While we’re discussing grammar and pronunciation...in this thread (?!).??
It’s “PRAH-leen” not “PRAY-leen”!!!!
It’s “PRAH-leen” not “PRAY-leen”!!!!
-
Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
-
The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.
5E Mearls' "Firing" tweet
- Thread starter TerraDave
- Start date
- Status
lowkey13
Exterminate all rational thought
A-yut.
Down the street from the outlet store.
That's Maine for you. Even their vaunted "Mother Ship" is right next to an outlet.
"We have both colors in stock; orange AND plaid."
lowkey13
Exterminate all rational thought
lowkey13
Exterminate all rational thought
Colour me surprised that you would find humour in this; take your extraneous letters with you.
robus
Lowcountry Low Roller
I also find myself hearing the word in my head and then having to remember the correct spelling in the context.
Azzy
Explorer
Eventually, they'll merge into one spelling as people keep confusing them. Honestly, English could do with a huge spelling reform because much of it is not spell phonetically and is simply hanger's-on from prior versions of the language.I also find myself hearing the word in my head and then having to remember the correct spelling in the context.
LordEntrails
Explorer
You New Englander's, so titled or not!, crack me up. One of your states is like the size of a single county out west.
Just for fun I used www.thetruesize.com to put all six of your "states" into California. Lots of room left over.
Just for fun I used www.thetruesize.com to put all six of your "states" into California. Lots of room left over.
Attachments
Last edited:
Empty space doesn’t count.
Satyrn
Villager
You left out 2 New England states.
Connecticut and Rhode Island are huge. I'm sure they'd fill in the gaps.
LordEntrails
Explorer
Have you been between San Diego and San Fran? There's not much empty space out there except Camp Pendelton north of San Diego. And it's not exactly like New England is a megacity sprawl.
Reminds me of a story when I was staying with my Grandmother as a teenager. We were going to be driving from upstate New York (Balston Spa) to Vermont (Bennington) and she was adamant that we make sure to take the short cut via Grandma Moses Road. I made sure we did. Years later I learned it saved about 1/10 of a mile. And that drive is about as long and far as I used to drive to high school every day (all urban rush hour).
TheTruSize is really cool for understanding perspective. And scale of different parts of the country or world. Especially as you move things between latitudes it adjusts. For example, Greenland (which most everyone thinks of as HUGE) to Africa;
LordEntrails
Explorer
Yea, I tried adding them but then got caught up with multiple images in the post and deleted the wrong ones... Give me a minute and I will correct the post.
Satyrn
Villager
Yeah that wasn't really necessary. I was just trying to show off my entirely pointless knowledge. I'm Canadian, but somehow recognize the shape of New England states.
Canadians- and almost everyone outside of the USA- are taught a fair amount of geography. Nooooot exactly a priority here.Yeah that wasn't really necessary. I was just trying to show off my entirely pointless knowledge. I'm Canadian, but somehow recognize the shape of New England states.
While discussing geopolitics, I joked with a Canadian friend (who had just become a naturalized US citizen a few months prior) that he had to stop accurately pointing out where certain countries were or he’d be revoked and deported.
BookBarbarian
Expert Long Rester
I was rather enjoying the geography discussion of this last page.
But yeah this rest of it...
Why?
We’re are making good time, neither tarrying nor running. I bet our faces are expressionless. One or more may be dressed as a cleric of some sort, and another might be dressed as a traveling drummer. The others could be peasants or serfs going from one location to another for the harvest season.
ParanoydStyle
Peace Among Worlds
I'll try and keep this digression brief, civil, and friendly. I don't want anyone to have hard feelings over grammar.
"Any body in their senses" is again a plural, although it's kind of a crypto-plural, it still refers to a group of multiple individuals, "all sensible people". "Anybody" and "everyone" are both plural nouns. As I understand it.
Digression within a digression? That is a very wise quote from William Paley, and nicely contradicts a lot of commonly agreed upon (pseudo)-wisdom of more recent/modern vintage.
This.
Also this. By which I mean, you're absolutely right. Based on how I was taught English, using "they" to refer to a singular antecedent is majorly wrongbadwrong. Others may have been taught English differently.
"Every one" (everyone) is a plural noun. Byron would have written "every man must judge of his own feelings" if he meant to use the singular case.
"Any body in their senses" is again a plural, although it's kind of a crypto-plural, it still refers to a group of multiple individuals, "all sensible people". "Anybody" and "everyone" are both plural nouns. As I understand it.
Same thing, "every considering Christian" is just an idiosyncratic way of rendering the plural noun "all considerate Christians"
Now here I do believe you're right, but I also do believe William Paley is (grammatically) wrong. "Every person's happiness depends in part upon the respect he or she meets in the world" would be more grammatically correct.
Digression within a digression? That is a very wise quote from William Paley, and nicely contradicts a lot of commonly agreed upon (pseudo)-wisdom of more recent/modern vintage.
This.
Also this. By which I mean, you're absolutely right. Based on how I was taught English, using "they" to refer to a singular antecedent is majorly wrongbadwrong. Others may have been taught English differently.
Last edited:
Check your formatting, ParanoydStyle- some of the tail end of your post is invisible.
ParanoydStyle
Peace Among Worlds
Yeah, I think I unborked it.
It doesn't change the fact that I was taught from preschool through kindergarten through primary school through elementary school through middle school through high school through and through the style guides I've referred to as an author that "they" is a plural pronoun. It's always going to feel incredibly, shriekingly, gratingly wrong to me to use it or see it used as a singular pronoun, like nails on a chalkboard. I'm still going to make every effort to refer to individuals by their preferred pronouns.
This is BY FAR the strongest citation I've seen for a "singular they" that goes back centuries as opposed to one that is a relatively recent fad. "Man" is an incredibly clear cut singular antecedent paired with a very explicit use of "their". I have no refutation for this particular citation, I think it's pretty solid.
It doesn't change the fact that I was taught from preschool through kindergarten through primary school through elementary school through middle school through high school through and through the style guides I've referred to as an author that "they" is a plural pronoun. It's always going to feel incredibly, shriekingly, gratingly wrong to me to use it or see it used as a singular pronoun, like nails on a chalkboard. I'm still going to make every effort to refer to individuals by their preferred pronouns.
Last edited:
- Status