T1B

Felix wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

smackaholic wrote:The TDI is an awesome vehicle, if you do a lot of open road driving.

BTW, the TDI is not a vehicle. You fucking moron.

nice catch.....

but I've got to be honest, your sentence structure here leaves a lot to be desired....I think if you'd have inserted an apostrophe after vehicle it would have given your post more punch and eliminated a three word sentence that's a grammatical nightmare.....

hope this helps....

I guess it is a "nice catch" in an annoying dinsdale anal dipshit kind of way.

The rest of your statement is dead on. If you're gonna call someone a fucking moron for a minor technical inaccuracy, don't do it with a major grammatical flaw.

The key to using fragments is CONTEXT. According to Fowler's, if in the context of what you are writing you use a sentence fragment and it works, it is usually acceptable. However, as stated in Essentials of English, 4th Edition, if it seriously dislocates the continuity of the writing, it's a sentence error. Who's call is it? First, yours. Second, your editor's.

Most writers use sentence fragments in dialogue or in quick action sequences because the context of their writing calls for it. There's a very good section on using sentence fragments in dialogue in Renni Browne and Dave King's, Self-Editing For Fiction Writers, pp 64-67. The authors list quite a few examples and basically conclude that, "If not overused, this technique captures remarkably well the rhythms of real speech."

Go fuck yourselves. You nattering nabobs of negativism.

smackaholic wrote: If you're gonna call someone a fucking moron for a minor technical inaccuracy, don't do it with a major grammatical flaw.

"You fucking moron.", is a fragmented sentence. If this came across my desk, I'd ask the author to revise it. If the author insisted on using two sentences, I'd probably suggest he revise the second sentence to "You're a fucking moron." Not ideal, but it's not fragmented. There was simply no need to insert a period after vehicle......

However, as stated in Essentials of English, 4th Edition, if it seriously dislocates the continuity of the writing, it's a sentence error.

and within the context of the post, the sentence was a writing error.

Let's try it out

BTW, the TDI is not a vehicle you fucking moron.

vs

BTW, the TDI is not a vehicle. You fucking moron.

I'm pretty sure the single sentence would have been the choice...it simply flows better....

Goober McTuber wrote:You tedious fuckpuddle.

you did that on purpose....the first one wasn't....

Sudden Sam wrote:

Felix wrote:
BTW, the TDI is not a vehicle you fucking moron.

Wouldn't the proper sentence be:

BTW, the TDI is not a vehicle, you fucking moron.

Stay down, Felix.

You just got schooled by a Bammer on grammar. Call it a day.

BTW -- way back when, my fishing buddy had a 88 (?) Chevy Sprint. On highway trips, we'd usually get about 70MPG (EPA rated it at 55 or thereabouts).

Loved that car. Didn't drive all that nicely, and ate those miniature clutch disks like they were candy, but in those days, we'd go to the coast and back for $3. Could drive all over the northwest part of the state for $5.

Felix wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:You tedious fuckpuddle.

you did that on purpose....the first one wasn't....

Wrong. They were both done on purpose. If you check it out, it's a style I have used more than once. You slack-jawed halfwit.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Felix wrote:
BTW, the TDI is not a vehicle you fucking moron.

Wouldn't the proper sentence be:

BTW, the TDI is not a vehicle, you fucking moron.

from my perspective (as a reviewer), either way would be acceptable within the context of the writing style (casual)...use of a comma in that instance would denote a distinct pause and would emphasize "you fucking moron".....drive it home so to speak....

I think it would be required if it was in a formal writing (e.g. technical) style, but I don't deal with that much technical writing..... someone else (s'up all the ambulance chasers in da house) could provide a better opinion on that....

Goober McTuber wrote:

Wrong. They were both done on purpose. If you check it out, it's a style I have used more than once. You slack-jawed halfwit.

you write fragmented sentences on purpose and you call that a "style"?

I guess that would qualify as a win in your book....

Felix wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Wrong. They were both done on purpose. If you check it out, it's a style I have used more than once. You slack-jawed halfwit.

so you write fragmented sentences on purpose?

Yes. For emphasis.

Goober McTuber wrote: I used to be in the business, and no one I know refers to them that way.

bullshit

BTW, from my experience Volkswagen routine maintenance was always 2-3 times more expensive than any of the Japanese brands.

no arguement there. veedubs suffer from all sorts of little stupid shit that the japs figured out a long time ago. back when you were just middle aged.

Felix - a three word sentence (fragment) is a grammatical nightmare? When I have time, I'll diagram it for you. You tedious fuckpuddle.

just because some use it, doesn't make it correct or the best way.

Goober McTuber wrote:

Yes. For emphasis.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'm going to have to rescind that part-time review job I offered you...

smackaholic wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: I used to be in the business, and no one I know refers to them that way.

bullshit

Seriously. I was in the car business for about five years. I still see a lot of those people.

smackaholic wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: Felix - a three word sentence (fragment) is a grammatical nightmare? When I have time, I'll diagram it for you. You tedious fuckpuddle.

just because some use it, doesn't make it correct or the best way.

It’s a question of style. It’s perfectly acceptable. Even if it does give Felix nightmares.

Felix wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Yes. For emphasis.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I'm going to have to rescind that part-time review job I offered you...

Oh, do you come here to write reviews, Felix? This is conversation. People often use sentence fragments in everyday conversation. It's really quite common, in fact.

no arguement there. veedubs suffer from all sorts of little stupid shit that the japs figured out a long time ago. back when you were just middle aged.

Goober McTuber wrote: It’s perfectly acceptable.

maybe in the world of knuckle dragging neanderthals.....
when reviewing documents/reports, I'll let one or two of those slide by....a preponderance of fragmented sentences would pretty much ensure that you'd be doing the document/report over....

I used to sell VWs. We commonly referred to them as the "Golf TDI," "Touareg TDI" or "Jetta TDI." Merely referring to something as a "TDI" wouldn't be enough, since there was more than one model carrying the 'TDI' designation.

smackaholic, okay...



400 lbs, 193 rwhp, a bit over 200 hp at the crank...and that same shmuck could come blundering in off the street with just a pocket full of cash and a learner's permit before crashing this thing in the parking lot an hour later.

Felix wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: It’s perfectly acceptable.

maybe in the world of knuckle dragging neanderthals.....
when reviewing documents/reports, I'll let one or two of those slide by....a preponderance of fragmented sentences would pretty much ensure that you'd be doing the document/report over....

What you just posted there - is that grammatically correct? Jesus Christ, do you come here to write reports, or just to converse? You must be a fucking hoot at parties.

BTW. I referred to it as TDI. Because I might consider either the Golf. Or the Jetta wagon.

Also. I am not nor have I ever been. In "the business". Nor will I ever be. How "they" refer to these cars means absolutely nothing. To me.

So fuck. Off.

Goober McTuber wrote:
Jesus Christ, do you come here to write reports, or just to converse? You must be a fucking hoot at parties.

nope, I'm just giving back what you dealt out....when I used the word palatable instead of palpable you were all over me about it....

it was a stupid mistake on my part (and I've made plenty) but I didn't think you were going to grind on it like you did....

I'm just trying to demonstrate how tedious that kind of shit is...

this will be the end of it...

Sam, I've seen guys literally not make it out of the parking lot before they'd totaled their new 'Busas. Probably the funniest incident involved the guy who was so terrrified of the thing that he completely froze up on the bike. Rather than provide any steering inputs whatsoever, he just exited the lot while feathering the clutch. He couldn't make the bike turn so he just went straight through the street to the other side, whereupon he jumped the curb before running into a Pepsi vending machine. He went over the bars, hitting the Pepsi machine while upside down before landing on his back in a thick bunch of bushes.

All the while, his girlfriend was laughing her ass off next to me in the parking lot.

smackaholic wrote: just because some use it, doesn't make it correct or the best way.

Sin,
Qualifiers with "unique," "amuck," and periods and commas outside quotation marks.

I read that it's as the possessive form of it, is considered proper as well in ole blighty.

Sam, face it. We have a written language that makes no sense.

Sam, depends on the (parenthetical) statement.

If the statement is complete on its own, it can be punctuated inside the parentheses. If it qualifies, clarifies, or otherwise defines the sentence it's in, then it doesn't have closing punctuation (unless an excaimation mark is used for emphasis!).

Obviously, commas are still used where appropriate (like here, for example). (This is an example of a stand-alone sentence, so the period goes inside the parentheses.)

From EV batteries to TDI semantics, to proper punctuation...

Where's the dirigible-sportin' pneumatic bimbos proudly hoisting dead pairs of fish?

smackaholic wrote:I read that it's as the possessive form of it, is considered proper as well in ole blighty.

Incorrect. You aren't getting off that easy, dude.

The possessive form of 'it' is 'its' in Ole Blighty, the same as it is here. British English doesn't differ from American English in its use of apostrophes. The differences occur in areas such as comma usage with subjective conjunctions, commas eschewed in multiple-clause phrases, and the location of punctuation within single and double quotes. Also, they often differ in the order of those single and double quotes.

For a long time I engaged in a sort of pick-and-choose method of combining my favorite aspects of each. Eventually I decided to ditch it, choosing instead to go with American English full time. It still occasionally grates on me, though, especially when it comes to our penchant for over-using commas, at least compared to the British method.

Sam, I see that pic and all I can think of is the infamous Led Zeppelin shark/groupie story.

It was a Pacific Rockfish.

http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/mudshark.asp

Love the octopus story, especially since it was Page.

The addition of the bacon placement to the Great Dane story is pretty funny too, and you just gotta love Zappa for doing "Mud Shark."

Cuda wrote:How much Gubmint Cheese did they get? Several hundred million, or so?

Actually it was a few billion, oh not wait that was the oil industry's take of gov cheese in just the last year because 130+ billion in profit wasn't enough.

Van wrote:you just gotta love Zappa for doing "Mud Shark."

You KNOW that'll get played tonight if I have it in my library.

Felix wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:
Jesus Christ, do you come here to write reports, or just to converse? You must be a fucking hoot at parties.

nope, I'm just giving back what you dealt out....when I used the word palatable instead of palpable you were all over me about it....

it was a stupid mistake on my part (and I've made plenty) but I didn't think you were going to grind on it like you did....

I'm just trying to demonstrate how tedious that kind of shit is...

this will be the end of it...

Excuse me for not responding to your IM on this, but they’re not comparable situations. What we typically have on T1B are conversations, not reports or reviews. Sentence fragments appear frequently in conversations. And you know what? They are quite acceptable. And for you to get all whiny about it is just so….Felixesque.

On the other hand, what you did with the “palatable” thing was to totally butcher the use of a word. If you had said the same thing in a conversation, people would probably snicker a bit. I know I would. I pointed it out, you got all butt hurt about it, and you’re still running around looking for some way to get back at me.

It would have been real simple if you simply said “my bad” but no, you said:

Felix wrote:maybe pervasive would have been a better choice here...in any event, the point remains the same....

And then followed that up with an accusation that I was critiquing your grammar, punctuation and spelling. None of which have anything to do with your malapropism.

And please don’t send me any more IMs instructing me on what are the acceptable ways to smack you.

Nothing personal, after all it is a "smack" board right?

Now we're done.

i knew i should of put felix in my "most tedious" poll.

Van wrote:Incorrect. You aren't getting off that easy, dude.

The first time I went and looked it up after my KYOA clinic, I seem to remember reading somewhere that it was an accepted english way of spending it. Might have been a correct mid 19th century british way of spelling it, now that I think about it.



I think maybe I should just rip the fukking apostrophe key off my keyboard and be done with it. :)

And to those that will respond "rip them all off" a pre-emptive GFY.

BTW, when is the - used with prefixes, proper?

Give me an example.

Papa Willie wrote:Southern boys having fun.

Undoubtedly involves livestock.

Or sisters.

Same difference.

Goober McTuber wrote: None of which have anything to do with your malapropism.

Now we're done.

not quite...I forgot to thank you for the sig.....

btw, its PM's not IM's

Felix wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote: None of which have anything to do with your malapropism.

Now we're done.

not quite...I forgot to thank you for the sig.....

Malapropism

The misuse of similar sounding words, especially with humorous results.

Sometimes there’s just one right word that is absolutely perfect for the situation, and you need to use it.

So your new sig is supposed to somehow represent a put-down? You’re basically noting that I did something that you seem to struggle with. That is, use “big” words in their proper context. Must fill you with a nasty mixture of awe and envy, Mr. Professional Writer.

And what a smart move putting the word “malapropism” in your sig. Because now if anyone comes across a Felix post who hasn’t already read this thread, and they’re curious about that sig, they can just search on that word. Because it only shows up in one thread. The one where you chose to prove what a thoroughly petulant little cunt you are. Brilliant.

Goober McTuber wrote: Because now if anyone comes across a Felix post who hasn’t already read this thread, and they’re curious about that sig, they can just search on that word.

you seem to operate under the impression that anybody on this board gives two fucking shits about it....I've been posting on these boards with the same people for 10 fucking years....in that time one constant has remained the same...

nobody fucking cares....

brilliant

thanks....

look if you're going to play the role of "giant fucking asshole" on the interwebs, either be funny (s'up not you) or witty (s'up not you again)....

represent dawg....

Felix wrote:I've been posting on these boards with the same people for 10 fucking years....in that time one constant has remained the same...

None of them can stand you.

Goober McTuber wrote: None of them can stand you.

I went to this comedy club once and the comedian was probably the worst I've ever seen....there came a point where I wanted him to say something funny to alleviate my embarrassment for him....

in much the same way I'm pulling for you....

but congrats on your ability to maintain the whole "you kids get off my porch" persona you've cultivated over the years....not an easy task

There’s one thing you need to get through your thick head, Felix. My primary focus here is to amuse one person. In that regard, I’ve been highly successful. I certainly appreciate your efforts to help out the last few days, though.

Goober McTuber wrote: My primary focus here is to amuse one person.

so your not even going to try?

good to know.....I need to relegate you the "unreadable" scrap heap right next to At Least I'm Not Him....