It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
A Book!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eats,_Shoots_%26_Leaves
avatar
Lionel212008: The nature of facts is that they continue to evolve and when examined up close, all facts are to a degree ambiguous. There is a certain lacunae in our understanding (That what is defined by the finite number of senses through which we perceive things) where we can arrive at the most tenable conjecture. That is the basis of evidence and proof. Nothing is absolutely absolute....

Is the sky really blue or is it that how we perceive the sky to be?
Is the pencil tip you see actually solid?
Do you really exist or are merely a figment of my imagination and I of yours?
You seem to be a pocket fan of Immanuel Kant. I recommend you read the book "Brighter Than 1000 Suns" which covers the entire Manhattan Project through to it's aftermath and beyond.
I can only give a german example.

Alten Vögeln helfen.
Alten vögeln helfen.

http://nurmeiner.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/alten-vc3b6geln-helfen.jpg

translated:

Help old birds.
Help old people with fucking.
Post edited February 20, 2014 by Silverhawk170485
We're formulating a grammar programme for the employees in the organisation that I work for. Any ideas about a name that I could use for the programme?....It has to be extremely simple. I would appreciate any help.
avatar
Nirth: "off his horse", is that even grammatically correct? I would say "get off his horse".

Anyway, context is always needed and the reason people are against grammar is because they don't like rules that don't come naturally, that just means more work.
avatar
hedwards: The reason people are against grammar is that it's bullshit. And that comes from somebody who makes his living because of those same rules.

A lot of the "rules" aren't rules at all. There's no reason why you can't split infinitives or dangle participles. Some constructs are used by damn near everybody despite being wrong for technical reasons.

And don't get me started with all the idiots that try and convince me that you can't use the word can't to express permission. Can't has been used in that fashion for centuries.
Eh. Grammar *is* important for clarity, just like spelling or pronunciation. I agree that many of the rules are outdated or strange and don't really apply in everyday life. But we shouldn't toss the baby out with the bathwater.
avatar
hedwards: The reason people are against grammar is that it's bullshit. And that comes from somebody who makes his living because of those same rules.

A lot of the "rules" aren't rules at all. There's no reason why you can't split infinitives or dangle participles. Some constructs are used by damn near everybody despite being wrong for technical reasons.

And don't get me started with all the idiots that try and convince me that you can't use the word can't to express permission. Can't has been used in that fashion for centuries.
avatar
HGiles: Eh. Grammar *is* important for clarity, just like spelling or pronunciation. I agree that many of the rules are outdated or strange and don't really apply in everyday life. But we shouldn't toss the baby out with the bathwater.
Not really, in the vast majority of cases where there's confusion about the meaning of a sentence, it's not the grammar that's at fault, it's that the wrong word was used.

Think of it this way, grammar is something that's taught, so for the most part it's people that go to school and or read that learn it. But, for the vast majority of the time humans have had language, few people had any actual grammar instruction. And people of my age probably went to school without receiving any grammar instruction.

And yet, people had no particular issue with communicative competence. Grammar is purely for efficiency reasons, making it so that that the listener knows what order to expect information in and can rely upon the structures to keep track of what's going on.

What's more, some of the least comprehensible sentences you're going to find are ones that are technically grammatically correct, but written by lawyers to be incomprehensible.
avatar
jdsiege: I believe Stephen Fry sums it up well: http://youtu.be/J7E-aoXLZGY
Thank you for that video!