Pretty sure he was kidding.
Why would you read something out of context when the context is explicitly given?
I don’t know. He sounded like me when I’m feeling snippy. It happens.
Who said I did? Sheesh.
Pretty sure Frylock in post #41 was saying to Wendell Wagner that Leo Bloom had been kidding in post #38.
Would you feel better if I rephrased the questions as:
Why would anyone read that out of context when the context is explicitly given? And if they did, why would we concern ourselves with it? IOW, why even bring it up?
Because I wanted to make a profound, extremely important and brilliant point about the Yinglish word order, which is common and understandable as proper English with a distinct semantic intelligibility, yet identifiable to some as a grammatical Yinglishism.
And, little did I know when I began, it got me to think up the nifty “gibberish–Yoda–Bill Buckley” thing, which is very clever overall, if I do say so myself, and particularly so in the context of this thread. Speaking of context.
And really, who the hell ever knows what SD posters concern themselves with?
Wait. Just re-read this. I wasn’t kidding.
What? Don’t be silly man of course you were.
But more to the point since you were being serious after all:
“A doctor he’s not” is not an OSV construction, and,
The 0% figure is rounded, as was clearly specified in the post you were responding to.
Enough already! OSV schmoSV, Yiddish constructions and word order are definitely reflected in English expressions like that one, used by a high percentage of New Yorkers and a smaller percentage of folks elsewhere.
Frylock, would “Not a doctor, he is” be OSV (or perhaps SOV)?
“The red ball he threw,” would be OSV. It’s not incomprehensible, but it’s Yodaese.