Talk:First-come, first-served

Gaming

Surely any limited-stock item for sale will be first come first served? Unless people think games consoles are a particularly good example of the concept, maybe that bit should go. Johnny E (talk) 12:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Grammar

That it should correctly be "first-come, first-served" may well be true, but there are good reasons why you might decide that it ought to be "first come, first serve" even if that is grammatically incorrect, for example because that is the more common usage. The explanation as it stands in any case strikes me as dubious, partly because it is using the continuous tense, and should perhaps be referenced. Hutchinson's has "first-come, first-serve."

None of this accounts for the hyphens, which would only make sense if the expression was adjectival, as in "on a first-come, first-serve (adj.) basis (noun)."

Google is no help as it won't account for hyphens or whether the d should be there or no. Has anybody got an old-fashioned Oxford dictionary, on paper?Sartoresartus (talk) 08:26, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Here is the content from OED Online. There are 2 hits on the search (none for first come first serve, by the way): 1. first come, first served in first, adj. (and n.2) and adv. . . . b. proverb. first come, first served. Also as attrib. phr.

• ?1542 - H. Brinkelow Complaynt Roderyck Mors xvii. sig. E3, First come, first serued: so one or ij. shal be all payed, and the rest shal haue nothyng.
• 1632 - P. Massinger Maid of Honour i. ii. sig. C3, And you know First come first seru'd.
• 1860 - Macmillan's Mag. June 113 The sailors . . rushed away to the boat. First come, first in.
• 1887 - Times (weekly ed.) 24 June 7/4 It was . . a case of first come, first served.
• 1960 - R. B. Gregg Power of Nonviolence (ed. 2) i. 38 Passengers were seated on a first-come, first-served basis.
• 1964 - Sun (Brisbane) 23 July 9/1 The Administration Bill would substitute the quota system with one based on a first-come, first-served basis.

2. first come, first served in serve, v.1 . . . d. Proverbs. to serve with (or †of) the same sauce: see sauce n. 3a first come, first served (also used with reference to sense 35).

• 1523 - Ld. Berners tr. J. Froissart Chron. I. ccccxv. 726 If the flemynges had achyued the prise ouer them, they had bene serued of the same sauce.
• ?1542 - H. Brinkelow Complaynt Roderyck Mors xvii. sig. E3, First come, first serued: so one or ij. shal be all payed, and the rest shal haue nothyng.
• 1583 - A. Golding tr. J. Calvin Serm. on Deut. cxv. 707 That hee which hath gone about to do his neighbour harme shall be serued of the same sawce himselfe.
• a1722 - J. Lauder Decisions (1759) I. 9 They must wait their tour‥; and he that's first ready must be first served.
• 1837 - T. Carlyle French Revol. I. vi. iv. 323 Their long strings of purchasers, arranged in tail, so that the first come be the first served,—were the shop once open.

I accessed it through my library (I am Adjunct English Faculty), so the link probably won't work. But here it is: http://www.oed.com.ezproxy.uvu.edu/search?searchType=dictionary&q=first+come+first+served&_searchBtn=Search Garrettwinn (talk) 22:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Don't understand this section, is someone actually claiming that "first come, first serve" is commonly used - 'fraid not, it's always "first come, first served" in my 50 some years of experience.

As of March 4, 2013, "first come first serve" gets 3,770,000 Google results, and "first come first served" gets 5,090,000. On this basis I would advocate for a less normative main entry. scottgwald (talk) 23:46, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I definitely often hear and say "first come first serve" but I think the grammar section of this article is prescriptivistic and should be removed. It contributes nothing and would probably be considered "wrong" by linguists, as opposed to grammar nazis. 205.175.97.219 (talk) 02:06, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I myself am unclear which use is "best practice" but user Gnom provides no cite for the etymology he claims is the basis for "first-come, first-served" being "correct". Like others before me, I can think of other derivations. Hypnopompus (talk) 21:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

"First come, first serve" might make sense on a tennis court, but is grammatically incorrect when used at a restaurant or barber shop, and reflects a less developed degree of literacy. It is the same phenomenon as the phrase "cut and dried" being misspoken as "cut and dry". The dropping of the "-ed" is a notable phenomenon on the internet, where people write, "You are bias", or, "He is prejudice." It goes with the decline of the adverb, e.g, "Don't take it personal". It's not as bad as "prolly", "liberry", and "burfday", but getting there. Sometimes bad English becomes entrenched for so long that it becomes accepted. For example, the incorrect use of "anymore" to describe non-negatives seems accepted in some regions, as in, "Since I got my new shoes, I've been walking a lot anymore." Whether there is a name for this phenomenon - the normalization of incorrect English - is something that needs looking into.77Mike77 (talk) 20:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay, other examples

This article states: "The practice is also common among some airlines" - some airlines? Is there any other airline besides SWA that does this? If so, please give some examples - never seen it anywhere else so mainly just curious.