 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Doctor John wrote:
>
>> <sings> Please please me, oh yeah, like I please you.
>
> Please stop singing. :-S
>
Please stop your pleas!!!!!! Please?
:-D
John
--
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
>> Or commas. Or, most recently, quotation marks to "mean" emphasis.
>
> Using quotation marks to express irony is perfectly valid in most languages,
> including English.
Yes, exactly. They're quotation marks. They are quoting what you
surround them with, which is to say, they're marking what's inside as to
be interpreted as the words themselves rather than as the meaning of the
words.
> For example: My brother claimed he was "too busy" to help me.
Well, I'd call that more "skepticism" than "irony." But that's just my
point. By putting it in quotes, you're saying this is what your brother
said, and explicitly implying that his words didn't match the reality.
But if you write
I really "did" want him to win the election.
rather than
I really *did* want him to win the election.
then it comes out looking exactly opposite of what was intended.
> * indicate descriptive but unusual, colloquial, folksy words or phrases
> * indicate descriptive but startling, humorous, or metaphoric words or phrases
Yep and yep. In both cases, you're pointing out that the reader should
pay attention to the words itself and not just their meaning.
> * distance the writer from the terminology in question so as not to be
> associated with it. For example, to indicate that a quoted word is not
> official terminology, or that a quoted phrase pre-supposes things that
> the author does not necessarily agree with.
Right. And when you use quote marks for *emphasis*, this is exactly what
happens. By using quote marks to mean you extra-agree, and you trigger
most peoples' "I'm distancing myself from this statement" understanding,
you're defeating the purpose.
> * indicate special terminology that should be identified for accuracy's sake
> as someone else's terminology, for example if a term (particularly a
> controversial term) pre-dates the writer or represents the views of
> someone else, perhaps without judgement
Yes. These are all valid forms of quotes.
For example,
By the way, Sally said hello.
is different from
By the way, Sally said "Hello."
In the latter, that's the exact words she used. In the former, she might
have said "Give Joe my regards when you see him."
I have nothing against quote marks used properly. It's when someone says
he "really" means it, it's just completely confusing. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> But if you write
> I really "did" want him to win the election.
> rather than
> I really *did* want him to win the election.
> then it comes out looking exactly opposite of what was intended.
Or maybe a better example, if you write
I really did want him to *win* the election.
it means he lost, but came close or otherwise did a good job, and you
wanted success.
If you write
I really did want him to "win" the election.
it means you'd rather he stuffed the ballot boxes and cheated in order
to be elected in spite of the fact he didn't actually get enough votes.
Completely different meanings.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> - Misuse of the apostrophe. (There's, like, 4 rules or something. Even a
> retard like me can understand it!)
I recall someone on IRC who thought "meant" was written "mean't", and when I
told him it didn't have an apostrophe he was seriously surprised (he had
always written it that way).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> - People who constantly confuse the words "than" and "then".
AUGH >.<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Or commas. Or, most recently, quotation marks to "mean" emphasis.
http://donotwantyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/quotationfail.jpg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> http://donotwantyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/quotationfail.jpg
Ah... that puts the "ph" back into "phale". :-D
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> I recall someone on IRC who thought "meant" was written "mean't",
LOL!
I'll have to remember that, and use it in sentences when I correct
peoples' apostrophes. (which isn't often, mind, but usually only when
they ask.)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-Nov-08 15:31, Invisible wrote:
>
> - People who write "i.e." when they actually mean "e.g."
Reminds me of a comment in a peer review process: "Latin, i.e. 'Mutatis
mutandis' may not be understood by all. A goal of all published works
should be clarity. This is obfuscation."
We didn't realize that "mutatis mutandis" is perfectly good Dutch but
possibly not used by everyone, so he had a point. Yet, using a sentence
containing i.e. to explain that had me rolling on the floor. And
"obfuscation" had the poor first author running towards his dictionary.
I keep this one in my collection of self contradicting expressions.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Things that irritate me:
>
> - email messages that contain no punctuation of any kind just several
> sentences strung together presumably youre supposed to figure out
> sentence boundaries from context or something its really quite
> irritating though
>
> - Email messages that overuse punctuation!!!!
>
> - Sentences that end with a question mark despite not being questions.
> You know the kind of thing I mean:
>
> + What is the average flight time?
> + Draw a histogram of the light times?
>
> - Sentences that begin and end with "please". (Surely once is enough?)
>
> - Misuse of the apostrophe. (There's, like, 4 rules or something. Even a
> retard like me can understand it!)
>
> - People who write "i.e." when they actually mean "e.g."
My pet peeve is people who use "per" to stand for "according to."
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
