Grammar/Spelling/Syntax/English lessons

[faustian bargain]

Originally Posted by Nantucket Red

I hate this construction with a buring passion that cannot be assuaged. "What it is is" is a construction I believe I first started hearing in the early 80s. It grated on my nerves from the very first and I vowed never to use it. Unfortunately, when thoughtless constructions like this become widespread, they become infectious and you have to make a concentrated effort to avoid using them. For a **** topping, add "it's," eg.: "What it is is, it's a way of sounding like an utter moron."
hey man, it is what it is.

 

[LabelKing]

Originally Posted by Nantucket Red

I hate this construction with a buring passion that cannot be assuaged. "What it is is" is a construction I believe I first started hearing in the early 80s. It grated on my nerves from the very first and I vowed never to use it. Unfortunately, when thoughtless constructions like this become widespread, they become infectious and you have to make a concentrated effort to avoid using them. For a **** topping, add "it's," eg.: "What it is is, it's a way of sounding like an utter moron."
That sounds like common argot, which usually signifies mediocrity.

 

[Nantucket Red]

Originally Posted by faustian bargain

hey man, it is what it is.

This is not even close to being in the same league. It's not what it's not, too.

Originally Posted by LabelKing

That sounds like common argot, which usually signifies mediocrity.

In this case, aspiring to the bottom rung of mediocrity.

 

[j]

"Each was better than the next"... what you're probably trying to say was that they just kept getting better, but what you are saying is that they kept getting worse.

What you meant to say was "each was better than the last".

..

"Principle" means rule, ethical standard, basic generalization.
"Principal" means the most important or primary, or the guy who gave you a detention.

 

[Mr. Checks]

Originally Posted by j

I think this was on the thread we lost, and I disagree that it is a hard-and-fast rule.

"Hicks", "rednecks", and "the unsophisticated" prefer inferior service.
When words/phrases are in scare quotes, or are in quotation marks to denote the unusual use of the word, or as a citation, etc., I don't think the commas should be in the quotes. (do not check this sentence for parallel construction Bob)

"I have begun," he said, "to go insane."
In this case, it makes sense to me. However, if the quotation itself doesn't include a comma or the end of a sentence, why would it be in the quotation marks?


I'm gonna hang with my 4th grade English teacher and Strunk & White on this one.

Period goes inside the quotes, "period."

Why? The construction of the sentence isn't altered by a quotation. The quotation marks are used to indicate something to the reader, not to change the grammatical construction of the sentence.
I can't think of any reason why your example would generate some kind of exception.
It's like starting a sentence with a capital letter.

 

[Nantucket Red]

Originally Posted by Mr. Checks

I'm gonna hang with my 4th grade English teacher and Strunk & White on this one.

Period goes inside the quotes, "period."

Why? The construction of the sentence isn't altered by a quotation. The quotation marks are used to indicate something to the reader, not to change the grammatical construction of the sentence.
I can't think of any reason why your example would generate some kind of exception.
It's like starting a sentence with a capital letter.

As a professional editor, I want to voice my complete agreement.

Placing periods and commas outside of quotation marks is a British convention. This is the style used by The Economist. If you want to use this style as an American, be consistent throughout with spelling too ("colour," etc.).

 

[Arethusa]

I just hate doing it with periods but not doing it with exclamation and question marks. Everything tends to go inside quotation marks with me, save in formal writing.

 

[Nantucket Red]

Originally Posted by Arethusa

I just hate doing it with periods but not doing it with exclamation and question marks. Everything tends to go inside quotation marks with me, save in formal writing.

Yes, but consider how including either of the others within quotation marks materially changes the quoted text:

Have you read Tolstoy's "War and Peace?"

vs

Have you read Tolstoy's "War and Peace"?

 

[Arethusa]

I realize it does, but that doesn't stop the inconsistency of the system from annoying me. In that sense, the British convention is preferable, even if I can do without the colour.

 

[RJman]

Originally Posted by Nantucket Red

Yes, but consider how including either of the others within quotation marks materially changes the quoted text:

Have you read Tolstoy's "War and Peace?"

vs

Have you read Tolstoy's "War and Peace"?
Wouldn't it be War and Peace? I was taught that books and films should be underlined or italicized, and short stories or songs are in quotes.

 

[Arethusa]

In formal, cited writing, underlined— never italicized— at least in MLA form. Otherwise, just capitalized like normal.

 

[Kent Wang]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark#Punctuation

Due to the influence of computer science (see BNF rules for describing formal languages), what is essentially (if unknowingly) the British standard has become more widely accepted in the U.S.

 

[Nantucket Red]

Originally Posted by RJman

Wouldn't it be War and Peace? I was taught that books and films should be underlined or italicized, and short stories or songs are in quotes.

Yes, this is correct. That was not the best example. This should illustrate the point better: (

)

Did you hear him when he said, "All humhahs are weewahs, and all weewahs are poobahs, therefore all humhahs are poobahs?"

vs

Did you hear him when he said, "All humhahs are weewahs, and all weewahs are poobahs, therefore all humhahs are poobahs"?


In the first, he's being quoted as framing the syllogism as a question, when, in fact, it was a statement.

 

[LabelKing]

Originally Posted by RJman

Wouldn't it be War and Peace? I was taught that books and films should be underlined or italicized, and short stories or songs are in quotes.
In reportage texts, the titles are italicized.

 

[LabelKing]

On another tangent, I love those quite British appropriations of grammar, cantering it into verbose, dense sentences, pregnant like biting little poems of hate. An especial example would be Dame Edith Sitwell: I'm not the man to balk at a low smell, I not the man to insist on asphodel. This sounds like a He-fellow, don't you think? It sounds like that. I belch, I bawl, I drink. Why not be oneself? That is the whole secret of a successful appearance. If one is a greyhound, why try to look like a Pekingese?