Grammar and Punctuation Civil Disobedience 2

[KornGeek]

(Forgive my rambling. It's getting late, but I thought this might be fun.)

Are there any grammar or punctuation (or even spelling) rules that you know, but choose not to follow?

For me, a big one is the rule regarding punctuation and quotation marks at the end of a sentence. The rule states that the punctuation should go inside the quotation marks, but I usually put it outside.

The way I decide where the punctuation goes has to do with whether it was part of what I was quoting or not. For instance I will punctuate as follows:

She told me to "Use punctuation the right way."
and
She told me to use punctuation "the right way".

In the first instance, I'm quoting a sentence, so I include the punctuation. In the second instance, I'm quoting a fragment, so I put the punctuation outside the quotes.

Even though I've always been taught that the punctuation should go inside the quotes, I feel that it makes your intentions more clear doing it my way.

What rules do you deliberately disobey?

 

[Ed2020]

I may be missing something, but I don't think there's anything wrong with "do not leave your luggage unattended"...

Ed Metcalfe.

Please do not feed the trolls.....

 

[MeGustaXL]

Although it would be ungramatical to say "Do keep your luggage attended..."

Chris

If yer see a Rook on 'is own, im's a Crow. If yer sees a flock o' Crows, them's Rooks - My Uncle Cecil

 

[Lunatic]

Unattended is a negative? I thought it was a state...
I thought the negatives were:
Don't
No
Nothing
Not
Ain't (slang, I know)

Personally, I can't see anything postive or negative about the words attended and unattended...

Is there something I'm missing? Does being in the state of not being something automatically make it a negative?

Have a problem with my spelling or grammar? Please refer all complaints to my English teacher:

Ralphy "Me fail English? That's unpossible." Wiggum

 

[philhege]

Different than"? Why?

Simple. "Different" implies that the subject has a quality that sets it apart from the predicate. It doesn't deal with degree of difference, merely that the difference exists.

The use of "than" implies a comparison of degree: "He's more affable than she is."

The best way to expose the error is to use the verb. Do you say that something "differs from" something else, or that something "differs than" something else?

(Thanks to Mr. Cavahaugh and James Kirkpatrick for the inspiration.)



Phil Hegedusich
Senior Programmer/Analyst
IIMAK

http://www.iimak.com

-----------
I'll have the roast duck with the mango salsa.

 

[philhege]

Of COURSE I didn't mean predicate; I meant prepositional object.

Phil Hegedusich
Senior Programmer/Analyst
IIMAK

http://www.iimak.com

-----------
I'll have the roast duck with the mango salsa.

 

[Remou]

What about this example?

"Different than" is sometimes used to avoid the cumbersome
"different from that which", etc. (e.g., "a very different Pamela than I used to leave all company and pleasure for" -- Samuel Richardson).

http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxdiffer.html

 

[MeGustaXL]

Ahh.. I see now Phil, and it grates on me as well - thanks a bunch!

Using the verb also exposes the error in "differs to" (which really rubs my tender secret sensitive parts with 0000-grit)

Chris

If yer see a Rook on 'is own, im's a Crow. If yer sees a flock o' Crows, them's Rooks - My Uncle Cecil

 

[philhege]

Remou, I still think it's more misused than it is employed as the example you cite. In that sentence, I'm comfortable with "different from the one" or "different from the woman".

Phil Hegedusich
Senior Programmer/Analyst
IIMAK

http://www.iimak.com

-----------
I'll have the roast duck with the mango salsa.

 

[jrbarnett]

Maybe its just me thinking odd things, but it doesn't sound right as far as I am concerned. Better get the dictionary out...

John

 

[CajunCenturion]

I agree with jrbarnett; it's double negative. The prefix "un-" means not, so the imperative "Do not leave your luggage unattended" is the same as "Do not leave your luggage not attended".

==> Although it would be un-grammatical to say "Do keep your luggage attended..."
How so?

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Ed2020]

John,

If you can lay your hands on one have a look in Fowler's Modern English Usage. This confirms that, whilst this is a double negative, there is nothing wrong with it in this instance.

Ed Metcalfe.

Please do not feed the trolls.....

 

[Lunatic]

CC, jrbarnet,

Would that make "I'm not unwilling" grammatically incorrect as well? It seems to me that 'un' or 'dis' (e.g. I'm not disinclined) do not fit into the double negative format, at least in terms of proper grammar. As has been pointed out numerous times, I'm not an English major and I'm struggling to see what makes double negatives with 'un' or 'dis' as part of them grammatically incorrect.

Ed2020,

Does that book contain an explanation of when a double negative is not a double negative? And maybe even a name for the phenomenon?

***************************************
Have a problem with my spelling or grammar? Please refer all complaints to my English teacher:
Ralphy "Me fail English? That's unpossible." Wiggum

 

[Stella740pl]

"I'm not unwilling" is a good example.

Even though it is built on double negative, the meaning is different from the double popsitive "I am willing".

"I am willing to do this" means "I would volunteer for that, and I would do this consciously and deliberately."

"I'm not unwilling to do this" means "I would not volunteer to do this, but I would not refuse if I still have to."

"Don't leave unattended" and "Do keep attended" don't seem to have that big a difference (maybe just a hint, though), but I don't see it as gramatically incorrect ;-).

(By the way, is there a slight difference between "Don't see it as gramatically incorrect" and "See it as gramatically correct" ?)

 

[SantaMufasa]

Just catching up here...

I just can't bring myself to say "an historic event". Doesn't roll off my tongue nicely.

This treatment (and any involving a leading "h") depends upon how your vocalise the "h": If you properly articulate the word "honor", the "h" is silent, thus taking on the vowel sound of "o". I doubt anyone is comfortable with "a honor" (pronounced "eh honor")...Equal discomfort results from "eh onor". Therefore, "an onor" is the appropriate pronunciation, in this instance.


So, if your pronunciation of a leading-"h" word involves a silent "h" (thus taking on the vowel sound), then "an" is the appropriate indefinite article.

"Different than" grates on my soul..."Different" implies that the subject has a quality that sets it apart from the predicate. It doesn't deal with degree of difference, merely that the difference exists. The use of "than" implies a comparison of degree...

Absolutely right on the money, Phil. (Please accept a

for a scholarly, yet concise explanation of a "finger-nails-on-the-chalkboard" abuse of the language.) If one wishes to use "than" in combination with "different", then one should "correct" their wording to "differenter than".<grin> Use of "different than" is always a sign of sub-standard use of the language, regardless of attempts to justify such.

e.g., "a very different Pamela than I used to leave all company and pleasure for"

I knew that there were reasons for my not reading more of Richardson. There were probably good reasons that he waited until age 51 (in 1740) to write his first novel. Those reasons may have included that he was still learning to write properly, never quite achieving even that goal <grin>...not only was he satisfied with "different than", but his imagination could not provide him with an alternative to a dangling preposition.


A valid interpreation of the poorly written passage as Richardson originally wrote it becomes a profound insult to Pamela: that she caused him "to leave 'all company' (including hers) and her company was certainly no pleasure. <wide grin>

Would not a re-write of the above passage be more colourful and precise:

(She was) a very different Pamela from the woman for whom I used to abandon all other company and pleasure.

IMHO, if one speaks or writes "different than", then they are not yet done properly formulating their thoughts.

Another flagrant violation in this same vein is "very unique".

He has a very unique way of expressing his opinion.

Something is either unique or it is not unique...there is no degree of uniquesness that would justify any adverb modification. If one insists on adverbial modification of unique, then one would be satisfied with "His way is uniquer than my way."


Just because a significant percent of the (uneducated, inarticulate) public conventionally misuses the language should not cause the abuse to become an acceptable convention.

And another

to Stella for drawing the slight distinction in meanings between some double negatives versus positives:

...is there a slight difference between "Don't see it as gramatically incorrect" and "See it as gramatically correct" ?

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]

 

[Stella740pl]

Thanks, Dave.

Something is either unique or it is not unique...there is no degree of uniquesness that would justify any adverb modification. If one insists on adverbial modification of unique, then one would be satisfied with "His way is uniquer than my way."

Definite case of deja vu.
We have already discussed this at least twice, in thread1256-979053 and thread1256-1070766. I would like to draw your attention to this link posted by sleipnir214 in one of them:

http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/u/u0084800.html.

Scroll down to the Usage note; it discusses the expression "very unique" and similar cases. I would say that it has its merits and its place in the modern language.

 

[CajunCenturion]

==&gt; Would that make &quot;I'm not unwilling&quot; grammatically incorrect as well?
No, &quot;I'm not unwilling&quot; is grammatically correct, yet it remains a double negative.

My issue is with the assertion that ALL double negatives are grammatically wrong. I don't accept that. In those situations where a neutral state exists, I think it's acceptable to use a double negative to assert the neutral position. In jrbarnett's example, there is no neutral position, so the double negative is wrong. It is also grammatically wrong to use a double negative to reinforce the negative position.

However, in the willing/unwilling situation, there is a neutral state, an in-between state. One can be neither willing nor unwilling; they're neutral. The double negative, &quot;not unwilling&quot; is often the most efficient means to identify the neutral state.

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Trevoke]

That's not a double negative..

It's like saying that "x != -1" is a double negative.
x = 1
x = -1
x != 1
x != -1

They're all different, aren't they?

"That time in Seattle... was a nightmare. I came out of it dead broke, without a house, without anything except a girlfriend and a knowledge of UNIX."
"Well, that's something," Avi says. "Normally those two are mutually exclusive."
-- Neal Stephenson, "Cryptonomicon"

 

[SantaMufasa]

Stella,

I have taken the opportunity to re-read that link where it says:

Eighty percent disapprove of (<adverb> unique)..."unique" appears as a modified adjective in the work of many reputable writers. A travel writer states that "Chicago is no less unique an American city than New York or San Francisco," for example, and the critic Fredric Jameson writes "The great modern writers have all been defined by the invention or production of rather unique styles." Although these examples of the qualification of unique are defensible, writers should be aware that such constructions are liable to incur the censure of some readers.

First, I don't know by what standard YourDictionary.com deems "a (nameless) travel writer" and "critic Fredric Jameson as reputable writers, but just because someone writes (sub-standard) copy and receives remuneration in return, does not a reputable writer make...It simply makes them a sub-standard writer with some change in her/his pocket.


How could I consider myself a "good writer" if 80% of the public believes that I write with sub-standard constructs? There are "musical artists" and "cinematic artists" that make a lorrie-load of money for producing, what many of us consider to be, tripe, but the size of one's bank account does not mean that one achieved that bank account from producing "high quality" product.

Just because a seemingly authoritative website says that something is acceptable does not mean that the "something" in not sub-standard.

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]

 

[Welshbird]

I'm not sure that I could take issue with 'rather unique', or 'no less unique' or even possibly with 'slightly unique' in the same way that I would with 'very unique'.

But that doesn't make sense to me, as I do agree, but somehow stating that the is very little variance in uniqueness seems more correct that asserting a large difference in uniqueness.

La... I love language, me!



Fee

The question should be [red]Is it worth trying to do?[/red] not [blue] Can it be done?[/blue]

 

[SantaMufasa]

I'm not sure that I could take issue with...'slightly unique'...

Fee, can you please describe something to me that is slightly unique, and what makes it such?

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]