On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 19:19:47 -0500, Australopithecus scobis
wrote:



Commas and periods go inside the quotation marks.
snip

Now, that's pure dumb, if you ask me.

Which nobody did.

And my opinion, like everyone else's, doesn't have to be based on objective
fact.

And frequently isn't.

Tom Veatch
Wichita, KS USA

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:20:53 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:38:48 -0400, Tom Watson
calmly ranted:

Strunk and White is God.

Are.

Since it is the common name for a book it is singular. Think about
it.

_Don't_ make me draw my Webbie's Hernia Edition...


I'll see your hernia and raise you an OED.




Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:38:48 -0400, Tom Watson
wrote:

Strunk and White is God.

Not in England it isn't.

--
Smert' spamionam

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:31:12 +0100, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:38:48 -0400, Tom Watson
wrote:

Strunk and White is God.

Not in England it isn't.

Yeah, youse guys is pretty much stuck with Fowler's. The closest we
have to that is the Chicago Manual of Style but it suffers from the
same disease as Fowler - a lack of wit.

I base this charge on the definition of a fairly good English stylist,
who said, "...brevity is the soul of wit..." and thus Fowle'sr (and
it's colonial cousin, The Chicago Manual) must be lacking in wit, as
they are obviously lacking in brevity.

The Elements of Style ( by messrs Strunk and White) on the other
hand, is brief to a fault and thus nearly faultless in it's wit.


(watson - who learned to love the spit infinitive by reading brother
fowler, back when it still might have mattered)




Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

Tom Watson wrote in
:

snip
(watson - who learned to love the spit infinitive by reading brother
fowler, back when it still might have mattered)

This term, the spit infinitive, was not a part of my education. Care to
elucidate?

Patriarch

"Tom Watson" wrote in message

The Elements of Style ( by messrs Strunk and White) on the other
hand, is brief to a fault and thus nearly faultless in it's wit.

Once a requirement for HS English, probably not seen now until graduate
school.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 7/10/04

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 21:40:06 +0000, wrote:

This term, the spit infinitive, was not a part of my education. Care to
elucidate?

To boldly go...'to go' boldly

--
"Keep your ass behind you"

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 15:40:14 -0400, Tom Watson wrote:

hand, is brief to a fault and thus nearly faultless in it's wit.

faultless in _its_ wit, dagnabit!
--
"Keep your ass behind you"

Australopithecus scobis wrote:

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 21:40:06 +0000, wrote:


This term, the spit infinitive, was not a part of my education. Care to
elucidate?


To boldly go...'to go' boldly

patooie.

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 17:32:52 -0500, Australopithecus scobis
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 15:40:14 -0400, Tom Watson wrote:

hand, is brief to a fault and thus nearly faultless in it's wit.

faultless in _its_ wit, dagnabit!


Der's for or fyve udders in dat post. wide ya pick on dat un?


Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

In article , Swingman
wrote:

probably not seen now until graduate
school.

I doubt even grad students see Strunk & White these days. Certainly
J-School grads don't.

djb

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:40:27 -0400, Tom Watson wrote:
Der's for or fyve udders in dat post. wide ya pick on dat un?

Brevity

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:59:02 -0500, Australopithecus scobis
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:40:27 -0400, Tom Watson wrote:
Der's for or fyve udders in dat post. wide ya pick on dat un?

Brevity


Brilliant!



Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

Dave Balderstone responds:

In article , Swingman
wrote:

probably not seen now until graduate
school.

I doubt even grad students see Strunk & White these days. Certainly
J-School grads don't.

My second writer's job was for a guy who had graduated from J-School...but not
as a grad student. Just a BS. Still, my 3/4 of a degree in English lit put me
way ahead of him at various times. He did know how to dig to get factual
material, but he often couldn't assemble it so it made sense.

Of course, that was nearly 40 years ago, I finally completed the degree and Tim
went on to bigger and better things working in PR for Aetna Insurance.

Charlie Self
"Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and
hurry off as if nothing happened." Sir Winston Churchill

In article , Charlie Self
wrote:

He did know how to dig to get factual
material, but he often couldn't assemble it so it made sense.

That's why editors were invented, n'est ce pas?

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 17:41:28 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

In article , Swingman
wrote:

probably not seen now until graduate
school.

I doubt even grad students see Strunk & White these days. Certainly
J-School grads don't.


Seems to be true across the board. Even professional magazines, for
example, Aviation Week, in addition to injecting editorial commentary into
some news stories, is also declining in terms of grammatical quality.


djb

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 13:31:12 +0100, Andy Dingley
calmly ranted:

On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 20:38:48 -0400, Tom Watson
wrote:

Strunk and White is God.

Not in England it isn't.

Yabbut, what would THEY know?


-------------------------------------------------------------
give me The Luxuries Of Life * http://www.diversify.com
i can live without the necessities * 2 Tee collections online
-------------------------------------------------------------

In article ,
patriarch patriarch wrote:
Tom Watson wrote in
:

snip
(watson - who learned to love the spit infinitive by reading brother
fowler, back when it still might have mattered)

This term, the spit infinitive, was not a part of my education. Care to
elucidate?

Grammar: an 'infinitive' is the verb form 'to {something}', as in 'to be'.

To 'split' an infinitive is to insert a modifier _between_ the words that
make up the verb. Sometimes one finds it necessary to brazenly split an
infinitive, to convey the precise shade of meaning desired, although the
process was strongly frowned-upon by strict grammarians.

One of the better known examples:
"Boldly to go..."
"To go boldly..."
"To boldly go ... where no man has gone before."

In the general case, splitting the infinitive is considered to really be
bad usage. (That sentence is a deliberate illustration of _why_ it is justly
so considered. In comparatively rare cases, on the other hand, it
does serve to convey a shade of meaning not available in the more 'formally
correct' forms; see the usage of 'brazenly', above.

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:21:08 +0000,
(Robert Bonomi) wrote:

In article ,
patriarch patriarch wrote:
Tom Watson wrote in
m:

snip
(watson - who learned to love the spit infinitive by reading brother
fowler, back when it still might have mattered)

This term, the spit infinitive, was not a part of my education. Care to
elucidate?

Grammar: an 'infinitive' is the verb form 'to {something}', as in 'to be'.

To 'split' an infinitive is to insert a modifier _between_ the words that
make up the verb. Sometimes one finds it necessary to brazenly split an
infinitive, to convey the precise shade of meaning desired, although the
process was strongly frowned-upon by strict grammarians.

One of the better known examples:
"Boldly to go..."
"To go boldly..."
"To boldly go ... where no man has gone before."

In the general case, splitting the infinitive is considered to really be
bad usage. (That sentence is a deliberate illustration of _why_ it is justly
so considered. In comparatively rare cases, on the other hand, it
does serve to convey a shade of meaning not available in the more 'formally
correct' forms; see the usage of 'brazenly', above.



To be fair, Bob, I think he wanted to know about the "Spit"
infinitive.

(watson - who baldly goes and spits out infinitives with abandon.)



Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On 12 Sep 2004 00:16:33 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
calmly ranted:

Dave Balderstone responds:

In article , Swingman
wrote:

probably not seen now until graduate
school.

I doubt even grad students see Strunk & White these days. Certainly
J-School grads don't.

My second writer's job was for a guy who had graduated from J-School

Um, who was your first writer and what was his job, Charlie? g
("...second writing job", perhaps?) parry, riposte, thrust


-------------------------------------------------------------
give me The Luxuries Of Life * http://www.diversify.com
i can live without the necessities * 2 Tee collections online
-------------------------------------------------------------

In article ,
Tom Watson wrote:
On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:21:08 +0000,
(Robert Bonomi) wrote:

In article ,
patriarch patriarch wrote:
Tom Watson wrote in
:

snip
(watson - who learned to love the spit infinitive by reading brother
fowler, back when it still might have mattered)

This term, the spit infinitive, was not a part of my education. Care to
elucidate?

Grammar: an 'infinitive' is the verb form 'to {something}', as in 'to be'.

To 'split' an infinitive is to insert a modifier _between_ the words that
make up the verb. Sometimes one finds it necessary to brazenly split an
infinitive, to convey the precise shade of meaning desired, although the
process was strongly frowned-upon by strict grammarians.

One of the better known examples:
"Boldly to go..."
"To go boldly..."
"To boldly go ... where no man has gone before."

In the general case, splitting the infinitive is considered to really be
bad usage. (That sentence is a deliberate illustration of _why_ it is justly
so considered. In comparatively rare cases, on the other hand, it
does serve to convey a shade of meaning not available in the more 'formally
correct' forms; see the usage of 'brazenly', above.



To be fair, Bob, I think he wanted to know about the "Spit"
infinitive.

D'oh. Well that, obviously, is 'to spit'.

Guess he never chawwed bacco. s******