English grammar
Timo Noko
Q: What is this "Correct English Grammar" that they keep yapping
about? What are the rules of this notorius grammar?
A: There are several rules. Like "I" must written with capital-"I".
And "She" refers to a female. And.., and.., er....
Q: What about "a sentence must always have a verb"?
A: Well, not so, in fact. But you must always use correct
preposition. Like if you are on the bed, you cannot say "on the
bed", you must say "in bed".
Q: That is not a "rule", unless everything you can be on-to must be
referred as in-to-smt?
A: You must understand that English is a language for morons,
which anyone can learn in 3 days. It is a simplified free-form
extension of the programming language Pascal. To appear
somewhat sophisticated the natives of England have to
1) keep commenting about other peoples use of this imaginary
"grammar".
2) learn 100,000 synonyms for common words. For example, "apparel"
could be used for "clothes". You can often see the abundance of
these-words-with-exactly-the-same-meaning bragged about as
the "expressiveness" of the lingo.
Q: Uskoisinkohan?
= (One finnish word "uskoa" (to believe), which according to
inhumanly complex rules is transformed into "I have serious doubts,
if I could possibly ever believe this, especially in future?")
A: <wide grin>.
=-=--=---=----=-----=------=-----=----=---=--=--=
Timo Noko - TeleNokia - no...@tnvsu1.tele.nokia.fi
=-=--=---=----=--The NoGo Man----=----=---=--=--=
Never Kid A Kidder
A: There are several rules. Like "I" must written with capital-"I".
And "She" refers to a female. And.., and.., er....
I'm sick and tired of reading crap about English not having genders!!!
It just isn't true!!! `she' *sometimes* refers to females, but more
often will be used, by men, in reference to large mechanical objects
that can be ridden, sat on, or generally abused, and also to
unpredictable natural phenomena like hurricanes and volcanoes.
Anything generally reliable and predictable will be considered male,
eg, buildings, rivers and mountains.
A: You must understand that English is a language for morons,
which anyone can learn in 3 days. It is a simplified free-form
extension of the programming language Pascal. To appear
somewhat sophisticated the natives of England have to
Fightin' talk!!! Actually, the reason the British conquered so much
of the globe was because they didn't have to spend so much time trying
to remember utterly stupid tenses that could only be used at certain
phases of the moon, or perhaps while walking on the cracks in the
pavement. They just went in and kicked the shite out of everybody
instead. It is a little known fact that Hitler lost the Second World
War because he forgot to use the subjuctive when someone asked him
about surrendering.
Adrian Hurt
>
> Q: What is this "Correct English Grammar" that they keep yapping
> about? What are the rules of this notorius grammar?
A: "I", when used as first person singular, must be a capital. Full stops,
known to the ignorant as periods, should be followed either by two spaces or
a new line. Even vi knows that! So should exclamation marks, known to the
ignorant as plings; and question marks, known to the ignorant as a period
under a squiggly thing.
> Q: What about "a sentence must always have a verb"?
>
A: This is true. Of course, there is nothing to say you must always speak
in sentences.
> Like if you are on the bed, you cannot say "on the
> bed", you must say "in bed".
That is not English. That is French. The English are perfectly capable of
being on the bed without feeling an overwhelming urge to get into it.
> Q: That is not a "rule", unless everything you can be on-to must be
> referred as in-to-smt?
>
> A: You must understand that English is a language for morons,
> which anyone can learn in 3 days. It is a simplified free-form
> extension of the programming language Pascal.
On the contrary, English is an extremely complex language, with pieces taken
from lots of simpler languages, such as German, Latin and Gibberish. There is
also some French present as well, hence the above confusion. It is so complex
that it is virtually impossible for a moron (i.e. foreigner) to learn it;
even the natives have great problems. To attempt to cover this up, they will
sometimes attempt to correct others in their use of grammar or spelling. This
is entirely in accordance with the principle "Those who can, do. Those who
can't, teach."
> 2) learn 100,000 synonyms for common words. For example, "apparel"
> could be used for "clothes". You can often see the abundance of
> these-words-with-exactly-the-same-meaning bragged about as
> the "expressiveness" of the lingo.
No, this is the attempt of the English to make certain foreigners feel at home
by allowing them to use their own words. The above example is for the French.
There is also a great proportion of Latin, which is the fault of the Roman
Empire. However, the English aren't the only ones who have trouble with their
own language; the Romans now call themselves Italians, speak a simplified
derivative of Latin, and the last time they tried to build an empire they
failed . This serves them right. They ought first to learn to speak the
Imperial language.
> Q: Uskoisinkohan?
> = (One finnish word "uskoa" (to believe), which according to
> inhumanly complex rules is transformed into "I have serious doubts,
> if I could possibly ever believe this, especially in future?")
I thought it meant "I believe I have sinned with Kohan". Don't tell Kohan
about this correction; I have been blackmailing him for some time now.
"Keyboard? How quaint!" - M. Scott
Adrian Hurt | JANET: adr...@uk.ac.hw.cs
UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian | ARPA: adr...@cs.hw.ac.uk
Harjula Mikko
> about? What are the rules of this notorius grammar?
Is the next sentence proper Queen's English (so claims one American)?
Mommy, what did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to
out of up for?
Yll{ olevista mahdollisista mielipiteist{ vastaan itse.
Mikko Harjula
Geoff Ballinger
-Is the next sentence proper Queen's English (so claims one American)?
-
-Mommy, what did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to
-out of up for?
My understanding was that a sentence has to, by definition, make
sence, so the above is not correct English even if it obeys the normal
rules (and I havn't checked if it does or not!).
--
Geoff Ballinger, JANET: Ge...@Uk.Ac.Ed
CS/AI, ARPA: Geoff%Uk.A...@nsfnet-relay.Ac.Uk
Edinburgh University. UUCP: ...!uunet!mcvax!ukc!Ed.Ac.Uk!Geoff
M Smith
>In article <10...@etana.tut.fi> m...@korppi.tut.fi (Harjula Mikko) writes:
>-Is the next sentence proper Queen's English (so claims one American)?
>-
>-Mommy, what did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to
>-out of up for?
>
> My understanding was that a sentence has to, by definition, make
>sence, so the above is not correct English even if it obeys the normal
Sorry Geoff, I couldn't resist that bit of nit-picking!
>rules (and I havn't checked if it does or not!).
Anyway, the sentence can be understood (granted you may need a kind of
depraved mind!) and therefore I think it passes a "sense" test. A translation
would go along the lines of:
Mommy, you know that book that I didn't want you to read to me? Well,
what did you bring it upstairs for?
However, and now we come to the point of the posting: (at last)
The sentence breaks one of the ``Golden Rules'' of English, namely:
Rule: Never use a preposition to end a sentence up with.
There are a whole bunch of these rules - some a lot more amusing than that
one, can anyone remember any more?
Mark.
--
Mark.
Nick Rothwell
>In article <12...@castle.ed.ac.uk> ai...@castle.ed.ac.uk (Geoff Ballinger) writes:
>>-Mommy, what did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to
>>-out of up for?
>Anyway, the sentence can be understood (granted you may need a kind of
>depraved mind!) and therefore I think it passes a "sense" test. A translation
>would go along the lines of:
> Mommy, you know that book that I didn't want you to read to me? Well,
> what did you bring it upstairs for?
The original (as I saw it in the Guiness book of Records) is something
like
-Mommy, what did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to
-out of from Down Under up for?
there's an extra preposition or two here, if you accept the
colloquialism for Australia.
>Mark.
Nick.
--
Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh.
ni...@lfcs.ed.ac.uk <Atlantic Ocean>!mcvax!ukc!lfcs!nick
~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~
"You're gonna jump!?" "No, Al. I'm gonna FLY!"
rob hulsebos
>Fightin' talk!!! Actually, the reason the British conquered so much
>of the globe was because they didn't have to spend so much time trying
>to remember utterly stupid tenses
to remember how to *pronounce* a word. If you don't believe my, first
try to pronounce this aloud without a single error:
DEAREST CREATURE
Dearest creature in creation
studying English pronunciation
I will teach you in my verse
sounds like corpse, corps, horse and worse
It will keep you Susy, busy
Make your head with heat grow dizzy
Tear in eye your dress you'll tear
So shall I! Oh hear my prayer
pray, console your loving poet
Make my coat look new, dear, sew it
just compare heart, beard and heard
dies and diet, lord and word
sword and sward, retain and britain
(mind the latter how it's written)
made has not the sound of bade
say-said, pay-paid, laid but plaid
now I surely will not plague you
with such words as vague and ague
but be careful how to speak
say gush, bush and break and bleak
previous, precious, fuchsia, via
pipe, snipe, recipe and choir
cloven, oven, how and low
script, receipt, shoe, poem, toe
hear me say, devoid of trickery
daughter, laughter and terpsichore
typhoid, measles, topsails, aisles
exiles, similes, reviles
wholly, holly, signal, signing,
Thames, examining, combining,
scholar, vicar and sigar
solar, mica, war and far
from "desire" desirable - admirable from admire
lumber, plumber, bier, but brier
Chatham, Brougham, renown, but known
knowledge, done but gone and tone
one, anemone, Balmoral
Kitchen, lichen, laundry, Laurel
Gertrude, German, wind and mind
scene, melpomene, mankind
tortoise, turquoise, Chamois leather
reading-reading, heathen, Heather,
this phonetic labyrinth
gives moss, gross, brook, brooch, ninth, plinth
billet does not end like ballet
bouquet, wallet, mallet, chalet
blood and flood are not like food
nor is mould like should and would
banquet is not nearly parquet
which exactly rhymes with khaki
discount, viscount, load and broad
toward, to forward, to reward
ricocheted and croqueting, croquet?
Right! Your pronunciation is OK!
Rounded, wounded, grieve and sieve
friend and fiend, alive and live
liberty, library, heave and heaven
Rachel, ache, moustache, eleven
we say hallowed, but allowed
people, leopard, towed but vowed
mark the difference, moreover
between mover, plover, Dover
leeches, breeches, wise, precise
chalice, but police and lice
camel, constable, unstable
principle, disciple, label
petal, penal and canal
wait, surmise, plait, promise, pal
suit, suite, ruin, circuit, conduit
rime with "shirk it" and "beyond it"
but it is not hard to tell
why it is pall, mall, but Pall Mall
muscle, muscular, gaol, iron
timber, climber, bullion, lion
worm and storm, chaise, chaos, chair
senator, spectator, mayor
ivy, privy, famous, glamour
and enamour rime with "hammer"
pussy, hussy, and possess
desert but desert, adress
golf, wolf, countenance, lieutenants
hoist, in lieu of flags, left pennants
river, rival, tomb, bomb, comb
doll and roll and some and home
stranger does not rime with anger
neither does devour with clangour
soul, but foul and gaunt, but aunt
font, front, wont, want, grand and grant
shoes, goes, does. Now first say finger
then say singer, ginger, linge
real, zeal, mauve, gauze and gauge
marriage, foliage, mirage, age
query does not rime with very
nor does fury sound like bury
dost, lost, post and doth, cloth, loth
job, job, blossom, bosom, cath
my oppugnant, keen oppugners
bowing - bowing banjo-tuners
in their yachts or their canoes
puisne truism, use, to use
though the difference seems little
we say actual, but victual
seat, sweat, chaste, caste, leigh, eight, height
put, nut, granite and unite
reefer does not rime with "deafer"
feoffer does, and zephyr, heifer
dull, bull, Geoffry, George, ate, late
hint, pint, senate, but sedate
scenic, Arabic, Pacific
science, conscience, scientific
tour, but our and succour, four
gad, alas, and Arkansas
sea, idea, Guinea, area
psalm, Maria but malaria
youth, south, southern, cleanse and clean
doctrine, turpentine, marine
compare alien with Italian
dandelion with battalion
Sally with ally, yea, ye
eye, I, ay, aye, whey, key, quay,
say aver, but ever, fever
neither, leisure, skein, receiver
never guess it is not safe
we say calves, valves, half, but ralph
heron, granary, canary
crevice and device and Eyrie
face but preface, but grimace
phlegm, phlegmatic, ass, glass, bass
bass, large, target, gin, give, verging
ougth, out, joust and scour, but scourging
ear but earn and wear and tear
do not rime with "here" but "ere"
seven is right, but so is even
hyphen, roughen, nephew, Stephen
monkey, donkey, clerk and jerk
asp, grasp, wasp, demesne, cork, work
pronunciation think of psyche!
It's a paling, stout and spikey
won't it make you lose your wits
writing groats and saying groats?
It's a dark abyss or tunnel
strewn with stones, like rowlock, gunwale
Islington and Isle of Wight
housewife, verdict and indict
don't you think so, reader rather
saying lather, bather, father?
Finally: which rimes with "enough"
though, through, plough, cough, hough, or tough?
hiccough has the sound of "cup"
My advise is: give it up!
This poem was written by a Dutch teacher of English, to train his
students in pronunciation. Incidentally, I think that even native
English speakers may have difficulty correctly pronouncing it.
So please let the net know your own experiences.
If anyone has an example for any of the other European languages, I would
be very interested to see it. Please post!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Hulsebos == huls...@tq.ine.philips.nl Tel +31-40-785723, Fax +31-40-786114
Philips I&E - Where the future is being made today!
i...@mva.cs.liv.ac.uk
> Is the next sentence proper Queen's English (so claims one American)?
>
> Mommy, what did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to
> out of up for?
>
ends with a preposition.
A joke (stolen from rec.humor)
Q: What do you get if you cross a mouse with an elephant?
A: mouse elephant sine theta.
Q: What do you get if you cross a mouse with a mountaineer?
A: Don't be silly, a mountaineer is a scaler [scalar].
Ian Finch
---------
Nick Holloway
> [ various discussion about "Mommy, me dunt wanna reed boock" ]
>
> Rule: Never use a preposition to end a sentence up with.
>
> There are a whole bunch of these rules - some a lot more amusing than that
> one, can anyone remember any more?
A: Where's the action at?
B: Never end a sentance with a preposition.
A: OK, where's the action at, asshole?
Maybe this is what you were really referring to. I can't remember
where this version came from, probably some newsgroup - but I believe I
have also seen it in fortune(1).
--
In real life: Nick Holloway <al...@cs.warwick.ac.uk>
===============================================================================
William Safire's Rules for Writers:
Remember to never split an infinitive. The passive voice should never
be used. Do not put statements in the negative form. Verbs have to
agree with their subjects. Proofread carefully to see if you words
out. If you reread your work, you can find on rereading a great deal
of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing. A writer must
not shift your point of view. And don't start a sentence with a
conjunction. (Remember, too, a preposition is a terrible word to end a
sentence with.) Don't overuse exclamation marks!! Place pronouns as
close as possible, especially in long sentences, as of 10 or more
words, to their antecedents. Writing carefully, dangling participles
must be avoided. If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a
linking verb is. Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing
metaphors. Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky. Everyone should
be careful to use a singular pronoun with singular nouns in their
writing. Always pick on the correct idiom. The adverb always follows
the verb. Last but not least, avoid cliches like the plague; seek
viable alternatives.
===============================================================================
Never Kid A Kidder
> -Mommy, (what (did you bring (the book (that I did not want to be read to)
> -out of) up) for)?
Someone else wrote:
> My understanding was that a sentence has to, by definition, make
> sence, so the above is not correct English even if it obeys the normal
> rules (and I havn't checked if it does or not!).
False. Chomsky's famous `Colourless green ideas dream furiously' is
grammatically correct, but semantically hallucinogenic. The other
sentence does not obey the rule of not ending sentences with a
preposition, but that is an arbitrary one invented by Ruskin or
someone in the early 1800's. It is *confusing*, perhaps, but not
nonsense; observe the bracketing to see that each preposition has a
matching phrase relating to it.
OJ: What's the difference between a new coin and the North Sea?
A: A new coin is all shiny and bright...
Jordan K. Hubbard
>Is the next sentence proper Queen's English (so claims one American)?
>
>Mommy, what did you bring the book that I did not want to be read to
>out of up for?
No. In Queen's english that would probably be something more like:
"Mummy, whatever possessed you to transport this particular tome
from which I did not desire an auditory rendition thereof?"
Americans would be more likely to say:
"Mom! I don' wanna hear that book again!"
--
PCS Computer Systeme GmbH, Munich, West Germany
UUCP: pyramid!pcsbst!jkh j...@meepmeep.pcs.com
EUNET: unido!pcsbst!jkh
ARPA: j...@violet.berkeley.edu or hub...@decwrl.dec.com
John V Ashby
>===============================================================================
> William Safire's Rules for Writers:
>
I concur but I think that to agree with the general theme of the article
this should read:
Verbs has to agree with their subjects.
Oblig. Joke excluded on the grounds of pacifism (for all those who watched MPFC).