In a recent episode, he said "from whence." "Whence" means "where from" or "from where." So "from whence" is redundant.

A while back he use the expression "that begs the question" in the wrong way that everybody uses it. If that raises a question don't say it begs the question. That means "that assumes the premise in the conclusion," which is not what you mean when you raise a question.

Marshall is kind of a Cliff Claven (from "Cheers") in that he is a know-it-all who does not always know it all.

Well actually it's the script writers fault. Not the character. Unless it was done on purpose. And if it was, than we probably shouldn't be concered.

"Idioms"

I think Marshall should be given a break for an occasional faux pau. After all, he was the victim of a vicious shuttlecock injury in college.

John

Yeah, I figured it was the writers’ fault because pretending it is really the character’s quirk is a bit too subtle to be believed.

“Begging the question” has indeed become an idiomatic phrase, but it comes from misunderstanding a bad translation of the Latin phrase “petitio principii” which should be translated something like “pleading the premise.” Translating it as “begging the question” makes people think it refers to the kind of question that you ask rather than the kind of question encountered by debating teams: i.e., “Resolved: The Electoral College should be abolished.” “Principia,” in this usage, is not so much a question as it is an issue or premise. I happen to think that saying “raise the question”—when that’s what is meant—is not only correct but easy to do and easy to understand.

Actually, from whence is perfectly acceptable and not considered redundant when used as an adverb, as is used by Marshall in that episode.

That's funny.

How about. There are words and phases that, although they are grammatically incorrect, have become "acceptable" through usage. For example, we say, "data are" instead of "data is" even though when used as a word "data" is singular.

"From whence" is not something we working-stiffs are likely to drop into a conversation. But, it is something that isn't ear-piercing among those whose prowess (academically speaking) kicks them up a few notches on the intellectual-food-chain (Marshall?).

In other words, if I heard one of my buds use the term "from whence", or even the word "whence" I'd suspect body snatching. But, if I heard it in a lecture hall, I wouldn't give it a second thought.

I spend my days searching for redundancies and correcting data is to data are. (Datum is actually the singular, but I would never correct a nonacademic on it. Not worth the effort.) I'm just excited that lay vs. lie is used correctly and that Marshall hardly ever ends his sentences with prepositions.

I completely blame the day job.

Let me clarify.

I said that the “word” was singular—not the meaning of the word. The word is singular in that it does not take on any of the characteristics of a plural—“es”/“s”. Which is why, no doubt, folks tend to put “is” after it instead of “are”.

Even down here in Slowville, we know the difference between “data” and “datum”.

I apologize for having misunderstood your discourse. I was not trying to be denigrating in anyway; I walk authors through this error every week.