tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post115595321086458719..comments2024-01-13T02:11:14.727-08:00Comments on grammargrinch: The Jounalistic SP Times Priesthood Sinks Davis, Exalts Smith, Cuffs Around the English Languagetwinkobiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07865056039680988073noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1169351998150130182007-01-20T19:59:00.000-08:002007-01-20T19:59:00.000-08:00>Lee: Since we are being picky, "Perhaps not" is ...><I>Lee: Since we are being picky, "Perhaps not" is a fragment. Don't try that old "elliptical clause" flim flam on me to weasel out of this grammar felony.</I><<BR/><BR/>I wouldn’t dream of trying the old "elliptical clause" flim flam to weasel out of it. This excerpt from Strunk & White’s Rule 6 should do the trick.<BR/><BR/><B>"It is permissible to make an emphatic word or expression serve the purpose of a sentence and to punctuate it accordingly:<BR/><BR/>Again and again he called out. No reply."</B><BR/><BR/>Lee, go and read your little book. Properly.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1166359743312259532006-12-17T04:49:00.000-08:002006-12-17T04:49:00.000-08:00>What in others is a grave character flaw in me is...><I>What in others is a grave character flaw in me is a charming foible.</I><<BR/><BR/>And people tell you this, right? Maybe you really did spend twenty-eight years teaching (or what you call teaching), browbeating your students with lessons consisting of "I say it; so it's right."<BR/><BR/>Keep deluding yourself if you must. You're as charming as a rattlesnake.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1166359229671498312006-12-17T04:40:00.000-08:002006-12-17T04:40:00.000-08:00Lee: >The complement of "reason" is not "specimen...Lee: ><I>The complement of "reason" is not "specimen"; the complement of "reason" is the noun clause "[that] the specimen below shows that birds of a feather flock together."</I><<BR/><BR/>You’re saying that “the reason” is “that the specimen below shows something”? The SP Times editors wouldn’t have seen anything below. Nice try.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1166358711909562242006-12-17T04:31:00.000-08:002006-12-17T04:31:00.000-08:00Sorry to keep you waiting. I had a lot of hog pen...Sorry to keep you waiting. I had a lot of hog pens to slop out. <BR/><BR/>I could write an essay, but I’d rather just quote a source. Strunk and White is no use; let’s try Nesfield.<BR/><BR/><B>The forms of the different Participles are as follows: -<BR/><BR/>Transitive verbs<BR/><BR/><I>Present or continuous</I><BR/>Loving (Active voice)<BR/>Being loved (Passive Voice)<BR/><BR/><I>Past indefinite</I><BR/>Loved (Passive Voice)<BR/><BR/><I>Past Perfect</I><BR/>Having loved (Active voice)<BR/>Having been loved (Passive Voice)<BR/><BR/><BR/>Intransitive verbs<BR/><BR/><I>Present or continuous</I><BR/>Fading<BR/><BR/><I>Past indefinite</I><BR/>Faded<BR/><BR/><I>Past Perfect</I><BR/>Having faded<BR/><BR/>....<BR/><BR/>Since a Participle is a verb as well as an adjective, it can take an Object, which may be of five different kinds.<BR/><BR/>Having shot <I>the tiger</I>, he returned home. (Direct Object)<BR/><BR/>He is busy, teaching <I>his sons</I> Greek. (Indirect Object)<BR/><BR/>Having been taught <I>Greek</I>, he was a good scholar. (Retained Object)<BR/><BR/>We saw him fighting a hard <I>battle</I>. (Cognate Object)<BR/><BR/>Having sat <I>himself</I> down, he began to eat. (Reflexive Object)</B><BR/><BR/>All your participial phrases start with a past indefinite participle in the passive voice. A participle is still a verb; it still tells time (as you told your little cherubs). I never maintained that participles are finite verbs; you are putting words in my mouth, dearie.<BR/><BR/>Now, perhaps you could write me an essay on how<BR/> <BR/><I>… chambers provided by the dumbest publisher … </I><BR/><BR/>is any less flabby than <BR/><BR/><I>… chambers that are provided by the dumbest publisher … </I>.<BR/><BR/>They’re both written in the passive voice. If you want to believe that all your participles introducing your participial phrases are not verb forms used in the flabby old passive voice, that is your prerogative. <BR/><BR/>Lee: <I>A verb must be finite, Matt. You pressed that wisdom upon me.</I><BR/><BR/>I pressed no such wisdom. I wrote that <I>a sentence</I> needs a finite verb. Are you maintaining that an infinitive is not a verb? Infinitives can also denote present or past time and be active or passive.<BR/><BR/>Twenty-eight years, you say? Nesfield is spinning in his grave.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1163298610565674492006-11-11T18:30:00.000-08:002006-11-11T18:30:00.000-08:00The great grammargrinch blames the spellchecker fo...The great grammargrinch blames the spellchecker for her error! Wow!<BR/><BR/>Lee, I’m short for time right now. I’ll respond later to your many wonderful points. <BR/><BR/>I’ve chewed on that which you suggested, and I thank you for clarifying your double standard.<BR/><BR/>While you’re waiting for my reply, chew on the following.<BR/><BR/>Your original stance:<BR/><BR/>><I>Davis’s and Smith’s: You need separate possession before “support.”</I><<BR/><BR/>Your current stance:<BR/> <BR/>><I>Me: No, I don't need separate possession. These guys supported the project together.Your "support" needs a capital. It begins a sentence or a fragment or a partridge in a pear tree.</I><<BR/><BR/>Lee, I was quoting you. You’ve jumped in and corrected the amendment you made in your earlier post. Make up your mind.<BR/><BR/>><I>It begins a sentence or a fragment or a partridge in a pear tree.</I><<BR/><BR/>“It” has no antecedent. If you cannot remember my previous sentences to establish an antecedent, why should I have to do so when reading yours?Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1161274257168639002006-10-19T09:10:00.000-07:002006-10-19T09:10:00.000-07:00Matt: >Davis and Smith Davis’s and Smith’s: You ne...Matt: >Davis and Smith Davis’s and Smith’s: You need separate possession before “support.” support [for] preserving abortion rights, reviewing sales tax hyphenated “sales-tax” exemptions and creating an independent commission to redraw legislative and congressional districts.<<BR/><BR/>Me: No, I don't need separate possession. These guys supported the project together.Your "support" needs a capital. It begins a sentence or a fragment or a partridge in a pear tree. My sentence fragment was a green pony to see if you were awake. <BR/><BR/>Matt: Didn't you learn in your twenty-eight years of teaching that a sentence needs a finite verb? Perhaps not.<BR/><BR/>Me: I want you to write me an essay on "finite" verbs. You are trying to use flossy terms that would have confused my students just to make you look learned. I told the dears that a sentence needs a verb that shows time.Talk American, Matt. Since we are being picky, "Perhaps not" is a fragment. Don't try that old "elliptical clause" flim flam on me to weasel out of this grammar felony.<BR/><BR/>Your "birds of a feather" comment has the period mark outside the quotation marks at the end. Only if one lives in Great Britain must it go outside.<BR/><BR/>Me: One can omit "that" ("specimen below" comment) if it is not the subject of the subordinate clause. The complement of "reason" is not "specimen"; the complement of "reason" is the noun clause "[that] the specimen below shows that birds of a feather flock together."<BR/><BR/>I do not "churn out" sentences, Matt. I craft them. I do not "rant"; I deliver remarks in measured tones of relentless logic. You've a tin ear, young man.<BR/><BR/>Do you suggest I take drugs? I haven't yet but am considering ingesting hallucigens to induce grammar ecstasy.<BR/><BR/>>They help readers understand when you use them before a noun preceded by words used as a single adjective.<<BR/><BR/>Me: I have no passive verb in this sentence, sirrah. I have a past participial phrase.That phrase is adjectival. A verb must be finite, Matt. You pressed that wisdom upon me.<BR/><BR/>Me: >That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb chops and baby asparagus for lunch in chambers provided by the dumbest publisher in the newspaper world.<<BR/><BR/>Me: You again mistake past participial phrases for verbs. These act adjectivally as they did in my previous sentence. You tilt with grammar windmills and show you don't know the difference between finite verbs and participial phrases.<BR/><BR/>Matt: Now, Lee, why didn't you think of that? Or does avoiding limp passive verbs apply only to others when you're dishing it out?<BR/><BR/>Me: "That" has no antecedent, Matt. Neither does "it" in your cliche "dishing it out." Your synapses have burned out.<BR/><BR/>I see from the time stamps that I deal with a critter who sits in front of his CRT screen at four in the morning. Doubtless you are a farmer in the grammar badlands of Iowa or some other rural fastness at the end of the civilized world.<BR/><BR/>What you must comprehend, Festus, before you issue forth to slop the hogs is that if we are to play this grammar game,there is a major rule for you to observe: What in others is a grave character flaw in me is a charming foible.<BR/><BR/>Chew on that, Mr.Carper Darper. And go feed those hogs. Today is harvesting day for the North Forty.<BR/><BR/>lee drury de cesare, Gulf of Mexico, Floridatwinkobiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07865056039680988073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1161270404809122622006-10-19T08:06:00.000-07:002006-10-19T08:06:00.000-07:00Heavens, I didn't know I had a fan. Thanks for yo...Heavens, I didn't know I had a fan. Thanks for your anal-retentive attention, Matt. Let me riposte, old sweetie.<BR/><BR/>The "it's" represents the revenge of the spellchecker. But gloat if you wish. You are right. Don't use "boneheadedly." It's a redundant adverb. "Stupid" is sufficient. Strunk & White would rap your knuckles. Avoid cliches such as "take the cake." They make you sound stale, dear one. (continued)twinkobiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07865056039680988073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1157454398068398362006-09-05T04:06:00.000-07:002006-09-05T04:06:00.000-07:00>That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb ...><I>That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb chops and baby asparagus for lunch in chambers <B>provided by</B> the dumbest publisher in the newspaper world.</I><<BR/><BR/>More passive verbs. Try:<BR/><BR/><I>That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb chops and baby asparagus for lunch in chambers that the dumbest publisher in the newspaper world provides.</I><BR/><BR/>Now, Lee, why didn't you think of that? Or does avoiding limp passive verbs apply only to others when you're dishing it out?Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1156767680342814162006-08-28T05:21:00.000-07:002006-08-28T05:21:00.000-07:00>They help readers understand a sentence when you ...><I>They help readers understand a sentence when you use them before a noun <B>preceded by words</B> used as a single adjective.</I><<BR/><BR/>Oh, go on. Fix your limp passive verb for me. I'll let you decide how.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1156767349243276982006-08-28T05:15:00.000-07:002006-08-28T05:15:00.000-07:00>Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le ...><I>Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le Smith is the specimen below shows that birds of a feather flock together.</I><<BR/><BR/>My goodness, Lee. "Specimen" (the complement of "is") is also the subject of "shows". This must be one of the most ridiculous sentences you have ever churned out in your ranting.<BR/><BR/>Try:<BR/><BR/><I>Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le Smith is the specimen below that shows that birds of a feather flock together.</I><BR/><BR/>or:<BR/><BR/><I>Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le Smith is the specimen below, showing that birds of a feather flock together.</I><BR/><BR/>or, better still:<BR/><BR/>Say "no" to cheap drugs that affect your writing.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1156766450407162062006-08-28T05:00:00.000-07:002006-08-28T05:00:00.000-07:00>Davis and Smith Davis’s and Smith’s: You need sep...><I>Davis and Smith <B>Davis’s and Smith’s: You need separate possession before “support.”</B> support <B> [for]</B> preserving abortion rights, reviewing sales tax <B> hyphenated “sales-tax”</B> exemptions and creating an independent commission to redraw legislative and congressional districts.</I><<BR/><BR/>Are you serious?<BR/><BR/><I>Davis's and Smith's support for preserving abortion rights, reviewing sales-tax exemptions and creating an independent commission to redraw legislative and congressional districts.</I><BR/><BR/>In the original "support" is a verb. Your revised version (with "support" as a noun attributed to Davis and Smith) is a sentence fragment. <BR/><BR/>Didn't you learn in your twenty-eight years of teaching that a sentence needs a finite verb? Perhaps not.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10202103.post-1156764988019010482006-08-28T04:36:00.000-07:002006-08-28T04:36:00.000-07:00It's [sic] meat-and-potatoes style provides homely...<I>It's [sic] meat-and-potatoes style provides homely fare. But I have seen The NY Times editorial grandees do worse.</I><BR/><BR/>Well done, Lee. In your first paragraph you make one of the most boneheadedly stupid errors of all time. The NY times editorial may do worse, but you ex-teachers of English with twenty-eight years' experience really take the cake. <BR/><BR/>I'm scared to read on.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05402579416733487159noreply@blogger.com