Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
not within who
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  8 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Marius Hancu  
View profile  
 More options Feb 9, 5:12 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Marius Hancu <marius.ha...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 14:12:02 -0800 (PST)
Local: Thurs, Feb 9 2012 5:12 pm
Subject: not within who
Hello:

--
"I don't believe that the Marines involved would have ever used any
type of symbol associated the Nazi Germany military criminal
organization that committed mass atrocities in WWII," Chapin said.
"It's not within who we are as Marines."

http://tinyurl.com/7eqbex4
--

Is this "not within who we are" OK?

--
Thanks.
Marius Hancu


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)  
View profile  
 More options Feb 9, 5:26 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:26:38 +0000
Local: Thurs, Feb 9 2012 5:26 pm
Subject: Re: not within who
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012 14:12:02 -0800 (PST), Marius Hancu

<marius.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hello:

>--
>"I don't believe that the Marines involved would have ever used any
>type of symbol associated the Nazi Germany military criminal
>organization that committed mass atrocities in WWII," Chapin said.
>"It's not within who we are as Marines."

>http://tinyurl.com/7eqbex4
>--

>Is this "not within who we are" OK?

It's not fine rhetoric but it seems OK-ish to me.

Perhaps we should be grateful that she didn't say "It's not within our
DNA as Marines."

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
tony cooper  
View profile  
 More options Feb 9, 5:28 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: tony cooper <tony.cooper...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:28:32 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 9 2012 5:28 pm
Subject: Re: not within who
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012 14:12:02 -0800 (PST), Marius Hancu

<marius.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hello:

>--
>"I don't believe that the Marines involved would have ever used any
>type of symbol associated the Nazi Germany military criminal
>organization that committed mass atrocities in WWII," Chapin said.
>"It's not within who we are as Marines."

>http://tinyurl.com/7eqbex4
>--

>Is this "not within who we are" OK?

Sounds awkward, but - given the entire sentence - I don't see it to be
not-OK.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Jerry Friedman  
View profile  
 More options Feb 9, 5:19 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 14:19:24 -0800 (PST)
Local: Thurs, Feb 9 2012 5:19 pm
Subject: Re: not within who
On Feb 9, 3:12 pm, Marius Hancu <marius.ha...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello:

> --
> "I don't believe that the Marines involved would have ever used any
> type of symbol associated the Nazi Germany military criminal
> organization that committed mass atrocities in WWII," Chapin said.
> "It's not within who we are as Marines."

> http://tinyurl.com/7eqbex4
> --

> Is this "not within who we are" OK?

Yes, although not graceful, in my opinion.  It means "It's not within
our identity as Marines."

--
Jerry Friedman


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Duggy  
View profile  
 More options Feb 9, 7:12 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Duggy <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 16:12:15 -0800 (PST)
Local: Thurs, Feb 9 2012 7:12 pm
Subject: Re: not within who
On Feb 10, 8:19 am, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Does "It isn't within who we are as Marines" work better or come out
the same (or worse)?

===
= DUG.
===


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Marius Hancu  
View profile  
 More options Feb 9, 9:06 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Marius Hancu <marius.ha...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 18:06:30 -0800 (PST)
Local: Thurs, Feb 9 2012 9:06 pm
Subject: Re: not within who
On Feb 9, 5:19 pm, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > --
> > "I don't believe that the Marines involved would have ever used any
> > type of symbol associated the Nazi Germany military criminal
> > organization that committed mass atrocities in WWII," Chapin said.
> > "It's not within who we are as Marines."

> >http://tinyurl.com/7eqbex4
> > --

> > Is this "not within who we are" OK?

> Yes, although not graceful, in my opinion.  It means "It's not within
> our identity as Marines."

Glad I'm not alone.

Thank you all.
Marius Hancu


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Joe Fineman  
View profile  
 More options Feb 10, 5:23 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Joe Fineman <jo...@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:23:10 -0500
Local: Fri, Feb 10 2012 5:23 pm
Subject: Re: not within who

Grammatically, one may parse the substantival clause "who we are" as
the object of the preposition "within".

However, the spokesperson would have had my admiration & gratitude if
he had eschewed identityese & said "in line with our honor (or
principles, or whatever he meant) as Marines".
--
---  Joe Fineman    jo...@verizon.net

||:  Wag more, bark less.  ||


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Eric Walker  
View profile  
 More options Feb 12, 7:31 pm
Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
From: Eric Walker <em...@owlcroft.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 00:31:43 +0000 (UTC)
Local: Sun, Feb 12 2012 7:31 pm
Subject: Re: not within who

On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:12:02 -0800, Marius Hancu wrote:
> "I don't believe that the Marines involved would have ever used any type
> of symbol associated the Nazi Germany military criminal organization
> that committed mass atrocities in WWII," Chapin said. "It's not within
> who we are as Marines."

> Is this "not within who we are" OK?

That depends on how much slack one is willing to cut extemporaneous
speech.  I wouldn't court-martial him for it.

--
Cordially,
Eric Walker


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »