Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SI Grammar and Spelling Lab -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (677)	1/9/1998 4:23:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Respond to of 4710

>Where in that post did I throw my support toward either side? I'd say: 1) by advising me taht my quixotic quest was a foregone thing 2) by quoting the ADHD as some sort of authorityon the subject, when all we've established to our mutual satisfaction is that the editors of the AHD are wusses. As for my abject apology - well, sorry. (giggles inanely at own trenchant wit)

To: Rambi who wrote (677)	1/9/1998 5:14:00 PM
From: Jack Clarke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4710

Hi Penni, I'm still just starting your recommended Bryson book (The Mother Tongue), so I can't report on it. Many thanks again. With regard to gender, I won't prolong the fruitless argument, but I must say that I don't accept all the usages in dictionaries, since they are trying too hard, in my opinion, to stay au courant. But again, I accept that I am a dinosaur in this case. >>I was scorned last week because I and my progeny still say It is I. On the "it is I" thing, I hope I made the point that as far as I am concerned, you are quite correct in the written language and in formal situations in the spoken language. It's just that in colloquial interchanges such as the one I gave ("No, that wasn't me!"), the formal proper use of the predicate nominative may seem stilted or stuffy. Can we still be friends? Jack