Corrections to CHH's punctuation, spelling, and grammar

[masterdmjg]

Here it is. More to come.

[masterdmjg]

That is impossible since everything from polygamy to Cops is interrelated to taxes because income taxes are directly related to Communism. It is Satan's counterfeit gospel and you people defend it. It is all a part of the single plan of the Civil Religion of Marxism. I am truly sorry you cannot understand what is going on all around you but you are, you personally, to me, totally seduced. That you would ask me to commit perjury and join into the Marxist system that I have fought against my whole life and been given revelations and gift to remain free, was so unbelievably shocking to me that I cannot compare it to anything that ever happened to me before by a person that actually claims to support liberty. And the saddest thing of all was that, unlike jbalm, how I know to be a IRS agent of sycophant, you honestly believe you are doing the right thing. That is the most dangerous person to liberty there is.
http://ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic.ph ... 22&p=38214

Wow. This is full of errors. First of all, I would try using some more commas now and again. That first sentence just sounds bad with no commas. Read it aloud to yourself to see how it sounds.

I would avoid capitalizing Cops, Communism, and for that matter, Socialism. See the link: http://www1.umn.edu/urelate/style/capit ... IONS-59404

Do not capitalize words designating political and economic philosophies or their proponents, unless such words are derived from proper nouns.

democracy
capitalist
communism
Marxist

This is a little side note, but the word "personally" is really starting to bug me. "You personally." What else would you use in that instance besides personally? "You interpersonally?" "You impersonally?" I think we don't use that word correctly, but I'll have to do more research into the matter. Maybe there's more potential for a new thread.

"I have been given revelations and gift...." You might want to look that one over again. I would also try to stick to the same tense in a single sentence. It sounds strange to go from present to past to conditional, and back again.

And the saddest thing of all was that, unlike jbalm, how I know to be a IRS agent of sycophant, you honestly believe you are doing the right thing.

I spell HOW, WHO, I think. Use AN before IRS, and I don't think "agent of sycophant" is acceptable. Sycophant is a noun. Maybe, "agent of sycophantism," I don't know for sure. Maybe someone can back me up on this one. "Agent of sycophant" just sounds messed up.

[masterdmjg]

That is impossible since everything from polygamy to Cops is interrelated to taxes because income taxes are directly related to Communism.
http://ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic.ph ... 22&p=38214

One other thing - I don't think something, anything, or everything, can be interrelated to taxes. It may be related, but interrelated? Polygamy and taxes can be interrelated. But polygamy can't be interrelated to taxes. It doesn't make sense.

And the logic is just not really there, by the way. Income taxes are directly related to communism, so everything is related to taxes? That logic must be beyond my comprehension.

[jnjnelson]

Corrections to CHH's punctuation, spelling, and grammar

Here is a link to Amazon.com about a wonderful book on the topic of grammar corrections. I thoroughly love this book. It teaches grammar, and at the same time illustrates how grammar criticisms are highly debatable.

[masterdmjg]

Corrections to CHH's punctuation, spelling, and grammar

Here is a link to Amazon.com about a wonderful book on the topic of grammar corrections. I thoroughly love this book. It teaches grammar, and at the same time illustrates how grammar criticisms are highly debatable.

That's excellent. I reserved a copy from the public library (cheaper) so I can take a look at it. One of my friends growing up had parents who you might deem "grammar snobs" so I am concious of the need to use English properly, and yet sometimes I choose not to do so, just to bug people.

However, the usage of English on the Internet can be simply atrocious sometimes. I guess you could say I am an aspiring "snob," but I don't know everything, so I don't want to be a total "meany."

[masterdmjg]

I believe that people with knowledge that act willfully against that knowledge go to Hell. If you pay "your" income tax because you owe it because you accepted a Congressionally granted benefit then you need to repent because the First Presidency has told us we cannot become wards of the government. If you are receiving a Congrerssionally created benefit then you have become a word of the government or a Federal Public Servant. If you truly are a servant then that is not evil but if you are not and just accepting an even an unknown benefit, then you should repent.

Again, I'd explore some comma usage in some of these sentences. You got Congressionally right the first time, but not the second. Ward, not word, I think. And, I think you had an extra "an."

[Proud 2b Peculiar]

I think CHH does great considering his dyslexia.

[masterdmjg]

As do I, but he said he was cool with me correcting now and again. I'm not going to name names, but there are a good number of folks who could improve their performance on this topic considerably (i.e. - they are much more egregious offenders than CHH). I just knew if anyone was apt to shake off the criticism, CHH would be.

[Proud 2b Peculiar]

LOL I know that I throw grammar to the wind online.. it is my Free place LOL

[masterdmjg]

Corrections to CHH's punctuation, spelling, and grammar

Here is a link to Amazon.com about a wonderful book on the topic of grammar corrections. I thoroughly love this book. It teaches grammar, and at the same time illustrates how grammar criticisms are highly debatable.

Well, jnjnelson, I have to thank you heartily for your suggestion. I've only just started reading the book you suggested, and I've already found myself holding back tears, the author cracked me up so much. I am looking forward to holding back more tears as I continue reading. Thanks again for the great recommendation. Maybe I'll share some of the side-splitting insights on here now and then.

[Bircher]

As do I, but he said he was cool with me correcting now and again. I'm not going to name names, but there are a good number of folks who could improve their performance on this topic considerably (i.e. - they are much more egregious offenders than CHH). I just knew if anyone was apt to shake off the criticism, CHH would be.

I am probably public enemy number one when it come to correct grammar on the internet. I am horrible to begin with, but when typing on message forums I get even more lazy.

This is a funny topic, and would not mind correction now and then either.

[masterdmjg]

As do I, but he said he was cool with me correcting now and again. I'm not going to name names, but there are a good number of folks who could improve their performance on this topic considerably (i.e. - they are much more egregious offenders than CHH). I just knew if anyone was apt to shake off the criticism, CHH would be.

I am probably public enemy number one when it come to correct grammar on the internet. I am horrible to begin with, but when typing on message forums I get even more lazy.

This is a funny topic, and would not mind correction now and then either.

It's Internet, Bircher.

[masterdmjg]

Here's an excerpt from the chapter on shared possesives. It might be amusing to some of you.

In a 1980 piece, Safire demonstrates a surprising capacity for understanding the dangers of language superiority. "Some of the interest in the world of words comes from people who like to put less-educated people down - Language Snobs, who give good usage a bad name." But after authoring that piece, Safire went on to spend the next twenty-five years writing columns that snootily drop more names than you can count....

...Perhaps it's no coincidence that both Kilpatrick and Safire have had long careers as political columnists - conservative political columnists. And perhaps the fact that one William F. Buckley Jr. authored one of the language books at my local library is further evidence of something funny going on here. It's certainly not my place to speculate whether there exists any correlation between conservative political punditry and uptight, anal, quasi-erotic obsession with impossibly strict language rules and/or mean-spirited superiority. My job here is only to examine the shared affliction of these men to consider the question: What crawled up their behinds and died?

For argument's sake, let's say it was a bug.

So, transitioning not so gracefully into the lesson phase of this chapter, would you say, "A bug crawled up Kilpatrick's and Safire's behinds and died"? Or would you omit the first apostrophe and "s" and instead say, "It crawled up Kilpatrick and Safire's behinds"?

Though both sentences have a certain on-the-money ring to them, the first one sounds better, doesn't it? That's because the question of whether to use the extra apostrophe and "s" has to do with whether the possession is shared or separate.

If Kilpatrick and Safire shared two behinds, you would say "Safire and Kilpatrick's butts." If they shared a single behind, it would be "Safire and Kilpatrick's butt. (And no doubt it would also have to work double overtime to expel both men's special brand of genius.)

But because it's safe to assume that each man has his own distinct and vise-tight posterior, you would say, "Safire's and Kilpatrick's butts."

No doubt right now you're probably thinking, "This whole question is ridiculous. A single bug could not have crawled up both their butts and died, unless of course it was some kind of super zombie bug that can rise from the dead to irritate again."

So, looking forward to the day when science can transcend such limitations and genetically engineer a fanny-loving phoenix but, I concede that, for now, you're right.

[ChelC]

Dont gib me none dat dair gramma. I likes tawkin dis wa.

[masterdmjg]

Dont gib me none dat dair gramma. I likes tawkin dis wa.

ChelC, you've been reading Huck Finn again, haven't you!