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: Jack Clarke who wrote (907)	2/20/1998 9:26:00 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4710

Hi Jack- Came across this on a stock thread. I think the second writer is wrong and thought I'd throw it out here. I debated this a while back with someone else-so I have my references all lined up. <<>>Making fun of people who think they are smarter than I>> Humbly note in passing that the above quote contains a grammatical error: 'than I' should be 'than me' since 'than' in the above context is but a humble preposition.>> There is an implied am after the I and the first writer is correct. The second is informally accepted (which we purists know means that enough people use it to make it sound correct to the uncritical ear, but we word police, ever vigilant in the protection of our deteriorating language stand ready to pounce on those who would attempt change)

To: Jack Clarke who wrote (907)	2/21/1998 3:09:00 AM
From: Sowbug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4710

Thanks, Jack. On my to-do list is "Read messages nos. 1-800 on SI Grammar thread." Which brings another thing up. In my former life as a trial attorney, I was in the distinct minority of writers who believed it's "messages nos. 1-800," and the rest thought it was "message nos. 1-800." Very frustrating because I was the most junior and regularly vetoed. I think I'm right because you're talking about the messages, not the numbers. My views on "that", for what they're worth: