Be Excellent To Each Other

Yes, but in Hindi, it wouldn't make sense as a question, because it doesn't have the <THIS IS A QUESTION> word appended, hence the addition of 'isn't it', contracted to 'innit', because it conforms better to the sentence structure that native Hindi speakers are used to. It then spreads due to common usage.

That's my understanding, anyway.

Argh! I have indirectly caused this tedious arguement!

(*Kills self*)

Yes - usage that *doesn't* make you sound like a cretin.

A line whos creation you appear to be single handedly dictating.



See above. My point still stands. I express myself through a language of variety and interpretion in a way I feel most comfortable and appropriate. Being told I am doing this "wrong", I find rude, thanks.

Re-interpretation and creativity within language, especially English, I find beautiful and fascinating. Look at Patwa/Jamaican English - created by a people in such a radically mutated way to express their identity as kidnapped and enslaved Africans, forced into a Colonial nation against their will. In your eyes, they speak "wrong", which I know if you said to any Caribbean friends of mine, they would be VERY angry about.

Isn't there?

Correct

http://spanish.about.com/od/sentencestructure/a/ask_question.htm

Sound like a cretin to you. Once again, if you went and had a chat with Shakespeare, he'd probably think you sounded like a cretin. Indeed, he was something of a language revolutionary himself, with made-up words littering his texts.

I really didn't. I think that first sentence is one of the worst I've ever constructed

Yes. Me alone. Not at all teachers, university lecturers, professionals, writers etc etc.



Well, more fool you then. As I said, I'm happy to be corrected when I may be wrong about something, and I certainly don't find it to be rude. If they're correcting me incorrectly, I'll politely point that out, rather than insult them.

Such as the one last week who recommended that common misspellings be accepted into common language, you mean?

Or perhaps the OED, which adds new words every year to keep up with language - Twonk (n) and Therapise (v) are two of this year's highlights....

That's not what he said, I think. He said he shouldn't have to mark them down for it as long as they can make themselves understood.

But he was roundly castigated for "dumbing down". And quite rightly too.

Otherwise, what, we just give up with "correct" spellings and put OED out of business? Great! Let's make language into a complete barrier to understanding.

And I can write contracts that say shit like "U mst duhliver stuff 2 R factree and will giv u spenny". Awesomes.

A good example of why correct spelling is necessary would be that a sentence such as "Their books - they're there" could now become "There books - there there." Which one makes any sense?

But who cares, eh? Let's not tie people down to anything "correct" - that's just restricting creativity!

Sorry to derail your thread, Pete.

Mr Chris: If you can't see the flexibility within language and appreciate that it isn't as clearly black & white defined as you say, then I'm wasting my time typing here. Academically accepted spelling definitions are not the same as regional or social colloquialisms - they don't obey the same rules of right and wrong. Making out that they do and saying your own colloquialisms are the only correct ones IS just elitism.

There's this wonderful thing called "context".

Depends on the sphere of use though, of course.

Take law, for example. Many cases heard in court hinge around the interpretation of words and phrases. Can you imagine the nightmare that would ensue if it became accepted that people could just use any old words they fancied to mean anything they wanted and there were no common "rules" for language? You need a common and definite meaning for things in order for the whole system to work.

Two people having a conversation in a pub about whippets and flat caps is entirely different, and would indeed have different accepted "rules".



Except there wouldn't be. If I've not learned at school that there's a "correct" spelling, but have instead been allowed to get away with txt spk, then that's my context.

Anyway, I'm boring my elitist snob self now, so stop it.

Ever since that "professor wants to make spelling wrong" news debacle I've noticed loads of people spelling argument with a big "e" slapped in the middle for no reason, so I guess he won, despite being a lecturer in something completely inconsequential like business management or tricycle riding or something.

Also, Firefox doesn't like "debacle", the uncultured shit.

Anyway, Star Wars. The problem with the Expanded Universe and the Prequels and stuff is that they wank themselves silly over the Jedi. Even though the Jedi are always the most boring characters in the setting.

"Shit on the glass table you must, if rent money you have not."

Yep. In speech, the only way to tell when something is a question is the inflection. Or sometimes the context, obv. If someone says "Habla Aleman" ("you speak German"*), they could also be asking if you speak German. The same is true in English, but in Spanish there's no alternative but to use the magical power of THE VOICE.

Yoda speaks like that because if he spoke normally, his lines would reveal themselves not as profound wisdom, but as cringeworthy tripe. Because Lucas is a crap writer.

*Well, technically he/she/it speaks German, but that's the polite form.

"You can write this shit George, but you can't say it" or words to that effect, wasn't it?

Wow, does anyone actually use the variant with the accents any more?

Agreed. This Star Wars thing is well better than that cack mp3 what he included in Windows XP, innit.

Right then, Ice Pirates FTW? (If only for 2:18, obv)