"get off of"

[Shakespeare's brother]

Hi. Are we all agreed then that 'off of' is colloquial and not formal - therefore, not strictly standard English?

 

[riverkid]

Hi. Are we all agreed then that 'off of' is colloquial and not formal - therefore, not strictly standard English?

I'd say yeah, but I don't think that we're all on the same page as to what "standard English means.

AHD:

USAGE NOTE: People who invoke the term Standard English rarely make clear what they have in mind by it, and tend to slur over the inconvenient ambiguities that are inherent in the term. Sometimes it is used to denote the variety of English prescribed by traditional prescriptive norms, and in this sense it includes rules and usages that many educated speakers don't systematically conform to in their speech or writing, such as the rules for use of who and whom. In recent years, however, the term has more often been used to distinguish the speech and writing of middle-class educated speakers from the speech of other groups and classes, which are termed nonstandard. This is the sense in which the word is used in the usage labels in this dictionary. But it should be borne in mind that when it is used in this way, the term is highly elastic and variable, since what counts as Standard English will depend on both the locality and the particular varieties that Standard English is being contrasted with. A form that is considered standard in one region may be nonstandard in another, and a form that is standard by contrast with one variety (for example the language of inner-city African Americans) may be considered nonstandard by contrast with the usage of middle-class professionals. No matter how it is interpreted, however, Standard English in this sense shouldn't be regarded as being necessarily correct or unexceptionable, since it will include many kinds of language that could be faulted on various grounds, like the language of corporate memos and television advertisements or the conversations of middle-class high-school students. Thus while the term can serve a useful descriptive purpose providing the context makes its meaning clear, it shouldn't be construed as conferring any absolute positive evaluation.

 

[riverkid]

Last posting's URL:

Standard English. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.

 

[Shakespeare's brother]

A very interesting quote. In context, I used the term perhaps too losely to describe what is considered acceptable writing/speech. My point is that along with a vernacular there has to be a text-book style of English, and to the latter 'of off' would most surely not fit.

In the context of this forum, people who are trying to learn English as a second language must be at least initially taught the proper grammar/vocab/syntax and then allow themselves to be exposed to the colloquial style.

You surely must agree that if they did not, ESL students would all be speaking an English that in some quarters would be laughed at.

SB

 

[Philly]

Hi SB

You seem to be forgetting that there are quite a number of prescriptively "correct" grammatical constructions which would be laughed at (or possibly even ridiculed) if an ESL student were to use them.

As I see it, in this particular case, it would probably be best to advise the learner that there is a difference in usage (UK vs. North America). Personally, I would not be terribly surprised to find 'off of' used in a textbook written in the US.

 

[Shakespeare's brother]

Thank you Philly, I appreciate your comments.

(And really hope this thread doesn't go over three pages!)

 

[BobK]

Very short - shouldn't start a new page ;-) . I forget who first mentioned 'Can't take my eyes off of you', but I notice that some British English cover versions - whether intentionally or unthinkingly - 'repair' the grammar at the expense of the underlay, so that 'o-off' occupies two notes.

b

 

[Shakespeare's brother]

Thank you, Bob!

 

[riverkid]

Here's a further description/discussion of what standard versus nonstandard means.

Introduction. The American Heritage Book of English Usage. 1996

 

[riverkid]

Listening to Frankie Valli right this second.

You're just too good to be true, can't take my eyes offa you.


It just wouldn't be the same, it just wouldn't cut it without the 'of'. Emphasis for sure!!

 

[Tdol]

Andy Williams obviously was unfamiliar with the American Heritage Book of Usage when he did his cover. ;-)