|
Post by sayne on Jan 4, 2012 11:19:35 GMT -5
After reading the posts in the "World in Which We Live In" thread, I thought it might be fun for us to post the myriad of lyrics or titles with bad grammar. Not as a put-down or to suggest that correct grammar must always be used in literature, but simply as a fun exercise.
Man We Was Lonely is a good one someone mentioned. Here's mine to get things started:
Hey Jude should have a comma.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jan 4, 2012 11:57:15 GMT -5
Arguable. But I'll play! It's been A Hard Day's Night doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jan 4, 2012 12:17:18 GMT -5
Arguable. But I'll play! It's been A Hard Day's Night doesn't make sense. But, at least, they put in the apostrophe.
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Jan 4, 2012 12:32:40 GMT -5
'Love you to' always sets my teeth on edge. Let me explain... Either it should be 'Love you too' meaning 'Love you also', or it needs something adding to it - i.e. 'Love you to...rub my feet / cook my dinner / butter my turnips' etc. As it is, it's meaningless, improperly spelt, irritatingly ungrammatic and it just looks wrong.
|
|
gloi
Very Clean
Posts: 222
|
Post by gloi on Jan 4, 2012 12:44:08 GMT -5
"Every one of us has all we need" where it really should be 'all he needs'
This little oddity in Yellow Submarine always make me think about Paul's statement "The things is, we're all really the same person. We're just four parts of the one."
|
|
JCV
Very Clean
Posts: 545
|
Post by JCV on Jan 4, 2012 12:56:56 GMT -5
Another case of the missing comma in "Cry Baby , Cry." Love this thread! I totally agree with you, woolie. That title KILLS me. JCV
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Jan 4, 2012 13:08:50 GMT -5
Another case of the missing comma in "Cry Baby , Cry." Speaking of commas, shouldn't it be 'I, me, mine'?
|
|
JCV
Very Clean
Posts: 545
|
Post by JCV on Jan 4, 2012 13:17:56 GMT -5
Another case of the missing comma in "Cry Baby , Cry." Speaking of commas, shouldn't it be 'I, me, mine'? I thought of that one too, but I didn't want to be a thread hog... Actually, there are probably more grammar mistakes within the lyrics than within the song titles. But then again, you could claim artistic license in working the song lyrics out. JCV
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Jan 4, 2012 13:20:29 GMT -5
"Say you don't need no diamond ring"
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 4, 2012 13:38:53 GMT -5
"My love don't give me presents," from " She's A Woman." My love does not give me presents.
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Jan 4, 2012 14:44:19 GMT -5
I think the mitigating factor for both Scousey and JSD's examples are they they were trying to use some sort of trendy, quasi-American vernacular. In other words, they knew they were taking liberties with the Queen's English, but they were trying to be street-cred (for 1964).
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Jan 4, 2012 14:56:12 GMT -5
There's nothing "wrong" with graphically transcribing vernacular English. So, "My love don't give me presents" is fine, and "A hard day's night" is just an attempted creative idiom. It's all good. I mean, are we gonna argue that "Can't Buy Me Love" should be "Cannot Purchase Affection"?
"Love You To" is a weird one. I suspect they didn't have a name for the song until the 11th hour, and had to come up with one quickly. It may just be something somebody said in the studio and then got written down as the title (to a pretty weird song). My alternate theory about it is that they wanted to name it "I'll Make Love To You" (which is repeated in the lyric), but George Martin, in 1966, would surely have said, 'No, we can't have a Beatle record with that title'. So, then maybe George suggested "Love To You", but it was also denied. Finally, in frustration, they mixed the preposition and the object to come up with the nonsensical "Love You To".
Had "I Me Mine" employed commas, it would like have been: "I, Me Mine", since Britons do not (ironically) use the Oxford Comma in most situations (whereas Americans do). But I think George was singing "I Me Mine" as sort-of one entity -- it's not supposed to be a list of three things!
I've always thought "Love Me Do" was a strange phrase. Putting "do" at the end of an imperative is odd in North-American English, and I don't think British speakers do it very often either. It should be "Do Love Me", right? But somehow, "Do... Do... Love Me", just doesn't sound right!
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jan 4, 2012 14:58:27 GMT -5
Another case of the missing comma in "Cry Baby , Cry." Love this thread! I totally agree with you, woolie. That title KILLS me. JCV Or, it could be "Cry, Baby, Cry." In this one, he would be addressing his "baby."
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Jan 4, 2012 16:39:43 GMT -5
I think the mitigating factor for both Scousey and JSD's examples are they they were trying to use some sort of trendy, quasi-American vernacular. In other words, they knew they were taking liberties with the Queen's English, but they were trying to be street-cred (for 1964). I agree and it's all good fun. Look at examples of speech these days such as "you don't got no money" etc The only thing that does drive me mad is the phrase "my bad". Your bad what? a) Breath b) Knees c) Back d) Feet e) If it was your mistake then say "sorry my mistake"
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Jan 4, 2012 16:40:28 GMT -5
I apologise for going off topic.
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Jan 4, 2012 17:06:23 GMT -5
"We would be so happy, you and me"
instead of
"We would be so happy, you and I"
OCTOPUS'S GARDEN, lyrics by Dingle Infant School dropout Richard Starkey
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jan 4, 2012 17:39:59 GMT -5
To elaborate/clarify Panther's post above, Love Me Do should have a comma - Love Me, Do, the Do being an imprecation reinforcing the imperative Love Me. It was not uncommon in England for a Do to be added for the purpose of emphasis: rather precious, perhaps, and somewhat out of use by the 60s, but far from unknown.
|
|
|
Post by Zander on Jan 4, 2012 19:06:57 GMT -5
"Me used to be angry young man, Me hiding me head in the sand" - Enough said on that one...
Macca doing a bit of Jamaican...
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jan 4, 2012 21:30:01 GMT -5
There's nothing "wrong" with graphically transcribing vernacular English. So, "My love don't give me presents" is fine . . . Guess you missed this part in my original post: I thought it might be fun for us to post the myriad of lyrics or titles with bad grammar. Not as a put-down or to suggest that correct grammar must always be used in literature, but simply as a fun exercise.
No one is saying that it would have been better for them to sing using proper grammar. We're simply pointing out the bad grammar. Jeez, who'd want to go back and correct all of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer? However, since one cannot sing or say a punctuation mark, it is fair to call out the omission of them in print.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 4, 2012 21:50:08 GMT -5
There's nothing "wrong" with graphically transcribing vernacular English. So, "My love don't give me presents" is fine . . . Guess you missed this part in my original post: I thought it might be fun for us to post the myriad of lyrics or titles with bad grammar. Not as a put-down or to suggest that correct grammar must always be used in literature, but simply as a fun exercise.
No one is saying that it would have been better for them to sing using proper grammar. We're simply pointing out the bad grammar. Jeez, who'd want to go back and correct all of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer? However, since one cannot sing or say a punctuation mark, it is fair to call out the omission of them in print. Ha Ha. As Paul's father once said. "Can't you just say She Loves You, Yes, Yes, Yes?".
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Jan 4, 2012 23:29:53 GMT -5
Sayne, I was just making the point that there's really nothing to say about usage of slang terminology. It's not wrong in any way (it's just that it isn't appropriate in some contexts, but no one in their right mind would suggest R&B/rock music as one such context).
Bad grammar, or incorrect punctuation, however, is another matter entirely...
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Jan 5, 2012 8:09:33 GMT -5
"We would be so happy, you and me" instead of "We would be so happy, you and I" By the same token, if we're talking the Queen's English, really it should be, 'Everybody's got something to hide except my monkey and I'.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jan 5, 2012 11:42:23 GMT -5
"We would be so happy, you and me" instead of "We would be so happy, you and I" By the same token, if we're talking the Queen's English, really it should be, 'Everybody's got something to hide except my monkey and I'. Actually, "Everybody has something to hide except for my monkey and me." "Got" is something one receives, while "has" is something one possesses. Also, take out " my monkey" and one will see that "I" does not work.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jan 5, 2012 11:53:29 GMT -5
'Love you to' always sets my teeth on edge. Let me explain... Either it should be 'Love you too' meaning 'Love you also', or it needs something adding to it - i.e. 'Love you to...rub my feet / cook my dinner / butter my turnips' etc. As it is, it's meaningless, improperly spelt, irritatingly ungrammatic and it just looks wrong. I always thought it was meant as "Love To You" with the last two words switched to attract attention. I say that because in the lyrics he says "I'll make love to you if you want me to" or is it "if you want me too".
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jan 5, 2012 12:41:55 GMT -5
By the same token, if we're talking the Queen's English, really it should be, 'Everybody's got something to hide except my monkey and I'. Actually, "Everybody has something to hide except for my monkey and me." "Got" is something one receives, while "has" is something one possesses. Also, take out " my monkey" and one will see that "I" does not work. I agree about the use of "I" but I found this on a search: Today’s topic is whether the phrase “have got” (substitute "has got" or contraction "everybody's got") is good English or not. And now, guest-writer Bonnie Trenga answers an e-mail from a listener, Lee, who says, “A pet peeve of mine is the frequent use of the ‘have got’ phrase, such as ‘I have got a [something or other]’ or ‘I’ve got a [something or other],’ when ‘I have a [something or other]’ is completely sufficient.” We all have phrases that bother us. I hate it when I see “It was a chill night” instead of “It was a chilly night.” Alas, I get all bent out of shape for no reason. Much as I dislike “chill” instead of “chilly,” there’s nothing wrong with it. Likewise, all four sources I consulted about the “have got” issue agree that this phrase is, in fact, good English. Added Emphasis The phrases “has got” and “have got” are somewhat informal and are often contracted, as in “He’s got” and “They’ve got.” Although this expression has long been criticized as an unnecessary substitution for the verb “to have,” it is perfectly idiomatic. It simply adds emphasis (1). In American English, “have got” is an intensive form of “have” (2). For example, if I say, “I’ve got a really big TV,” I’m placing more emphasis on my possession of the TV than if I say, “I have a really big TV.” If you say you haven’t got any money, you’re stressing the fact that you’re broke. Note that you can use “has got” or “have got” only in the present tense. If you want to talk in the past tense about your enormous TV, you would say, “I had a really big TV.” You would probably use expressive intonation to add emphasis. American English Versus British English How often you use “have got” instead of “have” depends on where you’re from. In American speech, “the form without ‘got’ is used more than in the UK” (3), so in other words, Americans tend to say, “have” and the British tend to say, “have got.” For example, according to The New Fowler's Modern English Usage*, in Britain, you’re more likely to hear the question “Have you got this book in stock?” whereas in America, “Do you have this book in stock?” would be more common (4). As I’ve said, it’s perfectly fine to say, “have got” if you’re in America, though it is less formal than plain old “have.” Even less formal than “have got”—and probably considered objectionable by most grammarians—is simply “got” by itself. You might have heard of the Spike Lee movie “He Got Game.” I don’t think Spike considered calling it “He Has Game.” “He got” is a very colloquial way of saying, “he has.” RTP: Its true about UK vs US. I would have titled the song Everybody Has Something to Hide... but then again Everybody's Got Something to Hide... sounds better in the song.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jan 5, 2012 12:55:02 GMT -5
There's nothing "wrong" with graphically transcribing vernacular English. So, "My love don't give me presents" is fine . . . Guess you missed this part in my original post: I thought it might be fun for us to post the myriad of lyrics or titles with bad grammar. Not as a put-down or to suggest that correct grammar must always be used in literature, but simply as a fun exercise.
No one is saying that it would have been better for them to sing using proper grammar. We're simply pointing out the bad grammar. Jeez, who'd want to go back and correct all of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer? However, since one cannot sing or say a punctuation mark, it is fair to call out the omission of them in print. I think we can make the distinction by dividing these examples between intentional and unintentional use of bad grammar. If it is intentional it is usually poetic license or just that the bad grammar fits or sounds better. A perfect example of unintended bad grammar is the last line of the following lyric from Holland/Dozier/Holland: You can't hurry love, No you just have to wait, She said love don't come easy, It's a game of give and take. How long must I wait how much more can I take, Before loneliness will 'cause my heart, heart to break? No, I can't bear to live my life alone. I grow impatient for a love to call my own, But when I feel that I, I can't go on, These precious words keeps me hanging on.
|
|
|
Post by joshferrell on Jan 5, 2012 14:08:44 GMT -5
that would be funny if "love you to" was SUPPOSED to be titled "Love to you" but capitol misspelled it on the cover so it became a happy little accident (like Bob Ross would say) ;D
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 5, 2012 15:23:31 GMT -5
'Love you to' always sets my teeth on edge. Let me explain... Either it should be 'Love you too' meaning 'Love you also', or it needs something adding to it - i.e. 'Love you to...rub my feet / cook my dinner / butter my turnips' etc. As it is, it's meaningless, improperly spelt, irritatingly ungrammatic and it just looks wrong. I always thought it was meant as "Love To You" with the last two words switched to attract attention. I say that because in the lyrics he says "I'll make love to you if you want me to" or is it "if you want me too". That song title bugs me too. George should have kept it "Granny Smith." Now that makes sense in relation to that song. ;D
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jan 5, 2012 15:34:04 GMT -5
I think when it comes to song lyrics, grammar rules can be, should be, and often are, suspended. Lyrics are emotions, feelings, experiences, recollections, stories, told often in the First person. They should be sung as though the performer is presenting to you (the listener) the lyrics, whatever they may be, for the very first time. Good Grammar is not all that important to the experience, what is important is getting the performer and the listener to connect through the message the song has and hoping it ignites an emotional response in the listener. Perfect grammar is often a very sterile thing, and does not lend itself to the best possible emotional reaction the song is trying to project. I never really pay attention to the grammar of a song. I'm looking to connect with the performer/composer through the music and actually prefer it if the grammar is more spontaneous in feeling and delivery within the song.
So I wouldn't really care how much "bad" grammar appears in any song, much less Beatle songs.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Jan 5, 2012 16:06:16 GMT -5
I've know the secret for a week or two Nobody knows just we twoThat should be Nobody knows, just you and I
|
|