Huh? We were addressing the Islamic terrorists in England. If you are really worried about the butter dripped on your popcorn (and I would be 'cause it is guaranteed to shorten your life in conjunction with one of the worst of the carbs), I'd suggest you rent movies and sit and watch them in your living room with the windows taped up with duct tape and Saran Wrap.
I think that Light Wizard has gone around the bend after watching such GREAT movies as "Students Gang Bang" and the great sequel and the inimitable sequel- "Revenge Gang Bang starring, of course, the epicene Oliver Smiles.
Light Wizard Wrote:
Islamic terrorist who aren't too smart or they would not have been caught. The U.S. in the case of "9-11" displayed an unprecedented
stupidity in identifying and stopping the Islamic terrorist and this is quite will documented and studied. It was a gigantic failure of politics, administration, intelligence and action. Condelezza Rice's assessment of,"Who would of though planes would be flow into buildings" is a tragically stupid statement.
end of quote
Surely, Light Wizard does not believe that "Islamic terrorist who aren't too smart" makes any sense or that "stopping the Islamic terrorist" has any relation to reality since even sixth graders know that there were more than one terrorist involved.
And, even Light Wizard cannot denigrate C. Rice whose verbal skills are unparalleled by stating that she said:
"Who would of though( sic) planes would flow( sic) into buildings"?
Poor Light WIzard!!! Give those Gang Bang DVD's a rest!!!!
You seen to know what those Gang Bang DVD's are and I would suggest you stop watching them as reference. Or do you now find them entertaining? Again, the typo police are patrolling the forum, not even knowing what the term (sic) means. Your English skills are marginal -- I suggest going back and taking dumbell English. Or did you even take any English courses in University?
Poor BernardR -- for want of a retort he grasps at straws. Of course, we know he has plenty of those behind his ears.
Lightwizard wrote:... Again, the typo police are patrolling the forum, not even knowing what the term (sic) means. Your English skills are marginal -- I suggest going back and taking dumbell English. Or did you even take any English courses in University?
"(sic)" is employed by one quoting a passage exactly as written, even though it contains an error, to identify that the person quoting the passage is intentionally quoting the passage as written, errors and all. That being the case, I'm unsure how exactly you believe BernardR has demonstrated he does not know what the term "(sic)" means.
That being said, personally I would prefer it if the "typo police" took a break.
Incorrect. (sic) is not used to point out typos. You're stretching it and would get a big "F" in English Compostions class.
BTW -- The right of center show South Park is crude but satirical and funny.
Light Wizard wrote:
"Incorrect.(Sic) is not used to point out typos."
THAT IS NOT WHAT TICOMAYA WROTE!!
Ticomaya wrote:
"(sic)" is employed by one quoting a passage exactly as written, even though it contains an error, to identify that the person quoting the passage is intentionally quoting the passage as written, errors and all.
end of quote
Are you so dense that you cannot understand English when written clearly, Light Wizard?
plainoldme wrote:BTW -- The right of center show South Park is crude but satirical and funny.
Cude and satirical, definitely and demonstrably. Funny? Matter of opinion.
Lightwizard wrote:Incorrect. (sic) is not used to point out typos. You're stretching it and would get a big "F" in English Compostions class.
[sic] is used to replicate a post as written, errors -- including typos -- and all.
Quote:sic 1 Pronunciation (sik)
adv.
Thus; so. Used to indicate that a quoted passage, especially one containing an error or unconventional spelling, has been retained in its original form or written intentionally.
LINK
Ticomaya wrote:Lightwizard wrote:Incorrect. (sic) is not used to point out typos. You're stretching it and would get a big "F" in English Compostions class.
[sic] is used to replicate a post as written, errors -- including typos -- and all.
Quote:sic 1 Pronunciation (sik)
adv.
Thus; so. Used to indicate that a quoted passage, especially one containing an error or unconventional spelling, has been retained in its original form or written intentionally.
LINK
In English composition style, it has to specifically relate to some point the writer is making. BernieR, as usual, was making no point other than playing typo police. Stop trying to defend an F grade in English comp -- 'cause if you want to get technical on these threads, you have to pay the consequences.
Sic transit gloria mundi
No, Light Wizard, (sic) is used when one is correcting a mistake in another person's writing--If I quoted someone who wrote-
"The American Psyclogical Association"
I would correct the mistake by quoting the person, as is necessary to quote accurately but then by entering sic.
as in "The American Psyclogical( sic) Association" to show that Psclogical is misspelled while you are still replicating the persons' actual albeit misspelled quote.
Now, here is your post of August 12th replicated with all of its grammatical errors-No words changed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Islamic terrorist who aren't too smart or they would not have been caught. The U.S. in the case of "9-11" displayed an unprecedented
stupidity in identifying and stopping the Islamic terrorist and this is quite will documented and studied. It was a gigantic failure of politics, administration, intelligence and action. Condelezza Rice's assessment of,"Who would of though planes would be flow into buildings" is a tragically stupid statement.
_____________________________________________________________
Now, here is my replication of that post, quoted exactly as you wrote it with Sic inserted whereever there was a mistake in grammar or in spelling.
Islamic terrorist( sic)who aren't too smark or they would not have been caught. The U. S. in the case of "9-11" displayed an unprecedented stupidity in identifying and stopping the Islamic terrorist( sic) and this is quite well documented and studied, It was a gigantic failure of politics, administration, intelligence and actgion. Condelezza Rice's assessment of. "Who would of( sic) though( sic) planes would be flow( sic) into buildings" is a tragically stupid statement.
No wonder you're writing is often incomprehensible if you believe (sic) is to purposefully correct someone else's writing, particularly typos. You're a prig, pure and simple.
Lightwizard wrote:In English composition style, it has to specifically relate to some point the writer is making. BernieR, as usual, was making no point other than playing typo police. Stop trying to defend an F grade in English comp -- 'cause if you want to get technical on these threads, you have to pay the consequences.
So in your mind, my correcting you is "getting technical"? In any event, it was you, sir, who attempted to "get technical" in the first instance.
Quote:Sic transit gloria mundi
Words and phrases from other languages that are not in common use should be italicized.
Light Wizard wrote:
Posted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 4:02 pm Post: 2208884 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No wonder you're writing is often incomprehensible if you believe (sic) is to purposefully correct someone else's writing, particularly typos. You're a prig, pure and simple.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"No wonder you're(sic) writing is often incomprehensible if you believe(sic) is to purposefully correct someone else's writing, particularly typos. You're a prig, pure and simple"
NOTE_
"Sic" is Latin for "thus." Yeah, that didn't clear it up for us either. But apparently, since the 1880s, writers have used [sic] next to quotations that include errors.
This little notation means, "Hey, I know this quote looks wrong, but it was that way when I found it, so don't blame me." Maybe the original text used archaic spelling or the original writer just messed up. But the person who's quoting that text is aware of the earlier mistake and wants you to know it.
[Sic] is shorthand for all that, at least to scholarly types.
Here is a somewhat bitchy review of Coulter's statements before a group. Among other things, she thinks that Darwinism is crap.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_burton_h_060813_ann_coulter_3a_darwin_.htm
It's just stunning that she gets a platform to spew her bile on the MSM. But since journalism died a while ago, the shows who have her on are pretty much "junk" and "crap" anyway. Therefore, she fits right in.
It's sad that much of America watches this "junk" and "crap." But we as a nation have gotten dumber by the day, and can't think for ourselves without having some fringe pundit telling us what to do.
The use of (sic) (italicized BTW so even our (sic) is (sic) was used to try and validate Condelezza Rice's ineptitude in pimping for Dubya and his adminstration of predators. It's a weak argument -- I was in a rush to post and leave on an appointment, inadvertently making two typos which cannot be later edited. I was not addressing the world on a news program about a crucial and horrific event. I'm not disputing the definition of the term (sic) but the more reprehensible typo police tactic that did not in any way fortify any argument or point. It's poor writing style but does fit in with most of the other tripe posted by the nimrod.
Dook, it is called the coarsening of America. There is big money in capitalizing on it.
I apologize to those familiar with the statement, but Mencken had it right when he said no one ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
Lightwizard wrote:The use of (sic) (italicized BTW so even our (sic) is (sic) was used to try and validate Condelezza Rice's ineptitude in pimping for Dubya and his adminstration of predators. It's a weak argument -- I was in a rush to post and leave on an appointment, inadvertently making two typos which cannot be later edited. I was not addressing the world on a news program about a crucial and horrific event.
Gosh, you're getting so close, I almost hate to bring it up ... but [
sic] ought to be in brackets.
Quote:I'm not disputing the definition of the term (sic) but the more reprehensible typo police tactic that did not in any way fortify any argument or point. It's poor writing style but does fit in with most of the other tripe posted by the nimrod.
I understand, which leaves me wondering why you didn't just make that point, rather than engage in the entire discussion about the proper use of (sic), (
sic), or [
sic].
A new movie idea I've presented to Kevin James starring Bernard R entitled "Clucks." It's about those who are easily baited when I initially wrote only that one has to be clear on the use of [sic] in good compositional essay writing rather than picking on typos just for the sake of picking on typos (which is the job of an editor, which this site does not have except for the amateur editors like BernieR who should concentrating on editing themselves -- entirely out). I know, the box office will obviously be miserable because of the star but this is only funnin'
