucker, suckee, ...

'Chance' and 'Mark' are both used as names, so would presumably be subject to the same strictures as 'John' ;)

But 'john' is a common noun for this meaning, and I suggest 'chance' or 'mark' could be used as common nouns in robberhands universe.

but if you click on 'word origin' it then mentions "Early 20th cent. (meaning a prostitute's client)"

In the US, john for a prostitute's client is still in active use by prostitutes, law enforcement, and news media for stories about prostitution.

In the US, john for a prostitute's client is still in active use

That's why I described the Oxford Dictionary's not showing it as a current definition as 'a curiosity'.
It does identify it as informal and North American. I was just surprised they were so coy about a usage that is so everyday, and every night.

^^

No, the character wasn't a pimp :)

It was just a curiosity. I was 99% sure that those were typos but in the back of my head, someone is saying: so many flies can't be wrong.... ;)

I suppose if an incompetent businessman can call himself "The Donald", then a fictitious character in an erotic story can call himself "The John".

Thee Ohio State University

it was generally used whenever you refer to anything that non-descript or unsavory males tend to use.

John Doe would agree with that, if he wasn't dead.

(also the source of the name "Commode").

And I forget which one it was (Either Shit or Crap) but that one is allegedly tied to the branding on the toilets that American "Doughboys" encountered in England while heading to the front in WW1.

And I forget which one it was (Either Shit or Crap) but that one is allegedly tied to the branding on the toilets that American "Doughboys" encountered in England while heading to the front in WW1.

If that story is true, it would be crap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Crapper

I'm going to go with toilets armed with automatic weapons...

California could probably use them in public restrooms as a deterrent against vandals. "This john is authorized to use deadly force in self-defence." Of course, that probably wouldn't end well for more than just the vandals.

I'm going to go with toilets armed with automatic weapons...

Some of my wife's relatives talk of going to the dunny with a shotgun and checking the rafters for snakes and spiders. (She was too young when she left there)

I wished I'd had a shotgun when a Huntsman spider came in through the open window in my daughter's room in Sydney years ago.

Those fuckers are big. 18-24 inches across, right, Ernest? Or is it 36-48 inches? I forget.

Yeah, them's nasty but then your country is renowned for the number of nasty wildlife.

Herself and I had to contend with the possibility of black mambas - I saw several around the house. Had a ?false widow spider in the kitchen here one day and another time she had a tiny spider fell in her hair - took three months of daily anti MRSA antibiotic and sterilising sprays to fix it and she was lucky.

Give off, this isn't a fishing or hunting story!

What? A 12 foot huntsman spider tearing down a wall looking for children to eat sounds like a hunting story to me.

A 12 foot huntsman spider tearing down a wall looking for children to eat sounds like a hunting story to me.

No, that's a monster movie. And at that size, you're going to need an anti-tank weapon.

What? A 12 foot huntsman spider tearing down a wall looking for children to eat sounds like a hunting story to me.

Shouldn't that have been in the "Story Ideas" section? Nice sci fi possibility for planet arachnidheaven :-)

Since "John" was the predominant name in America for some 50 years, it was generally used whenever you refer to anything that non-descript or unsavory males tend to use.

And you can just _guess_ how well that has gone over with those of us named John.

And you can just _guess_ how well that has gone over with those of us named John.

I blame the parents for that.

There was a movie, TV show or book some time back about a bunch of high-school girls all named Janet. They formed their own group, and they were collectively called "The Janets".

Are you thinking of the movie 'Heathers'? It's a cult classic which I quite enjoyed. Three of the four girls in a high school clique are called Heather.

The and A are normally used in front of an adjective (the OLD man), a word denoting rank (The General) or a position or job (the President, the postman ...) or a word denoting origin/nationality (the Irishman, the alien) There might be a few more.

Agreed, it is occasionally used as a quasi-honorific (or insult) if somebody(or a bunch of them) decided somebody "embodies" the term in question. Or if the position itself embodies it in some cases, such as "The President" rather than "President Umpty."

The specific usage cited in the OP is an error, whatever happened to let it slip through.

Completely irrelevant aside, but people with a sense of entitlement are describing themselves as 'the' on Twitter

To be fair, I have a username that is 20+ years old that has "The" appended to the front of it, and from experience I know I'm not particularly unique in that.

"Dark" (or even "Darth"), and a few other words (including titles typically reserved for nobility/the gentry classes) also tend to be common enough name appendages for usernames online. Usernames exist in their own space, where word-mashups are pretty much expected for public-facing names. Short of people opting for something like "Hi! My username is df2zj4yxt"

Completely irrelevant aside, but people with a sense of entitlement are describing themselves as 'the' on Twitter on the assumption they have more right to their name than the others they share it with.

Yet there are some people in real life to whose name the prefix has always been used. If you saw "A bridge too far" the bloke in a white sweater marching up the centre of the road is always THE Lord Lovat. There is no other titled person apart from the Queen who has that that I know of.

As for twitters on twitter, they just twit. My username exists solely because my real name has been appropriated by the hoi polloi ;-)

- and now my username has been appropriated!

the bloke in a white sweater marching up the centre of the road is always THE Lord Lovat.

Although it's now regarded as archaic and affected, I believe that is a traditional British form of address for a Lord, so you'd have 'The Lord Lucan' etc.

AJ

Although it's now regarded as archaic and affected, I believe that is a traditional British form of address for a Lord, so you'd have 'The Lord Lucan' etc.

I cannot find anything to support that in style guides.

The only mentions I can find about arbitrary capitalisations of titles are:
* Capitals are always used in the British Commonwealth for the 'Queen' and the 'Lord Privy Seal'. In BrE you would use 'Elizabeth II, the Queen of ...', but in AmE that would be 'Elizabeth II, the queen of ...' In both you would use 'Queen Elizabeth II' following the usual practice of using capitals for titles when they precede the person's name.
* The only British title I can find with a capitalised 'The' is 'The Honourable'.

There is some mention of needless capitals (tugging the forelock) being used frequently by businesses in promotional and internal documents, but it's not considered "correct" for technical writing.

I can see why some might feel inclined to add 'the' before their name for their twit-tag, but I agree with you it is annoyingly pretentious.
I think adding 'that' instead makes sense, as in #thatsophiebuggermyworthlessarse. :-)

https://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-tugendhat/1705

I followed this link on that page:
"What you need to know when writing to a member of the House of Lords."
That had a link called:
"Find a member's title: A-Z list"

As far as I can tell, it says you should address an envelope to "The Lord ...", but they may be referred to as "Lord ..."

Also it suggests that there are more than just 'The Honourables'. Some have an added 'Right' or 'Most', and some are 'Reverends' rather than 'Honourables'.

And it should be '@', not '#'. ;)

Thank you for informing me about something I hope I will never need to know. :-)

Please use Reply to Thread rather than replies to me if you want to continue discussing this here. :-)

* The only British title I can find with a capitalised 'The' is 'The Honourable'.

eg.
Full title
The Lord Bach
The Rt Hon. the Lord Astor of Hever DL
The Lord Armstrong of Ilminster GCB CVO
The Earl Attlee
The Viscount Chandos
The Rt Hon. the Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top
The Baroness Bakewell DBE
The Countess of Mar
The Rt Rev. the Lord Bishop of Birmingham
The Most Rev. and the Rt Hon. the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury
The Most Hon. the Rt Hon. Marquess of Lothian QC
The Duke of Montrose

The examples above are from the entries in this list: http://www.parliament.uk/mps-lords-and-offices/lords/

Seems to me only the first 'the' in the full title is capitalized. Lord, Viscount, Earl, Baroness ... are always capitalized.

HM.

Seems to me only the first 'the' in the full title is capitalized. Lord, Viscount, Earl, Baroness ... are always capitalized.

I am not sure. What I said is I can find nothing in style guides that supports that.

There may be some difference between a "full title" and the name someone is addressed by.
I think the site AJ found is ambiguous. I identified where it also lists Lords without 'The' in their titles.
I do not think it necessarily means capitals are used when they are named in the middle of a sentence.

Surely this is not correct, 'The function was attended by the Queen and The Baroness Thatcher'!

The proper title starts with 'The'. Informally, eg in conversation, you'd drop the 'The'. Sometimes (in circumstances I'm unsure of) the 'Lord' can also be dropped. So if a bunch of lords were hanging out, one might introduce himself as 'Astor of Hever' (from above).

Your style guides will not authoritative - HM's site almost certainly is, but there are other publications with stronger claims eg 'Burke's Peerage'.

AJ

Your style guides will not authoritative - HM's site almost certainly is, but there are other publications with stronger claims eg 'Burke's Peerage'.

Can we agree on the ultimate authority, Fawlty Towers?
From the first episode:
Basil Fawlty: Would you put both your names, please.
Lord Melbury: No, I only use one. I'm Lord Melbury, so I just sign 'Melbury'.

Think about an official reception, where each guest is announced when entering. The full title is used for this announcement (I think).

Your example is unfair.

Surely this is not correct, 'The function was attended by the Queen and The Baroness Thatcher'

You should at least compare these three sentences:
'The function was attended by The Queen and The Baroness Thatcher'
'The function was attended by the Queen and the Baroness Thatcher'
'The function was attended by the Queen and Baroness Thatcher'

HM.

Addition to my previous post.
The third of my examples would be ambiguous:

'The function was attended by the Queen and Baroness Thatcher'

It could be understood as an enumeration of titles the Queen holds. ;)

HM

Now you're getting into Peers of the Realm there are some weird ways to address them.
When you refer to them by their position you use The in the title, so you have have Prince Charles who's also The Prince of Wales.

At formal events he'd be announced as The Lord Lovat.

Many of the older clans have a clan head who's simply known as, and referred to, with the word the - thus the head of the McDonald Clan is The McDonald, and so on.

In the case of The Lord Lovat he is the head of the Clan Fraser of Lovat so that could be a lengthy address. There is a separate Clan Fraser, hence the reference to Lovat.

I cannot find a trace of Clan McDonald but there are two separate clans using the name MacDonald..
Ranald Alexander Macdonald of Clanranald has not been elevated to the peerage.

Now it gets complicated with The Right Honourable Godfrey James Macdonald of Macdonald, 8th Lord Macdonald,

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1997-02-02/news/9702020275_1_ronald-mcdonald-mcdonald-s-restaurants-scot

As for twitters on twitter, they just twit.

No, they just are twits.

A few exceptions I would make have been traditional in English for a long time: the Queen, the Pope, and same other words associated with religions.

Also, I would use 'Speaker' for the position to avoid confusion with the common noun 'speaker'

Depending on the context it would be proper to refer to Her Majesty (or H.M.) The Queen and His Holiness The Pope

In the Commons it is The Speaker or Mr Speaker as appropriate.
In respect of the Speaker, he or she is a member of the House of Commons and cannot therefore in theory be elevated to the Peerage and remain Speaker.

Depending on the context it would be ...

That is what I'm saying I would do with almost all titles in fiction.

In contexts where I would use a capital for 'President', I would also use one for 'Duke', 'Baron', 'Captain', 'Professor', etc.
In other cases I'd use lowercase for them all.
Among the few exceptions where I would never use lowercase are: 'Queen', 'Pope', and 'Speaker'.

Wasn't there a song about someone called The One And Only? ;)

Yeah, but only the one.

Yeah, but only the one.

Was that the one where the person was shot for proclaiming they were The Son of a Modern Major General?