<p>I have recently noticed the following phrase being used to refer to more than one object, time period, etc: “I haven’t seen him in a couple years.”</p>
<p>I need a couple things at the grocery store."</p>
<p>Shouldn’t there be an “of” following the word “couple”???</p>
<p>Has this usage become an accepted colloquialism or abbreviation while I wasn’t paying attention???</p>
<p>All of you hypereducated grammar mavens out there–I’m looking to you!</p>
<p>Theoretically, yes, there should be an “of” following “couple” in standard English. </p>
<p>However, language changes, and while some would argue that we should try to preserve or protect the English language as it is, the fact is that language will change regardless of what grammar mavens tell us to do. As of now, it seems to me that this usage is colloquial only, but perhaps in ten or twenty years it will join the ranks of the many other idiosyncrasies we find in English.</p>
<p>Etselec, I agree with you about the changing nature of the English language, but I see this phrase in writing as well. Spoken English is one thing, but this CAN’T be acceptable in any kind of written form other than im’s and text messages—can it???</p>
<p>“A couple of” is a colloquial, informal phrase anyway, and obviously imprecise and even misleading (since in this context “a couple” rarely means “no more or less than two”). You are unlikely to come across it in any kind of formal writing, unless the writer is trying to mimic the tone and phrasing of informal, oral usage. So I don’t think written vs. spoken is a meaningful distinction for this issue.</p>
<p>Grammar Hotline:
[ELI</a> Grammar Hotline](<a href=“http://www.udel.edu/eli/grammar.html]ELI”>http://www.udel.edu/eli/grammar.html)</p>
<p>Most linguists would tell you that there’s no such thing as a grammatical error in the casual, colloquial speech of a native speaker, because correct colloquial grammar is defined by the intuitions of native speakers. If someone else’s colloquial English sounds wrong to you, then you’re probably speaking different dialects.</p>
<p>I’m a major grammar nerd when it comes to written English (or, say, presidential press conferences), but when people are describing what they need at the grocery store…I’m with the linguists.</p>
<p>Then you must love President Bush. I should have asked you to edit my college app essay, Hanna : (.</p>
<p>“The correct expression is ‘in a couple of minutes’ in formal speaking and writing…” </p>
<p>Is that really the suggestion? In FORMAL writing??</p>
<p>I’m with JHS on that one.</p>
<p>What’s the matter with “in a few…”?</p>
<p>Formal writing–</p>
<p>“in 2.0 minutes”</p>
<p>LMNOP - 
I think you mean “in two point zero minutes”.</p>
<p>Thank you binx for the correction–of course, in formal writing, 1 mustn’t use numbers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, one mustn’t use them for one-digit numbers. More than one digit numbers should be written with numerals. Example: I took my six dogs to the park, where they joined 56 other dogs.</p>
<p>Or in more modern, yet still formal, usage:
“in two dot oh minutes.”</p>
<p>I would say that one shouldn’t use numerals in formal writing.</p>
<p>this dicussion’s pointless. but i’m having fun. go on guys…wooooohooooo</p>