A language learners’ forum

smallwhite wrote:I texted this the other day: "I'm sorry, it's actually 4. I just silly wrote 7 because xxx".

"I just silly wrote" means "I just wrote sillily" I know the expression is used, I can google it, but it seems rare. Is it maybe regional or, er... old-fashioned...? Do you use it?

I'm not familiar with that usage.

I'd be more likely to say "..silly of me", "just being silly", "for some silly reason", "silly me" etc.

smallwhite wrote:"I just silly wrote" means "I just wrote sillily" I know the expression is used, I can google it, but it seems rare. Is it maybe regional or, er... old-fashioned...? Do you use it?

I would use it, but most likely do so playfully with more a linguistically competent friend, because while the word isn't commonly used, its meaning is clear to if the listener's inner "English parser" is healthy and active.

teapot wrote:Curious that stomach ache is two words, but bellyache is just one. I wonder if that is because it appears most as a verb.

Strangely, I always considered stomachache to be one word. I'm surprised to see it written as two words here. I would say I've never seen it that way before, but that just invites people to bury with me with responses that "no, that's the standard way things are done across the pond" or whatever.

smallwhite wrote:I texted this the other day: "I'm sorry, it's actually 4. I just silly wrote 7 because xxx".

"I just silly wrote" means "I just wrote sillily" I know the expression is used, I can google it, but it seems rare. Is it maybe regional or, er... old-fashioned...? Do you use it?

That just sounds un-grammatical to me. It doesn't even sound like internet slang, it just sounds like a mistake. Perhaps people are using it as slang nowadays, but if so, I haven't seen it.

golyplot wrote:Strangely, I always considered stomachache to be one word. I'm surprised to see it written as two words here. I would say I've never seen it that before, but that just invites people to bury with me with responses that "no, that's the standard way things are done across the pond" or whatever.

I was very surprised to see it as two words too. For what it's worth, the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary only includes it as "stomach ache", while both the Oxford Advanced American Dictionary and two Merriam-Webster dictionaries I checked only have it as "stomachache"... There may be an element of across-the-pond differences.

golyplot wrote:Strangely, I always considered stomachache to be one word. I'm surprised to see it written as two words here. I would say I've never seen it that before, but that just invites people to bury with me with responses that "no, that's the standard way things are done across the pond" or whatever.

Excepting medicos, I think that's probably something that everyone has their own changable rules for.

DaveAgain wrote:Excepting medicos, I think that's probably something that everyone has their own changable rules for.

Huh, I've never seen "medico" used in English before. I had to look it up.

golyplot wrote:

DaveAgain wrote:Excepting medicos, I think that's probably something that everyone has their own changable rules for.

Huh, I've never seen "medico" used in English before. I had to look it up.

Report to engineering. They will update your software, or recycle you for parts.

DaveAgain wrote:

golyplot wrote:

DaveAgain wrote:Excepting medicos, I think that's probably something that everyone has their own changable rules for.

Huh, I've never seen "medico" used in English before. I had to look it up.

Report to engineering. They will update your software, or recycle you for parts.

I think you'll find that medicos is an Americanism.

rdearman wrote:I think you'll find that medicos is an Americanism.

Hey, don't pin that on us!

golyplot wrote:Strangely, I always considered stomachache to be one word. I'm surprised to see it written as two words here. I would say I've never seen it that way before, but that just invites people to bury with me with responses that "no, that's the standard way things are done across the pond" or whatever.

In Canada (not sure which side of the pond that puts me relative to you), I see both stomachache (which seems wrong to me) and stomach ache, and bellyache and belly ache.

Myself, I avoid the controversy by using the phrase "tummy ache," for a number of reasons:

- to identify what is often a generalized abdominal discomfort as a "stomach ache" (or if you must, a "stomachache") brings a precision that is often unwarranted. The stomach represents only a portion of the abdomen, and I think it is challenging for one to be able to identify any particular abdominal pain or discomfort as being located specifically in the stomach per se as opposed to elsewhere in that goop that constitutes one's innards

- "belly" rhymes with "jelly" and nothing good comes from anything that rhymes with jelly. Other than vermicelli. Due apologies to anyone named Kelly, Shell(e)y, Elly or Nelly - not your fault in getting caught up with the smelly Machiavelli group of bad eggs

- also, I know many who equate "belly" with excess abdominal fat, so that a skinny person can be said not to have a belly (whereas hopefully even skinny folks have a stomach)

- "tummy" - being essentially a childish, nursery sort of word, it is a more comforting term to use when one is in discomfort or distress. "Tummy aches" go away 'cause they are childish minor things and can be best treated by a lollipop or kind, soothing words from a loved one.