<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Monthly Gleanings: August 2011</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.oup.com/2011/08/august-2011/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.oup.com/2011/08/august-2011/</link>
	<description>Academic insights for the thinking world.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 12:26:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: OUPblog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Monthly Gleanings: September 2011</title>
		<link>http://blog.oup.com/2011/08/august-2011/#comment-232172</link>
		<dc:creator>OUPblog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Monthly Gleanings: September 2011</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:32:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.oup.com/?p=18147#comment-232172</guid>
		<description>[...] to Mr. Michael Lamb, who, although he watches with amusement my struggle with linguistic windmills, agreed to comment on the use of if we would have been in power.  It appears that careful speakers across the ocean [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to Mr. Michael Lamb, who, although he watches with amusement my struggle with linguistic windmills, agreed to comment on the use of if we would have been in power.  It appears that careful speakers across the ocean [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mollymooly</title>
		<link>http://blog.oup.com/2011/08/august-2011/#comment-229023</link>
		<dc:creator>mollymooly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:50:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.oup.com/?p=18147#comment-229023</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know that &quot;If I&#039;d uh known&quot; is more common or acceptable in one anglophone region than another. The &lt;a href=&quot;http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temps_surcompos%C3%A9&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;temps surcomposés&lt;/a&gt; are similarly frowned upon by francophones.

The counterfactual subjunctive is commoner is the US than the UK, where &quot;If I was you&quot; for &quot;If I were you&quot; is seldom deprecated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know that &#8220;If I&#8217;d uh known&#8221; is more common or acceptable in one anglophone region than another. The <a href="http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temps_surcompos%C3%A9" rel="nofollow">temps surcomposés</a> are similarly frowned upon by francophones.</p>
<p>The counterfactual subjunctive is commoner is the US than the UK, where &#8220;If I was you&#8221; for &#8220;If I were you&#8221; is seldom deprecated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Lamb</title>
		<link>http://blog.oup.com/2011/08/august-2011/#comment-228293</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Lamb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.oup.com/?p=18147#comment-228293</guid>
		<description>I am across the ocean (from you) as you are (from me), and I read this blog, sometimes thinking that such quixotic pedantry as you link to above must be a spoof.  But I agree with your view of &#039;if we would have been&#039;, and trust that this will facilitate your promised appreciation of transpontine comments on it.

Standard British usage does of course require &#039;if we were&#039; or &#039;if we had been&#039;, and I regret to say it therefore breeds annoyance at the use of &#039;if we would have been&#039;, especially by a British MP. But I don&#039;t think this annoyance is necessarily because it is perceived as an Americanism. It may partly stem from the feeling that it is a reconstruction (albeit a relatively unexceptionable one) of what does survive in British English, namely the non-standard &#039;if we&#039;d have been&#039; and its infelicitously expanded forms &#039;if we had have been&#039; and even &#039;if we had of been&#039;. We even get incongruous expressions like &#039;had we have been&#039;, which are presumably intended to be more upmarket.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am across the ocean (from you) as you are (from me), and I read this blog, sometimes thinking that such quixotic pedantry as you link to above must be a spoof.  But I agree with your view of &#8216;if we would have been&#8217;, and trust that this will facilitate your promised appreciation of transpontine comments on it.</p>
<p>Standard British usage does of course require &#8216;if we were&#8217; or &#8216;if we had been&#8217;, and I regret to say it therefore breeds annoyance at the use of &#8216;if we would have been&#8217;, especially by a British MP. But I don&#8217;t think this annoyance is necessarily because it is perceived as an Americanism. It may partly stem from the feeling that it is a reconstruction (albeit a relatively unexceptionable one) of what does survive in British English, namely the non-standard &#8216;if we&#8217;d have been&#8217; and its infelicitously expanded forms &#8216;if we had have been&#8217; and even &#8216;if we had of been&#8217;. We even get incongruous expressions like &#8216;had we have been&#8217;, which are presumably intended to be more upmarket.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roland Schuhmann</title>
		<link>http://blog.oup.com/2011/08/august-2011/#comment-228206</link>
		<dc:creator>Roland Schuhmann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 13:20:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.oup.com/?p=18147#comment-228206</guid>
		<description>For strawberry cp. this quite recent article: http://ojs.ub.gu.se/ojs/index.php/modernasprak/article/view/345/340</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For strawberry cp. this quite recent article: <a href="http://ojs.ub.gu.se/ojs/index.php/modernasprak/article/view/345/340" rel="nofollow">http://ojs.ub.gu.se/ojs/index.php/modernasprak/article/view/345/340</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->