Grammar Wars: The Colon Strikes Back! [Archive] - Team17 Forum

PDA

View Full Version : Grammar Wars: The Colon Strikes Back!

FutureWorm
2 Aug 2006, 01:15
Note: The posts below have been taken from the "OD Get-Together: Paid And Going" thread - http://forum.team17.co.uk/showthread.php?t=29716
Yeah, the others were making sarcastic comments most of the way down. I enjoyed it; it was on my level.
Yeah, you are definitely having way too much fun. :p

worMatty
2 Aug 2006, 21:24
Are having too much fun? Paul I recommend you stop right now before you cause yourself an injury.

Paul.Power
2 Aug 2006, 23:25
I think are is correct in the context. After all, the photograph is in the present, even if the event was in the past.

worMatty
3 Aug 2006, 00:33
He should have used past tense. You did. It makes more sense. If he was talking about what was going on in the picture he should have specified that by putting "there," on the end of his sentence. He could have been talking about your experience in this thread.

FutureWorm
3 Aug 2006, 00:42
"In that picture" was implied, or so I thought. We were discussing the photograph, after all.

Vader
3 Aug 2006, 10:42
Hows this for grammar get stuffed?

Paul.Power
3 Aug 2006, 11:23
I appreciate you prefer brains, but colons are important too ;).

Vader
3 Aug 2006, 11:40
Baddum...Tccchhh!
Actually, it should have been a semi-colon. Oh, and an apostrophe:
How's this for grammar; get stuffed?

Paul.Power
3 Aug 2006, 12:00
I think I'd prefer a colon myself: you want to emphasise the get stuffed, and a colon is more powerful and directional than a semi.

Vader
3 Aug 2006, 12:20
There are too many innuendos in that post for to comment.
You may well prefer a colon, but that would be linguistically incorrect. It's because I'm asking a question in two or more parts. If it was a statement (as your post is) it would be different.
A pair of examples follow:
Do you prefer; Worms, Worms:Armageddon, Worms 3D?
I wish I could explain what i mean. I made one of the examples a bit more subtle, I guess. Bah, I've lost my train of thought.

Paul.Power
3 Aug 2006, 12:25
Fair enough; I haven't come across that subtlety before.
(Well, that's us immunised against Nettus noobicus)

AndrewTaylor
3 Aug 2006, 14:48
I think are is correct in the context. After all, the photograph is in the present, even if the event was in the past.
I was told in English class that when writing about a book you use the present continuous tense for all events in that book, even ones set in the past or future (which is most books). I would assume the same rule applies to photographs.
That said, since you could have omitted either "in that photograph" or "when that photograph was taken", neither past nor present tense is really wrong.

thomasp
3 Aug 2006, 15:47
I am sooo tempted to split this off into a new thread about grammar.

Vader
4 Aug 2006, 19:02
I would love that.
I am grammar nazi.
Not an actual nazi, you understand.

thomasp
5 Aug 2006, 10:58
One lovely new grammar thread for all your grammer-discussing needs :D

AndrewTaylor
5 Aug 2006, 11:26
I am sooo tempted to split this off into a new thread about grammar.
Good job. Now, go and split the 100%OTT into threads for its many constituent subjects.

Xinos
5 Aug 2006, 12:38
wtf is going on?

thomasp
5 Aug 2006, 12:57
wtf is going on?
Everyone started moaning about grammar in the OD Get-together thread, so I split it off, at Vader's request.
Here's a question for Paul & Vader: Is the title of this thread grammatically correct?

Vader
5 Aug 2006, 14:02
Yes. The second part is a subtext of the first. I'm not using the correct terminology because I can't remember it. I guess that mens I might be using the correct terminology. Something about denotation.
Note: Not detonation.

Blinx
5 Aug 2006, 16:14
*apathy levels rising*

Xinos
5 Aug 2006, 17:38
Yes. The second part is a subtext of the first. I'm not using the correct terminology because I can't remember it. I guess that mens I might be using the correct terminology. Something about denotation.
Note: Not detonation.
I think you meant "means". But if you are talking about men, I would suggest you write: "I guess the men I might be using, are using the correct terminology" or "I am using men, and I suppose they are using correct terminology". I hope you meant "mean" though, because the new sentences are very confusing and somewhat scary to think about.

AndrewTaylor
5 Aug 2006, 17:55
Yes. The second part is a subtext of the first. I'm not using the correct terminology because I can't remember it. I guess that mens I might be using the correct terminology. Something about denotation.
Note: Not detonation.
Detonation is looking like a better and better idea...

SomePerson
5 Aug 2006, 18:06
There are too many innuendos in that post for to comment.
You may well prefer a colon, but that would be linguistically incorrect. It's because I'm asking a question in two or more parts. If it was a statement (as your post is) it would be different.
A pair of examples follow:
Do you prefer; Worms, Worms:Armageddon, Worms 3D?
I wish I could explain what i mean. I made one of the examples a bit more subtle, I guess. Bah, I've lost my train of thought.
If it were. Conditional/subjunctive is always "were." "If I were green." "I wish he were my friend."

Vader
5 Aug 2006, 19:47
I think you meant "means".
Yarrr.
If it were. Conditional/subjunctive is always "were." "If I were green." "I wish he were my friend."
That were dead well spotted.

Lex
11 Aug 2006, 15:40
I take pride in being a grammatical master. Vader, if you're so into grammar, why have you made so many grammar mistakes in this thread? Is it just for sarcasm and/or silliness? You have been tending to use sentence fragments, in case you haven't noticed.

AndrewTaylor
11 Aug 2006, 17:07
You have been tending to use sentence fragments, in case you haven't noticed.
Nothing wrong with sentence fragments.

Xinos
11 Aug 2006, 17:43
Nothing wrong with sentence fragments.
That is, right.

Paul.Power
11 Aug 2006, 17:51
Must conserve battery power.

Vader
11 Aug 2006, 17:52
That depends if you are adhering to prescriptive or descriptive grammar.
Lex, I'm not that bothered. If I was I'd end up spamming 90% of posts with corrections. The novelty would soon wear off.
I try not to use sentence fragments but on a forum like this I think it makes things seem a bit long-winded.
Also, you mixed your tenses up in that last sentence. You could have said "You have a tendency to use sentence fragments, in case you haven't noticed" or "You have been tending to use sentence fragments, in case you hadn't noticed".
Furthermore, you are from America and have different linguistic rules.
Most importantly, meh, it's just a forum.

FutureWorm
11 Aug 2006, 19:13
Furthermore, you are from America and have different linguistic rules.
Ontario is in Canada.

bonz
11 Aug 2006, 19:17
Ontario is in Canada.
Ontario is in Canada, Canada is in America, so Ontaria is in America.

Lex
11 Aug 2006, 19:17
Lex, I'm not that bothered. If I was I'd end up spamming 90% of posts with corrections. The novelty would soon wear off.This is a grammar thread. I wouldn't normally give corrections either, unless I was being silly with Bonz. :pAlso, you mixed your tenses up in that last sentence. You could have said "You have a tendency to use sentence fragments, in case you haven't noticed" or "You have been tending to use sentence fragments, in case you hadn't noticed".Both examples would mean something different from what I meant. As opposed to the "hadn't" in the last example, I meant the noticing in the present tense, so "hadn't" wouldn't have applied. However, that's quite silly of me, as I had just informed you, earlier in the sentence, that you had been using sentence fragments. Still, the use of multiple tenses in the same sentence is correct, as long the user means to use them. The first example is a statement of general usage of sentence fragments, which isn't what I meant, as I was pointing out the present case rather than a long-term case.Furthermore, you are from America and have different linguistic rules.Nope, Canadian people use the same rules as British people.Most importantly, meh, it's just a forum.Agreed.

thomasp
11 Aug 2006, 19:34
Ontario is in Canada, Canada is in America, so Ontaria is in America.
Technically, Canada is in the continent of North America, not the truncated country of America

bonz
11 Aug 2006, 19:48
Technically, Canada is in the continent of North America, not the truncated country of America
That can depend on definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent#Models

AndrewTaylor
11 Aug 2006, 19:56
That can depend on definition:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent#Models
Yes, but that definition is utterly irrelevant to a discussion of language, as Canadians do not speak American English. Nor, come to that, do they speak British English. They tend, as I understand it, to speak a blend of British English, American English, and that special brand of French that only exists in Canada. You have to have some grasp of context, or you won't be allowed in a language discussion.

Lex
11 Aug 2006, 20:01
Only those who speak French speak French here. It is not intermingled with the English, making a strange French-English crossbreed language, though that probably isn't what you meant.
We say "colour" here rather than "color". We also say "period" rather than "full stop". So, you're right, Andrew. It is a mixture, though the linguistic rules are the same as England's.

Vader
11 Aug 2006, 21:44
That's quite a shock to hear. I assumed, given the language was taken from here, over lots of water, and onto another continent, that the language which formed there spread north to Canada.
It's good to know, though.

Lex
13 Aug 2006, 00:17
I'm really proud that Canadians have managed to resist US influences as much as they have. :) Canada is much different from the USA, really. We use the metric system and suchlike. There's even a law saying that 35% of the music played on public [airwave] radio stations must be Canadian, so USA doesn't take over everything.

FutureWorm
13 Aug 2006, 00:21
There's even a law saying that 35% of the music played on public [airwave] radio stations must be Canadian, so USA doesn't take over everything.
That's a dumb law.

Lex
13 Aug 2006, 00:26
For a radio DJ, like I wanted to be, it is. I decided not to when I found out I wouldn't have total freedom. However, it has kept the US influence away, and was most useful before the Internet came about and gave people a clear vision of what was out there. I agree that it should be removed now, however.

AndrewTaylor
13 Aug 2006, 00:44
That's a dumb law.
It's a great law. Just play Barenaked Ladies and Arrogant Worms all day. Problem solved.

worMatty
13 Aug 2006, 01:08
If the law didn't exist but you played more than 35% out of love for your country would you still be complaining?

Lex
13 Aug 2006, 01:11
Not at all. If most of the music I listened to was Canadian, it'd be perfectly fine. As it is, Boards Of Canada (my favourite band) doesn't even count because they're Scottish.

FutureWorm
13 Aug 2006, 02:10
Not at all. If most of the music I listened to was Canadian, it'd be perfectly fine. As it is, Boards Of Canada (my favourite band) doesn't even count because they're Scottish.
Are they really? What a letdown.

AndrewTaylor
13 Aug 2006, 11:47
What if you had Canadian music on a constant loop in the background, being talked over, and then played whatever you liked? Would that count?

Vader
13 Aug 2006, 14:00
Would you not run out of Canadian music after about 3 months? I mean without resorting to Celine Dion.

Paul.Power
13 Aug 2006, 14:02
Shaniya Twain is Canadian, is she not?

Vader
13 Aug 2006, 14:10
Even more reason to quit DJing!

Paul.Power
13 Aug 2006, 14:11
Well she's an improvement on Celine Dion, anyway.

AndrewTaylor
13 Aug 2006, 14:24
What if you got some Canadian mates together and recorded some Pulp songs? Would that count?

Paul.Power
13 Aug 2006, 15:33
I wonder if there are any Canadian internet musicians, of the ilk of Lemon Demon and Jonathan Coulton (both American, but presumably there are Canadian ones out there)

Vader
13 Aug 2006, 15:42
What if you got some Canadian mates together and recorded some Pulp songs? Would that count?
That would still be rubbish music, though, so it doesn't really help.

AndrewTaylor
13 Aug 2006, 15:49
That would still be rubbish music, though, so it doesn't really help.
I choose to take that as an aspersion on his friends' musical abilities, as it is not possible for a sentient being to dislike Do You Remember The First Time unless it is deaf or speaks a language where, by sheer fluke, the phrase "Do You Remember The First Time?" means "Your Mother Was A Child Molester".

Paul.Power
13 Aug 2006, 15:52
Has to be said, I don't remember Do You Remember The First Time?
How does it go?
(It took me a few years, and the coincidence of Oasis and my mother both supporting Manchester City, to realise that Britpop was actually quite good)

AndrewTaylor
13 Aug 2006, 15:56
Has to be said, I don't remember Do You Remember The First Time?
How does it go?
(It took me a few years, and the coincidence of Oasis and my mother both supporting Manchester City, to realise that Britpop was actually quite good)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uZTwCQjFfk&mode=related&search=
It's not the best version, but it's a good answer, I'm sure you'll agree. It's the guitar line under the chorus that makes it, I think.

Paul.Power
13 Aug 2006, 16:00
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uZTwCQjFfk&mode=related&search=
It's not the best version, but it's a good answer, I'm sure you'll agree. It's the guitar line under the chorus that makes it, I think.Oh, that one. Think I remember that one now. The chorus, at least.
Yeah, it's pretty good. And I agree about the guitar line (The bass in the chorus is pretty cool, too).

Vader
13 Aug 2006, 16:00
It is not possible for a sentient being to dislike Do You Remember The First Time.
Erm, well, it is. I can prove it. Look:
I don't like "Do You Remember The First Time?".
It's not the sort of music I enjoy. I enjoy other music which happens not to include that.
Sorry to break it to you like that but it's true. I may go to Hell for it but at least I'll be listening to good tunes on the way.

philby4000
13 Aug 2006, 16:21
Oasis
I'm melting! I'm melllting!
*melts*

Paul.Power
13 Aug 2006, 16:33
Time for a split-off thread from the split-off thread, perhaps?

AndrewTaylor
13 Aug 2006, 16:55
I may go to Hell for it but at least I'll be listening to good tunes on the way.
No, you won't. You'll be listening to trash and enjoying it.

Paul.Power
13 Aug 2006, 17:02
No, you won't. You'll be listening to trash and enjoying it.That's not necessarily true. After all, it would be daft to say that the set of good tunes and the set of tunes Vader likes are mutually exclusive based on one particular example.
Oh, wait. Astrophysicist.
But also mathematician...

AndrewTaylor
13 Aug 2006, 17:24
That's not necessarily true. After all, it would be daft to say that the set of good tunes and the set of tunes Vader likes are mutually exclusive based on one particular example.
It is my experience that Vader has apalling taste.
(By which of course I mean wildly different taste to my own. That's what it says under "apalling taste" in my dictionary, because I wrote it there myself.)

Vader
13 Aug 2006, 19:29
If you find the things I like apalling then you are too easily apalled which suggests the range of things to your taste is somewhat narrow.
My taste may well differ from yours but I feel mine is probably more diverse.
I'm not entirely sure what impact that has on this discussion but I'm pretty sure it has some. Perhaps it's a sign that if you were to broaden your taste somewhat you'd find that a lot of the things which apall you are actually very good. Perhaps.

Lex
14 Aug 2006, 05:27
Just as a note, the Canadian musicians I would play mostly, if I were to become a radio DJ, would probably be:
Venetian Snares
Manitoba (aka Caribou)
Alexisonfire
Metric
Whitfield (SammyJ's amazing band. SammyJ's a wormer in SfX. He's also a true rock star.)
Buck 65
The Arcade Fire
Final Fantasy
Death From Above 1979
Do Make Say Think
Godspeed You! Black Emperor
A Silver Mt. Zion
Delerium
Kittie
Neil Young
Our Lady Peace
Set Fire To Flames
Skinny Puppy

vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.