Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (08/18/89)
Really-From: adams%bosco.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey P. Adams) Okay, now we're up to three examples of Kate using improper grammar. Can we agree that, grammatical-wise [No flames - it's a joke.], she is not perfect? No need to invent stories explaining the phenomena. I must admit, though, that it bothers me greatly to see professional users of English, Kate included, make fundamental mistakes of grammar and usage. It also bothers me that so many people want to justify the perversion of formal rules of language. Some people claim that "You and I like Kate" sounds stilted and unnatural, but "You and me like Kate" sounds OK. To whom? Certainly not to me. It only sounds unnatural if you are uncomfortable speaking properly, and you convey this through your voice. If you pay close attention, you'll notice that lots of people you know speak properly and it doesn't sound unnatural. It amuses me that many of these same people complain about exceptions to the rules of grammar, yet advocate creating many more such exceptions by making "street English" acceptable. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jeff Adams "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part adams@bosco.berkeley.edu that wonders what the part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of." -They Might Be Giants
tmc@cbnews.ATT.COM (Thomas M. Cliff) (08/18/89)
In article <1989Aug17.222455.16637@agate.berkeley.edu> Love-Hounds@GAFFA.MIT.EDU writes: >Really-From: adams%bosco.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey P. Adams) > >Okay, now we're up to three examples of Kate using improper grammar. >Can we agree that, grammatical-wise [No flames - it's a joke.], she >is not perfect? No need to invent stories explaining the phenomena. > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Jeff Adams "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part >adams@bosco.berkeley.edu that wonders what the part that isn't thinking > isn't thinking of." -They Might Be Giants I think it's interesting that the "They Might Be Giants" quote has a dangling preposition. Tom Cliff Bell Labs
Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU (08/19/89)
Really-From: Richard Caley <rjc%edai.edinburgh.ac.uk@NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK> >Really-From: adams%bosco.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey P. Adams) >I must admit, though, that it bothers me greatly to see professional >users of English, Kate included, make fundamental mistakes of grammar Prove it is a mistake - that is that she didn't realise _precicely_ what she was doing. >and usage. It also bothers me that so many people want to justify >the perversion of formal rules of language. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Tee Hee. spot the Mathematician. There _are_ no formal rules to language. >Some people claim that >"You and I like Kate" sounds stilted and unnatural, but "You and me >like Kate" sounds OK. To whom? Certainly not to me. Then the problem lies with you. >It only sounds >unnatural if you are uncomfortable speaking properly, and you convey >this through your voice. If you pay close attention, you'll notice >that lots of people you know speak properly and it doesn't sound >unnatural. This I can agree with, but assuming that you would naturally say "You and I . . ." then you will sound unnatural saying "You and me . . ." Neither of these facts are evidnece for one form being "better" or "more correct" than the other. >It amuses me that many of these same people complain about exceptions >to the rules of grammar, yet advocate creating many more such >exceptions by making "street English" acceptable. "Street English" is acceptable; if it were not it would not be spoken. Now, it may not be acceptable to some people, that is what dialects are all about. Anyone who tells you that one dialect is "better" or "more correct" than another is selling snake oil. Language is a tool. The use of language is a craft, the best craftsmen raise it to an Art ( mentioning no names, but The Lady is very good ). If KT uses a phrase from a particular dialect then I think we can be sure that there is a reason for that useage. This applies when the dialect is a formalised "educated" one as much as when it is a more normal one. For instance in the early version of Kashka she uses the word "garbage" I think that it is safe to say that she is trying to raise American images. Should we casticate her for using incorrect English ( after all, she is British and so this word _is_ incorrect, in the sence of net being in the "educated" dialect ). -- rjc@uk.ac.ed.edai " It's a terrible habbit, quotes " - Mayland Long