According to my high school English teacher, "lots" is slang and not acceptable in formal writing. "A lot of" is acceptable.
According to my high school English teacher, "lots" is slang and not acceptable in formal writing. "A lot of" is acceptable.
That is interesting. My copy of the fifth edition of the Concise Oxford Dictionary considers both "a lot of" and "lots of" to be colloquial. On the other hand, the various entries at dictionary.com for "lot" do not make special mention of this.Originally Posted by cyberfish
Last edited by laserlight; 09-06-2009 at 09:04 AM.
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart WayOriginally Posted by Bjarne Stroustrup (2000-10-14)
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
Isn't there any standard in English which can distinguish between wrong and right, like C has it's own standard for the language. I'm asking this because whenever I ask a question about English, people doesn't give definite answers.
HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND.......
By associating with wise people you will become wise yourself
It's fine to celebrate success but it is more important to heed the lessons of failure
We've got to put a lot of money into changing behavior
PC specifications- 512MB RAM, Windows XP sp3, 2.79 GHz pentium D.
IDE- Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 Express Edition
I don't think so. Many references claim to be authoritative on this, but they do disagree amongst themselves, and IMHO none is better than any other.
Unlike C, English is collectively "designed" by its millions of speakers. Dictionaries and other references are written after the fact. They try to describe how people use the language, but the problem is, everyone uses and understands it in slightly different ways, so they have to only include mainstream definitions and interpretations. Even then, what's mainstream or not depends on where you are, and who you talk to.
For C, very few people designed the language, and the specifications are written before people start using them. Even then, we get slightly different behaviours from different implementations due to ambiguities in the standards.
Perhaps you asking the wrong peoples
There usually is a straightforward answer, eg, wrong or right, but since it is the most widely spoken language in the world and probably used by more people as a second or third language than actually use it as their first, native tongue, there is a lot of flexability.
I think if you make the question less stringent, eg "Is the meaning of this clear, and is it what I think it is?" is better than "Is this absolutely proper?". People are not computers and can accommodate certain amounts of fuzziness.
Eg, it is totally normal and clear to say "Lots of people do" or "A lot of people do" but in a strict academic setting you may be told that is not how we do it.
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
I think that question presupposes that human languages are intentionally designed. Nearly nobody believes that, at least in linguistics circles. Symbolic communication seems to be an instinctive human behavior, to the point that children who are not exposed to some pre-existing language will actually create one in order to communicate with each other (don't have the reference to the study but it's been observed).
Usage rules of English or any other language aren't really rules so much as descriptions of how the language is used in practice.
In my mind, if a large group of people speaks in a certain way, then this is legitimate speech and it's pointless to try to claim it is incorrect.
Code://try //{ if (a) do { f( b); } while(1); else do { f(!b); } while(1); //}