Follow-up to Lee post

Did anyone get the post I made about him yesterday (basically an update from when he woke up)? Just wondering, because I've come to the conclusion my news server is pretty diabolical, but I can't leave it until October. Grrrr.... :(

Tina

On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 14:42:36 +0000, Tina Nellis wrote:

|Did anyone get the post I made about him yesterday (basically an |update from when he woke up)? Just wondering, because I've come to |the conclusion my news server is pretty diabolical, but I can't leave |it until October. Grrrr.... :( | |Tina

I have a post entitled "Slow Progress". Is that the one you mean?

Denise

On Mon, 24 Jan 2000 15:32:08 GMT, [email] (Denise Mjelde) wrote:

|On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 14:42:36 +0000, Tina Nellis | wrote: |

| |I have a post entitled "Slow Progress". Is that the one you mean? | |Denise

Ooops, make that "Steady Progress." I wish Lee were here, I bet he could tell me where to put that period (before or after the endquote?). <sigh>

Denise

After, just like you did with the bracket. :)

There's another ASC post about Lee - "Lee Green... 23/1/99" I think (Jen's mistake, not mine!). If I don't see it here by 9pm GMT I'll assume Tina or Larissa aren't posting it and retrieve it from wherever my nr has stuffed it. (It's been misbehaving since it upgraded itself.)

Jac (Nise, can you mail me please? Problems getting mail out to you.)

Even though that's the wrong way and he knows it - he refuses to conform to books and magazines. :)

Did you see the post yet? Denise posted it before you wrote the above message, so maybe your newsreader dropped it from ATF? Anyway, it did get posted here.

Larissa

conform to

No it isn't, "steady progress" is a component within the main sentence. All sentences end with a full stop (period) no matter what clauses go in them. Components, of themselves, do not end sentences. Always apply the "removable" rule. If you can remove a component and still leave the sentence structure intact, then it's correct. If you remove "steady progress." then you lose the full stop. If you remove "steady progress" the full stop is still in place. Think of it as a structure where all the components of a sentence fit between the capital letter and the full stop. You can rearrange them however you like, but the capital and the full stop continue to mark beginning and end, so it's illogical to put something belonging to the sentence (the " or a closing bracket) after the end. :)

itself.)

message,

posted here.

I didn't when I posted this yesterday afternoon, or last night (11pm ish) but it showed up this morning. :)

Jac

I really, really don't feel like looking it up right now, so I'll just say you're right. :) But what if it's like you're quoting something someone's said? Here's an example: Larissa said, "I'm very tired." Wouldn't you put the period before the quotation marks in that case? If you're really not supposed to, then all the books and magazines have been wrong for a long time.

Larissa

Think of it as a structure where all

full

the

say

Well my marks for Language Literature and Discourse II (Grammar) suggest I am. :) I looked it up, too.

But what if it's like you're quoting something someone's

you put

not

long time.

That is where it gets awkward. The "true" answer is not to end your sentences in that way. In practice you can't avoid it. I would still write:

Larissa said "I'm very tired".

But most editors/writers won't. "House style" overrides most grammatical rules, unfortunately. :)

Jac

Were you taught that that's the British way, or the universal way? Now that it's not 1AM and I can think about it, I'm pretty sure that could be yet another discrepancy in what we think of as "proper" English. Oh well.

Larissa

suggest

Lol, the English way. In England. :) I was actually taught that it's the correct and predominant way, but I guess if you (Americans) are all taught the other way then it's one of those where we'll have to agree to differ. For the record, I still think it's clearer the English way, because it gives you scope to add things to your sentence without messing up your punctuation e.g. Larissa said "I'm very tired". That could become: Larissa said "I'm very tired" and fell asleep. That could be typed without having to delete the first full stop and type the second, because you could just insert it after the " without any deletion. That's a very facile and seemingly pointless "benefit" but a) I'm tired and b) the importance of sub-editing shows on things like that. You could end up with: Larissa said "I'm very tired." and fell asleep. Which makes no sense at all to me. :) Where this gets further confused is where you might say 2 sentences. Larissa said "I'm very tired. I'll fall asleep". :) Now I'm too tired to go further than that.....

Now that

yet

I think it is a transAtlantic thing. We do it this way, you do it yours. I could get slightly jingoistic and remind you what the *name* of the language is and who started the whole thing (and start on that blasted Webster again) but that's an argument I usually reserve for Lee, so will wait for his return to stoke *that* fire up again. :)

Jac

Yep, I understand that. Even though I still think that when you put the period at the very end of the sentence after quotes, it looks unattached, sort of floating out there. :) But I'll agree to disagree.

And he'll be happy to argue as always, I'm sure. :)

Larissa

Jacqui wrote:

"Hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way..."

The lunatics are on the grass. (Usually playing football of either kind. :))

Jac (have you tried the Wizard of Oz thing, Jon?)

In article , Jonathan Roberts wrote:

         "The time is gone the song is over,
          thought I'd something more to say."

Tennant

On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Tennant Stuart wrote:

		"Home, home again
		 I like to be here when I can
		 When I come home cold and tired
		 It's good to warm my bones beside the fire

		 Far away across the field
		 The tolling of the iron bell
		 Calls the faithful to their knees
		 To hear the softly spoken magic spells"

[remainder snipped for X-rating] ;-)

I heard Jonathan Roberts's cries on the wind...

I know that's Pink Floyd, but which song..?

Raven wrote:

"Time," from <Dark Side of the Moon>.

Yr makin me feel old(er).

I heard Jonathan Roberts's cries on the wind...

Sorry! I do know the song, and the album; it's just that the copy I listened to didn't have a track listing with it, so it's hard to know what's what. :)

I don't think anyone will care of this (which makes me eligible as most pointless poster) but my mom's friend's friend is the wife of a guy from the Pink Floyd. I have no idea what his name is. I think he plays guitar. It's true, it really is.

Adeline.

~"Welcome to the real world ! It sucks, you're gonna love it !"

In article , "leborgne.jl" wrote:

Ooh Adeline, could it *be* anyone but David Gilmour ???

Tennant

Yeah maybe, now you're saying it, David sounds familiar. But don't expect anything from me, alright. I am NOT directly related to him. It's just that my mum has been writing to that woman named Janet since they both were in, like 8th grade (Form 3, in UK) and last year, Janet mentioned a trip she'd made to the USA to visit her friend, who happens to be that Pink Floyd guy. She even joined a pic. He was a tall guy, with long grey hair, a beard and a moustache (I'm not sure 'bout the moustache). Does it sound like Gilmour ?

In article , "leborgne.jl" wrote:

Pink Floyd were never ones for putting their pictures on their album covers, but there are a couple of very good photographs of Mr. Gilmour on his solo album, "About Face".

Tennant

On Fri, 28 Jan 2000, leborgne.jl wrote:

If this "trip" took place in the 70's, then it pretty much had to be Gilmour, except perhaps for the late 70's. However, if it happened during the 80's or the 90's, it's a little uncertain. In the late 70's, the Floyd ended up using additional musicians on stage, and there may well have been more than one guitar player. The same goes for the 80's and the 90's which saw doubling up at several positions.

"Tall guy with long grey hair a beard and a moustache" *almost* matches the Gilmour of the late 60's/early 70's. I don't believe he had the beard and the moustache, but he did have long grey hair. However, the 80's / 90's Gilmour has really short hair.

James Squire wrote:

Long, yes, but not gray, not then.

On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Jonathan Roberts wrote:

Doh! Probably because he wasn't that old then, eh ;-)

Would ya say light brown?

On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 07:25:26 -0000, "Jacqui" wrote:

|conform to

| |No it isn't, "steady progress" is a component within the main sentence. |All sentences end with a full stop (period) no matter what clauses go in |them. Components, of themselves, do not end sentences. Always apply |the "removable" rule. If you can remove a component and still leave the |sentence structure intact, then it's correct. If you remove "steady |progress." then you lose the full stop. If you remove "steady progress" |the full stop is still in place. Think of it as a structure where all |the components of a sentence fit between the capital letter and the full |stop. You can rearrange them however you like, but the capital and the |full stop continue to mark beginning and end, so it's illogical to put |something belonging to the sentence (the " or a closing bracket) after |the end. :)

My problem is that the French do it the other way around (don't ask me why) so then I get confused as to which way to do it in which language.

Denise

P.S. Jacqui, I'll get an email off to you now. I've just let email slip a lot in the past few (well 6 to 9, actually) months.

<<If you remove "steady progress" |the full stop is still in place. Think of it as a structure where all the components of a sentence fit between the capital letter and the full |stop. You can rearrange them however you like, but the capital and the full stop continue to mark beginning and end, so it's illogical to put something belonging to the sentence (the " or a closing bracket) after |the end. :)

My problem is that the French do it the other way around >>

So do Americans (i.e. "steady progress."). However, the British do it the way you describe ("steady progress".), which may explain why it's so confusing to people in a newsgroup made of American AND British subscribers.

Thank you! I was hoping I wasn't totally insane. :)

Larissa