No entiendo que "original holder" significa.
Quote:
How about "if I was you", "I ain't", "I don't have no money" or "a whole nother apple"?
|
Well, those are dialectal. They don't exist in my dialect at all (nobody uses those forms here, even poor and/or educated people), so they aren't really in the same "league" as "I agree" vs. "I concur." Agree and concur to me are synonyms. There is no difference in meaning. They would be used in the same contexts, in the same way as Spanish has "Me llamo Alec Cowan" and "Llamome Alec Cowen". There is no situation I would ever need to use the word "concur" over the word "agree", not even if I was talking to Queen Elizabeth. But if someone used the word "concur", there wouldn't even be a hint of a difference in meaning, any more than "Me llamo" and "Llamome" has. It would just sound a bit sepia toned, as you put it. So when you said that "Estoy de acuerdo" and "Me sumo" mean "I agree" and "I concur", I couldn't pick out any difference in meaning of those two in English, although in Spanish they obviously mean subtly different things.
Quote:
agree is just as Latinate as concur
|
Yes, but it comes via French. Not to mention that just the way it looks, it looks like it could be an Anglo-Saxon word, even though it isn't.
Interesting thing about agree:
Dictionary.com has an additional definition:
10.
"Chiefly British . to consent to or concur with: We agree the stipulations. I must agree your plans. "
Both of those sound
completely incorrect to my American ears.
We could say "We agree," but not "We agree the stipulations." We would say "We agree to the stipulations." As for "I must agree your plans," I have no idea what that means. Can someone explain? Is it the same as "I agree with your plans?" Why is the "must" in there?