Hello Mr. Canadjun, I thank you for your response.
I believe the spelling of the word is “necessity”.
J. Johan Pallen.
Hello Mr. John W. Kennedy, I thank you for your response.
The noun wakefulness is the word that I had intended to use. I apologise for that mistake.
I should have stated that the noun “death” is similar in its syntax to the noun “wakefulness”.
My comparing of the word “death” to the word “wakefulness” is limited to the extent that each word is an uncountable noun to.
It seems to me that there is not much consensus about the use of the uncountable noun “death”.
I hope that this explanation will suffice.
The subject of a statement takes the plural form.
The subject “baby” takes the plural form “babies”.
The condition of the subject does not take a plural form.
The uncountable noun “death” does not take the plural form.
The omitting of the subject from the statement does not change this.
I thank you, Mr. Kennedy.
J. Johan Pallen.
Hello Mr. JJohanPallen, I thank you for your response.
You are, without a doubt, my favorite poster.
I do not know how to say this any more plainly:
You are obviously not a native speaker of English.
Your English, although far from execrable, is not especially good. (Lena Meyer-Landrut, for example, speaks better English than you.)
Your attempts to correct the grammar of people who do speak English are laughable.
JJohanPallen said:
Humane: you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Really, you know this about every woman? :dubious:
Language is not always logical. Colloquially plenty of people will use the pronoun “they” for an unspecified single person. This is because English does not have an unspecified gender single pronoun other than “it”, which feels wrong when discussing adults. However, babies are a different class of person. “It” is an acceptable referent when the gender is unknown.
Incorrect.
The word can refer to the process (at the end of life comes death) or it can refer to individual instances of the process. In this second use, it is permissible to count instances of deaths.
And I have to say, it’s rather annoying to be lectured about the proper use of the English language from someone who is making up his own rules (humane, anim).
Is it just me, or is reality leaking again? :dubious:
You’re welcome Mr. Pallen. You have no need to apologize. I merely addressed the use of the word ‘awake’ as a noun, in any context. I appreciate your posting, which I take for what it conveys to me.
Thanks,
Ed
“I reject your reality and substitute my own.”
To Mr. John W. Kennedy,
I apologise if the standard of my communication in English offends you.
I have provide an explanation of the manner that wrong statements are wrong to.
I assumed, in responding to your comment, that you are a well educated member of the human group.
If my assumption about you is wrong, please inform me. I will apologise.
How is the manner that I am applying English in wrong?.
Please explain my mistake/mistakes in the manner that I have explained Mr. Cecil Adams’ fabricating of the plural form of the condition death.
You have stated that “You are obviously not a native speaker of English”.
To whom is it obvious?.
Are you willing to bet £100.00 that it is a fact that I am not a native speaker of English?.
Who is Lena Meyer-Landrut?. Does she communicate in our humane language?.
I have stated that the condition “death” does not take the plural form.
Does Lena Meyer-Landrut disagree?.
J. Johan Pallen.
To Mr. John W. Kennedy,
I apologise if the standard of my communication in English offends you.
I have provide an explanation of the manner that wrong statements are wrong to.
I assumed, in responding to your comment, that you are a well educated member of the human group.
If my assumption about you is wrong, please inform me. I will apologise.
How is the manner that I am applying English in wrong?.
Please explain my mistake/mistakes in the manner that I have explained Mr. Cecil Adams’ fabricating of the plural form of the condition death.
You have stated that “You are obviously not a native speaker of English”.
To whom is it obvious?.
Are you willing to bet £100.00 that it is a fact that I am not a native speaker of English?.
Who is Lena Meyer-Landrut?. Does she communicate in our humane language?.
I have stated that the condition “death” does not take the plural form.
Does Lena Meyer-Landrut disagree?.
I am making an attempt to rectify the wrong manner that human forms communicate their humane language(their psycholoigy) in.
If a male human form’s entitlement to the pronouns “he, his, him, himself” is part of his humanity, then we must acknowledge his entitlement whether he is a baby or a boy or a man or an elderly man.
If a female human form’s entitlement to the pronouns “she, hers, her, herself” is part of her humanity, then we must acknowledge her entitlement whether she is a baby or a girl or a woman or an elderly woman.
I am asserting that we must exhibit our humanity in the way that we refer to our human children in.
I am asserting that our referring to our children as “he, his” or “she, her” is an exhibition of our humane psychology, a code.
We must exhibit our humane psychology whether we communicate in English or Japanese or French or German.
Respect for the humanity of our own children is the same whether we express it in English or Japanese or French or German.
How does our exhibiting of our humane psychology in this manner offend you?.
How does our referring to a human child as he/she offend you?.
What are you losing?.
J. Johan Pallen.
I wonder how Mr. Cecil Adams got his fabrication into Merriam-Webster:
He, or accomplices I suppose, have also managed to get this fabrication into the physical dictionaries in my home.
The mistake you are making is that you’re not presenting any evidence that your position is right, which makes you look extremely foolish when plenty of evidence exists that your position is completely wrong.
I have provided an explanation of the standard ** that erroneous ** statements are wrong to.
How is the manner in which I am applying English wrong.
Please explain my mistake/mistakes in the manner in which ** I have explained Mr. Cecil Adams’ fabrication** of the plural form of the condition death.
To me. I’m guessing you’re from the subcontinent, right?
Depends how you define “native speaker”. English is one of India’s official languages for example, and many children learn it from infancy, but they are not native speakers for all that.
Let me put it this way: it is clear that you were not raised with English as your primary language of both literacy speech.
I am making an attempt to rectify the wrong manner *which *human forms communicate their humane language (their psychology) in
I am asserting that we must exhibit our humanity in the way that we refer to our human children**.**
Hey, I’m the only one allowed to insult JWK that way.
This is a perfect example of your poor grasp of the grammar of English.
It should be “have provided,” not “have provide.” (But “have provide” is commong among non-native speakers.)
“The manner that wrong statements are wrong to” barely makes sense. Nothing is ever “wrong to a manner.” You’re trying to say something like:
“I have provided an explanation of the the standard that incorrect statements fail to satisfy.”
Again, a very typical example of incorrect grammar that one finds from non-native speakers. You’re lookinng for “How is the manner in which I am applying English wrong?” And even this isn’t that good. We don’t typically talk in terms of “applying” a language. Better would be “How is the manner in which I am writing in English wrong?”
And all of that is oddly phrased anyway. A native speaker would typically say “In what way am I using poor English?” or something along those lines.
Blake suggests you may be from the sub-continent. That makes you possibly a native speaker of a dialect of English. But it is a dialect different in a lot of ways from Standard English, which there is nothing wrong with, but which does obviate your claims to be explaining standard English. There’s a certain flavor of English which is conventionally “standard,” and the flavor you’re describing ain’t it.
This thread contains some of the hands-down goofiest material I’ve read in a long time. The OP’s writing sounds like it’s been synthesized by a computer. I keep hearing HAL’s voice in my head when I read it.
Well, at any rate, please tell Mr. Malin that I think his bureau is beautiful. 
I’m not sure where J. Johan Pallen is from, but the way that he writes is not that of an educated speaker of English from India. It’s possible that he’s from India, but his English would be considered substandard there as well. I’ve just done a search on “JJohanPallen” and “J. Johan Pallen” and found several posts to various message boards. He does somewhat better on his grammar in those posts. In one he claims to be from the U.K. That’s not the writing style of an educated English speaker from the U.K. either. I think that he’s probably born in some non-English speaking country and is not a native English speaker. I won’t comment on the plausiblility of his ideas.
JJohanPallen, why don’t you just tell us where you live now, where you’ve lived in your life, what languages you’ve spoken, and when you learned English? We’re going to keep commenting on your strange writing style until you do. Once you’ve resolved that, we can get to the matter of your ideas.
Actually, I think a native American might say something like, “How is my English crap?” and might precede that with an obscenity (e.g., F you).
And assuming that your assumption is correct that JJohanPallen is from the Subcontinent, he might consider himself a “native English speaker” since English is spoken and taught from a young age there, but it’s not the same as American English. It does bear some resemblance to British English, but it’s different enough to be unique. (For one example, the use of “homely” in Indian matrimonial ads. In the US, calling a woman homely would not be complimenting her.)
As I said, no well-educated English-speaker from India would use the particular grammatical phrases that JJohanPallen does. The English of India does differ from American and British English, but it doesn’t resemble the way that he is writing. I just searched on his E-mail address, and I found a second post to a message board which seems to indicate that he is (or at least claims to be) living in the U.K. The way that he is writing is not that of any educated English speaker from anywhere.
He’s clearly not North American, since he offered a £100.00 bet.
Even his grammatically correct English sounds like it has gone through a translation program in places - “I assumed, in responding to your comment, that you are a well educated member of the human group.” …of the human group ??!!
His use of the adjective humane when he presumably means the adjective human also makes me wonder.