Feminazis need to shush

This is the place for topical debate and discussion about anything in the world (non-Queen related).

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby Roger » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:12 pm

From the Telegraph, in case the Guardian was too progressive:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... nists.html
 
Roger
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby musicalprostitute » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:21 pm

Roger wrote:
musicalprostitute wrote:
As long as you don't want them to learn your quirky grammar then all should be good in the hood, guv. Really.


I’ve never made any such demands of immigrants; only of those who make such demands themselves. I mean, if you’re going to insist that immigrants learn English, you should really know that ‘none’ is a singular noun.


I think I said this to you the other day when you tried to criticise my use of the word 'hung' or something: you really should not be so pedantic when you, yourself, cannot construct an English sentence correctly. Now, I do not care about any of this (it is so small fry to me), but when you attempt to criticise the mistakes of others just take a breather and look at your own errors.

Look, to halt your latest rant/whine right here: I do not care if my spelling or grammar is incorrect on here - mere trivialities like this mean absolutely nothing to me. I am glad that you care (but...shhh...whisper it quietly...work on your own grammar first, hey?).
 
musicalprostitute
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

Defend yourself, I bring catastrophe

      
 
Posts: 4271
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Essex and Cardiff.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 455 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby musicalprostitute » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:23 pm

Roger wrote:From the Telegraph, in case the Guardian was too progressive:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... nists.html


Nah, The Guardian is not progressive, bruv...it is just shite. Dirty little rag.
 
musicalprostitute
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

Defend yourself, I bring catastrophe

      
 
Posts: 4271
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Essex and Cardiff.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 455 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby Roger » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:37 pm

I think I said this to you the other day when you tried to criticise my use of the word 'hung' or something: you really should not be so pedantic when you, yourself, cannot construct an English sentence correctly. Now, I do not care about any of this (it is so small fry to me), but when you attempt to criticise the mistakes of others just take a breather and look at your own errors.


If I criticise someone’s spelling or grammar, it’s just because it annoys me. You, however, feel that those who don’t speak English shouldn’t be in this country, so you really are putting yourself under pressure to demonstrate flawless English, lest you feel obliged to depart from this rock.

Incidentally I wasn’t even discussing hanging with you at the time. It was a general observation of pro-death penalty folk, made in response to a post by JLP. Thrillingly and unbeknownst to me, you had demonstrated my point in an earlier post that I had yet to read. My post was of a similar theme to a nice little quote (should be quotation; there’s an example of an actual error that I deliberately made) I read the other day: People who proudly call themselves politically incorrect are invariably also factually, morally and grammatically incorrect.

As for my own grammar, I’m very happy to have mine challenged and usually very pleased to learn new rules. I also regularly and deliberately ignore rules. I have no issue ending a sentence with a preposition or starting one with a conjunction. Splitting an infinitive is fair game. I doubt I’ll ever fully understand the difference between ‘because of’ and ‘owing to’. Sadly, your attempt to point out an error failed (because it wasn’t an error), but I’ll welcome any future endeavours.
 
Roger
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby musicalprostitute » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:51 pm

Roger wrote:
I think I said this to you the other day when you tried to criticise my use of the word 'hung' or something: you really should not be so pedantic when you, yourself, cannot construct an English sentence correctly. Now, I do not care about any of this (it is so small fry to me), but when you attempt to criticise the mistakes of others just take a breather and look at your own errors.


If I criticise someone’s spelling or grammar, it’s just because it annoys me. You, however, feel that those who don’t speak English shouldn’t be in this country, so you really are putting yourself under pressure to demonstrate flawless English, lest you feel obliged to depart from this rock.

Incidentally I wasn’t even discussing hanging with you at the time. It was a general observation of pro-death penalty folk, made in response to a post by JLP. Thrillingly and unbeknownst to me, you had demonstrated my point in an earlier post that I had yet to read. My post was of a similar theme to a nice little quote (should be quotation; there’s an example of an actual error that I deliberately made) I read the other day: People who proudly call themselves politically incorrect are invariably also factually, morally and grammatically incorrect.

As for my own grammar, I’m very happy to have mine challenged and usually very pleased to learn new rules. I also regularly and deliberately ignore rules. I have no issue ending a sentence with a preposition or starting one with a conjunction. Splitting an infinitive is fair game. I doubt I’ll ever fully understand the difference between ‘because of’ and ‘owing to’. Sadly, your attempt to point out an error failed (because it wasn’t an error), but I’ll welcome any future endeavours.


But it was an error. Your sentence made no grammatical sense at all; please tell me how it was grammatically correct. But, listen, old boy, we could argue about this for days and I cannot be arsed - it is all so trivial and meaningless...but each to their own.

Do I think that if you move to another country you should at least learn the native tongue? Er, yes. If you think that is a bad thing then that is your problem - to me, it is mere common sense. But carry on digging up those old posts (and putting words in my mouth) - smacks of desperation to me, butty. Oh, yes.
 
musicalprostitute
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

Defend yourself, I bring catastrophe

      
 
Posts: 4271
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Essex and Cardiff.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 455 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby Roger » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:00 pm

I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging, and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’.


(clue: there really should not be a comma before that 'and' in your last sentence).



The comma avoids ambiguity, given that the sentence is quite long and involves a comparison of two fairly long clauses. I suppose another option would have been a semi-colon. My philosophy is much the same as when I’m constructing formulae in Excel (which I’m pretty rubbish at) - it’s usually best to just throw in loads of brackets, even if they’re not strictly necessary. Most modern style guides endorse my approach.
 
Roger
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby musicalprostitute » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:19 pm

Roger wrote:
I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging, and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’.


(clue: there really should not be a comma before that 'and' in your last sentence).



The comma avoids ambiguity, given that the sentence is quite long and involves a comparison of two fairly long clauses. I suppose another option would have been a semi-colon. My philosophy is much the same as when I’m constructing formulae in Excel (which I’m pretty rubbish at) - it’s usually best to just throw in loads of brackets, even if they’re not strictly necessary. Most modern style guides endorse my approach.


No. It is definitely wrong. A semi colon would not work here either. 'The perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging' should not be separated from 'and those who...'. It is grammatically incorrect. The comma can indeed be used to avoid ambiguity, but here you have not done that: you have simply placed it in the wrong place.

Now, I - as I have previously stated - am not perfect by any means (certainly when writing on an internet forum - I haven't the time to re-check everything), but I do know for one hundred per cent that you are completely wrong in this case.

But, out of interest, what modern style guide confirms what you have stated? Certainly not Fowler's.
 
musicalprostitute
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

Defend yourself, I bring catastrophe

      
 
Posts: 4271
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Essex and Cardiff.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 455 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby Roger » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:36 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-ob ... le-guide-o
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/boo ... 6/toc.html
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Garners-Modern- ... 0190491485
http://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/ ... 0Guide.pdf (which incidentally advocates the semi-colon that I might have used instead)

...amongst others.

It's a stylistic thing.

It's true that using a comma as I have done tends to be favoured by left-leaning, higher brow (+/- pretentious) publications, whereas it is usually omitted by newspapers (except for the Guardian, obviously). Turn it into a class thing if you like, and call it an error if you really want to (again, just because 'left' is the opposite of 'right', doesn't mean it's synonymous with 'wrong'), but it's not. I think I'm probably even exempt from accusations of pretentiousness, because if I wanted to be pretentious there's no way I'd do something endorsed by 'the other place'.
Last edited by Roger on Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
Roger
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby Roger » Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:43 pm

Incidentally it annoys me that John Deacon gets 'You And I' wrong, and then Brian May makes the opposite mistake 15 years later in 'Bijou'. I guess they needed to rhyme though.
 
Roger
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby Roger » Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:00 pm

musicalprostitute wrote:
Roger wrote:The comma avoids ambiguity, given that the sentence is quite long and involves a comparison of two fairly long clauses. I suppose another option would have been a semi-colon. My philosophy is much the same as when I’m constructing formulae in Excel (which I’m pretty rubbish at) - it’s usually best to just throw in loads of brackets, even if they’re not strictly necessary. Most modern style guides endorse my approach.


No. It is definitely wrong. A semi colon would not work here either. 'The perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging' should not be separated from 'and those who...'. It is grammatically incorrect. The comma can indeed be used to avoid ambiguity, but here you have not done that: you have simply placed it in the wrong place.


I actually think that it's essential in that sentence, because otherwise a reader might parse the sentence and initially think that the 'and' is part of the first clause, which wouldn't be entirely unreasonable, for example:

"I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging and other execution methods, and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

Although the more I think about it, the more I think a semi-colon is the way forward, especially if we got proper medieval on those child killers:

"I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging, drawing and quartering; and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

You could even use a colon as well, but I think that's overkill:

"I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between: Those in favour of hanging, drawing and quartering; and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

Or avoid the comparison altogether:

"Those in favour of hanging correlate almost perfectly with those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

Lots of options. All correct.
And, to be fair, it turns out that hung vs hanged is a stylistic thing as well, so there we go.
 
Roger
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: The Grammar discussion

Postby Roger » Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:25 am

This two page split thread is about feminism, or more specifically whether or not it’s acceptable to compare the struggle for gender equality with mass genocide, until the fifth post of the second page; in other words, the 20th of 28 posts. However it’s now all been split off, labelled as childish, and tucked away in a non-serious forum. For the entirety of the first page my posts were long and backed up with research; research that took a not-insignificant amount of time and effort.

Meanwhile, back in the parent thread, gender equality continues to be compared to the holocaust, only now there’s no counter-balance because that was considered childish and intrusive.

Is this what we’ve become? This isn’t even censorship. At least with censorship there’d be no trace of what’s happening. Instead, the unwelcome views are split off, given their own thread, and labelled as childish, as though that has now become the website’s (and by implication, the band’s, although entirely without their knowledge) official stance. Meanwhile the more acceptable views - those that compare civil rights to industrialised murder - remain in the flagship thread, which I note also now discourages criticism of the most powerful man on the planet who, coincidentally, has regularly voiced similar sentiments about women.

I don’t know how we got to this point, but I’m tired of feeling like a one-man resistance to it.
 
Roger
The Show Must Go On
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 1147
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:15 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: The Grammar discussion

Postby JLP » Thu Feb 15, 2018 9:41 am

I will merge it into the feminazi thread. No one wants to stifle debate, especially a radical leftie like me.
Come on you Tigers.
 
JLP
Site Admin
 
User avatar

 

Growing old disgracefully

      
 
Posts: 11172
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 7:33 pm
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 414 times

Re: Feminazis need to shush

Postby Innuendoes » Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:03 am

Image

Just pull the whole board. :bomb:
 
Innuendoes
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby musicalprostitute » Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:47 am

Roger wrote:
I actually think that it's essential in that sentence, because otherwise a reader might parse the sentence and initially think that the 'and' is part of the first clause, which wouldn't be entirely unreasonable, for example:

"I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging and other execution methods, and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

Although the more I think about it, the more I think a semi-colon is the way forward, especially if we got proper medieval on those child killers:

"I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between those in favour of hanging, drawing and quartering; and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

You could even use a colon as well, but I think that's overkill:

"I’ve noticed an almost perfect correlation between: Those in favour of hanging, drawing and quartering; and those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

Or avoid the comparison altogether:

"Those in favour of hanging correlate almost perfectly with those who don’t know that the past tense is ‘hanged’, not ‘hung’."

Lots of options. All correct.
And, to be fair, it turns out that hung vs hanged is a stylistic thing as well, so there we go.


Well, I vehemently disagree with all of the above (obviously).

In your first example, the comma is acceptable here to clear up any confusion to the reader - fair enough; but in your original sentence you did not do this, you just separated clauses that should not have been separated. What that first sentence above requires is either a couple of dashes or brackets to separate the additional information (other execution methods) from the main clause.

In your second example, again you have changed your original sentence to make it work with a semi-colon. I agree that a semi-colon is incredibly useful in long, wordy sentences (especially if they contain a few 'ands'), but those sentences also need to be able to stand alone, independently.

I completely disagree with your use of the colon too. The first sentence is not a full sentence and, therefore, can not stand alone - a definite 'no, no' concerning the use of the colon.

Try and separate your original clauses (without any alterations) using the punctuation methods above and then you will see why the above examples do not work.
 
musicalprostitute
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

Defend yourself, I bring catastrophe

      
 
Posts: 4271
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Essex and Cardiff.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 455 times

Re: The New News Thread.

Postby musicalprostitute » Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:56 am

Roger wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-o
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/boo ... 6/toc.html
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Garners-Modern- ... 0190491485
http://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/ ... 0Guide.pdf (which incidentally advocates the semi-colon that I might have used instead)

...amongst others.

It's a stylistic thing.

It's true that using a comma as I have done tends to be favoured by left-leaning, higher brow (+/- pretentious) publications, whereas it is usually omitted by newspapers (except for the Guardian, obviously). Turn it into a class thing if you like, and call it an error if you really want to (again, just because 'left' is the opposite of 'right', doesn't mean it's synonymous with 'wrong'), but it's not. I think I'm probably even exempt from accusations of pretentiousness, because if I wanted to be pretentious there's no way I'd do something endorsed by 'the other place'.


I have no problem with 'high brow'; my issue is with grammar that is completely wrong. And I am only calling it wrong because it clearly is, not just to disagree with you (we have enough to disagree over as it is).

The links do not direct me to a specific example of the use of a comma in a sentence like your original one. I will happily concede if you can give me just one example from any reputable style guide of a sentence in which a comma before a conjunction is used to separate two clauses - one of which can not stand alone (as in your original sentence). That will shut me up.
 
musicalprostitute
Don't Stop Me Now
 
User avatar

 

Defend yourself, I bring catastrophe

      
 
Posts: 4271
Images: 0
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:52 am
Location: Essex and Cardiff.
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 455 times

PreviousNext

Return to Views Of The World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests