Watching the Apprentice annoys me every single week.
Apart from the obvious.
When Lord Sugar asks "who was the project manager on this task?" the person in question always answers "that was myself".
I think to myself, "don't they mean me?" and so I looked it up.
Yes. It should be me. Not me on the Apprentice, perish the thought, but the word "me" instead of "myself".
Basically, "me" is always correct in the me/myself choice except in one condition. That condition is when the person speaking is both subject and object of the sentence.
I saw myself in the mirror.
I chose it myself.
I doubt myself.
"Me" or "I" is simple to know. If in doubt, take out the other people/things involved and think how it would sound:
Bananas and me are often seen in Tesco.
or
Bananas and I are often seen in Tesco.
Me is often seen in Tesco.
or
I am often seen in Tesco.
Obviously, it's "I".
Tesco is fed up of bananas and me.
or
Tesco is fed up of bananas and I.
Tesco is fed up of me.
or
Tesco is fed up of I.
"Me" this time.
Easy.
If you are the subject of a sentence, the correct way to address yourself is "I". If you are the object, then it is "me". If you are both, then use "I" and "myself".
I upset myself by looking at other common grammar errors.
Affect/effect. Duh. One is a verb and one is a noun.
Allusion/illusion. They're different words!
There's lots of them. Ugh. Think people, think.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Wednesday, 18 April 2012
Monday, 16 April 2012
Tuesday, 10 April 2012
Titanic
There's not a lot I can say that hasn't been said already, everywhere, constantly. But I've always been kind of fascinated by Titanic and today marked the 100th anniversary of her sailing from Southampton.
That's pretty momentous. I'd have been on the memorial cruise if I'd known about it in advance, had the money and all sorts of other things.
Actually, no, I probably wouldn't have been. I'm no sailor. Possibly due to a lifelong obsession with Titanic, but I don't fully trust boats not to sink; I seriously don't like rocky crossings. And I get very seasick.
For the record, should the memorial cruise, in a truly unlikely manner, hit an iceberg and sink, I'm guessing that there will definitely be enough lifeboats for everyone on board and then some.
It is possible that had the passengers on the Titanic not been sending telegrams that they could have received and heeded warnings. 100 years on and every minute of every hour of every passenger will be tweeted/facebooked/blogged, not to mention the media coverage. Any iceberg sightings will be known to everyone in the world and any mishaps responded to with haste never before recorded.
So no, I don't think it's going to sink. I'm not sure what it will do when it gets to the site of the crash. Will it stop and sit for three hours and then come home? Will it carry on to New York?
Pause to Google.
Ah. The itinery, which I misread as Titanery and think they missed a trick there.
The plan is to arrive at the site of the Titanic wreck - along with Memorial Titanic II, which is going the other direction - and have a memorial service there at the exact time the Titanic sank. Which is either touching and apt, or weirdly macabre. One of those.
The period costumed people alarm me somewhat. Literal reenactment is probably unwise.
Instead of transferring some of the passengers to lifeboats and sinking the rest, the boat is to travel onto Halifax and then New York, tracing the rest of the journey for the survivors (New York) and the recovered bodies of the victims (Halifax).
Who said macabre?
I think on the night of the 14 April I shall watch the film in my own safely on land manner of tribute. Yes, that film. Not the good one, the shiny one.
That's pretty momentous. I'd have been on the memorial cruise if I'd known about it in advance, had the money and all sorts of other things.
Actually, no, I probably wouldn't have been. I'm no sailor. Possibly due to a lifelong obsession with Titanic, but I don't fully trust boats not to sink; I seriously don't like rocky crossings. And I get very seasick.
For the record, should the memorial cruise, in a truly unlikely manner, hit an iceberg and sink, I'm guessing that there will definitely be enough lifeboats for everyone on board and then some.
It is possible that had the passengers on the Titanic not been sending telegrams that they could have received and heeded warnings. 100 years on and every minute of every hour of every passenger will be tweeted/facebooked/blogged, not to mention the media coverage. Any iceberg sightings will be known to everyone in the world and any mishaps responded to with haste never before recorded.
So no, I don't think it's going to sink. I'm not sure what it will do when it gets to the site of the crash. Will it stop and sit for three hours and then come home? Will it carry on to New York?
Pause to Google.
Ah. The itinery, which I misread as Titanery and think they missed a trick there.
The plan is to arrive at the site of the Titanic wreck - along with Memorial Titanic II, which is going the other direction - and have a memorial service there at the exact time the Titanic sank. Which is either touching and apt, or weirdly macabre. One of those.
The period costumed people alarm me somewhat. Literal reenactment is probably unwise.
Instead of transferring some of the passengers to lifeboats and sinking the rest, the boat is to travel onto Halifax and then New York, tracing the rest of the journey for the survivors (New York) and the recovered bodies of the victims (Halifax).
Who said macabre?
I think on the night of the 14 April I shall watch the film in my own safely on land manner of tribute. Yes, that film. Not the good one, the shiny one.
Sunday, 8 April 2012
Yummy, mummy
This should probably go on my mummy blog but I want to tell anyone I can and this blog does occasionally get read.
I have discovered the most wonderful product for parents of babies. It is a necklace from a company called
Gumigem.
The necklace is beautiful, just the sort of necklace I would wear anyway.
Mine is identical to the above picture, it is the Lightning necklace in Fury. It looks like it is made from a pretty stone.
But it is amazing. It is made of silicon which is entirely baby friendly and free of parabens and BPA. Baby can chew away without any worry as to whether they may ingest anything harmful. As it hangs round your neck, it is always there for baby to play with whenever you pick her up or lean over her.
I am blown away by the simplicity yet genius of this idea. Babies are instinctively drawn to necklaces and this one is safe for baby so mummy doesn't have to fret about keeping necklaces off while baby is small. Best of all it is an excellent teether and seems to provide genuine soothing for aching baby gums.
Gumigem also offer different styles of necklace as well as bangles - a safe toy for baby that's just there on your wrist looking pretty. I intend to buy more, for these products are not at all expensive unlike other teething necklaces available.
One very happy customer that wants to share this with every mother out there.
I have discovered the most wonderful product for parents of babies. It is a necklace from a company called
Gumigem.
The necklace is beautiful, just the sort of necklace I would wear anyway.
Mine is identical to the above picture, it is the Lightning necklace in Fury. It looks like it is made from a pretty stone.
But it is amazing. It is made of silicon which is entirely baby friendly and free of parabens and BPA. Baby can chew away without any worry as to whether they may ingest anything harmful. As it hangs round your neck, it is always there for baby to play with whenever you pick her up or lean over her.
I am blown away by the simplicity yet genius of this idea. Babies are instinctively drawn to necklaces and this one is safe for baby so mummy doesn't have to fret about keeping necklaces off while baby is small. Best of all it is an excellent teether and seems to provide genuine soothing for aching baby gums.
Gumigem also offer different styles of necklace as well as bangles - a safe toy for baby that's just there on your wrist looking pretty. I intend to buy more, for these products are not at all expensive unlike other teething necklaces available.
One very happy customer that wants to share this with every mother out there.
Tuesday, 3 April 2012
Reasons not to smoke
So I'm an ex smoker. Which means I shall have to become evangelical about not smoking, have the ability forever more to sniff out a cigarette at 100 yards (sorry kids) and will always slightly lean towards smokers when drunk.
Unless I start again. This has happened before, and has also happened with meat, fish and doughnuts so I can't discount that possibility.
But for now, I haven't smoked for a while and have got to the point where I don't need to remind myself every time I go to the shop that I don't buy them any more.
And if I should falter, the reasons not to smoke are many.
1) They cost something approaching 40p for each single cigarette. That's ridiculous.
2) It is nice being able to breathe. Having been in possession of a particularly virulent cough for the last few weeks, the thought of anything unavoidable ever irritating my fragile lungs is anathemic.
3) Cigarettes reek, they don't half stink. It is pleasant to be able to enjoy things like perfume.
4) Having been a closet smoker (as a manner of speech; I'm pretty sure I didn't ever smoke in a closet, not least because I call it a wardrobe) it is pleasant not to have to formulate plans to sneak off and have one.
And then we get onto
5) I'd like to live long enough to see my children grow up and ideally their children too. Smoking would mean that this would become considerably less likely.
I'll still always find affinity with those that have smoked. It's a rite of passage, or lasagne if autocorrect insists.
Unless I start again. This has happened before, and has also happened with meat, fish and doughnuts so I can't discount that possibility.
But for now, I haven't smoked for a while and have got to the point where I don't need to remind myself every time I go to the shop that I don't buy them any more.
And if I should falter, the reasons not to smoke are many.
1) They cost something approaching 40p for each single cigarette. That's ridiculous.
2) It is nice being able to breathe. Having been in possession of a particularly virulent cough for the last few weeks, the thought of anything unavoidable ever irritating my fragile lungs is anathemic.
3) Cigarettes reek, they don't half stink. It is pleasant to be able to enjoy things like perfume.
4) Having been a closet smoker (as a manner of speech; I'm pretty sure I didn't ever smoke in a closet, not least because I call it a wardrobe) it is pleasant not to have to formulate plans to sneak off and have one.
And then we get onto
5) I'd like to live long enough to see my children grow up and ideally their children too. Smoking would mean that this would become considerably less likely.
I'll still always find affinity with those that have smoked. It's a rite of passage, or lasagne if autocorrect insists.
Monday, 2 April 2012
Food for thought
Breakfast this morning did not cause any particular thoughts.
Lunch was momentarily irksome while being made. Sainsburys roasted beef slices claim to be cooked and roasted. Confusion: would the roasting not do plenty enough cooking to ensure additional cooking unnecessary? Par boiling, which I've not heard of with beef, doesn't equate to cooking.
Tea was most definitely annoying on account of it being ordered for 17.15, being collected at 17.15 and being discovered to be past its best on account of actually being ready at 17.03.
If that sounds overly pedantic, it was a pizza from Pizza Hut. Why have a fantouche online ordering system if the kitchen staff can't estimate cooking time of a pizza? I mean, it's a pizza from a pizza place, not a complex or unusual dish.
I have emailed them. They have not replied. Shockeronie.
Lunch was momentarily irksome while being made. Sainsburys roasted beef slices claim to be cooked and roasted. Confusion: would the roasting not do plenty enough cooking to ensure additional cooking unnecessary? Par boiling, which I've not heard of with beef, doesn't equate to cooking.
Tea was most definitely annoying on account of it being ordered for 17.15, being collected at 17.15 and being discovered to be past its best on account of actually being ready at 17.03.
If that sounds overly pedantic, it was a pizza from Pizza Hut. Why have a fantouche online ordering system if the kitchen staff can't estimate cooking time of a pizza? I mean, it's a pizza from a pizza place, not a complex or unusual dish.
I have emailed them. They have not replied. Shockeronie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
