# Jodi, you’re a hypocrite and a blatant liar **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 17, 2001, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916 "2001-11-17T07:14:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![DopeyDave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9bd4f/32.png) [@DopeyDave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DopeyDave)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916/61 "2001-11-23T00:40:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Maeglin \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > Understood, but I can hardly pass up a chance to engage in a grammatical discussion, myself. As monumental a work as _Modern English Usage_ is, it must be remembered (gerundive) that Fowler was a “schoolman” and a classicist to boot. While I have not performed a stringent survey of his work nor documented every instance where he privileges classical grammatical jargon over “native” English, I don’t think it is a huge stretch to assert that his work is slanted. \*\* That may be true, but it is an _ad hominem_ argument that is irrelevant to the merits of what Fowler actually says, and without giving evidence it is unsubstantiated to boot. > [@](#): > > \*\*The degree of the slant is open to discussion. > > Jack Lynch, professor of English at Rutgers, argues [here](http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/) that: > > > [@](#): > > > > Yanks may find this classic work unsuitable because of its focus on British English, and much of it has been outdated in the seven decades since its first edition’s completion.\*\* That’s why a second edition was produced, _ **in 1968** _. This edition was revised by Sir Ernest Gowers (I mistakenly omitted that in my cite), who is famous as a proponent of plain writing (he is the author of _The Complete Plain Words_). > [@](#): > > \*\*The [alt.english.usage faq](http://www.faqs.org/faqs/alt-usage-english-faq/), in which some of the mightiest pedants in the world participate, has the following to say: > > > [@](#): > > > > The final factor is the traditional use of Latin grammatical concepts to teach English grammar. This historical quirk dates to the 17th century, and has never quite left us. From this we get the Latin-derived rule, which Fowler still acknowledges. And we _do_ follow that rule to some extent: “Who are they?” (not “Who are > > them?” or “Whom are they?”) “We are they!” (in response to the preceding) “It is I who am at fault.” “That’s the man who he is.”\*\* None of this precludes the use of all concepts taken from Latin when discussing English. In fact, in the very alt.english.usage article Maeglin quoted from, which was [“It’s me” vs “It is I”](http://www.faqs.org/faqs/alt-usage-english-faq/), the word ‘accusative’ is used _five_ times to aid the discussion (the article argues that “is” does not always take the accusative case, but requires an agreement of case – Nominative takes nominative and accusative takes accusative). Accusative case is certainly alive and well, even if we don’t always recognise its use. ---
**Author:** ![Slip\_Mahoney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47774/32.png) [@Slip\_Mahoney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slip_Mahoney)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916/62 "2001-11-23T00:51:57Z")
Fuck off, Dopey. Even the cows and chickens on the farm hate a smug asshole. ---
**Author:** ![DopeyDave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9bd4f/32.png) [@DopeyDave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DopeyDave)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916/63 "2001-11-23T01:19:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Slip Mahoney \* > \*\*Fuck off, Dopey. > > Even the cows and chickens on the farm hate a smug asshole. \*\* Don’t like being proved wrong, eh, Slope? ---
**Author:** ![Slip\_Mahoney](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47774/32.png) [@Slip\_Mahoney](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slip_Mahoney)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916/64 "2001-11-23T03:26:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DopeyDave \* Don’t like being proved wrong, eh, Slope? \*\* [/QUOTE] I hate it. And the name is **Slip,** Stupiddave ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2001, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916/65 "2001-11-23T06:40:41Z")
How many "Something"Dave’s do we got on this Board, anyway? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2001, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916/66 "2001-12-02T02:35:16Z")
> [@](#): > > As for this dispute itself - Yes, **Jodi** can overparse, and **The Ryan** can (at least appear to be) deliberately obtuse in order to score a point. I like both of them, even though both on occasion can irritate me. > In this case, I would rule Jodi the winner on points - **The Ryan** was jerkier in the linked thread. Could you explain that statement please? ---
**Author:** ![omni-not](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8dc957/32.png) [@omni-not](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/omni-not)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2001, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916/67 "2001-12-02T03:18:37Z")
Nickrz - You’re back! In fine form, I see…🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jodi-you-re-a-hypocrite-and-a-blatant-liar/93916.md?page=3)