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: jbe who wrote (1308)	5/22/1998 1:26:00 PM
From: Rick Slemmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4711

jb: Long weekend got you down? Have to stir the pot? OK, I've got a couple of genuine, I-have-no-idea-anymore questions regarding grammar. 1. (From an earlier post by Jack Fowler) ...as other examples, although I personally wouldn't notice if I read "stadia" or "asyla". When ending a sentence with a quoted item, does the punctuation go inside the quotes, even when the quoted item is something noted as an aside? Jack's punctuation makes perfect sense to me, but English grammar is rarely sensible. I've been corrected both ways by editors who should know, so the rules on quotation marks at the end of a sentence seem to be nebulous. I think I've seen arguments on both sides in style manuals, but I gave up years ago in favor of alternate sentence structure. 2. Forbes magazine often uses passages such as this: "Roberts is academically astute, witty, and wealthy. Which explains the large sculpture in his closet." To me, that should read as one sentence, the "which" being used as a conjunction and preceded by a comma. I would rewrite it as: "Roberts is academically astute, witty, and wealthy, which explains the large sculpture in his closet." Am I correct? RS

To: jbe who wrote (1308)	5/24/1998 6:26:00 PM
From: Wizzer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4711

If you can't do that, you get murk, instead of clarity. Language becomes, not a "medium of exchange"....but what? JBE, I was away for the weekend and enjoyed myself thoroughly. I have not read the other posts, but these are my feelings about what you wrote. I feel that many of us who post on this thread, qualify what they are writing to suit their particular discussion. Many times the source of the problem in communication, whether by writing or speaking, is that people will miss the qualified nature of the words, hence there is a misunderstanding. Even in verbal communication I have been misunderstood so many times, and there was nothing wrong with what I was saying. The listener plainly wasn't listening to all the words that clarify my speech. The same is true with SI. I appreciate when people in this thread, who are responding to posts, italicize the phrase that they are discussing. This shows the reader exactly what the person is referring to, and highlights points in question. You are entirely correct in you assertion that people don't "get into the other guy's head". It is a form of "internet laziness" that dictates that people reading posts, will read the surface of the post and quickly respond. Lately, I have learned that if I am going to discuss a message, I will read it 2 or 3 times to ensure that I appreciate what the author is saying. Many times on the 2nd reading, I realize that in my initial read I was not diligent in searching for the qualified nature of the statements. To avoid an argument, I believe this is necessary. Although, I am sure that I have been reckless in reading some messages at certain times, I have vowed that I will never do so again. This is out of consideration and respect for other people and communication as a whole. This is what makes a human being, a human. Humanity and respect are becoming more and more absent on the internet and in common life. I choose to be one of those people that cherish others and their ideas, many of which are often profound. Such is the true nature of a human being, in my opinion.