Alright, I'm going to do this ONCE. Ya hear? ONLY ONCE.

The BBQ Pit
41

You were correct.

Hey, I said I believed the correct usage was “your’s.” And I also admitted my suckiness in the realm of style.

From The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White:

That book was stuffed down into one of my book bags for so long, it almost qualified as a time capsule. I really should have it out on my desk.

Uh … actualllly … this was all a ploy on my part, to show you aren’t as safe in your knowledge of style as you think. Yeah; that’s it. The fact you got scared proves it.

  • ahem *
42

Sorry, sparta, looks like we’re losing the battle on this one.

Usage Experts Change Their Minds**
[/QUOTE]

43

Proper Bostonian lady hops into a cab at the airport in NY, states her destination, then asks “Do you know where a person can get a good scrod around here?”
The taxi driver, stunned, whirls around, looks at the lady, and says, “Lady, I been pushin’ a hack for twenty years, and I ain’t never heard it in the past plupoifect before!”

::Ducks & runs::

44

Why, I couldn’t agree with you more, Anth. The only thing worse than an inappropriately overused semicolon is, of course, an inappropriately overused colon. :stuck_out_tongue:

Welcome Home!!! ( had to throw in a coupla-nine exclamation points ).

<<Chanting, Go Grimace, Go Grimace >>

Cartooniverse

45

May I add another?

When a particular fact or conclusion leads to a further line of inquiry, it does not “beg the question”. Begging the question has a specific meaning, along the lines of “the fallacy of founding a conclusion on a basis that as much needs to be proved as the conclusion itself.” The only reason this grates on me so is that I never see this phrase used correctly. I’ve seen (and heard) it used incorrectly numerous times in real life, on these boards, and (most irritatingly) by journalists who ought to know better

46

Well, another one I seem to be losing is decimate.
The original (and correct) meaning was “to reduce by 1/10th”. Yet CNN keeps talking about things being “completely decimated”; maybe someone has confused it with “devastate”. Shit, they both begin “de…”
Hey people, especially you technical shitweasels who expect me to hire you – learn the difference between principle and principal. If you were (as your lying resume claims) a “Principle Software Engineer”, you would probably know how to spell the fucking job title. Don’t argue with me that since I knew what you meant, the spelling didn’t matter. Last I checked, computers tend to care a lot about spelling! [sub]Waiting for Jeremy’s Evil Twin to blame THAT on Bill Gates, too[/sub]

Scruff

47

Hey! This is actually in the Associated Press Stylebook! But I’ve never heard of it being a general rule before! Are you sure about this?!

48

I’m surprised nobody has mentioned the lay/lie problem. Has that battle already been lost?

Lie is an intransitive verb; i.e., it takes no object.
Lay is a transitive verb. It requires an object.

The past tense of lie is lay.
The past tense of lay is laid.

E.g., Bob lay on his bed wondering where he laid his car keys.
Note also that i.e., the abbreviation for the latin phrase id est, means “that is”. E.g., the abbreviation for the latin phrase exempli gratia, means “for example”.

49

Whew, you gave me quite a fright there, young man. Always trust your instincts, or some shit like that, eh?

50

Here’s one for you . . .

Less never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever refers to a numerical quantity. Ever. Ever. Fewer does. Thus,

Bob is less intelligent than I.
Bob therefore has fewer brain cells than I.

One can numerically quantify brain cells (I have 4,234,251,134). Not intelligence.

And regarding that number: according to MLA style (and straight out th’handbook, this is), numbers that can be written out in one or two words (e.g. twenty-four, seventy-six, eight) should be, while numbers that cannot (e.g. four billion, two hundred and thirty-four million, two hundred and fifty-one thousand, one hundred and thirty-four) most definitely should not. That’s how I’d always learned it in school, too.

Which leads me to my next point:
The appropriate ending to the preceding examples was, in fact, I. To say that “Bob is less intelligent than me” would have proved me wrong. The only reason that those sentences work is because of an implied am. That is to say, the complete sentence would be “Bob is less intelligent than I am.” Does “me am” work? Not if you don’t want me to shove a pencil through your eye socket.

Thank you for this, Friedo. Thank you very, very, very much.

Like Milossarian, I constantly violate many of these rules. This is because I belong to what I refer to as the Modern School of Grammar. Modern artists, y’see, were those who had the technical knowledge and training to represent reality appropriately. They could do realistic art. They just chose not to. Ditto for grammar. I know the rules. That’s why I can break 'em.

I therefore reserve the right to arbitrarily and doubly contract.

What, you ask, is a double contraction? Well, if I’d’ve thought of it earlier, I’d’ve let you know before I went t’th’store. (I’d’ve here not meaning “I had have,” which would make me stupid, but “I would have,” which makes me lazy.) I’ve also been known to contract words for no reason–I’m particularly fond of t’morrow. The wise will observe that I’m not even cutting keystrokes with that one. Just general laziness principles.

51

The speaker implies. The listener infers.

I once heard someone on a radio talk show who called herself “The Grammar Police” make this error. Just as the show was ending, so I couldn’t phone up and scream, of course.

52

Oh, and one more thing: It DOES matter where in the sentence you place the modifier.

From one of my students’ papers about the film American History X: “After being raped in prison, the audience begins to feel sympathy for Derek.”

53

chosing to be the villian in this, are’nt you?

54

OK, here’s some more shit.

  1. “Quote” is not a noun. You cannot have a quote. You can quote a person; you can quote a document. If you do so, then you have a quotation.

  2. In formal writing, you should never include sentences written in the passive voice. Thus:

“Bob took a shit on the new sofa.” Correct.
“The sofa was shit upon by Bob.” Correct, but should be avoided, because Friedo doesn’t like it.

And, I can’t believe I actually forgot this one in my OP:

  1. USE CAPITAL LETTERS, DICKSMACK! A sentence starts with a capital letter. A proper noun starts with a capital letter. Yes, ass-breath, I know how difficult it is to reach all the way to the shift key while straining your poor little hands to press the letter at the same motherfuckin’ time, but it really does make things easier to read.
55

Uh-oh…Better notify the DDMB people:D!

56

Make that SDMB…

57

And yet another one: ‘hopefully’ does not mean ‘we hope.’ It means exactly what it says: in a manner full of hope. If you hope Bob doesn’t shit on the new sofa, don’t say ‘Hopefully, Bob won’t etc.’ because that means Bob hopes something good will happen to him if he refrains, not that you hope he won’t do it.

I can’t believe we’re losing the battle over irregardless. I refuse to accept it. Gotta draw the line in the sand somewhere.

That illustrates another important point: you can break the rules of grammar and syntax with relative impunity to create specific effects or impressions, but you have to know them first in order to understand what you’re doing. The last sentence of the previous paragraph contains no subject, which is against the most basic first rules of grammar. But I know what I’m doing. I think.

58

It was used correctly in the Opening Post of a metaphysics debate called “Reality”.

“Unfortunately, to prove anything at all, including your own existence, you must first exist, since a being who does not exist cannot leave such evidences. That makes your existence axiomatic. Because your axiom (that you exist) will match your conclusion (that you exist), your argument begs the question, and is a circle.”

59

Man! And John Waters thought he was all outre with the Scratch-and-Sniff pads at his movie.

60

To be a little more precise it’s because nouns are modified to make them possesive, but posessive pronouns are in fact distinct words, not modifications of regular pronouns. In some cases the two pronouns are similar (it/its) or even identical (her/her) but in others they are not (I/my,we/our).