# Amateur Grammar Authorities **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 13, 2009, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117 "2009-12-13T17:49:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 10:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/61 "2009-12-21T10:32:13Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > Do please try to avoid the one-word _bon mots_ I presume you meant _bons mots_ there? ::nya nya nya:: šŸ˜› ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/62 "2009-12-21T11:23:37Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > No. No, I am _not_. Iā€™m asking why the commonly accepted approach should be based on tradition stemming from the practical considerations of an all-but-obsolete technology rather than logical consistency aimed at clarity in communication. Thereā€™s nothing that says it must. As soon as the consensus shifts, if it does, then it will be based on some new (at least somewhat) arbitrary rule. > [@](#): > > I _know_ why the commonly accepted usage is commonly accepted - ā€œbecause it isā€ - and I find that answer completely inadequate. Especially as grounds to call other approaches incorrect. Thereā€™s is where weā€™re talking past each other. Iā€™m not questioning your logic, or saying your method isnā€™t better. But it is, by definition, _currently_ wrong. As grammar is understood, ā€œbecause it isā€ is the ONLY adequate grounds for calling another approach incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/63 "2009-12-21T17:18:25Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > No disagreement here, I just think the arbitrary approach defended by **Rhythmdvl** does _not_ add precision to the English language; in fact I feel it does the opposite.I donā€™t accept that answer in other fields of inquiry; why should I do so here? [Whatever](http://boardstest.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=544762):rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/64 "2009-12-21T18:00:39Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > Thereā€™s nothing that says it must. As soon as the consensus shifts, if it does, then it will be based on some new (at least somewhat) arbitrary rule. Again, no disagreement here. Thatā€™s why Iā€™m pointing out what I perceive as an inconsistency in the use of punctuation. There is nothing that says it must be the way it is now, but IMHO thereā€™s a stronger argument for why it ought to change. > [@](#): > > _Iā€™m not questioning your logic, or saying your method isnā€™t better. But it is, by definition, currently wrong._ By one standard. As has been shown above (explicitly, I believe, in a quote supplied by **Big T** ) the treatment of periods and commas in relation to quotation marks is not universally the same in the English language. Therefore it is wrong to call either of the two methods (or any others currently in use) incorrect, only more or less logically justifiable. > [@](#): > > _As grammar is understood, ā€œbecause it isā€ is the ONLY adequate grounds for calling another approach incorrect._ No, and again no. ā€œBecause it isā€ - or other similar variants - is a cop-out that really only indicates the speaker hasnā€™t put much thought into the side of the argument being defended and doesnā€™t care to do so. The Chicago Manual of Style is a very useful book and Iā€™ve referred to it myself on a number of occasions, but as far as the section referring to periods and quotation marks, relying on ā€œbecause it isā€ - no matter how impeccably dressed - is an abject grammar fail. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/65 "2009-12-21T18:10:49Z")
> [@jjimm](#): > > I presume you meant _bons mots_ there? > > ::nya nya nya:: šŸ˜› Ah, comme tu es intelligent! Voici un petit gĆ¢teau, sauve-toi et joue. šŸ˜ƒ ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/66 "2009-12-21T21:57:18Z")
You know what else doesnā€™t make sense? Idiosyncratic systems of measurement used in the U.S. (e.g., feet and inches, ounces and pounds), versus metric systems. Good luck changing that, either. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2009, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/67 "2009-12-22T00:03:32Z")
Olentzero: It doesnā€™t matter whether you accept it or not, just like it doesnā€™t matter on any other concept. I was actually going to come in and explain more thoroughly why we use the system we do, but Iā€™m not sure thereā€™s a point. Youā€™re still going to argue that it isnā€™t logical, and make the ILLOGICAL leap that, since it isnā€™t logical, it isnā€™t true. But I guess Iā€™ll give it a shot. Periods and commas are low impact punctuation marks. They donā€™t really change much of what is said. If I leave out a period, you are almost certainly still going to understand me. If I leave out a comma, there are specific instances where it will be confusing, but itā€™s still pretty rare. Question marks, exclamation points often change the tone of what is being said. Colons and dashes often change the meaning itself. (Semicolons are apparently just along for the rideā€“rarely are they used at the end of quotations.) So what does this have to do with the quotation rules? Itā€™s simple: since commas and periods are so low-impact, people really donā€™t care whether they belong to the quote or not. It is almost never an issue that can be misunderstood. So, instead, the use has evolved to use the typography explanation I gave above, and, well, just aesthetics. The period preceded by a quotation mark looks like itā€™s out there, standing by itself. This is generally considered a bad thing Furthermore, in most quotations, the period would have to be repeated, anyways, and this is also against the rules for aesthetic reasons (even in International English). If we followed your system, weā€™d have to say, _ā€œJohn went to the bathroom.ā€._ Both the quote and the statement themselves are declarative sentencesā€“each would need their own period. (Yes, Iā€™m aware I didnā€™t punctuate my example properly. I found italics to be better than using multiple quotation mark, as that would seem confusing.) ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2009, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/68 "2009-12-22T01:11:34Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I was actually going to come in and explain more thoroughly why we use the system we do, but Iā€™m not sure thereā€™s a point. Youā€™re still going to argue that it isnā€™t logical, and make the ILLOGICAL leap that, since it isnā€™t logical, it isnā€™t true. No, I make no claims about the truth or validity of either system, rather their justifiability based on their logical foundations. I favor one approach over the other, but I donā€™t call the system I donā€™t favor untrue or incorrect because of it. > [@](#): > > _If we followed your system, weā€™d have to say, ā€œJohn went to the bathroom.ā€._ There, sir, is where you are in fact wrong. See my (much) earlier reply to **friedo** using his own example of the word ā€œnopeā€ for what I actually mean. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2009, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/69 "2009-12-22T15:49:26Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > There, sir, is where you are in fact wrong. See my (much) earlier reply to **friedo** using his own example of the word ā€œnopeā€ for what I actually mean. But then your new (crap) system is no more logical or systematic than the current one; in which case, if itā€™s not superior, why should anyone adhere to it? ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/70 "2009-12-22T21:12:01Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > But then your new (crap) system is no more logical or systematic than the current one; in which case, if itā€™s not superior, why should anyone adhere to it? Ahem. To quote from the _Chicago Manual of Style_: [QUOTE=6.10 Alternative system] According to what is sometimes called the British style (set forth in The Oxford Guide to Style [the successor to Hartā€™s Rules; see bibliog. 1.1]), a style also followed in other English-speaking countries, only those punctuation points that appeared in the original material should be included within the quotation marks; all others follow the closing quotation marks. [/QUOTE] So itā€™s neither my system nor a new one. Is it crap, however? Letā€™s see what _CMS_ has to say further: [QUOTE=6.8 Periods and commas] Periods and commas precede closing quotation marks, whether double or single. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=6.9 Colons, semicolons, question marks, and exclamation points] **Unlike periods and commas** , these all follow closing quotation marks unless a question mark or an exclamation point belongs within the quoted matter. (This rule applies the logic absent in 6.8.) [/QUOTE] As you can see from the section so heavily emphasized you couldnā€™t possibly miss it, the period and the comma are treated differently as regards quotation marks: always inside, regardless of whether the matter is quoted or not. What, as I have asked several times already, is the justification for this? What do the authorities on American usage, _CMS_ and Strunk & White, say to defend this _Plessy v Ferguson_ of punctuation? [QUOTE=The Chicago Manual of Style] This is a traditional style, in use well before the first edition of this manual (1906). [/QUOTE] ā€œWeā€™ve always done it this way.ā€ [QUOTE=Strunk & White] Typographical usage dictates that the comma be inside the [quotation] marks, though logically it often seems not to belong there. [/QUOTE] ā€œAmerican typographers have always done it this way, even though it doesnā€™t always make sense.ā€ This is, and has been, my point. There is no logical justification for always putting the period and the comma inside quotation marks except for tradition stemming from a technology that is now no longer in mainstream use, and from a practical consideration that had nothing whatsoever to do with grammar, punctuation, or clarity of communication. Treating periods and commas exactly the same way as the other punctuation marks listed above - inside quotes when quoting the words of others, outside quotes when not - is simpler, more logically consistent, and IMHO easier for most to remember. It does away with the absence of logic (by _CMS_ā€™ own admission) in Section 6.8. I do hope this post wasnā€™t too much of a drain on your attention span, as your comment clearly indicated you were physically unable to read the rest of the thread. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2009, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/71 "2009-12-23T16:08:07Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > So itā€™s neither my system nor a new one. Ah, mea culpaā€“I conflated you with **Chief Pedant** , who [proposed a system](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11885519&postcount=22) of including inside the quotation marks only what was exactly said, with further punctuation outside. My apologies for assuming you were also the one who was trying to be original and creative instead of just plain wrong with regard to American usage. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2009, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/72 "2009-12-23T16:40:04Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > Ah, mea culpaā€“I conflated you with **Chief Pedant** , who [proposed a system](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11885519&postcount=22) of including inside the quotation marks only what was exactly said, with further punctuation outside. My apologies for assuming you were also the one who was trying to be original and creative instead of just plain wrong with regard to American usage. You forgot something: ā€œ **CP** ā€™s is a superb proposal, because it simultaneously improves clarity and simplifies a rule created by idiots and perpetuated by pedants.ā€ ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2009, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/73 "2009-12-23T17:53:51Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > ā€œ **CP** ā€™s is a superb proposal, because it simultaneously improves clarity and simplifies a rule created by idiots and perpetuated by pedants.ā€ So does this mean that if you rule is ever established, youā€™re not allowed to perpetuate it? ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2009, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/74 "2009-12-23T19:23:08Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > My apologies for assuming you were also the one who was trying to be original and creative instead of just plain wrong with regard to American usage. When even the proponents of the American system admit itā€™s not all that logical, and they allow that _the rest of the freaking English-speaking world does it the other way_, how wrong can the other approach be? ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2009, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/75 "2009-12-23T20:18:51Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > When even the proponents of the American system admit itā€™s not all that logical, and they allow that _the rest of the freaking English-speaking world does it the other way_, how wrong can the other approach be? My problem was that I though you were (a) proposing a new system, (b) claiming that the old system sucks because itā€™s illogical/inconsistent, and then (c) failing to notice that your own new system was inconsistent if it didnā€™t do the \*ā€œstatement.ā€. \*ending. Once I figured out that the conflict was nonexistent because you werenā€™t the one whoā€™d proposed the new system, we went straight on back to the simple, ā€œ\*\*Olentzero \*\*doesnā€™t know American punctuation standards.ā€ The key to any writing system or dialect is for it to be internally consistent. And the current American standard, while different from the British English system, _is internally consistent_. You may _wish that Americans would use a different system_, but you are still \*wrong \*regarding \*what is commonly accepted as correct usage \*in the U.S. Wrong, wrong, dead-fucking-oh-so-wrong, and everyone here knows it. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2009, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/76 "2009-12-23T20:27:23Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > You may _wish that Americans would use a different system_, but you are still \*wrong \*regarding \*what is commonly accepted as correct usage \*in the U.S. Wrong, wrong, dead-fucking-oh-so-wrong, **and everyone here knows it.** Except, of course, **Olentzero**. Itā€™s been fun watching him craft oh-so-pretentious insults yet fall on his face for lack of reading skills. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2009, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/77 "2009-12-23T23:39:07Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > The key to any writing system or dialect is for it to be internally consistent. And the current American standard, while different from the British English system, is internally consistent. How so? Two punctuation marks are treated differently than the others in a given situation, based on considerations that have nothing to do with the system itself, and its proponents admit the logic behind it is nonexistent. How is that internally consistent? > [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > Except, of course, **Olentzero**. Itā€™s been fun watching him craft oh-so-pretentious insults yet fall on his face for lack of reading skills. This from a fellow who quotes sources that themselves admit the systemā€™s a bit of a clusterfuck, and thinks thatā€™s a sufficient defense thereof? ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2009, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/78 "2009-12-24T00:00:02Z")
Yes. This from the fellow that knows how to read. Again, this isnā€™t an esoteric rule of grammar. This is basic, fourth grade material. You keep trying to hide the fact that your first correction was **wrong** and your followup snark to **freido** was **wrong**. You fucked up, but rather than simply admit it (or just STFU about it), you change this into a whiny grade-school rant about how stoopid **basic** grammar and syntax is (hence the Pit thread). While youā€™re at it, why donā€™t you capitalize all nouns? Doesnā€™t that make sense? Isnā€™t that how the Germanā€™s do it? Have fun. Oh, and why donā€™t you spell words completely phonetically? Or why donā€™t you spell everything with the British spelling? Someone made a statement about American usage, and several times you were wrong. Then you shifted to this nonsense about usage rules needing a logical foundation. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2009, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/79 "2009-12-24T00:09:25Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > You keep trying to hide the fact that your first correction was **wrong** and your followup snark to **freido** was **wrong**. Do try to get some [sleep](http://xkcd.com/386/), dear boy. Santa wonā€™t come with your presents if youā€™re still awake and frothing at the mouth so. Merry Christmas. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2009, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117/80 "2009-12-24T00:19:07Z")
See, there you go again with your snarks. Funny how piss poor your reading comprehension is ā€“ you donā€™t even get the gist of XKCD. No one would have given a shit if you just shut the hell up about it in the first place, but you needlessly flung your shit around in a childish reaction to being corrected. Pathetic. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/amateur-grammar-authorities/521117.md?page=5)