WashingtonPost topples English grammatical rule

@McTag,

David wrote:

it is my desire that these quick forms be adopted as the norm.

McTag wrote:

Good luck with that.

Thank u for your re-scoff,
but VICTORY is INEVITABLE.
Humanity will tire of carrying its useless burden
and it will lay it down, in favor of a lite-wate one!

McTag wrote:

How is your Esperanto, by the way?

That never appealed to me.
It did not deserve to prevail; this is better.
I have Teddy Roosevelt's support.

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

I've got more time than usual, today.

Om, I don't doubt your sincerity and I admire your determination. But in common with many other cranks, you fail to see the ludicrousness of your position.

0 Replies

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

How is your Esperanto, by the way?

hamburgboy's dad was a proponent of Esperanto. I think we'd all just be better off learning Chinese now. Go with the money eh.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

Yes, you could go on package holidays there, to visit your money.

Smile

1 Reply

@McTag,

Luckily they love Canada and bring their money here (as well as some of the best Hong Kong chefs ... yum!)

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

My nephews run the Fraser Cafe in Ottawa- quite a foodie place, I believe.

0 Replies

[Groucho voice]Oh yeah, where did they run it? Into the ground?[/Groucho voice]

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

The reason that thay now offend your eyes
is that u r not accustomed to them; if u 'd learned it the better way,
then it 'd seem appropriate to u.

Nonsense. The reason your eccentric spelling offends my eye is because it pretends to be something it is not. You obviously know nothing about what you call fonetik spelling (yes, phonetically that should be a 'k' not a 'c'). Thay, again phonetically, does not have the same pronunciation as they. You seem to think it does or should. C is a truly stupid way to indicate the words sea, see or the Spanish si. The letter C is pronounced that way only in English. OK for texting, not for a serious person such as you claim to be to use in correspondence.

I suggest you might study such languages as written Hawaiian or Turkish or (to a lesser extent) Italian to gain some insight into fontetik spelling. Gud lak.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

I have Teddy Roosevelt's support.

Umm, Dave, he's been dead more than a coupla years.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

I have Teddy Roosevelt's support.

JTT wrote:

Umm, Dave, he's been dead more than a coupla years.

That 's OK.

David

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

The reason that thay now offend your eyes
is that u r not accustomed to them; if u 'd learned it the better way,
then it 'd seem appropriate to u.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Nonsense. The reason your eccentric spelling offends my eye is because it pretends to be something it is not. You obviously know nothing about what you call fonetik spelling (yes, phonetically that should be a 'k' not a 'c').

That 's fine; k is more convenient to type than c,
but I need to take it ez, so as not to freak everyone out.
Fonetic perfection all at once 'd be counter-productive.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Thay, again phonetically, does not have the same pronunciation as they.
You seem to think it does or should.

I do; its a long A.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

C is a truly stupid way to indicate the words sea, see or the Spanish si.
The letter C is pronounced that way only in English.

English is all that matters; no problem.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

OK for texting, not for a serious person such as you claim to be to use in correspondence.

1. I made no such "claim" about myself.
2. It will be fine for correspondence 1ce it is tawt in the schools.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

I suggest you might study such languages as written Hawaiian or Turkish or (to a lesser extent)
Italian to gain some insight into fontetik spelling. Gud lak.

Thanx for your good wishes,
but I don't give a damn about Turkish; I don 't even eat its taffy.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Quote:
Thay, again phonetically, does not have the same pronunciation as they.
You seem to think it does or should.

I do; its a long A.

No. In fonetik spelling there are no 'long' a's nor any other kind of a's. The letter 'a' (fonetikally) can have only one sound. Fonetikally, thay would be pronounced the same as we pronounce 'thy' in standard English.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Quote:
Thay, again phonetically, does not have the same pronunciation as they.
You seem to think it does or should.

I do; its a long A.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

No. In fonetik spelling there are no 'long' a's nor any other kind of a's. The letter 'a' (fonetikally) can have only one sound. Fonetikally, thay would be pronounced the same as we pronounce 'thy' in standard English.

I don 't accept the logic of what u said.
The ultimate rules of fonetic spelling have yet to be chosen.
So far, not even the decision makers have been selected.

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Would you like your gravestone done phonetically, Dave?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I know this is hard for you, David, but please try very hard to understand. If you truly wish to spell phonetically ( or fonetikally, if you prefer) you cannot be arbitrary. A letter -- any letter, and that includes all vowels -- can have only one accepted and acceptable sound. Your method is just as arbitrary as the nonsensical spelling rules of Standard English and, therefore, just as nonsensical. If you'd like to acquaint yourself with a language which has truly phonetic spelling, take a look at Hawaiian. There is no way to mispronounce any word as long as you understand what the value of each letter is. And there is no way to misspell anything if it has been properly pronounced.

But, of course, if you prefer, I can start komnuiketing with iu fonetikally from nau on if that is wot iu wish.

2 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Would you like your gravestone done phonetically, Dave?

Clever question, J.

It matters not. My outer covering will be useless
and of no value to anyone when I have abandoned it.
Might as well throw it in a garbage dump.

(Yea, I know: u wanna do that now, already.)

David

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

I know this is hard for you, David, but please try very hard to understand. If you truly wish to spell phonetically ( or fonetikally, if you prefer) you cannot be arbitrary. A letter -- any letter, and that includes all vowels -- can have only one accepted and acceptable sound.

That is 1 way to do it.
Regardless of how adamant u r,
how emotional, it is not the only way; e.g., the last letter in "Rome" tells us that the O is a long O.

At this point in time, I express no preference for any fonetic system.
The rules have yet to be created. I will not be called upon to create them.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Your method is just as arbitrary as the nonsensical spelling rules of Standard English and, therefore, just as nonsensical. If you'd like to acquaint yourself with a language which has truly phonetic spelling, take a look at Hawaiian. There is no way to mispronounce any word as long as you understand what the value of each letter is. And there is no way to misspell anything if it has been properly pronounced.

But, of course, if you prefer, I can start komnuiketing with iu fonetikally from nau on if that is wot iu wish.

WashingtonPost topples English grammatical rule

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know