# A new standard for lameness in the Pit- Tarantula, who, and that **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 20, 2003, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133 "2003-06-20T11:48:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/21 "2003-06-20T13:53:57Z")
This thread is a veritable font of **Gaudere’s Law** in action. ---
**Author:** ![Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aslan_of_Narnia)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/22 "2003-06-20T14:03:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Neurotik \* > \*\*One hopes, **SkipMagic** , one hopes. \*\* I am quite sure that you meant to say “hop”, indicating that one hops, much like a bunny rabbit on it’s way to deliver chocolate. Please spell check all posts before posting, or I will have to take up some sort of complaint with the administration for jerkish behaviour on your part.\* \ ***REPORTED!** ---
**Author:** ![Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/db5fbb/32.png) [@Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fred)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/23 "2003-06-20T14:16:30Z")
You should probably be pitting **Tarantula** for being such an asshole rather than for any grammar mistakes on his part. There’s little that would justify a post in GQ that consists entirely of calling another poster an idiot and his post bullshit. Certainly a minor grammar error doesn’t fit the bill. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/24 "2003-06-20T14:42:50Z")
I shall never again attempt to defend someone’s grammar\* or punctuation. Clearly the comma to which **sugaree** objected was accidental, rather than a stylistic choice. - Or their gammar either. ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/25 "2003-06-20T14:48:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tarantula \* > \*\*\*\*Sugaree **- you’re just fucking wrong. It pisses me off no end, when people cannot string a sentence together.** As usual in grammar debates, people fail to take into account the regional differences in the use of the English language. For example, regarding the use of _who_ or _that_ with a human antecedent, Bryan Garner’s _A Dictionary of Modern American Usage_ has this to say: > [@](#): > > _That_, of course, is permissible when referrring to humans: _the people that were present_ or _the people who were present_. Editors tend, however, to prefer the latter phrasing. > > (p. 695) The standard dictionary of English usage, _Fowler’s Modern English Usage_ (third edition), edited by R.W. Burchfield, is, as usual, somewhat more prescriptive: > [@](#): > > Down through the centuries, _that_ has often been used with a human antecedent. Chaucer, Langland, and Wyclif are all cited in the _OED_ using _that_ in this way, and examples are also given for writers in each of the later centuries. The 20C. abounds with writers who keep to the rule that only _who_ is appropriate when the antecedent is human (whether a specified person or one representative of a class)… > > _Summary_. Normally use _who_ as the relative pronoun following a human antecedent and _that_ (or _which_) following an inanimate antecedent. Either _who_ or _that_ may be used when the antecedent is animate but not human, or when the antecedent is human but representative of a class or is an indefinite pronoun. > > (p. 773) We should probably give **Tarantula** the benefit of the doubt on this issue, and assume that he or she prefers the more prescriptive English usage rules. We need not, however, excuse his or her assholish behaviour in the other thread, where the grammar nazism on display was unnecessary and petty. We also need not excuse **Tarantula** ’s ignorance regarding usage of the English language in other parts of the world–if you’re going to be a grammar nazi on an international bulletin board, it would behoove you to read up a bit on the global variations in English usage. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Tarantula_ > **And in case your lame-ass IQ couldn’t pick it up, I was correcting gammar, not punctuation.** Actually, as others have already pointed out, your post in the other thread specifically stated: “Only idiots cannot punctuate correctly.” And, by the way, it’s “grammar,” not “gammar.” :wally ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/26 "2003-06-20T15:03:24Z")
A lot of people have overlooked another of Tarantula’s errors: > [@](#): > > It pisses me off no end Shouldn’t there be a “to” in there? Just wanted to be thorough. ---
**Author:** ![carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9de0a6/32.png) [@carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrot)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/27 "2003-06-20T15:08:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Aslan2 \* > a bunny rabbit on **it’s** way Its. ---
**Author:** ![Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aslan_of_Narnia)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/28 "2003-06-20T15:12:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by carrot \* > \*\*Its. \*\* Thanks. I was always confused as to if it was “its” or “it’s”. ---
**Author:** ![carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9de0a6/32.png) [@carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrot)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/29 "2003-06-20T15:18:07Z")
**Aslan2** , just remember: if you can replace the word with “it is”, then it should be “it’s”. Otherwise, it’s its. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/30 "2003-06-20T15:22:36Z")
> [@](#): > > **Tarantula** : It pisses me off no end > > **Munch** : Shouldn’t there be a “to” in there? Just wanted to be thorough. Hey, acceptable construction; “off” is a perfectly good preposition. Obviously, what he means to say is that no end exists off which he is pissed. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/31 "2003-06-20T15:30:55Z")
Yes, but shouldn’t it be “pisses me off _to_ no end?” ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/32 "2003-06-20T15:59:53Z")
Yes, if as you construe, it means “…pisses me off indefinitely.” My point was that, as written, he was likening himself to urine and suggesting that there was no such thing as “an end” from which he was (being) pissed. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![sugaree](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@sugaree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sugaree)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/33 "2003-06-20T16:00:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > \*\*Having said that, I want to pick a nit in the OP. The no-comma-after-verb “rule” is also not a valid one, and **Tarantula** ’s reconstruction is not in error in using it. \*\* **Poly** , the charming and insightful **Tarantula** did not violate some nonexistent no-comma-after-verb rule; he violated an extremely valid no-comma-between-subject-and-verb. Please note Rule 9 [here](http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm). Look at his sentence: “he said the reason why it is impossible for people to be racist against whites, is that only white people are in the position of social power needed to enable them to act upon their racism .” Keep in mind that it is very intricate, containing several pairs of subjects and predicates, but clearly the offending comma has been inserted between the subject “reason” and its predicate “is.” I am referring, of course, to the “is” that comes after the comma. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SkipMagic \* > **"… any teacher of English** ; h\*\*owever, you used a superfluous…" > \*\* Nonsense, **SkipMagic**. “However” has other functions besides that of conjunctive adverb. It is perfectly acceptable as an introductory element. I did not want that to be one sentence; I wanted it to be two. In fact, I feel that my writing relies far too heavily on compound sentences. I love semicolons, but I’m trying to cut back. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Tarantula_ > \*\* Yeah - whatever. My punctuation, as Polycarp agreed was fine. > > This is the most stupid thread ever. > > No doubt started by one of the most stupid people ever. > \*\* I thought that the title of my OP and my post in the General Questions thread indicated that I only wanted a discussion about grammar and punctuation. I meant you no harm. As it is, both "Yeah - whatever."and “No doubt started by one of the most stupid people ever.” are sentence fragments. ---
**Author:** ![SkipMagic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skipmagic/32/20706_2.png) [@SkipMagic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SkipMagic)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/34 "2003-06-20T16:44:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sugaree \* > **Nonsense, SkipMagic. “However” has other functions besides that of conjunctive adverb. It is perfectly acceptable as an introductory element. I did not want that to be one sentence; I wanted it to be two. In fact, I feel that my writing relies far too heavily on compound sentences. I love semicolons, but I’m trying to cut back.** Now, just so this is cleared up right away (in case you have any doubt), I want you to know that I was just joking with you when I posted that “correction.” I really wasn’t taking any serious pot-shots at you. That said, **sugaree** , even though you purposely split the original compound sentence into two, your use of “however”–although largely a style choice in informal writing–was still incorrect. While “however” does indeed function as more than a subjunctive adverb, the use of “however” to start the next sentence fit none of the other functions. All it did was make your second sentence choppy and somewhat awkward to read. Personally, I prefer longer, compound sentences (cut back on semicolons… noooooooo!); so while it’s perfectly acceptable to begin a sentence with “however” (in its subjunctive adverb function) informally, I try to stray away from doing so. (I’ve probably failed on a daily basis, but who wants to point that out in a thread like this one? ;)) However I choose to use it in the future, though, I sure hope I don’t have snarky nutjob like **SkipMagic** point out my error. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Wolfian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/7ea924/32.png) [@Wolfian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolfian)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/35 "2003-06-20T17:27:24Z")
Romanes eunt domus. -It had to be said. **Asian2** : Gammar rays? LOL. Well played. ---
**Author:** ![Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aslan_of_Narnia)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/36 "2003-06-20T17:32:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Wolfian \* > \*\*Romanes eunt domus. > -It had to be said. > **Asian2** : Gammar rays? LOL. Well played. \*\* Aslan2. Aslan being a character in the popular childrens series The Narnia Chronicles. And thanks. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![SkipMagic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skipmagic/32/20706_2.png) [@SkipMagic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SkipMagic)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/37 "2003-06-20T17:34:09Z")
“No, not dative! Not the dative, sir! No! The… accusative, accusative! _Domum_, sir, _ad domum_!” ---
**Author:** ![Qazzz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/aeb1de/32.png) [@Qazzz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qazzz)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/38 "2003-06-20T17:44:49Z")
You guys are too fucking funny. I love it love it love it. 🙂 I especially love Asian2’s hopping, chocolate-delivering bunny. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9de0a6/32.png) [@carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrot)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/39 "2003-06-20T17:48:37Z")
“People called Romanes they go the house?” ---
**Author:** ![carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9de0a6/32.png) [@carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrot)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2003, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133/40 "2003-06-20T17:49:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Qazzz \* > **Asian2’s** Now you’re just doing it on purpose. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-new-standard-for-lameness-in-the-pit-tarantula-who-and-that/183133.md?page=3)