>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Oh, and another cliche that REALLY bugs me is when someone is surprised and they say "I'm literally speechless" and then go on to gab incessantly (quite often about how they're still literally speechless).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It is amazing how many people today use the word "literally" to mean "figuratively." <s>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Tamar
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not just today. In my 1st years at grammar school we kept a notebook of "Common Mistakes" and that was one of the first, along with people being "livid with rage" (deathly pale; pallid; ashen) although that defo seems to have crept into acceptable language, along with "What are you trying to infer?" instead of "imply".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't think I've ever seen "livid with rage," but I certainly think of "livid" as meaning "exceptionally angry."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Many people here say, "Well, I was livid!"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>As for infer vs. imply, I'm not ready to surrender on that one yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>What do you mean by surrender? You don't mind the interchangeability or you do? if you ever saw the film Mrs Brown, re: the rel twixt Q Victoria and her Scottish retainer, there is a scene where he corrects the Prince of Wales on that very grammatical error. Now I know some dictionaries allow it nowadays but that's being forced by common use.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Oh, and "they were sat at the table" and "he was stood by the door"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I've never seen either of those. Must be a local idiom where you are. But it reminds me of the phrasing they use out in western Pennsylvania and nearby areas: "That homework needs done."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I don't find that as bad as the common usage (at least in GB) - "That homework needs doing." At least in PA the "to be" is "understood", I'd say equiv to "I'm bigger than he [is]".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Except that most people will say "I'm bigger than him". Drives me nuts, but what can you do.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Tamar
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>This is getting like a weird club full of language robots. Its a fluid communication method used by inexact creatures. Expect a little fuzziness .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Oh, I don't mind a little fuzziness in a chat, but when I pick up a newspaper and read a story written by a supposed jounalist in which four paragraphs in a row contain the phrase "It was her who...." I admit to getting a bit chafed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm never sure about "Give it to she/her who must be obeyed" I'd use the accusative/ablative, personally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'd definitely go with 'her'. Accusative.
>>>>>
>>>>>Aye, but isn't it ablative or dative, as it's "to her", rather than her being the object of the sentence? "It" is the object.
>>>>
>>>>Yes 'it' is the object of 'give', and 'her' is the object of the preposition 'to'. So I'd say it's dative.
>>>
>>>We rock! These others haven't a clue what we're talking about, except Tamar and Dragan (and he's damn quiet of late - he hasn't posted since b4 Xmas AFAIK)
>>
>>And, actually, I managed not to learn the names of most of this stuff and never studied Latin. So I know the correct usages and how to explain, but not generally what to call them.
>>
>>Tamar
>
>As I remember them:
>
>Nominative: Brutus kills Caesar
>Vocative: And you, Brute?
>Accusative: Anthony accuses Brutum
>Genative: This knife Bruti is
>Dative: The knife is mano Bruti (Brutus's hand - in/at hand = dative)
>Ablative: Brutus is Ludo (at the game)
>
>Now the last 2 I'm not sure which is which but they're generally the same endings in Latin.

Dative is just an indirect object - object of a preposition rather than the verb for example.
Ablative is, imho, simply not explainable, and should never have been coined for use in a civilised language.