Ted R's thoughts on nothing

[Tub]

2 hours ago, DrKrettin said:

The spacebar could do with a good clean as well. 

I'll get a new keyboard before my crest falls any farther - not further, lol.

Anyway, and before the Moderators pounce, back to " Nothing ": is "Nothing " necessary before " Something " can come into being? If there hadn't been " Nothing " before the BB, how could Space have expanded - just as you need an empty bucket before it can be filled with water?  Although we know that the Universe isn't really expanding " into " anywhere,  if " Something " was already in situ, could another " Something " have occupied the same volume as what was already extant?

On a lighter note, is the hole in a doughnut " Nothing " and part of the doughnut at the same time? And where does it go when the doughnut is eaten?

[Area54]

5 minutes ago, Tub said:

On a lighter note, is the hole in a doughnut " Nothing " and part of the doughnut at the same time? And where does it go when the doughnut is eaten?

I store mine in a small satchel and take them out when I need room on a crowded train.

[Tub]

Just now, Area54 said:

I store mine in a small satchel and take them out when I need room on a crowded train.

Ha,Ha. Hope it doesn't get too sticky for you!

[Ted Robinson]

Zapatos wrote the Ted Robinson wrote “Incidentally I notice that a number of submitters use the word “it’s” as the possessive form of “it,” which is like fingernails on a blackboard to namby-pamby nitpickers like myself.”  --  Shouldn't the comma have been placed outside the quotes? 

Not according to my education as a master’s degree in Journalism and experience as editor-in-chief of the Daily Bruin.  My staff practically

made a profession out of insuring correctness in these matters and grammatical textbooks became our Bible.

[zapatos]

What did your Bible say about using "insure" instead of "ensure"?

[DrKrettin]

12 hours ago, Ted Robinson said:

Zapatos wrote the Ted Robinson wrote “Incidentally I notice that a number of submitters use the word “it’s” as the possessive form of “it,” which is like fingernails on a blackboard to namby-pamby nitpickers like myself.”  --  Shouldn't the comma have been placed outside the quotes? 

Not according to my education as a master’s degree in Journalism and experience as editor-in-chief of the Daily Bruin.  My staff practically

made a profession out of insuring correctness in these matters and grammatical textbooks became our Bible.

 

Sorry, but this is just silly. The comma indicates the end of a subordinate clause which states that a number of submitters use the word "it's" as the possessive form of "it". The comma is not part of the disputed text, so why on Earth should it be inside the quotation marks? Incidentally, as I write it above, it's the end of a sentence and a full stop is used instead of a comma. To claim that this should be in the quotation marks is just nonsense.

[Area54]

2 minutes ago, DrKrettin said:

Sorry, but this is just silly. The comma indicates the end of a subordinate clause which states that a number of submitters use the word "it's" as the possessive form of "it". The comma is not part of the disputed text, so why on Earth should it be inside the quotation marks? Incidentally, as I write it above, it's the end of a sentence and a full stop is used instead of a comma. To claim that this should be in the quotation marks is just nonsense.

I cannot find any fault with this argument. There isn't even a hint of ambiguity. I shall be interested to see which grammatical textbook Ted cites to justify his position (and that of the comma).

[Manticore]

6 minutes ago, DrKrettin said:

Sorry, but this is just silly. The comma indicates the end of a subordinate clause which states that a number of submitters use the word "it's" as the possessive form of "it". The comma is not part of the disputed text, so why on Earth should it be inside the quotation marks? Incidentally, as I write it above, it's the end of a sentence and a full stop is used instead of a comma. To claim that this should be in the quotation marks is just nonsense.

Totally agree. +1

[MigL]

Arguments about where a comma goes ( outside quotes, in that case ) in a thread about 'nothing'.

How appropriate.

[Ted Robinson]

Area54 said, re: commas inside quotation marks:  “I shall be interested to see which grammatical textbook Ted cites to justify his position (and that of the comma).” 

Tub the Quark already answered that:  http://www.grammarbook.com/

zapatos said: T. Robinson said: “My staff practically made a profession out of insuring correctness in these matters and grammatical textbooks became our Bible.” -- What did your Bible say about using "insure" instead of "ensure"?

That’s the one thing that keeps me from being perfect.

[DrKrettin]

7 minutes ago, Ted Robinson said:

Area54 said, re: commas inside quotation marks:  “I shall be interested to see which grammatical textbook Ted cites to justify his position (and that of the comma).” 

Tub the Quark already answered that:  http://www.grammarbook.com/

Not really. Without a specific reference of chapter and verse, I am most certainly not going to read through an American grammar book which will probably leave me in a state of apoplexy.

3 hours ago, MigL said:

Arguments about where a comma goes ( outside quotes, in that case ) in a thread about 'nothing'.

How appropriate.

It just shows how much we need to talk about something, rather than nothing, despite how trivial.

[Manticore]

4 minutes ago, DrKrettin said:

Not really. Without a specific reference of chapter and verse, I am most certainly not going to read through an American grammar book which will probably leave me in a state of apoplexy.

Me too. I decided decades ago that Americans do not speak English. Trouble is, neither do large numbers of Britishers any more.

[Area54]

6 minutes ago, Manticore said:

Me too. I decided decades ago that Americans do not speak English. Trouble is, neither do large numbers of Britishers any more.

Should that be Britons?

[DrKrettin]

2 minutes ago, Manticore said:

Me too. I decided decades ago that Americans do not speak English. Trouble is, neither do large numbers of Britishers any more.

My aversion to American grammar originates in MS Word, which I once loaded without switching off the grammar check. I can live with a difference in spelling, but it would comment on documents I wrote, telling me off for using the passive voice, or the subjunctive mood, or any other normal feature of English grammar which I have used all my life. The effrontery.

[Manticore]

23 minutes ago, Area54 said:

Should that be Britons?

Possibly (maybe only if they're ancient) - I haven't met any for years - most of the people I know these days speak Kiswahili and/or Sukuma.

 

27 minutes ago, DrKrettin said:

My aversion to American grammar originates in MS Word, which I once loaded without switching off the grammar check. I can live with a difference in spelling, but it would comment on documents I wrote, telling me off for using the passive voice, or the subjunctive mood, or any other normal feature of English grammar which I have used all my life. The effrontery.

I remember reading somewhere that that's not because of American grammar as such. It's because Bill Gates has a reading age of about 14.

 

[Tub]

38 minutes ago, Ted Robinson said:

 

zapatos said: T. Robinson said: “My staff practically made a profession out of insuring correctness in these matters and grammatical textbooks became our Bible.” -- What did your Bible say about using "insure" instead of "ensure"?

That’s the one thing that keeps me from being perfect.

Not so fast, Ted - you might still be perfect after all, lol. Here in Great Britain, we would always use " ensure " in the mentioned context but, in my ( American ) Webster's Dictionary, " insure " is defined as "... to make sure or certain "!      Pax, DrK!

Was it George Bernard Shaw who wrote something like: " Great Britain and America are two countries separated by the same language "? And, hanging onto the thread by a thread,  wasn't it Shakespeare who wrote " Much Ado About Nothing "?

 

[Strange]

1 hour ago, DrKrettin said:

My aversion to American grammar originates in MS Word, which I once loaded without switching off the grammar check. I can live with a difference in spelling, but it would comment on documents I wrote, telling me off for using the passive voice, or the subjunctive mood, or any other normal feature of English grammar which I have used all my life. The effrontery.

That is not "American" grammar, though. It is just applying stupid "zombie" rules. (Rules that won't die even after you prove them bogus.)

28 minutes ago, Tub said:

Not so fast, Ted - you might still be perfect after all, lol.

Yes, as far as I know American English does not distinguish the two senses in British English.