I tend to agree with you. Lynn Truss attempted to convince me otherwise, and so now I just don’t know what to do. I sort of take it on a case by case basis.
My doctor just called. He wants to have a look at my MRI’s.
I think shes right
Of course there are rules, ya moron. Google “English punctuation rules” and you’ll get hundreds of references to books and articles and webpages patiently explaining to self-satisfied idiots like you the basic, standard, conventional rules of using punctuation marks in written English.
No, these rules are not legally enforced, and nobody will do anything to you if you don’t follow them except point and laugh at you. But that’s not the same thing as not having any rules at all.
The only written languages that have no punctuation rules are ones that have no punctuation.
I just leave them off always. Safer that way.
There are standards to which public written communication should adhere. It may not matter much if you send a grammatically muddled text message to your friends, but newspapers, magazines, the text on television, news websites, signs, books, etc. should all adhere to those standards. If they don’t, then those involved look uneducated and silly.
I hate the Oakland As.
Not being snarky: If you are going to complain about punctuation and grammar please provide the correct version also as a comparison and therefore a learning tool.
Should it be: Sally crossed the room, “I don’t want any pie, thanks”, she said.
or better yet: Sally crossed the room and said, “I don’t want any pie, thanks.”
Yes, and each reference can (and often does) set it’s own rules. For example- it is “an historic” or “a historic”?
There are no “basic, standard, conventional rules of using punctuation marks in written English.”. There are various guidelines and usages.
Nicely played.
Which standards? Set by who?
A lot of “standards” were made up by dudes that wanted to force Englsih to conform to the rules for Latin. Some still follow a few of them.
Some “standards” were made up, followed by a few, then dropped. “Standards” change every day and are mutable.
The only “standard” is that it is understandable and in more or less common usage.
You know, you’ve complained in a Pit thread about other posters putting signatures or signoff lines in their posts. You can, by God, post in the Queen’s English correctly, and you, by God, should be forced to, if you can force me not to sign my name.
The signature issue is a lot more minor and a lot less irritating than simply ejecting random keystroke’s all’ overthe plase because you don’t care.
Actually, no. The “A’s” in “Oakland A’s” is a contraction of “Athletics”, and thus the apostrophe is correctly used.
That should be “Set by whom?”.
Please Lord, let that “it’s” be a whoosh.
Look, the point of usage rules is preservation of clarity.
Sure, English is loaded with contradictory and sometimes silly guidelines (and frankly, the possessive “its” is a great example of an arbitrary guideline). No argument. But the implication that because there are no “rules” (in the sense you want to apply the term) means there are no conventions which rise to the level of needing to be followed is wrong.
The lazy and the stupid may take their solace from arguing “there are no rules.” However, it’s the one who eats, shoots, and leaves who will be able to communicate effectively, and those who communicate clearly are the ones who end up ruling the lazy and the stupid.
No, I have no problem at all with posters putting their signatures in the “sig”.
That’s not what he said, you retarded twatwaffle.
Seriously. Is it just me, or has everyone completely forgotten how to use the damn things in the past three or four months?
Especially trying to get one to stretch to fit over those three lines.
No, it isn’t. It’s an initialism, not a contraction.