Archivio per l'agosto 2008
Mentre mi preparo per il mio catharsis imminente dell'itinerario 66, o il viaggio per scoprire le mie radici (qualcosa dovrei' ve non ora fatto 40 anni fa,), sto leggendo tutti i libri che “della strada„ posso trovare, includendo Sulla strada da Jack Kerouac.
Uno dei ironies grandi dell'americano letteratura-e storia-è che Kerouac è considerare come il progenitor del Beatniks, che è circa come lontano dalla verità come possibile.
Kerouac era un cattolico che dabbled nel Buddhism e durante esso tutto era un William F. Tipo del Buckley di conservatore politico. Non ha portato barba e jeans ma ha fumato il tè, mentre ha denominato marijuana-e naturalmente, ha bevuto mólto.
Quando si è riferito alla generazione di battimento, ha descritto i relativi abitanti come essendo “battimento in su e battimento giù„ - in altre parole, una generazione che era stata spinta sotto e asunder e colpi severi trattati, socialmente, psicologicamente e finanziariamente. Persino ha identificato essere “battimento„ con “Beatific.„ Cioè quando siete stati “battimento alto ed avete battuto giù„ abbastanza, diventate angelic. Avete aspirato ad uno di più alti regni della vita in virtù del vostro suffering.
Ora, questo è tutto lontano un gridare dal Beatniks ed i Hippies e la verniciatura e l'abbandono reckless con quale e con quale è stato identificato erroneamente.
Il soggiorno ha sintonizzato per più sopra Kerouac-e una punta dopo quello, particolari sul mio proprio viaggio sulla strada.
Mentre stavo camminando il mio cane attraverso il parco questa mattina, ho notato un segno che detto, “bordo e pulizia dopo il vostro cane.„
Perchè è questo particolare? Una coppia dei motivi. Per uno, chiunque generato il segno ha usato la forma compound di aggettivo (pulizia) piuttosto che la forma di verbo di pulisca. Naturalmente, il significato era ancora chiaro: Se il vostro cane poops, scavilo in su e disfaccialo.
L'altro reaon si trova nell'uso di bordo. Che cosa quella media?
Dopo che il vostro cane defeci, assegnilo al bordo fino a che la polizia di poop non arrivi? Or worse, take yourself and your dog to the curb and wait there for the park police to exonerate you?
I have no idea why one would take a dog to a park to curb it. Can someone please explain that to me?
The new Fine Living Network series called Newlywed, Nearly Dead, though aiming at a cute word contrast, instead does nothing but murder the English language.
The combined word newlywed refers to someone who has been recently married, not to the act of being newly wed, while nearly dead refers only to the act of being almost expired.
Therefore, the construction is completely unparallel. Instead, it should be written Newly Wed, Nearly Dead so that it refers to two parallel acts, not to one person or persons and one act.
Newlybutchered, newly wrong.
I received an interesting e-mail from a reader named Todd, who was enquiring about the propriety of using the constructions about how and reason why.
I replied that their biggest sin is their utter redundancy. How, reason and why can, depending on the sentence, stand by themselves and do the job solo. About how is also unspecific and therefore unclear in most instances.
Todd himself later mailed some good examples, one of which I’ll shamelessly repeat here:
Original:
"The Usual Suspects is a 1995 film about how five criminals are brought together and embark on a crime spree, with a spectacular plot twist at the conclusion."
Todd’s revision:
"The Usual Suspects is a 1995 film about five criminals who are brought together and embark on a crime spree, with a spectacular plot twist at the conclusion."
(The sentence could further be rendered more readable by deleting and embark.)
Todd didn’t provide any reason why examples, but here’s a particularly egregious one:
"The reason why I’m hungry is because I haven’t eaten in two days."
First off, you can’t follow a linking verb (is) with an adverb (because), so that whole part is out. Second, and back to my main point, either reason, because or why is sufficient by itself.
Revisions:
"The reason I’m hungry is that I haven’t eaten in two days."
"I’m hungry because I haven’t eaten in two days."
So much for my diet, eh? LOL
I rushed this site into existence to take over for Grammar Sucks for a few reasons, one of them dealing with server-side issues. I was switching servers and wanted to retire Grammar Sucks (and use it as a 301 redirect only).
Thus, I slapped this site together and got it up quickly. When it came to titling it, my official URL was and is GrammarSource, but that doesn’t say much about what the site is all about, even with a subtitle under it.
I came up with what I thought was a brilliant idea to create my own word to signify that this site was all about English writing and grammar usage, so I coined the word Englishapedia.
My first impulse was to use Englishipedia, copying Wikipedia, but I thought that would be too obvious a rip-off. Then I toyed with Englishopedia, morphing the generic word encyclopedia.
Now that I look at what I have wrought, and I hate the "a" version. The other two seem much more suited.
If anyone would like to influence my choice over the next few days, please just e-mail me.
Welcome to my new site, which takes over for Grammar Sucks.
The latter site was great and dates back to 1997 or so, but with sucks in the title, my e-mail box was constantly filled with every spammy sexual-perversion offer in the universe. I just got sick of it.
So, welcome to Grammar Source.
I should be back on track here soon with new and substantial postings. To make an excuse, I switched servers this past week, whichI thought that would take a day or less to do. It ended up consuming at least four days, and there are still glitches.
So, to solve the problem, I’m placed Grammar Source on an entirely new hosting service. Things should be fine from now on.
Osservazioni 0 
