Important notice from the GRAMMAR POLICE. Plz read. This means you.

[rufio]

Specific terms would have been nice, but that wasn't what I wanted, no.

What did you want?  I'm curious.

(The fragment made sense to me, because as a fragment it implied a tone of voice to me that has a particular meaning when used IRL.  I can see why you didn't see that, though.)

[rohina]

Well, the implied "tone of voice" you identify isn't really a concept that other people might discern by reading.

[rufio]

Actually, your lack of inner voice is fairly nonstandard.

[rohina]

Actually, your lack of inner voice is fairly nonstandard.

My point, you ridiculous tosspot, is that "this is how it sounds to MY inner voice" is a bullshit statement as far as meaning anything to anyone else is concerned. Because guess why? NO ONE CAN HEAR RUFIO'S INNER VOICE, EXCEPT RUFIO.

Also, "lack of inner voice" is complete misrepresentation. I said I didn't HAVE to hear stuff in my head. No that I couldn't.

[rufio]

The structure (and any number of semantic cues) imply the tone of voice, generally.

In any case, that part was in parentheses because it was not the main part of my post.  What did you want to hear from the little quiz you gave me?

[jolrei]

The structure (and any number of semantic cues) imply the tone of voice, generally.

This at least is true.  I can easily discern rohina's growing ire and frustration from the structure and semantic/textual cues in her last post.  The inexplicable thing to me is why she even bothers to keep answering any of your posts, after most of the rest of us have given up due to sheer exhaustion (the "throwing up your hands" kind).  I can only imagine it's a slow day in Calgary.

I also imagine that if rohina was a ninja warrior, you would be a practice dummy.

[rohina]

Summer VACAY, jolrei. If this were term time, I would be more "HULK SMASH".

[Liz]

I'm still amused by the idea that rufio's "inner voice" has ears. All sorts of body parts out of place on that non-standard head...

[Audrey]

Shame, poor Midwig.   Deja vu. You tried, Rufio, you really tried.  However, that little exchange between you and rohina did make for interesting and amusing reading.

[J. M. Pescado]

Because guess why? NO ONE CAN HEAR RUFIO'S INNER VOICE, EXCEPT RUFIO.

Actually, I've heard people's inner voices before. Remarkably, they all sound rather similar: Moist and squishy.

[jolrei]

Actually, I've heard people's inner voices before. Remarkably, they all sound rather similar: Moist and squishy.

Are you sure that's a voice?  I mean, once you get inside there, everything is moist and squishy.

On the other hand, if that is a voice, it seems possible that Joan of Arc's "voices" that compelled her to rampage through France and then jump into a BBQ were little more than gas and perhaps her tummy rumbling.  Joan was a hungry emo; thousands die.

[/historical reductionism]

[Jelenedra]

Actually, I've heard people's inner voices before. Remarkably, they all sound rather similar: Moist and squishy.

Are you sure that's a voice?  I mean, once you get inside there, everything is moist and squishy.

On the other hand, if that is a voice, it seems possible that Joan of Arc's "voices" that compelled her to rampage through France and then jump into a BBQ were little more than gas and perhaps her tummy rumbling.  Joan was a hungry emo; thousands die.

[/historical reductionism]

Now you're making me want to watch The Messenger. Just for the scene where the Dustin Hoffman voice starts giving her a bunch of random scenarios as to why there might've been a sword lying in the middle of a field.

[K_L_Carten]

I have been lurking here on and off for years, but I have been a little afraid about my grammar.  Just like many of others here, its been years since I have taken a English class and even had to write something that I was truly worried about my grammar.  My spelling compared to most in any reports I had to write up at work was always better than my co-workers and my handwriting was the best of the lot.  I was always worried that I would have been called out by inadvertently making grammar errors.  Sometimes, I forget and sometimes use the rules of Spanish instead of English, and English is my native tongue.  It just slips and I am not fluent in Spanish anymore, it just seems that when writing I happen to mix it up at times. It sounds strange, but its the truth, ok, enough rambling. 
 
I just want to say on one thread there was question asked in a very misspelled and really hard to read grammar and logical way.  Someone cared enough to interpreted it for the rest of us and a few post down someone put a link on the site. The site is SpellCheck, not only does it check your spelling.  I always did that before posting, but it checks your grammar.  I have a tendency to be wordy and wow, it really shows on SpellCheck. If only we had that 20 years ago. I could have run it through SpellCheck and not worry about grammar.  Damn, kids are lucky today, I remember arguing over what was considered too wordy and cut it down so easy with this, and with that.  I just have to say the grammar police should be on patrol.  Really there is no reason that a post should not be misspelled and grammatically correct.  Thank you grammar police, and now when I go back to college, I will not be afraid of writing term papers again.     
 
 

[rufio]

Sometimes, I forget and sometimes use the rules of Spanish instead of English, and English is my native tongue.  It just slips and I am not fluent in Spanish anymore, it just seems that when writing I happen to mix it up at times.

Just out of curiosity, what kinds of errors?
 

I just want to say on one thread there was question asked in a very misspelled and really hard to read grammar and logical way.  Someone cared enough to interpreted it for the rest of us and a few post down someone put a link on the site. The site is SpellCheck, not only does it check your spelling.  I always did that before posting, but it checks your grammar.  I have a tendency to be wordy and wow, it really shows on SpellCheck. If only we had that 20 years ago. I could have run it through SpellCheck and not worry about grammar.

I didn't see the site, but computerized grammar checkers generally suck balls.  Anyway, being too verbose is not a grammatical problem, so a "grammar checker" should not be concerned about that.

[maxon]

I just want to say on one thread there was question asked in a very misspelled and really hard to read grammar and logical way.  Someone cared enough to interpreted it for the rest of us and a few post down someone put a link on the site. The site is SpellCheck, not only does it check your spelling.  I always did that before posting, but it checks your grammar.  I have a tendency to be wordy and wow, it really shows on SpellCheck. If only we had that 20 years ago. I could have run it through SpellCheck and not worry about grammar. 

I shouldn't rely too heavily on something like that if I were you.  The effectiveness of grammar checkers is very limited.  Similarly, spell-checkers - there are many words that sound the same but are spelled differently depending on what they mean.  You need to know (no) this, so you use the correct word.

[rohina]

The Grammar Check on MS Word is notoriously dreadful; it has no idea about pronoun agreement, and there are perfectly grammatical sentences you can write (especially using nouns and verbs ending in -ing) that it will mark as incorrect. I have a grammar exercise I give my students that is entirely made up of sentences the Grammar Check interprets incorrectly.

[michaelrym]

Essentially, my position is that spelling, punctuation and grammar are craft; stylistics is art. Compare it to painting: any hamtard can throw paint at a canvas, and maybe sometimes even get an aesthetically pleasing result, but a real artist has command of technique and craft, and knows WHY he/she achieved an aesthetically pleasing result.

Sorry to nitpick, but I just cannot agree with that.

A person who has command of technique and craft is just a good craftsman. An artist also has - in addition - his own, unique vision of the piece of reality he's trying to represent or imitate. There are no 'real' artists and 'unreal' artists. There are just artists, craftsmen, and morons who think they're artists because it makes them feel good.

I'm also tempted to debate the point that an artist knows why he achieved an aesthetically pleasing result. Well, maybe in retrospect, given enough time... IMO in all the big artistic breakthroughs  there's something I'll call the X factor: a combination of special circumstances which makes the artist do something unusual, to attempt something he's not attempted before. Note that 'special' here does not mean 'extraordinary'; it can be something as simple as a nagging toothache (as one art historian has it, the inspiration behind Munch's "The Scream").

Interesting thread, this. Spent two hours smoking and reading instead of playing TS3. Now, I have a question for everyone here: How do you feel about these two text strings from our favourite game: Write A Non-Fiction Novel and Write A Fiction Novel?

[shelleyb]

  I'm brand new to this particular "forum," but WOW!

For those in law enforcement, please note that CORRECTLY, any small punctuation mark goes INSIDE the close quotation mark.  Large punctuation marks, such as ? or ! go on the outside.  There is a very interesting reason why this is true and it has nothing to do with grammar.  In the old days of typesetting, actual metal pieces were lined up to assemble a page of print.  It just so happened that typesetters noticed when they placed a small punctuation mark tile OUTSIDE a close quotation tile, the rest of the line of type was slanted.  However, when they placed the small tile INSIDE the close quotation tile, no slanting occured. 

(And yes, it is true, occured can also be spelled occurred, but in today's proper grammar rules most of those redundant consonants are being dumped.  I think the reason is that someone has figured out that a person's actual lifespan can be determined by how many syllables we use--errors such as irregardless and preventative--or the quantity of letters we use in writing during our lifetime and are teaching today's youth to JUST SAY NO.  Any yes, it is also true that one can start a sentence with And or But if they know how to do it correctly.  Enough of my rant and back to the lesson at hand, typesetting.)

The reason for the slanting type can be easily explained mathematically, but the typesetters didn't have time to sit around and speculate, like we obviously do--otherwise why the attraction to forums?  Those old typesetters had to get a paper or periodical or penny dreadful printed and on the street or they would be out of a job.  So, in closing to this particular topic, that is the reason small punctuation marks are placed inside a close quotation mark.  Interesting . . .  (The dots, by the way, are called an ellipsis.  Two dashes placed one right after the other is still called a dash, it just places more emphasis on the break in the sentence.)

I haven't read through this whole thread--just the first and last pages--but wondered if a lesson on split infinitives or past participles has been provided.  I have been out of school for quite a while, doing technical writing by the way, and find that I have trouble remembering the rules for lay, lay, and laid.  Other interesting facts:  (and use of a colon is the proper punctuation mark to use in this situation seeing that I am beginning a list, separated by semicolons) school-aged children today are being taught to use very few commas in their writing (see the above explanation about determining lifespan) but technical writers are encouraged to use many commas so that a reader knows where to stop and digest the technical information they have just consumed; no one in today's society has any clue when to use -ible and when to use -able; very few people know when to use its and when to use it's.  Again, end rant.

Oops, one more thing to add.  I think it is appalling that there is a law enforcement task force which is allowed to use vulgarities and abusive language.  I may be inviting a nasty retort, or nobody reads this thread any more out of lack of interest.  In either case, vilifying someone else by insinuating that they are unintelligent is worse, by far, than overlooking some inadvertent misspelled word or text-speak.  If one can't understand the message someone is sending, a civilized person politely asks for clarification.  Name-calling is juvenile and should be below the standards of someone whose purpose is to monitor the language used on this website.  As you can clearly see by my signature line, you have hit a huge, throbbing nerve when you insult someone's cognitive abilities.  I came here to get the "awesomemod" and thought I would check out some of the forums to see what kind of information is being presented.  I was hoping for something better than what EA has to offer, but after reading a few entries on this thread, I may just satisfy myself with checking in periodically to see if any new updates to the mod are available.

If there is still any interest in this thread, I will look here a couple of times to see if there are any takers . . . (again, an ellipsis.)  I would be most honored to hear back from the originator of the thread (did someone assign the job of GRAMMAR POLICE to this individual or was it an assumed task?), and especially gratified to hear from the originator of the actual website.

Follow Up:  I have glanced over my missive and deleted most, not all, of the derogatory language directed at the grammarian (look it up, it's a valid word).  However, I was in a negative emotional state when I wrote it and pounded it out very quickly.  Some things you may notice are run-on sentences, verbosity, and continuous insults directed to those who are obviously not as erudite as they believe themselves to be.  IF (and I emphasize if) anyone looks at this thread anymore and finds a misspelled word, I apologize in advance.  That is the price you sometimes pay when adept with a keyboard.  Otherwise, the editorial field would be significantly "downsized."

End of rant.

[rohina]

Wow, the number of inaccuracies per word here is pretty high, considering how long the post is.

[snowbawl]

Word Vomit

Oh go fuck a retard and call yourself a Good Samaritan.  We do not care.

Here, you can have "{" as a parting gift.  Thanks for playing!

[Liz]

I'm brand new to this particular "forum," but WOW!

That was the most presumptuous and condescending introduction I've seen in quite some time. I especially liked the part where you chose to claim "too F to spell" and ended your pompous grammar screed by declaring that you couldn't be arsed to find and fix your errors. I feel honoured to have witnessed this emerging profile in courage.

I think it is appalling that there is a law enforcement task force which is allowed to use vulgarities and abusive language.  I may be inviting a nasty retort, or nobody reads this thread any more out of lack of interest...

In that case, I would like very much to introduce you to the word "fucktwittery". And please do feel free to enjoy that non-line-slanting, post-quotation-mark punctuation, free of charge.

[Lorelei]

[chaos]

@shellyb: All that ranting about grammar and you still exhibit which/that confusion. Grammar cat is not amused.

[maurie]

TL;DR. I skimmed the reaaaaaalllllly long rant.  Am I missing something? 

-He/she explains typsetting-induced punctuation
-redundant consonants (as opposed to unneccesary?)  -oops )?
-ellipses, dots and dashes for those who really don't know
-commas in technology
-the -ible/-able debate
-the use of vulgarities by grammar police to spork us dumbasses
-and an admitted unwillingness to correct his/her own typos/mistakes in a grammar thread

Was the point to inform, impress or redress?  Evidently, the rant missed its intended mark, or it would be clear.  I'm assuming the point is to lecture us about the use of vulgarities - he/she believes we should be addressing language, rather than the effective use of written communication. I don't claim to have superior writing skills, but personally, I think the use of the pronoun "fucktard" in the place of an incredible nuisance's username is a perfectly acceptable, grammatically correct way to say, "stfu."  This site is not for 12's who shouldn't be around such communication.

[soozelwoozel]

(The dots, by the way, are called an ellipsis.  Two dashes placed one right after the other is still called a dash, it just places more emphasis on the break in the sentence.)
blah blah blah
(and use of a colon is the proper punctuation mark to use in this situation seeing that I am beginning a list, separated by semicolons)
blah blah blah
no one in today's society has any clue when to use -ible and when to use -able; very few people know when to use its and when to use it's.  Again, end rant.

Gee, thanks so much for those condescending explanations. (That single dot I just used is a full stop by the way. It's used to end sentences.) I'm so glad you arrived on the scene armed with all this mind-blowing grammar knowledge, I was lost in a mire of semicolons and exclamation marks before you came along. Also, I think you're hanging around the wrong people if your fellows don't understand when to use its and it's.