@tsarstepan,
Because of you I now know the name of the guy who does xkcd.
The O'Reilly book I most want:
@hingehead,
Both are heretical and blasphemous in the eyes of the one true grammatical style format of the Chicago Manual of Style.
@tsarstepan,
THE CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE --- AND GRAMMAR
The Chicago Manual of Style (CMS) is an unparalleled resource for those engaged in publishing, particularly of academic material. But the Press decided to farm out the topic of grammar and usage, and the writer they selected was Bryan A. Garner, a former associate editor of the Texas Law Review who now teaches at Southern Methodist University School of Law and has written several popular books on usage and style. His chapter is unfortunately full of repetitions of stupidities of the past tradition in English grammar " more of them than you could shake a stick at.
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001869.html
APA, used by the school usually rated number one in the country. Good cartoon. Come to think of it, a long-time girlfriend was MLA, and it did become a bone of contention. And I remember seeing one of the Oxford Press style books, don't remember which one, on one of the used-book carts at the Brattle Book Store--their primary exemplar in their article on split infinitives was the opening credits of "Star Trek", an appropriate reference, I think, for a thread on geek humor.
@JoshThomas87 Josh Thomas
Night QT3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609
@tsarstepan,
That is more sad and hurtful than humorous.
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:
@JoshThomas87 Josh Thomas
Night QT3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609
Bloody irritating git, though!
