Re: A serious discussion about the need for more gun control


"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
news:6bj3p39vsmm4pd9sjeuv1t4n2stkst0mtc@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:04:35 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" <huntres23@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> quickly quoth:


"Larry Jaques" <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
news:90q2p3tmrfaohvmaabfps12tsogq6n5ega@xxxxxxxxxx
In any case, you took the snake to school, period. Unless the teacher
was telling it, when it would be "He brought a snake to class." The
easy fix is to use "take" in all instances except when "to here" is
stated or implied.

Where did you get this stuff? What's your reference for this?

Life 101. LRAFB Elementary, Jacksonville JHS, Vista HS.


In your cases, it wasn't. Besides, you're telling
a tale of old. Our old school days are never considered "here", IMHO.
They're "there" and in another "when".

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue/bring.html More to chew on.

Yeah. You should read it. <g> Here's the telling line: "Officially Correct
English, like the Tooth Fairy and Civic Virtue, is a product of grade
school
mythology and rarely leads to satisfying answers or useful decisions."

Damn, I knew you'd catch that. ;)


The implication (my inference) is "bring it with us."

Why would that be different from "bring it with you," which, since they
haven't left yet, violates your "rule"?

It doesn't. "Bring" indicates "here". To me, with me. Butcha gotta say
it right. "Bring it with you when you come to breakfast with me." is
good. "Bring it with you when you when you go to school." isn't.


We'll have to agree to disagree.

We can disagree, but it would be more useful if we knew what you were
basing
your ideas upon. The contemporary usage manuals, of which I've given two
major examples, generally take the point of view that I've taken.

My base is perfectly o^Hsubjective; up with what I grew. ;)

So, since you disagree, are you saying "for her and I" yet?

Objective and nominative mixtures make a part of my brain hurt when I see or
hear them. That's how this stuff gets implanted in our heads. Bad grammar
juju should cause mild headaches. If it wasn't for that, I couldn't make a
living as an editor. I would be too slow.

I got into a hell of an argument with a highly educated writer and our other
editor (I was Senior Editor on that job but one never pulls rank in that
work) a year ago. It was over comma splices. They raised holy hell with me
because I sometimes splice independent clauses with commas -- a trend in
good writing today, and it was good enough for Shakespeare. They remind me
of you. d8-)

My conclusion is that your point about misuse of "bring" and "take" is not a
bad thing, but examples of real writing show, as Webster's demonstrated,
that the supposed rule simply doesn't apply in many cases. That's typical of
grammar rules in English, and the reason I disparage schoolmarm grammar. To
make it teachable and memorable they make it too rigid. Often, as in this
case, they stretch points to avoid violating the rule and kids learn to
write stilted English for no legitimate reason. I'll guess that your brain
has been trained to spot the uses of bring and take and to run the usage
through your rule filter automatically. Again, that's not a bad thing. But
your rule is too simplistic and you're reaching to make the rule apply. It
doesn't.

There is hardly a thing in English for which I think of rules when I'm
editing. As I said, it all has to work automatically or you have no chance.
Clumsy sentences and bad grammatic constructions have to cause some pain,
automatically, when you read them, or you'll never get the job done. You
train by a lifetime of reading good writing to keep that part of your brain
sharp and aware. As it happens, a lot of good writing violates a lot of the
rules. So if you work at editing for a long period, the rules themselves can
cause headaches. You recognize quickly when you encounter one that makes no
sense.

--
Ed Huntress


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How to use SRQ effectively
    ... In almost every school I attended we studied a series called _Wariner's ... English Composition and Grammar_. ... We thumbed through it and discussed grammar. ... There are lots of ways to stimulate creativity, and it tends to wax and ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: Word count of minimum vocabulary
    ... three different types of compounding in writing. ... I extracted part of a word to make a point in English. ... What makes you think that there's a precise one-to-one translation between French "grammaire" and "orthographe" and English "grammar" and "orthography"? ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: OT for BO UPDATE
    ... I will work on my english." ... The old "rule" that you can't begin a sentence with a conjunction has ... writing, you can begin a sentence with and or but. ... But, like anything in grammar, do ...
    (alt.true-crime)
  • Re: TR:UK - does good English matter?
    ... wrong at the grammar school I ... of the English I was subjected to. ... Somehow I made it into a Latin stream and was there ...
    (uk.railway)
  • Re: TR:UK - does good English matter?
    ... wrong at the grammar school I ... of the English I was subjected to. ... Somehow I made it into a Latin stream and was there ...
    (uk.railway)