This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I tried to make this NPOV... at least the title now doesn't have a typo. -- hike395 05:04, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Is this original work? RickK 05:37, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC) <copied from Talk:It's I/It's me by Cyan>
-- hike395 06:59, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
--original poster
---
Should false english really redirect here?
---
Grammer? Really, folks.
Two things that possibly should be added to this page: The possessive gerund — do you object to me adding this, or would my doing it be controversial?
The comparative and superlative, a prescriptivist invention unknown in most other languages, and frequently violated. Would this count as disputed?
---
Should using they instead of he or he or she be included do you think? fabiform | talk 00:52, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I have marked this page with the NPOV dispute tag. I can tell that some attempt has been made to contextualize the boldly prescriptive statements, but there still remain such baldly non-neutral things like "XXX is wrong" and "XXX is correct". I'm going to try to excise the offending matter but I'm afraid the page will be nothing more than stub when I'm done. -- Nohat 05:09, 2004 Feb 6 (UTC)
---
How about including another example - "they/their" as a neutral, singular pronoun/possessive? That is something that many descriptivists accept, I believe, but which presses all the wrong buttons for prescriptivists (as far as I know). 21 Aug 2004.
I am not so sure about the first example of singular they. It strikes me that in the sentence given:
Someone who smokes damages their health.
Someone could be seen as plural as easily as they could be read as singular. As an example if the first word were People making the sentence:
People who smoke damage their health.
I think the two sentences have essentally the same meaning. Dalf | Talk 08:25, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
Is this article an elaborate joke? __earth 17:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Which is correct, "couldn't of" or "couldn't have"? 66.215.189.59 00:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Since when does Polish use an instrumentative case in, "It is I," type of sentences? We follow the, "It is I," pattern, not the, "It is me," or, "c'est moi." We always use Nominative there and it is not merely a mistake to use a different case; such usage simply does not exist. The Author is asked to make sure he has a vague idea of what he uses as an example to support his arguments. It is correct that we use an oblique case in, "If I were him," kind of sentences, but we always say, "It is he." Consequently, whereas the Author is correct on general usage, his specific example is a complete failure. 84.10.216.128 17:24, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I tried to make this NPOV... at least the title now doesn't have a typo. -- hike395 05:04, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Is this original work? RickK 05:37, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC) <copied from Talk:It's I/It's me by Cyan>
-- hike395 06:59, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
--original poster
---
Should false english really redirect here?
---
Grammer? Really, folks.
Two things that possibly should be added to this page: The possessive gerund — do you object to me adding this, or would my doing it be controversial?
The comparative and superlative, a prescriptivist invention unknown in most other languages, and frequently violated. Would this count as disputed?
---
Should using they instead of he or he or she be included do you think? fabiform | talk 00:52, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I have marked this page with the NPOV dispute tag. I can tell that some attempt has been made to contextualize the boldly prescriptive statements, but there still remain such baldly non-neutral things like "XXX is wrong" and "XXX is correct". I'm going to try to excise the offending matter but I'm afraid the page will be nothing more than stub when I'm done. -- Nohat 05:09, 2004 Feb 6 (UTC)
---
How about including another example - "they/their" as a neutral, singular pronoun/possessive? That is something that many descriptivists accept, I believe, but which presses all the wrong buttons for prescriptivists (as far as I know). 21 Aug 2004.
I am not so sure about the first example of singular they. It strikes me that in the sentence given:
Someone who smokes damages their health.
Someone could be seen as plural as easily as they could be read as singular. As an example if the first word were People making the sentence:
People who smoke damage their health.
I think the two sentences have essentally the same meaning. Dalf | Talk 08:25, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
Is this article an elaborate joke? __earth 17:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Which is correct, "couldn't of" or "couldn't have"? 66.215.189.59 00:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Since when does Polish use an instrumentative case in, "It is I," type of sentences? We follow the, "It is I," pattern, not the, "It is me," or, "c'est moi." We always use Nominative there and it is not merely a mistake to use a different case; such usage simply does not exist. The Author is asked to make sure he has a vague idea of what he uses as an example to support his arguments. It is correct that we use an oblique case in, "If I were him," kind of sentences, but we always say, "It is he." Consequently, whereas the Author is correct on general usage, his specific example is a complete failure. 84.10.216.128 17:24, 1 April 2006 (UTC)