 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / July 2009Happy Birthday, William!
Today is William Strunk, Jr.'s birthday, so I'll keep this post short! > Today is William Strunk, Jr.'s birthday, Stop right there! > so I'll keep this post short! Needless words! Needless words!  SignatureI heard that Hans Christian Andersen lifted the title for "The Little Mermaid" off a Red Lobster Menu. [Bucky Katt] >> Today is William Strunk, Jr.'s birthday, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Needless words! Needless words! and the comma after Strunk should be struck as well. SignatureSal Ye olde swarm of links: thousands of links for writers, researchers and the terminally curious <http://writers.internet-resources.com> > >> Today is William Strunk, Jr.'s birthday, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > and the comma after Strunk should be struck as well. No, it needs another comma after <Jr.> > > >> Today is William Strunk, Jr.'s birthday, > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > No, it needs another comma after <Jr.> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" ?!? > > > >> Today is William Strunk, Jr.'s birthday, > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" > ?!?- Precisely. The dictator-for-life banned you from posting to sci.lang. How dare you disobey? >> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" >> ?!?- > > Precisely. Don't you think that sequence (letters + period + comma + apostrophe + letter) looks funny? > The dictator-for-life banned you from posting to sci.lang. > How dare you disobey? I suspect you're taking that title a lot more seriously than Bob meant it. Signature| _ | ( ) ASCII Ribbon Campaign | X Against HTML email & news | / \ www.asciiribbon.org > >> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" > >> ?!?- [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Don't you think that sequence (letters + period + comma + apostrophe + > letter) looks funny? The alternative is to allow the Jr. to butt up against the name, which may be permissible in British disregard for norms of punctuation but isn't acceptable here. The usual advice is to rewrite to avoid multi-word possessive phrases. > > The dictator-for-life banned you from posting to sci.lang. > > How dare you disobey? > > I suspect you're taking that title a lot more seriously than Bob meant > it. Since he's the only one who ever paid any attention to it, isn't he the hypocrite? >>>> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" >>>> ?!?- [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > may be permissible in British disregard for norms of punctuation but > isn't acceptable here. And, yet, that's just what the Chicago Manual of Style and other style guides have been recommending since the '90s. http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Jr.Sr.III/Jr.Sr.III02.html SignatureSal Ye olde swarm of links: thousands of links for writers, researchers and the terminally curious <http://writers.internet-resources.com> > >>>> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" > >>>> ?!?- [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Jr.Sr.III/Jr.Sr.III02.html Thank you. It says that if you use the first comma, you must use the second. >>>>>> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" >>>>>> ?!?- [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Thank you. It says that if you use the first comma, you must use the > second. DON'T USE THE FIRST COMMA. *ahem* SignatureSal Ye olde swarm of links: thousands of links for writers, researchers and the terminally curious <http://writers.internet-resources.com> >> And, yet, that's just what the Chicago Manual of Style and other style >> guides have been recommending since the '90s. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Thank you. It says that if you use the first comma, you must use the > second. More precisely, it says that from the 14th edition of the holy CMOS, "the recommendation is to use no commas"; using them is the *second* choice. I think the comma before "Jr." is pointless and may even impede readability slightly. The comma in the middle of "Jr,'s" or "Jr.,'s" is definitely an impediment, largely because it looks ridiculous. I hardly pause (if at all) between "William Strunk" and "Junior" when saying the name aloud. SignatureA: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting. Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)? >>> And, yet, that's just what the Chicago Manual of Style and other >>> style guides have been recommending since the '90s. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > readability slightly. The comma in the middle of "Jr,'s" or "Jr.,'s" > is definitely an impediment, largely because it looks ridiculous. http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm has: Although you will often see a comma between a name and suffix — Bob Downey, Jr., Richard Harrison, III — this comma is no longer regarded as necessary by most copy editors, and some individuals — such as Martin Luther King Jr. — never used a comma there at all. > I hardly pause (if at all) between "William Strunk" and "Junior" when > saying the name aloud. Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical structure as well, actually even more so. SignatureSkitt (AmE) > >> Towse wrote: > >>> And, yet, that's just what the Chicago Manual of Style and other [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical > structure as well, actually even more so. Brits think it's about pausing, which is why they have abominations like the comma between subject and predicate. >> >> Towse wrote: >> >>> And, yet, that's just what the Chicago Manual of Style and other [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Brits think it's about pausing, which is why they have abominations > like the comma between subject and predicate. Someone sit on me before I do this. No? OK, then. No they bloody don't. Brits sometimes consider marking clear pauses - which often go with changes of line of thought in a sentence - as one of the factors that decides whether a comma should be included. As I've said before, we are further down the line towards making punctuation around quotation marks entirely logical than you are, and you are further down the line towards making the use of commas entirely logical. I suspect we'll end up with both, but who knows. Since you know SFA about what Brits do (seeming to get your entire knowledge from a few poor TV shows), why don't you keep off the subject. You're a world expert of things (or, as I've said before, someone with your name is) - why not use your erudition where it's earned, and not assume that some sort of gloss spreads out onto things about which you are pig-ignorant? I know you'll either find an error, or a minor point in here and respond to it, or even just snip selectively (eg, to suggest that I'm claiming that Brits never use the rhythm and sense of a sentence to help punctuation), but some little imp of the perverse in me does make me persist. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu [...] > Brits sometimes consider marking clear pauses - which often go with > changes of line of thought in a sentence - as one of the factors that > decides whether a comma should be included. . . . ". . . one of the factors that decides . . . ." Oops. (But even Homer nodded.) SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ > >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical > >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > which often go with changes of line of thought in a sentence - as one of > the factors that decides whether a comma should be included. I have been reading British novels and British linguistics and popular science books for many decades, and it is only there that I find commas between subject and predicate. Since you, like so many aue contributors, are afraid to use your real name, there is no way to determine whether you have any qualifications whatsoever to exapiate on this or any other topic. Ere I was risen from the place that show'd My duty kneeling, came there a reeking post, from "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>: >> >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical >> >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >name, there is no way to determine whether you have any qualifications >whatsoever to exapiate on this or any other topic. Before he became interested in canals, Nick used to keep bees. If anyone is qualified to exapiate, it is he. Anyway, Nick is not nearly as anonymous as you claim. SignatureJames > Ere I was risen from the place that show'd > My duty kneeling, came there a reeking post, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Anyway, Nick is not nearly as anonymous as you claim. I announced some time ago, but perhaps you missed it, that I will not comment on any content of a message that includes a spelling flame. I am about to visit the ophthalmologist and optometrist and in a short time will have new glasses that will make detection of typographic errors easier. Are you related to the late editor of the Cambridge History of the English Language? Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>, and I quote: >> Ere I was risen from the place that show'd >> My duty kneeling, came there a reeking post, [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >Are you related to the late editor of the Cambridge History of the >English Language? No, I'm not related to Richard M., but I'm cited in one of the volumes in that series. SignatureJames > Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net>, and I quote: > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > No, I'm not related to Richard M., but I'm cited in one of the > volumes in that series. Unfortunately the chapter bibliographies aren't combined per volume, and it would take a long time to check all of them ... >> >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical >> >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > name, there is no way to determine whether you have any qualifications > whatsoever to exapiate on this or any other topic. That is my real name. Of course, it's an abbreviation. Mr T. I notice that you've snipped the bit where I said you'd try to change the subject. And that you'd snip stuff to do so! SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > >> >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical > >> >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > I notice that you've snipped the bit where I said you'd try to change > the subject. And that you'd snip stuff to do so! Your attempts to change the subject were irrelevant. "Nick" does not help at all in finding your published work in a bibliography, say. >> >> >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical >> >> >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Your attempts to change the subject were irrelevant. I'm endevouring to keep the discussion on your ludicrous claims about how all British speakers and writers behave. A subject on which you regularly, wrongly, and offensively pontificate and yet shy immediately away from when challenged. As you have done again - in the above and the following swerve! > "Nick" does not help at all in finding your published work in a > bibliography, say. That's fine. I have no published works in a bibliography to which you have access: my PhD thesis rests in a university library and has no relevance on my competence in the field under discussion in this thread. I do not need to have published anything that has been indexed to be able to say that your understanding of many matters is, to say the least, limited. Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: I've not yet worked out if this is by clever software or by a remarkable tenacity driven by a similar feeling) I'm almost impossible to find since it happens to be a very common American (though rare to non-existant (I've never seen it) British) abbreviation. For the record, I'm arguing on my own time here. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: > I've not yet worked out if this is by clever software or by a remarkable > tenacity driven by a similar feeling) I'm almost impossible to find > since it happens to be a very common American (though rare to > non-existant (I've never seen it) British) abbreviation. Which brings us to the interesting subject of nested parenthetic expressions. What's your view of them? > > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't > > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Which brings us to the interesting subject of nested parenthetic > expressions. What's your view of them? Well, *I* love them. The deeper the nesting, the better. But then again I actually enjoy programming in LisP... > > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't > > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Which brings us to the interesting subject of nested parenthetic > expressions. What's your view of them? I use them frequently, but if I were editing my remarks for publication, I would unuse them. >> > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't >> > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I use them frequently, but if I were editing my remarks for > publication, I would unuse them. And for once we are in agreement! I do not write here as I would for publication. Good example of how the subjunctive is still normal in US use in PTD's bit as well; they're almost extinct over here in that context. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > >> > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't > >> > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > use in PTD's bit as well; they're almost extinct over here in that > context. I certainly notice that in British speech, less so in British print. Perhaps it's something that's still taught in schools even though it's slipped from the spoken language. >> >> > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't >> >> > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Perhaps it's something that's still taught in schools even though it's > slipped from the spoken language. It certainly wasn't for me - we had very little formal education in English grammar, and certainly not on "obscure" things like subjunctives. That was 30-40 years ago. I suspect you're seeing it in the writing of older or very formal authors and it will be pretty well extinct in a generation. Except, of course, for the way we are influenced by US use, so that could cause it come back, but I suspect it's not different enough to get picked up that way (the way unique words, or very different structures ("... not!" for example) get picked up as slang). SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > >> >> > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't > >> >> > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > picked up that way (the way unique words, or very different structures > ("... not!" for example) get picked up as slang). When I was listening to baseball broadcasts in the mid-80s, it bothered me terribly that they always said "may" instead of "might." Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>, and I quote: >> >> >> > Even given my surname - which I don't publicise these days but don't >> >> >> > hide (Mark, for example, regularly inserts it into his replies to me: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >When I was listening to baseball broadcasts in the mid-80s, it >bothered me terribly that they always said "may" instead of "might." You can hear a lot of "Mays" in baseball broadcasts. SignatureJames > Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>, and I quote: > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > You can hear a lot of "Mays" in baseball broadcasts. Which is why Charlie Brown can't spell "maze". SignatureDavid the Omrud filted: >> Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>, and I quote: >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Which is why Charlie Brown can't spell "maze". I contend to this day that Charlie Brown was robbed..."m-a-y-s" is a perfectly valid spelling for the word spoken, and there were no additional clues offered such as "use it in a sentence" to suggest which enantiophone was meant....r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? > Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net>, and I quote: > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > You can hear a lot of "Mays" in baseball broadcasts. Those would be Mayses. Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@verizon.net>, and I quote: >> Quoth "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net>, and I quote: >> >When I was listening to baseball broadcasts in the mid-80s, it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Those would be Mayses. It's certainly a puzzling sport. And violent: http://extras.thesun.co.uk/php/img_uploader/image_store/processed/1247234868_lar ge.jpg SignatureJames > It certainly wasn't for me - we had very little formal education in > English grammar, and certainly not on "obscure" things like > subjunctives. That was 30-40 years ago. I suspect you're seeing it in > the writing of older or very formal authors and it will be pretty well > extinct in a generation. ISTR reading in a linguist's criticism of Fowler (among other prescriptivists) that one of his books (I'm not sure if it's MEU) explains when you have to use the past subjunctive and then on the next page has "If I was..." in the author's voice in violation of the rule. Signature() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments > > It certainly wasn't for me - we had very little formal education in > > English grammar, and certainly not on "obscure" things like [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > next page has "If I was..." in the author's voice in violation of the > rule. If you think Fowler is prescriptivist, you haven't read Fowler. Fowler beleives that utterances (as opposed to grammar) should be "logical," but he doesn't arbitrarily forbid, e.g., split infinitives or sentence adverbs. >> ISTR reading in a linguist's criticism of Fowler (among other >> prescriptivists) that one of his books (I'm not sure if it's MEU) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > If you think Fowler is prescriptivist, you haven't read Fowler. I know you like Fowler (or at least a large part of his opinions). I guess your loyalty oath as a linguist requires you to renounce prescription, so you can't simply admit that there is such a thing as reasonable prescription (which fairly covers a lot of his views). > Fowler beleives that utterances (as opposed to grammar) should be > "logical," but he doesn't arbitrarily forbid, e.g., split infinitives > or sentence adverbs. The brothers Fowler personally made up the silly rule against using "who" and "which" for restrictive relative clauses, and HWF perpetuated it in MEU, which also prescribes the meanings of various pairs of related and similar words (I think he called many of them "useful distinctions") against popular usage. And there is no way to avoid the fact that his article on the "fused participle" is prescriptive --- and crazy. Are you ready to accept Fowler's views on the placement of punctuation? _Elements of Style_, BTW, does ban sentential "hopefully" --- are you willing to admit that that's prescriptive? (I used to like that book, but I've recanted; the proportion of wacko rules (such as that one) is just too high.) SignatureThe generation of random numbers is too important to be left to chance. [Robert R. Coveyou] > >> >> >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical > >> >> >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > away from when challenged. As you have done again - in the above and > the following swerve! How did you get from "Brits" to "all Brits"? > > "Nick" does not help at all in finding your published work in a > > bibliography, say. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > since it happens to be a very common American (though rare to > non-existant (I've never seen it) British) abbreviation. I don't know who "Mark" may be, and if "Mark" doesn't post to sci.lang, I don't see his postings. > For the record, I'm arguing on my own time here. All that to make not one contribution to the discussion. >I don't know who "Mark" may be, and if "Mark" doesn't post to >sci.lang, I don't see his postings. Then, of course, I don't see your postings if you do not post to alt.usage.english. I am replying to that not seen. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >> >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical >> >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > science books for many decades, and it is only there that I find > commas between subject and predicate. And I've been reading and writing British English for a good number of decades. That you observe a comma in a particular place in one style of English does not mean that the authors think that "[punctuation] is about pausing". You came in with that in response - as quoted above - to me saying that it's about structure as well, or even more so. I still hold that to be the case even in British use, although I accept - as I have in another thread elsewhere in > Since you, like so many aue contributors, are afraid to use your real > name, there is no way to determine whether you have any qualifications > whatsoever to exapiate on this or any other topic. I have no evidence at all that you are named Peter T. Daniels, nor (even if you were) that you are the same Peter T. Daniels who has published a book on writing - not on punctuation. Anyone with a smidgen of computer use can determine a fuller name of the person who has registered the domain I post from and, in fact from one of the domain names listed below can find my full name and address (I must get round to removing that!). Therefore it's really quite easy to establish that I really am called Nick (or, at least, that I probably have a credit card or other means of paying in that name). There is no way to establish /anything/ about you other than that you are a verizon customer who choses to enter "Peter T. Daniels" into his software. So, we can establish that I post under my real name, and that I am a resident of the area under discussion. We can establish nothing about you apart from an apparent posting record of sounding off on things you know nothing about (including areas a couple of miles from where you claim to have lived) and changing the subject when challenged on them. For the record, even if I'd published a 100 books in any of my specialist fields, that wouldn't alter my competence to speak on how I perceive British English speakers and writers to behave. That's already more than yours and unlikely to change. I'm still having fun here, but I'm sure it'll wear off. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > >> >> Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical > >> >> structure as well, actually even more so. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > still hold that to be the case even in British use, although I accept - > as I have in another thread elsewhere in Are your thoughts as incomplete as your sentence? > > Since you, like so many aue contributors, are afraid to use your real > > name, there is no way to determine whether you have any qualifications [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > below can find my full name and address (I must get round to removing > that!). Ooh, you have a domain of your very own! How exciting! > Therefore it's really quite easy to establish that I really am called > Nick (or, at least, that I probably have a credit card or other means of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > nothing about (including areas a couple of miles from where you claim to > have lived) and changing the subject when challenged on them. What "area" "a couple of miles from" where? > For the record, even if I'd published a 100 books in any of my > specialist fields, that wouldn't alter my competence to speak on how I > perceive British English speakers and writers to behave. That's already > more than yours and unlikely to change. Perhaps your perceptions are not accurate, or do not cohere with the facts. If you have no linguistics background, you can't be expected to observe language factors that normally occur below the level of consciousness. > I'm still having fun here, but I'm sure it'll wear off. > If you have no linguistics background, you can't be expected to > observe language factors that normally occur below the level of > consciousness. Does that set some sort of aue record for pomposity? SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email > On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:53:44 UTC, "Peter T. Daniels" > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Does that set some sort of aue record for pomposity? Probably not, to guess by the miscellaneous discussions that continue to be cross-posted to sci.lang long after the topic drifts off the linguistic question at hand. Are you objecting to the simple fact that human language operates below the level of consciousness? You have no idea what goes on in your brain when you talk. Neurolinguists are just beginning to have the tools to discover what goes on. And to the simple fact that after you have studied a couple of centuries of the observation of linguistic behavior, you're prepared to conduct your own non- superficial observations? >> If you have no linguistics background, you can't be expected to >> observe language factors that normally occur below the level of >> consciousness. > > Does that set some sort of aue record for pomposity? Plus which, it takes me back to studying "the largest glacier in Riverside (California) County. SignatureFrank ess > Perhaps your perceptions are not accurate, or do not cohere with the > facts. If you have no linguistics background, you can't be expected to > observe language factors that normally occur below the level of > consciousness. We're discussing how people punctuate. I do pay attention to what I read - if only to improve my own writing: I don't think one really needs a linguistic background to notice where people put commas. After all, if I did [need] and didn't [notice], then I'd not have noticed - and commented on - the differing habits about [around] punctuation. Glosses added as you seem to have a bit of a problem when anyone is slightly playful in their writing. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > > Perhaps your perceptions are not accurate, or do not cohere with the > > facts. If you have no linguistics background, you can't be expected to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Glosses added as you seem to have a bit of a problem when anyone is > slightly playful in their writing. If you're _observing_ the orthography of what you're reading, then you're not reading fluently. You should only notice punctuation when it trips up your normal reading process. When I am copyediting, I am not reading for content, but for the kind of thing that can trip up the reader. And when I'm reading (for content) a British book, I am tripped up by commas between subject and predicate. >> I hardly pause (if at all) between "William Strunk" and "Junior" when >> saying the name aloud. > > Punctuation is not necessarily about pausing -- it is about grammatical > structure as well, actually even more so. I agree, but Peter has previously claimed that punctuation is based on intonation or breathing (according to country) --- not syntax. (But there's also no syntactic reason for the comma before "Jr".) Signature"It is the role of librarians to keep government running in difficult times," replied Dramoren. "Librarians are the last line of defence against chaos." (McMullen 2001) [...] > (But there's also no syntactic reason for the comma before "Jr".) The form is, or was, to regard it as parenthetical material, hence to be set off by commas: "William Strunk, Junior, often said . . . ." Strunk had declared it so, but White emended the 3rd edition to class the "Jr." as restrictive. Opinions still differ, even among the learned, though Garner cites a small (25 participants) poll of eminent Juniors who unanimously preferred the non-restrictive comma-demarked form for their names. SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ > [...] > >> (But there's also no syntactic reason for the comma before "Jr".) > > The form is, or was, to regard it as parenthetical material, hence to be > set off by commas: "William Strunk, Junior, often said . . . ." Interesting argument, but I'm not convinced. The "Fred" in "Fred Smith" disambiguates the reference to a specific member of the Smith family; if there are two of them with the same first name, you can use the middle initials or names ("Fred A Smith" and "Fred B Smith", or "Fred Arnold Smith" and "Fred Bernard Smith") for the same purpose. As I see it, appending "Sr", "Jr", "III", etc., has the same function and is no more parenthetical; it just happens to come at the end rather than the beginning or the middle. > Strunk had declared it so, but White emended the 3rd edition to class the > "Jr." as restrictive. Opinions still differ, even among the learned, > though Garner cites a small (25 participants) poll of eminent Juniors who > unanimously preferred the non-restrictive comma-demarked form for their > names. That's interesting. (Sticking the comma between the period and the apostrophe in "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" just looks ridiculous, though.) SignatureSteve: Now, okay. I did say that monkeys could program Visual Basic. Leo: But not that all Visual Basic programmers are monkeys. Steve: Exactly. [Security Now 194] > > >> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" > > >> ?!?- [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > may be permissible in British disregard for norms of punctuation but > isn't acceptable here. A comma in the middle of the word looks funny. A period and a comma together in the middle of a word look ridiculous. And you're a really weird racist. > The usual advice is to rewrite to avoid multi-word possessive phrases. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Since he's the only one who ever paid any attention to it, isn't he > the hypocrite? Have you figured out how sarcasm works yet? > > > >> "William Strunk, Jr.,'s birthday" > > > >> ?!?- [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Have you figured out how sarcasm works yet?- The dictator-for-life, who was proclaimed by no one but "Ramblin' Bob," banned "Ramblin' Bob" from posting in sci.lang. Yet "Rambin; Bob" continues to post in sci.lang. "Ramblin' Bob" must have very low self-esteem if it can't even follow its own decrees. > The dictator-for-life, who was proclaimed by no one but "Ramblin' > Bob," banned "Ramblin' Bob" from posting in sci.lang. Yet "Rambin; > Bob" continues to post in sci.lang. > > "Ramblin' Bob" must have very low self-esteem if it can't even follow > its own decrees. If you're going to start randomly x-posting into aue, is there any chance of you dropping this stange third person gibberish and saying something useful? Even being wrong about the rest of the world and refusing to admit it, while irritating, is at least comprehensible. Hint: we don't all obsess over every perceived slight to you the way you do, and therefore a number of us we not have the foggiest idea of what you are talking. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu > Hint: we don't all obsess over every perceived slight to you the way you > do, and therefore a number of us we not have the foggiest idea of what > you are talking. While I have no idea what y'all are talking about here, but you've reminded me of a thought I had a few hours ago, which is... "Judge not...a man by the color of his skin, or his nationality or religion, but rather, judge him by the way he responds to our insults." Haaaaa ha ha ******* Mark >> A comma in the middle of the word looks funny. A >> period and a comma together in the middle of a word >> look ridiculous. And you're a really weird racist. It's especially ridiculous from someone who thinks punctuation should be transposed misleadingly around quotation marks just for looks. > The dictator-for-life, who was proclaimed by no one but "Ramblin' > Bob," banned "Ramblin' Bob" from posting in sci.lang. Yet "Rambin; > Bob" continues to post in sci.lang. > > "Ramblin' Bob" must have very low self-esteem if it can't even follow > its own decrees. Do you really want to go there? How about the self esteem of someone who calls people "it", exhibits strange bigotry, and thinks he owns a newsgroup? > >> A comma in the middle of the word looks funny. A > >> period and a comma together in the middle of a word [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > who calls people "it", exhibits strange bigotry, and thinks he owns a > newsgroup? Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. In article <59883d09-f8ac-4457-9ec8-cb946aa81e35 @v20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, grammatim@verizon.net says... > > >> A comma in the middle of the word looks funny. A > > >> period and a comma together in the middle of a word [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence > as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. What do you mean by "this newsgroup", Peter? You are posting to three. </lather, rinse, repeat> SignatureLinz Wet Yorks via Cambridge, York, London and Watford My accent may vary On Jul 10, 9:49 am, Amethyst Deceiver <s...@lindsayendell.co.uk> wrote: > In article <59883d09-f8ac-4457-9ec8-cb946aa81e35 > @v20g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, gramma...@verizon.net says... [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > What do you mean by "this newsgroup", Peter? You are posting to three. > </lather, rinse, repeat> I mean the one that's relevant to "Rambin' Bob"'s mania. If you didn't understand what Adam said, why didn't you ask _him_ what he meant? > Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence > as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. Have you ever heard of a woman named Bob? (Not Bobbie, Bob.) > > Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence > > as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. > > Have you ever heard of a woman named Bob? > (Not Bobbie, Bob.) Have you ever heard of George Sand or George Eliot? And you, the sole anointer of the dictator-for-life, continue to defy the dictator _you_ anointed. >> Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence >> as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. > > Have you ever heard of a woman named Bob? > (Not Bobbie, Bob.) What, isn't your first name 'Ramblin' or something? >> Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence >> as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. > > Have you ever heard of a woman named Bob? > (Not Bobbie, Bob.) No, but I've heard of a boy named Sue. Am I right in guessing "Ramblin Bob" is a country-music allusion? SignatureWhen Elaine turned 11, her mother sent her to train under Donald Knuth in his mountain hideaway. [XKCD 342] > Am I right in guessing "Ramblin Bob" is a country-music allusion? If it comes from where I presume it comes from, Wikipedia calls it a "novelty song originally found in Vaudeville performances from the early twentieth century". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Jailhouse_Now That page says that the song is usually credited to Jimmie Rodgers, who recorded it (with yodelling) in 1928: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLcrQTs_xcM but that the earliest copyright is from 1915 by "two African-American theater performers named Davis and Stafford". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |When you rewrite a compiler from 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |scratch, you sometimes fix things Palo Alto, CA 94304 |you didn't know were broken. | Larry Wall kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >> Am I right in guessing "Ramblin Bob" is a country-music allusion? > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > but that the earliest copyright is from 1915 by "two African-American > theater performers named Davis and Stafford". That's the song I was thinking about (and have had as an earworm since last night). I had no idea it was so old. I was only familiar with a few of the country singers' recordings and _O Brother, Where art Thou?_. Thanks! Those lyrics are a bit different from what I'm used to ("cabaret" instead of "honky-tonk"). Any idea how closely "poker" and "euchre" are supposed to rhyme? SignatureOh, I do most of my quality thinking on the old sandbox. [Bucky Katt] > Those lyrics are a bit different from what I'm used to ("cabaret" > instead of "honky-tonk"). Any idea how closely "poker" and "euchre" > are supposed to rhyme? Not too closely, I'd guess, unless the latter was pronounced like "ochre" at one point, but neither the OED nor MWCD11 gives any pronunciation but /ju/. But close enough for a song. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |You may hate gravity, but gravity 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |doesn't care. Palo Alto, CA 94304 | Clayton Christensen kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >> Those lyrics are a bit different from what I'm used to ("cabaret" >> instead of "honky-tonk"). Any idea how closely "poker" and "euchre" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "ochre" at one point, but neither the OED nor MWCD11 gives any > pronunciation but /ju/. But close enough for a song. I just got around to the youtube link you posted --- he pronounces "poker" the usual way and then rhymes "euchre" with it exactly (or as exactly as I can tell), like "yoker". SignatureI spend almost as much time figuring out what's wrong with my computer as I do actually using it. Networked software, especially, requires frequent updates and maintenance, all of which gets in the way of doing routine work. (Stoll 1995) > >> Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence > >> as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Am I right in guessing "Ramblin Bob" is a country-music allusion? Right. Finally, someone with culture! > > Am I right in guessing "Ramblin Bob" is a country-music allusion? > > Right. > Finally, someone with culture! What country? >> > Am I right in guessing "Ramblin Bob" is a country-music allusion? >> >> Right. >> Finally, someone with culture! > > What country? "We have both kinds, country *and* western." Signaturehmmmm: sounds like the same DLL hell problem my cousin had. try deleting all DLLs in your Windows/system32 directory and see what happens. (Bryce Utting) > > Have you ever heard of a woman named Bob? > > (Not Bobbie, Bob.) > > No, but I've heard of a boy named Sue. > > Am I right in guessing "Ramblin Bob" is a country-music allusion? My name really is Bob. Ramblin Bob is a nickname because I like to drink and play poker. But I've never been in jail! >> Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence >> as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. > > Have you ever heard of a woman named Bob? > (Not Bobbie, Bob.) "Oh yes, it would be an unusual name for a girl, but it's a perfectly straightforward name for a young chap like you, eh Bob?" SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu Nick: >>> Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no >>> evidence as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "Oh yes, it would be an unusual name for a girl, but it's a perfectly > straightforward name for a young chap like you, eh Bob?" [Sorry, obvious extension:] "Well then, Bob, I'll leave you two together, why don't you get to know each other, play a game of crimmage, have a smoke, something like that. They tell me that Captain Blackadder has rather a good line in rough shag. Um, I'm sure he'd be happy to fill your pipe. Carry on." SignatureTrond Engen > Nick: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > -- > Trond Engen crimmage? benlizro@ihug.co.nz: >> Nick: >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > crimmage? Cribbage, obviously, also for the pun. I half-remembered the passage, googled for the exact wording, and was careless with the result. The text I found (at <http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/8889/bladder/ba4-3.txt>) is a transcript of the episode, not a copy of the script, and the mistake seems to be a mishearing. Now I've played a YouTube clip of the episode (<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAq3aIZ9jps&feature=related>), and I understand that the /b/ in 'cribbage' (at 8:07) might have been mistaken for an /m/ -- but not why. It's not prenasalized, rather preaspirated to my ear. Is it just the blurryness that does the trick? SignatureTrond Engen > benli...@ihug.co.nz: > >> Nick: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > for an /m/ -- but not why. It's not prenasalized, rather preaspirated to > my ear. Is it just the blurryness that does the trick? It's a friggin' "mondegreen." There's no such thing as crimmage. > > benli...@ihug.co.nz: > > >> Nick: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > It's a friggin' "mondegreen." There's no such thing as crimmage. Well, no, not really. Simply mishearing a single word doth not a mondegreen make. Indeed, good mondegreens involve as little actual mis- hearing of segments as possible, and produce a hearing that makes some kind of sense, rather than a non-word. In any case, in this instance, I was open to the possibility that "crimmage" might have been a playful mispronunciation, or perhaps an archaic or obscure variant of "cribbage" not known to me (a real possibility given "Blackadder"'s settings ranging from medieval to WWI). Ross Clark benlizro@ihug.co.nz filted: >In any case, in this instance, I was open to the possibility that >"crimmage" might have been a playful mispronunciation, or perhaps an >archaic or obscure variant of "cribbage" not known to me (a real >possibility given "Blackadder"'s settings ranging from medieval to >WWI). You mean the way my brother used to ask people whether they wanted to play "chest", before he switched to "intendo"?...r SignatureA pessimist sees the glass as half empty. An optometrist asks whether you see the glass more full like this?...or like this? >>> benli...@ihug.co.nz: >>>>> Nick: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >> >> It's a friggin' "mondegreen." There's no such thing as crimmage. So "scrimmage" and "crammage" couldn't be (friggin') mondegreens? pjk > Well, no, not really. Simply mishearing a single word doth not a > mondegreen make. Indeed, good mondegreens involve as little actual mis- [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Ross Clark >> > "Ramblin' Bob" must have very low self-esteem if it can't even follow >> > its own decrees. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Only "Ramblin' Bob" thinks I own this newsgroup. We have no evidence > as to "Ramblin' Bob"'s gender. In what peculiar dialect do people usually refer to another person as "it"? SignatureTaken on the whole however this is a fine disc and a good example of the current pop scene attempting to break out of its vulgarisms and sometimes downright obscene derivative hogwash. (Julian Stone-Mason B.A., 1972) > and the comma after Strunk should be struck as well. Yeah, that threw me into a tizzy too. > Today is William Strunk, Jr.'s birthday, > so I'll keep this post short! The sci.lang dictator-for-life banned you from posting to sci.lang. How dare you disobey? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.