…and this is a 
We're about to leave lovely Vancouver to return to Kent, Washington, so must leave you with something awful to chew on for a while. This is is a beautiful example of why creationists can be so stupid: spelling and grammar errors throughout, misrepresentations of the actual science, and non-stop idiocy. For instance, it is not true that squid, octopus, and cuttlefish have all been found in the Cambrian; the coleoids diverged from a common ancestor in the late Cambrian or early Ordovician. This does not mean that modern coleoids were present in the Cambrian. We've got a pretty good idea of what the cephalopod ancestor would have looked like.
It's Saturday morning. That can't possibly damage your brain any more than my late night of wild partying with Vancouver skeptics could have possibly done, it's merely put us on an equal footing now.
Life Science
Comments
Posted by: darbyunlimited
|
July 31, 2010 12:18 PM
Okay, if this is going to be at least partially a grammar thread, can I make an appeal to NOT use the British quotation rules?
That puts punctuation outside the closing quote. For some reason, it's becoming kind of the internet standard. It's been slipping in to the PZ posts lately, too.
American puts it inside - that allows us to clearly change the meaning of a quote (change a statement to a question or exclamation, for instance) by putting such punctuation beyond the quote.
Sorry, incited to rave about pet peeve...
Posted by: darbyunlimited
|
July 31, 2010 12:20 PM
...And what's the internet rule that any posting on grammar will have at least one grammatical error?
...into...
Posted by: Haruhiist
|
July 31, 2010 12:26 PM
Made it through just over 1 minute... I've got one request:
Please stop abusing that poor comma!
Posted by: KKBundy
|
July 31, 2010 12:26 PM
At least they use the comma however inappropriately. This one isn't complete unfamiliar with that particular punctuation and it's use.
http://blessedatheist.com/2010/07/29/vaguely-illiterate-trolls-the-state-of-a-christian-education/
Posted by: Vole
|
July 31, 2010 12:29 PM
"Octopi"? What's the plural of "whataclotamus"?
I have no idea what darbyunlimited is on about. Though I do remember once having my punctuation "Americanised" in Wikipedia. In that case, it meant "vandalised to the point of nonsensicality and incomprehensibility".
They're not much good at spelling on that side of the pond either...
Posted by: Disturbingly Openminded
|
July 31, 2010 12:31 PM
darby ~ Maybe I haven't had enough coffee yet but I don't understand your argument. I've always preferred the British convention precisely because the American convention enables one to change the meaning of the quote. And that is a bad thing.
A quotation should convey the original intent. IMO, anything inside the quotation marks should be original and everything not original should be outside the marks.
In my opinion, the American convention needlessly invites confusion and, even worse, can be used to manipulate the original intent. A form of quote-mining, if you will.
Posted by: Snikkers
|
July 31, 2010 12:34 PM
Yes!
Posted by: Disturbingly Openminded
|
July 31, 2010 12:36 PM
Vole ~ You must mean "Americanized".
Posted by: Phodopus
|
July 31, 2010 12:36 PM
Interestingly, in teh Germany, the video is blocked by Sony music due to copyright issues.
Posted by: Dania
|
July 31, 2010 12:39 PM
So you can put stuff inside the quote that does not belong to the quote, changing its meaning. And why is that a good thing?
Posted by: Vole
|
July 31, 2010 12:39 PM
"Americanized"? Yes, that is certainly disturbingly open-minded of you.
Posted by: Disturbingly Openminded
|
July 31, 2010 12:39 PM
Hey, the "z" was supposed to be italicized.
Posted by: Doukas
|
July 31, 2010 12:39 PM
What? You mean this, video didn't make, you want to worship the one, ture god????
Posted by: Disturbingly Openminded
|
July 31, 2010 12:42 PM
Vole ~ I hope you noted the irony. :-)
Posted by: darbyunlimited
|
July 31, 2010 12:43 PM
Example -
He said, "we mean what we say"?
American: it was not said as a question, but we've clearly made a question out of it.
British: maybe it was originally a question, or maybe we've changed it to one. Not so clear.
Posted by: bgcamroux
|
July 31, 2010 12:47 PM
People like this should be forbidden from communication using any medium.
As far as the grammar debate goes, I'm Canadian and so use a hybrid of American and British conventions. I agree that punctuation within a quotation should be original to the quotation, else it should be outside. I'm also a big fan of the Oxford comma.
Posted by: Scott
|
July 31, 2010 12:48 PM
Gah, it burns! D:
Posted by: gbothel
|
July 31, 2010 12:52 PM
That's exactly the problem with it...
Posted by: and7barton
|
July 31, 2010 12:52 PM
"To make understanding simpler and clearer, I'm filling this movie with spelling and grammar errors".
.
And what the hell is "Octopi" ?
You couldn't even get THAT right.
Posted by: Moggie
|
July 31, 2010 12:53 PM
FFS, here we have an example of something objectively stupid and wrong, and what do people want to concentrate on? Arbitrary punctuation rules. The Internet, ladies and gentlemen!
Posted by: Disturbingly Openminded
|
July 31, 2010 12:53 PM
darby ~
In your example, I would say that the American version means the author doing the quoting is not making a question of it but is asking if the person being quoted really said that.
The British version clearly indicates to me that the original speaker did not ask a question but made a statement and the author is questioning that statement.
Posted by: Elf Eye
|
July 31, 2010 12:55 PM
KKBundy, were you being ironic when you typed "that particular punctuation and it's use"?
Posted by: Disturbingly Openminded
|
July 31, 2010 12:57 PM
Well, that didn't come out right.
time for coffee.
Posted by: Quagmire
|
July 31, 2010 1:00 PM
That was the dumbest thing I've ever seen, and I used to watch both "Full House" and "Small Wonder".
Posted by: hznfrst
|
July 31, 2010 1:00 PM
KKBundy #4, possessive pronouns do *not* contain apostrophes: mine, yours, his, hers, its, ours and theirs, period! I know you used "its" as an adjective, but the rule is the same.
The misuse of apostrophes is a bigger peeve to me than that of commas, although comma abuse does run a close second - and the American quoting convention is obviously more sensible than the British ;>).
This video gave me a headache for all kinds of reasons, and horrible grammar was only one of them.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo
|
July 31, 2010 1:03 PM
This rule of style applies only to the comma and period. OK? Only the comma and period go inside. You can't just go sticking semicolons and bangs and interogatives in wherever you feel like. And it doesn't mean, if the quote itself is a question or exclamation, that you put them outside or replace the proper quoted punctuation.
at least have the right argument
Posted by: Sven DiMilo
|
July 31, 2010 1:05 PM
oh, and it's 'octopuses'
Posted by: skeptifem
|
July 31, 2010 1:07 PM
I am pretty certain a kid made this video. Maybe it was a creation science project or something.
Posted by: Matt "Nora" Penfold
|
July 31, 2010 1:11 PM
Oh dear.
You really do not understand this do you ?
If the original had a question mark then in British grammar the question mark will go inside the quotes. The British rule is this: If the punctuation was in the original put it inside the quotes, otherwise put outside the quotes. Thus there can never be any confusion in the British usage. It is silly for you to say otherwise.
Posted by: Volant Proboscidian
|
July 31, 2010 1:13 PM
I'm not usually too bothered by punctuation errors (except its/it's), but anyone who uses a comma just because the following word is in scare quotes should be stabbed in the face.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo
|
July 31, 2010 1:14 PM
Posted by: Penny
|
July 31, 2010 1:14 PM
AND they've made Palladio sound like a funeral dirge!
(or did they just add the soundtrack with the wrong speed setting?)
Posted by: bgcamroux
|
July 31, 2010 1:14 PM
As far as I've ever been taught, the plural of "octopus" is "octopi". Apparently "octopuses" is acceptable, but I think it sounds far sillier than "octopi".
@skeptifem I would hope this was the product of a child, but this is a child who is beyond help as far as communication, written, spoken, or otherwise, is concerned. This is just beyond the pale!
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
July 31, 2010 1:16 PM
I am well aware of the American quotation rules, and I hate them. They make no sense at all. If the punctuation is part of the quoted material, then put it inside the quotes; if it isn't, it goes outside. That makes sense. I like the British style much better, which fits the logic of grammar far better.
I will occasionally screw up and include a comma inside the quote because that's what the editing rules in America say, but it's a mistake on my part. I will try to be more consistent in the future, but it will be an increased consistency in defying that stupid quote convention.
OK, grammar nazis? Happy now?
Posted by: Jules, Bride of Death
|
July 31, 2010 1:17 PM
There really is virtually no difference between the American and British versions of punctuation with quotations marks. Americans put the comma or period inside; those of the British persuasions put them outside. It is purely a style choice, and neither one is particularly more clear than the other. Any other punctuation mark is treated strictly within the context of the quote (e.g., question marks).
The Oxford comma, on the other hand, does make a difference in clarity. I prefer its use.
As to the video, as if the grammar, spelling, and punctuation were not enough, they had to go and use curly-q stylized fonts for an entire block of text. Stop doing that. This is not a Tolkien epic.
Also, loose, loss, and lose are not interchangeable.
Posted by: Dania
|
July 31, 2010 1:20 PM
Hm, okay. Sorry, I'm actually not all that familiar with the American/British quotation rules. I guess I shouldn't have talked as if I was.
What I learned was that I should only put inside the quotation marks what belongs to the quote, and if I want to add anything I should use square brackets. That's what makes the most sense to me.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo
|
July 31, 2010 1:22 PM
wtf
...unless you are ending a sentence or a clause with the quote, in which cases the period or comma go inside. It's not that big a deal. Maybe it's meaningless convention; maybe not. But it's been done that way in at least 90% of the many books, magazines, journals, and newspapers you've read all your life; if it doesn't make sense then you must have been really struggling for a long time.
come on, bring it on the Harvard comma next
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
July 31, 2010 1:25 PM
That's why the IDiots impressed some people for a while--the other creationists had set the bar so low. They knew something about punctuation, didn't actually deny the age of the earth (Heddle became annoyed that it couldn't be discussed on their private IDiot forum, however), and sounded sciency to people who didn't know science.
Behe pretty much ended that at Dover, though, as he quite obviously had no science to present.
Glen Davidson
Posted by: Sven DiMilo
|
July 31, 2010 1:26 PM
ha! Jules, great minds love the Oxvard comma, eh?
Posted by: antie.diaphanus
|
July 31, 2010 1:30 PM
It is a defensible plural form of octopus:
http://diaphanus.livejournal.com/2083516.html
1) The Romans used Latin terminations with Greek-derived words, and 2) the Greek-derived word element -pus had differing inflectional patterns even in Greek.
So the two major arguments against the plural form octopi are wrong.
Posted by: Waydude
|
July 31, 2010 1:33 PM
from above, Octopuses is the correct term no matter how silly you think it is. Octopi is a false plural coming from the incorrect assumption octopus derives from latin, but actually comes from greek.
Octopi is an example of Hypercorrection, the misuse of grammar in an attempt to seem educated.
As for that video, I couldn't watch more than a minute, why is it scrolling so slow? So that the morons who buy into it will be able and keep up? After about 10 seconds, I was reading it with a hick accent in my head...
Bonus, how many grammatical errors in this post?
Posted by: mistereveready
|
July 31, 2010 1:35 PM
Whenever I see the word Egregious, I think of Pauline and her pens.
Posted by: itsumademootaku
|
July 31, 2010 1:39 PM
Guess I have to disqualify myself from this one. I only got 54 seconds in before the lack of caffeine in my system forced me to stop.
Posted by: Pieter B
|
July 31, 2010 1:41 PM
So what's with the recent spate of creationists thinking that "scientist" and "evolutionist" are plurals?
Posted by: HughWillRidmee
|
July 31, 2010 1:41 PM
1) Where does all this talk about British and American grammar come from guys? Unless I've missed something the language is still called English.
2) The plural of octopus can be justified (preferred?) as octopi just as the plural of stylus is stylii, the plural of stadium is stadia and the plural of medium is media (as in TV, radio, newspapers etc. each being a medium of communication which together form the media of communication).
You've now had almost the total benefit of twelve terms of Latin many years ago. (And the video is still rather silly - and not just because of the stylistic errors in the topping and tailing).
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
July 31, 2010 1:42 PM
It obviously is to you.
Empty fluff.
So? I don't find this line of argument compelling when we're talking about the consistency or rationality of religious belief, either.
Nah, I'm getting too many "emacs vs. vi" vibes from you on this topic.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
July 31, 2010 1:43 PM
IT'S NOT FUCKING GRAMMAR! IT'S STYLE!And uninformed peeving about language should be a bannable offence. (It's not as if anyone cares what my opinion is anyway. Well, except Jerry Coyne, who cares enough to delete me.)
No, it does not. You can always come up with examples that are ambiguous with either convention. Well, "loss" is obviously the odd one out, but "lose" is just one of those stupid inconsistencies of English spelling, and the sooner we get rid of it, the better.Posted by: bgcamroux
|
July 31, 2010 1:48 PM
@NakedBunny:
I totally agree. Do it the way you like - just be consistent. If you are consistent, people can usually figure out what's going on.
But I can't resist: the Oxford comma does enhance clarity and I get frustrated when people don't use it.
Posted by: Multicellular
|
July 31, 2010 1:49 PM
My favorite spelling error of the whole video: "one ture God."
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
July 31, 2010 1:52 PM
Ah, you're one of those pedants who're easy to piss off. Where's the fun in that?Posted by: Vole
|
July 31, 2010 1:53 PM
Of course you can say "octopi" - if you don't mind people thinking you an ignoramus. (And if you try to form the plural of that, you'll probably convince them.)
The fact that "the" language is still called English is the problem. If only you lot recognised that you were speaking American.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
July 31, 2010 1:53 PM
wtf is the oxford comma
Posted by: bgcamroux
|
July 31, 2010 1:54 PM
@Jadehawk:
That's what the intertubes are for! Use them and learn.
Posted by: Jules, Bride of Death
|
July 31, 2010 1:55 PM
Sven
Indeed. I find your attempts at style clarifications nothing short of dashing.
Sili
I agree that you can come up with examples of ambiguity for either usage, but in my experience, it comes up more often for me without the Oxford comma. I don't get particularly hung up on style issues*, so it's just a personal preference of mine, not an edict.
Loss was the one that really confussed** me. I'm used to a neutral reading of loose and lose, with the anticipation that context will reveal intention shortly.
*I've worked in a variety of publishing fields, and there are almost as many style guides as there are publishers. After a while, you just pick what you like best for your personal writing, and have a "live and let live" attitude for the rest of it.
**Favorite misspelling in the video. At first I thought he said concussed.
Posted by: Midnight Rambler
|
July 31, 2010 1:56 PM
darbyunlimited back @1:
NO.
That's because "internet writing" is what people have always done when freed from the bounds of grammar/style nazis who try to impose idiotic rules like these. I never even knew it was "British style" to do it the other way until someone mentioned it a couple of threads ago, but I've always written it that way (with the punctuation outside if it doesn't belong in the quote) since my English teachers stopped forcing me to. I recognized it as being stupid when I first learned it in second grade or whatever.
Posted by: skeptifem
|
July 31, 2010 1:57 PM
@mistereveready
OMG ME TOO! The word "local" is also tainted permanently, too.
Posted by: bgcamroux
|
July 31, 2010 2:01 PM
Lynn Truss' Eats, Shoots, and Leaves is an excellent discussion of style and grammar, American v. British. Read it and learn (and laugh).
Posted by: tuvalkin
|
July 31, 2010 2:02 PM
Random sentence. “Quoted material, period. Another period of quoted material.” This is not quoted.
This is not about “grammar”. Period.
Posted by: Multicellular
|
July 31, 2010 2:06 PM
Ah yes, "American", but which one? English American, Spanish American, French American, Portuguese American or one of the 143 South American, 31 Central American or 55 North American indigenous American languages?
Posted by: Jules, Bride of Death
|
July 31, 2010 2:08 PM
Jadehawk
It is the comma preceding the conjunction in a list. For example: question mark, exclamation point, and Oxford comma
In AP style (and most US military publication styles), you don't use it. Many book publishers do. It doesn't melt your mind if it isn't there, but in lists where you may use a conjunction as part of the list (e.g. Bread and butter, pickles and ice cream, and peanut butter and jelly are my favorite foods), it can be a very useful clarifying element. However, to be effective, it has to be applied consistently.
And that is the major rule of style: consistency. If you stick with that, people will not have too much trouble following you*.
*I still prefer the Oxford comma and really wish the military would adopt its use. It's a jargon-filled industry, and it really slows down my processing time to have to google constantly to see if something is a single idiom or two distinct terms.
Posted by: H.H.
|
July 31, 2010 2:13 PM
I seen people who harp on proper grammar refered to "grammar Nazis," but Howie47 (the poster of the video) is the first I've seen to try to turn that into a literal accusation:
So if we don't want to be "good Nazis" we have to spell like illiterates? WTF???
Posted by: Chgo_Liz
|
July 31, 2010 2:15 PM
On the subject of octopi/octopuses...
Somebody named 11zxcvb11 linked the following educational YouTube in Teh Endless: Merriam-Webster editor explains the plural of octopus.
Posted by: MrFire
|
July 31, 2010 2:17 PM
You also split the infinitive, on two separate occasions, in #1.
;P
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
July 31, 2010 2:17 PM
No, it's not.Posted by: jack.rawlinson
|
July 31, 2010 2:20 PM
I have a T-shirt with a picture of George W on it. Under that picture it says, "I judge you if you use poor grammar." And by hell, I really do.
I love that T-shirt.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
July 31, 2010 2:23 PM
The Hartman-Skitt-McKean Law of Prescriptivist Retaliation.THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A SPLIT INFINITIVE! ARRGLE RARRGLE BLARRGLE!
Posted by: SWH
|
July 31, 2010 2:23 PM
Couldn't get much past the first minute or so of stupid, but I'll wade into the octopussies (!) debate reminding myself of a comment from a female colleague who on finding vaginal duplication in a transgenic mouse said "look - two vagina's - no waiting"
Per a post some time back from Jerry Coyne on WEIT - backed up by checking it should apparently be "octopodes" (which following on from a comment above is a Greek ending for a Greek word.)
The OED says:
The standard English plural of octopus is octopuses. However, the word octopus comes from Greek, and the Greek plural form is octopodes ( |äkˈtäpəˌdēz|). Modern usage of octopodes is so infrequent that many people mistakenly create the erroneous plural form octopi, formed according to rules for Latin plurals.
So there!
Posted by: Moggie
|
July 31, 2010 2:45 PM
#61:
I'm sorry, but I have to do this.
Posted by: Camus Dude
|
July 31, 2010 2:54 PM
Moggie, thank you for sharing. That was absolutely the best of any of the many Downfall parodies I've watched.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo
|
July 31, 2010 3:05 PM
bzzzzzzt Not Romans, not speaking Latin.
Problem is, the Greek-derived "octopodes" pluralizes only the "foot" part. 'Octopodes' means 'eightfeet,' not 'eight-footed cephalopods.'
It's 'octopuses.'
wha? I neither brought up the subject, engaged in an argument about it, nor advocated either position as "correct." Go back and check. I merely tried to clarify what the argument ought to be about, if there is to be one.
Sure. But mainly laziness--see, since I was neither making an argument nor advocating a position, my point was simply that I didn't care enough to do the research required to decide whether the convention was meaningless or not.
Fortunately, it wasn't a line of argument. Just pointing out that it doesn't matter, since it's never bothered PZ in his daily reading, despite the fact that he has issued the opinion that it "doesn't make sense."
*shrug* I haven't a clue what that might mean, but in any case you seem to have badly misFouriered my vibes or something.Posted by: Camus Dude
|
July 31, 2010 3:08 PM
Until I'd seen this. Now I don't know which is funnier. The troubles of being a nerd who spends all his time online! lol
Posted by: circleh
|
July 31, 2010 3:25 PM
For those who hated the Creationist video but was impressed by the music, you can find that here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfWAt_K0Esw
It SUX when Creationists take great art and use it make make crap taste better.
Posted by: ryk
|
July 31, 2010 3:26 PM
I remember this 'plural of octopus' debate came up way back in the days before the internet had pictures, on the rec.aquaria newsgroup (it was probably the saltwater subgroup, but I can't quite remember).
Eventually, after a lot of discussion involving the etymology of the word and such, they sort of settled on 'octopodes' being the correct term, 'octopuses' as also correct, and 'octopi' as just kinda dumb...
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler
|
July 31, 2010 3:41 PM
Sili, The Unknown Virgin @ # 47: ... except Jerry Coyne, who cares enough to delete me.
Hey, now I'm jealous! I thought I was the only one!
*sniffle*
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler
|
July 31, 2010 3:50 PM
H.H. @ # 61 (quoting Howie47): ... Hitler was a good speller.
Nein. From Timothy W. Ryback, Hitler’s Private Library: The Books That Shaped His Life -
Posted by: blf
|
July 31, 2010 4:05 PM
The principle I use (at work) is simple: Could what I have written be misunderstood by someone whose first language is not English? If yes, it's edited, rewritten, or reformatted. (So one thing that drives me to distraction and loud rants is software, such as some e-mailers, which then reformat what I've written, potentially obfuscating the meaning.)
Many of my colleagues don't speak English as a first language, so keeping that in mind, and also paying attention to the mistakes/misunderstandings that do happen (and trying to work out ways of avoiding it ever happening again (especially with a different person)), works a helluva lot better than arbitrary “rules” invented by pseudo-scholars of ancient Latin, ancient mariners, spelling/grammar nazis, and the many other weird and eccentric nutjubs who have tried to impose their fantasy worldviews on the English language. (Good grief! That was one fecking long sentence. And the sort of thing which would be rewritten.)
Quotations, whether inline or separated out (block), should only contain the original material with any modifications being clearly indicted, such as (but not limited to) bracketing with […]. This is neither the so-called British nor USAian rule, but an attempt to be fair to the original author. When inlining a quotation, I tend to use the USAian “double quotes” rather than the British ‘inverted commas’ (an amazingly stupid name), but couldn't care less which is used, albeit prefer (not require) it to be used consistently. Occasionally, when it seems to add to the clarity (typically as part of a defined notation), I'll use the French « guillemets » or other symbols/convention.
Posted by: blf
|
July 31, 2010 4:17 PM
A pointless “religious war”—that is, an extreme case where each side considers the other to be guilty Guilty! GUILTY!!1! of SIWOTI—about two very popular but bloated Unix/Linux(/some other systems) text editors. Huge numbers of electrons and hours, plus tons of CO2 and spittle emissions, have been wasted on this arcane topic.
Posted by: bgcamroux
|
July 31, 2010 4:41 PM
Obviously Sili knows far more than anyone else here. We must bow to him/her/it in awe. All hail the messiah!
Posted by: rynilss
|
July 31, 2010 4:41 PM
As long as they don't abuse teh Colon ... without permission.
That's specifically pixied for for for for teh anan..anan..anointed Catlicks & such like. See?
Or else, forgive: Christ'O'Bals
Posted by: Jockaira
|
July 31, 2010 4:41 PM
@Pierce R Butler #75
Hitler probably had many other things on his mind than proper grammar and spelling. If more of us would follow his example, and concentrate on the really important things in life, the results would be marvelous.
Posted by: mistereveready
|
July 31, 2010 4:47 PM
@skeptifem
Glad someone appreciated it. :). I agree, hearing about locals is now a bit awkward.
Posted by: rynilss
|
July 31, 2010 4:59 PM
@Jockaira #80
Sure, like staging one's niece's suicide, planning teh generic genocide, divining the nearest horoscope, and preparing for the weakly homöopathetic liver-cleansing enema, between public and private rantings.
Hmm, I wonder how the world would have evolved if Herr Schicklgruber, Jr. had gotten a proper session with his compatriot Dr Freud, instead of shell shock and a prison sentence. What with the abusive father figure, my guess is he could have benefited from such. And learnt to spel, to.
Please note how I never once violated teh Colon.. here.
Posted by: blf
|
July 31, 2010 4:59 PM
Camus Dude @71: That was hilarious. Thanks!
Posted by: Alan B
|
July 31, 2010 5:07 PM
#72 circleh
NO. I hated the music and had to put it on mute after less than half a minute.
I was impressed by the youtube link, however. Thank you.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
July 31, 2010 5:14 PM
Thanks, bgcamroux, but I'm just filling in for Marjanović and Blake Stacey, who're both much better at the link-love thing than me. I don't think Tim Martin comments here, but he held down the fort in the icky Coyne-thread.
Oooh? What got you banned, Pierce?
Posted by: simply not edible
|
July 31, 2010 5:15 PM
At least he's focusing manly on cephalopods...
Posted by: consciousness razor
|
July 31, 2010 5:28 PM
No, you people just aren't getting it.
There are additional commas because the text is poetry -- mind-numbingly, stupidly bad poetry. The lines were just broken up because of the large font sizes.
... and so forth.
I'm told that this would've been corrected, but most of the budget went to crappy background music and ID night classes at the local clown college.
Posted by: Moggie
|
July 31, 2010 5:38 PM
#85:
"Held down the fort"? You're doing this on purpose, aren't you?
Posted by: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawlZ5SUf0_EmBhfJBKb8y48djZ8Xyyzo3_Y
|
July 31, 2010 5:52 PM
Oh joy, the video is not available in my country due to it containing music property of Sony.
Thank you Sony, for once and once only, for keeping a shred of stupid away from my country.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
July 31, 2010 5:58 PM
Mayyyyyybeeeeee ...Posted by: BobbyJim
|
July 31, 2010 6:04 PM
off topic, but since it has gone into grammar, can anyone tell me why I keep seeing "the" written as "teh"? Seems too consistent to be a typo, but maybe....
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
July 31, 2010 6:06 PM
No it's not. It's early Saturday evening. I spent the day sailing, not arguing over grammar and style.
Posted by: Killua
|
July 31, 2010 6:47 PM
"Wild partying", you didn't even mention the tentacle sex!!! For shame PZ, for shame. (Though I'm glad us vancouverites provided some entertainment and mind numbing parting)
Posted by: Harbo
|
July 31, 2010 7:00 PM
So the pleural of puss is pi ! Or is that a circular argument?
All complaints referred to Moggie at 68.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
July 31, 2010 7:03 PM
internetspeak derived from a typo. see also: pwnPosted by: Pierce R. Butler
|
July 31, 2010 7:15 PM
Sili, The Unknown Virgin @ # 85: What got you banned, Pierce?
Pointing out that the quoted excerpt included three sentences -
- but (ahem) a bit more snarkastically than above.
Though (so far) I haven't been literally banned (have commented at WEIT since then), just had that one item consigned to the digital inferno.
Posted by: hznfrst
|
July 31, 2010 7:19 PM
As long as we're doing grammar, I remind everyone of Churchill's response when he was accused of ending a sentence with a preposition:
"That is a situation up with which I shall not put!" (quotes outside).
Posted by: monad
|
July 31, 2010 7:28 PM
On the plural of octopus:
The Greek name is, transliterated, 'oktopous' and its plural is 'oktopodes'. As with other genus names, what we use is the Latin form 'octopus', and it's perfectly reasonable to use the Latin plural.
However, not all Latin words that end in -us take -i in the plural. Compare:
1. 'radius' becomes 'radii'
2. 'census' becomes 'census'
3. 'genus' becomes 'genera'
In the case of Greek-derived words the plural usually follows suit, and so here it is 'octopodes'. Sven is wrong in saying that wouldn't apply to the animals, since in plural compounds usually only the last part is changed. In fact it seems to have been used a lot in the past.
However this is archaic today. When we don't use the Latin plural we use English ones, and so 'octopuses' is a perfectly good choice, just like 'censuses'. At the very least, nobody who knows the etymology will object.
'Octopi' is as based on a misunderstanding, but a very old one. It looks like it, too, was being used in the 1800s, and the related plural 'polypi' for 'polypus' has been used all the way back to the Romans themselves. I would personally avoid it, but since language is based on how people speak, I don't think it's so terrible.
This is apparently a difficult matter where even corrections (like "octopus isn't Latin") are often wrong. I hope this helps us bury it.
Posted by: hznfrst
|
July 31, 2010 8:05 PM
The confusion about plurals is made worse by the fact that only some nouns ending in -us have their plural in -i, i.e. 2nd declension masculines.
Octopus/octopodes belongs to the 3rd declension, generally a catchall for imported words which can have almost any ending for the nominative singular but which are distinguished by -es in the masculine and feminine plural.
4th declension nouns can end in -us but their plurals are then -us with a long 'u', and 5th declension nouns have both singular and plural in -es.
All clear now?
Posted by: DLC
|
July 31, 2010 8:41 PM
It's not the grammar I care about so much as the craptacularly stupid display of creationist canards.
Posted by: glenister_m
|
July 31, 2010 8:49 PM
Nice to see you in Vancouver. Unfortunately the reception was full, otherwise I would have tried to chat more (I asked the first question about religion - celibacy/frowning on promiscuity vs our natural impulses, and inquiring about your book at the end).
Have a good trip.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
July 31, 2010 9:07 PM
No.Posted by: JOB
|
July 31, 2010 9:11 PM
I have always pronounced octopodes and megapodes as three syllable words. From the dictionary lady above, I learn I should say ock-TOP-uh-dez. And apparently, I must say, meg-AP-uh-dez. Ugh!
Posted by: hznfrst
|
July 31, 2010 9:24 PM
#102: okay then, but it's still a good story.
Posted by: dezcrawford
|
August 1, 2010 1:35 AM
My head would hurt less if I'd gone on a tequila bender.
"Supposable."
"Propoltion." TWICE!
My pet peeve of poor grammar: "loose" instead of "lose."
And, oh, the commas. Make the commas stop.
When I hit fifty grammatical errors and misspellings, I quit counting.
I suspect Dan Quayle wrote this.
Posted by: Jennifer
|
August 1, 2010 5:04 AM
My favourite?
"Mean while creationist".
Does this indicate he'll be nice while Darwinist?
Posted by: Fred The Hun
|
August 1, 2010 8:58 AM
Multicellular@ 59,
Good point. As a native Brazilian living in South Florida I speak very fluent Portuñol, an Hispanicization (yes, I made that up) of Portuguese so that it becomes reasonably comprehensible to native speakers of most of the 174 currently spoken dialects of Spanglish.
BTW, Spanglish grammar and punctuation are at least an order of magnitude more difficult to master than the mathematics of string theory...
You should see what happens when you start mixing in the cultural nuances of Creole American, Portuñol American with Jamaican American while dancing Ramba, (Reggae and Samba) in an Irish America bar on South Beach.
You get some very interesting limericks >;^)
Even better than this one.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler
|
August 1, 2010 11:26 AM
Sili, The Unknown Virgin @ # 102 - Not to mention the internal evidence.
Certainly if that had been Sir Winston, he would have said,
Up with which I shall not put.
Posted by: otrame
|
August 1, 2010 11:36 AM
Hehe. Sounds like San Antonio. I'll always remember being in a sushi bar listening to a black woman and an Asian woman arguing (half in Spanish and half in English) about what was the best Indian restaurant in town while the Hispanic sushi chef served their meal. It's one of the reasons why I love this town.
Posted by: Fred The Hun
|
August 1, 2010 12:23 PM
otrame @109,
Sounds like my kinda town!
Hey, maybe the folks in places like Phoenix, AZ will eventually wake the fuck up.
Disclaimer my ancestry is part Danish, but being surrounded only by blond blue eyed people, who all speak the same language, does get a bit boring after awhile :(
Posted by: hznfrst
|
August 1, 2010 12:26 PM
PB #108, see my original post #97.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/K2PNji0at.txAjzTShOlxwLuFcVVFwbnng--#bd813
|
August 1, 2010 2:29 PM
"A regular army of hipotarmi, all singing their song in duet."
Posted by: Jockaira
|
August 1, 2010 5:41 PM
No one cared what he did any longer, no whistle woke him, no telescreen admonished him. Occasionally, perhaps twice a week, he went to a dusty, forgotten-looking office in the Ministry of Truth and did a little work, or what was called work. He had been appointed to a sub-committee of a sub-committee which had sprouted from one of the innumerable committees dealing with minor difficulties that arose in the compilation of the Eleventh Edition of the Newspeak Dictionary. They were engaged in producing something called an Interim Report, but what it was that they were reporting on he had never definitely found out. It was something to do with the question of whether commas should be placed inside brackets, or outside. There were four others on the committee, all of them persons similar to himself. There were days when they assembled and then promptly dispersed again, frankly admitting to one another that there was not really anything to be done. But there were other days when they settled down to their work almost eagerly, making a tremendous show of entering up their minutes and drafting long memoranda which were never finished — when the argument as to what they were supposedly arguing about grew extraordinarily involved and abstruse, with subtle haggling over definitions, enormous digressions, quarrels, threats, even, to appeal to higher authority. And then suddenly the life would go out of them and they would sit round the table looking at one another with extinct eyes, like ghosts fading at cock-crow. --Winston's Retirement 1984
Posted by: --PatF in Madison
|
August 1, 2010 6:08 PM
@112!!!
Since this is a grammar thread you should watch your spelling. Its'
A regular army of hippopotami
All singing this haunting refrain.
So there.
(PS: Heh. I know about "It's/its". Just trying to annoy the rest of you.)
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler
|
August 1, 2010 7:19 PM
hznfrst @ # 111 - oops, you definitely beat me to it: I shall bow to your primacy.
Posted by: Erulóra (formerly KOPD)
|
August 1, 2010 9:08 PM
It's not octopi or octopuses. According to this it's octopus'.
Posted by: redrabbitslife
|
August 2, 2010 2:45 AM
Hm. I always said "octopods," but never knew why.
Only the English language is this obsessive. Ok, maybe the French, too.
I remember learning to spell in Chichewa. Mtambo = ntambo (cloud) but namitambo, that means a bunch of little clouds. Safali = safari. It boggled the mind of this recovering grammar Nazi.
But my favourite lesson with my tutor: "Those are called donuts. Donuts is a chichewa word, and it's singular; the plural is madonuts."
Posted by: ecogito
|
August 2, 2010 7:20 AM
You might look up "comma splice" before ranting about "egregious comma abuse" among idiots. Your last sentence is one.