2 grammar questions - how conjugate verb in participle phrase

[toc1000]

Can anyone explain why the writer chose the word "lose" instead of "loss" in the following sentence? - from an NBA fan site. I've had the question about such sentences for awhile, and did not find the answer in any grammar book.

"WOW, I never saw that many Lebron haters around there after this lose without Lebron playing."



And same for the following sentence - why "chronicle" instead of "chronic"?

"Actually, I think it's a good sign that they let Rose rest. Rose is young and just started, we don't want him to have chronicle issues with his knee."


Thanks to anyone who can explain the subtlety!

[Mckk]

Lose is a verb - you lose your pen, you lose a match. Loss is a noun - Jane can't cope with the loss of her husband.

As for chronic and chronicle - according to the OED:

Chronic - adjective

1(of an illness) persisting for a long time or constantly recurring:
chronic bronchitis
Often contrasted with acute.

(of a person) having a chronic illness:
a chronic asthmatic

(of a problem) long-lasting:
the school suffers from chronic overcrowding

(of a person) having a bad habit:
a chronic liar

Chronicle

noun
a factual written account of important or historical events in the order of their occurrence:
- a vast chronicle of Spanish history
- the rebels' demands for personal freedom are conspicuous in the chronicles
- a fictitious or factual work describing a series of events:
- a chronicle of his life during the war years

verb - [with object]
record (a series of events) in a factual and detailed way:
his work chronicles 20th-century migration

All four of these are different words. I don't know why you were looking at a grammar book at all. Try a dictionary!

[Erato]

^Exactly.

[mammamaia]

the use of 'lose' as a noun is common 'sport-speak'... the opposite of 'a win'...

the use of 'chronicle' for 'chronic' is simply a typo, or a glaring goof by a writer with poor writing skills...

[toc1000]

Lose is a verb - you lose your pen, you lose a match. Loss is a noun - Jane can't cope with the loss of her husband.

As for chronic and chronicle - according to the OED:

Chronic - adjective

1(of an illness) persisting for a long time or constantly recurring:
chronic bronchitis
Often contrasted with acute.

(of a person) having a chronic illness:
a chronic asthmatic

(of a problem) long-lasting:
the school suffers from chronic overcrowding

(of a person) having a bad habit:
a chronic liar

Chronicle

noun
a factual written account of important or historical events in the order of their occurrence:
- a vast chronicle of Spanish history
- the rebels' demands for personal freedom are conspicuous in the chronicles
- a fictitious or factual work describing a series of events:
- a chronicle of his life during the war years

verb - [with object]
record (a series of events) in a factual and detailed way:
his work chronicles 20th-century migration

All four of these are different words. I don't know why you were looking at a grammar book at all. Try a dictionary!

Yeah, I know they're different parts of speech, duh.

My question is, to repeat: Why does their rendition sound so right? And which is grammatically correct?

P.S. - I'm looking for the grammatical rule that is operative.

@mammamaia: The use of "chronicle" was an effective choice of word, not a typo.

[superpsycho]

I suspect it's a mistake, A case of the brain saying one thing and the hands doing another. It happens to me all the time.

[art]

Can anyone explain why the writer chose the word "lose" instead of "loss" in the following sentence? - from an NBA fan site. I've had the question about such sentences for awhile, and did not find the answer in any grammar book.

"WOW, I never saw that many Lebron haters around there after this lose without Lebron playing."



And same for the following sentence - why "chronicle" instead of "chronic"?

"Actually, I think it's a good sign that they let Rose rest. Rose is young and just started, we don't want him to have chronicle issues with his knee."


Thanks to anyone who can explain the subtlety!

1- Take a look at your keyboard. Attend to e's propinquity to s.

2- He perhaps meant to write chronical, which would be legitimate (but antiquated).

[toc1000]

1- Take a look at your keyboard. Attend to e's propinquity to s.

2- He perhaps meant to write chronical, which would be legitimate (but antiquated).

You'll notice that the sentences *actually read better* with "lose" and "chronicle", respectively.

And I've seen many better writers apply the same mysterious rule.

[Erato]

You'll notice that the sentences *actually read better* with "lose" and "chronicle", respectively.

I wouldn't have thought so. I believe that this is against grammatical rules. Why it's written this way I don't know; it's either ignorance or a typo or both.

[art]

You'll notice that the sentences *actually read better* with "lose" and "chronicle", respectively.

And I've seen many better writers apply the same mysterious rule.

Well, I prefer (the sound of) chronical to chronic there, but don't agree that lose sounds better (than loss).

I would like it if you could find examples of significant authors deploying this device.

[digitig]

You'll notice that the sentences *actually read better* with "lose" and "chronicle", respectively.

This is clearly an obscure meaning of "better" that means "worse". Something like the way "bad" meant "good" in the 1980s.

[Cogito]

Short answer - the writer blew it on both counts. Neither usage is correct English.

[digitig]

Short answer - the writer blew it on both counts. Neither usage is correct English.

As Mamma points out, "lose" in that sense is common slang use, and so is reasonable in an informal context. "Chronicle" seems to be simply a Malapropism.

[minstrel]

As Mamma points out, "lose" in that sense is common slang use, and so is reasonable in an informal context. "Chronicle" seems to be simply a Malapropism.

I'm a sports fan (not basketball, though), and I've never heard the word "lose" in that sense. It's not on ESPN, anyway, and I regard it as incorrect usage.

"Chronicle" is just wrong.

Toc1000, neither sentence reads better the way you have them. They read better with "loss" and "chronic" respectively. And they'd be grammatically correct.

[MVP]

Can anyone explain why the writer chose the word "lose" instead of "loss" in the following sentence? - from an NBA fan site. I've had the question about such sentences for awhile, and did not find the answer in any grammar book.

"WOW, I never saw that many Lebron haters around there after this lose without Lebron playing."

That is a sentence that has been typed exactly the way someone would say it. They way people speak English is usually grammatically incorrect compared to the written word-(and even the written word can be far reaching). What 'sounds' correct when read or spoken, does not mean it is executed properly. Slang is everywhere. As far as grammar accuracy of that sentence, the whole thing is a piece of crap.

And same for the following sentence - why "chronicle" instead of "chronic"?

"Actually, I think it's a good sign that they let Rose rest. Rose is young and just started, we don't want him to have chronicle issues with his knee."

They meant chronic. Its a term to describe a medical condition in opposition to acute.

[lorilee]

Can anyone explain why the writer chose the word "lose" instead of "loss" in the following sentence? - from an NBA fan site. I've had the question about such sentences for awhile, and did not find the answer in any grammar book.

"WOW, I never saw that many Lebron haters around there after this lose without Lebron playing."



And same for the following sentence - why "chronicle" instead of "chronic"?

"Actually, I think it's a good sign that they let Rose rest. Rose is young and just started, we don't want him to have chronicle issues with his knee."


Thanks to anyone who can explain the subtlety!

no subtlety there, just the wrong word on both counts. LOSE the verb instead of LOSS the noun and CHRONICLE the noun instead of CHRONIC the adjective. At least lose and loss have similar meaning, chronic and chronicle don't even come close. As toc1000 said, they're just different words (or maybe those writers wood say their different words LOL)

[mammamaia]

@mammamaia: The use of "chronicle" was an effective choice of word, not a typo.

sorry, but that makes no sense whatsoever... there is no meaning of the word 'chronicle' that can possibly apply to an injury, in an adjectival or qualifying sense... so how on earth can it be an 'effective choice'?

and i said it was 'either a typo, or a glaring goof'...

[madhoca]

Actually, it could have been a typo. A typo that was auto-corrected on Word's spell and grammar check.
e.g. the writer typed 'chronicv', which was a slip of the finger on the keyboard to hit the neighbouring key (I do that frequently when I'm in a frenzy). It was flagged, and the suggestion 'chronical' appeared. Sloppy editing. The writer must have meant 'chronic' because it's the only possible word here, 'chronicle' makes the sentence complete nonsense.

Come on guys, surely we can agree that 'a lose' is slang only. We talk about companies making 'a loss', for example, not 'a lose'. But I can well believe it's used in sports vocab.

[mammamaia]

sportscasters have been using it thus for as long as i've been hearing it, at least [close to 7 decades!]... ask vin scully, red barber, curt gowdy, or howard cosell what a 'lose' is and they'll be glad to explain it to you... or would, if all but vin weren't now calling the plays up in that great ballfield in the sky...

[toc1000]

In hindsight, what struck me about the sentence is, it really reads:

"We wouldn't want him to have one of those injury-plagued careers, with a never-ending list of injuries." Rather than:

"His knee is at risk of a chronic condition."

Emphasis on 'career' rather than 'injury'.