On 22 Oct, 00:04, "William A. T. Clark" <clarknos...@masceng.ohio-
state.edu> wrote:
> In article ,
>
>
>
>
>
>  freeireland  wrote:
> > On 21 Oct, 17:30, "William A. T. Clark" <clarknos...@masceng.ohio-
> > state.edu> wrote:
> > > In article ,
>
> > >  freeireland  wrote:
> > > > On 19 Oct, 16:03, "William A. T. Clark" 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > In article ,
>
> > > > >  freeireland  wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 18, 8:55 pm, "William A. T. Clark" 
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > In article ,
>
> > > > > > >  freeireland  wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 18 Oct, 13:10, "William A. T. Clark" 
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > ,
>
> > > > > > > > >  freeireland  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On 18 Oct, 02:12, "William A. T. Clark"
> > > > > > > > > > <clarknos...@masceng.ohio-
> > > > > > > > > > state.edu> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > > > ,
>
> > > > > > > > > > >  freeireland  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 17 Oct, 11:05, "Falcon" 
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > freeireland wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > [...]
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > What case? Have you made it on another thread again!
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > even
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > admitt the poem is amusing even a little bit. Can you
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > spot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > tyops
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Falcon!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I know you're damaged ego demands light hearted
> > > > > > > > > > > > > obfuscation,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > even a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > little
> > > > > > > > > > > > > self-deprication, but repeatedly using "where" instead
> > > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > "were"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > isn't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > example of a simple typo. It's poor spelling and bad
> > > > > > > > > > > > > education.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > afraid
> > > > > > > > > > > > > you're a thick as a brick, and therefore irrelevant.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > You
> > > > > > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > weakest
> > > > > > > > > > > > > link. Goodbye.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Falcon:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > fide, sed cui vide. (L)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Police could not have prevented
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Greysteelhttp://www.policeombudsman.org/press.cfm?Press_
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ID=1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 69&a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ctio
> > > > > > > > > > > > > n=de
> > > > > > > > > > > > > tail
> > > > > > > > > > > > > &y...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > lol, clearly you have no idea of my education. Though
> > > > > > > > > > > > your in
> > > > > > > > > > > > no
> > > > > > > > > > > > position to be  pouncing on anyones typos or grammer. You
> > > > > > > > > > > > see
> > > > > > > > > > > > anything
> > > > > > > > > > > > I type is a large proportion of the time of the cuff, no
> > > > > > > > > > > > grammar
> > > > > > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > > spelling aids and without considering it. Though when the
> > > > > > > > > > > > self
> > > > > > > > > > > > appointed grammar or spelling police try do discredit you
> > > > > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > > illrelevant misdemeanors I often like to turn the tables.
> > > > > > > > > > > > You
> > > > > > > > > > > > see
> > > > > > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > was being critical of someones spelling, grammer or typos
> > > > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > > very, so very careful not to have any in the very post I
> > > > > > > > > > > > am
> > > > > > > > > > > > making.
> > > > > > > > > > > > You see does
> > > > > > > > > > > > "little self-deprication, but" actually form a single
> > > > > > > > > > > > adjective
> > > > > > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > > > > > a noun, involve compound numbers, an awkward combination
> > > > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > letters,
> > > > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > prefix or suffix or a line break in order to justify a
> > > > > > > > > > > > hypen.
> > > > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > > > > > > think so. Or is deprication an actual word or is there a
> > > > > > > > > > > > spelling
> > > > > > > > > > > > mistake. Is this a lack of your education Falcon? Do you
> > > > > > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > > makes you look a little foolish? Do you think when
> > > > > > > > > > > > pouncing
> > > > > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > > someones grammar you should at least not have any
> > > > > > > > > > > > speeling or
> > > > > > > > > > > > grammatical errors?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > As for obfuscation I think you should look back over the
> > > > > > > > > > > > thread
> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > > > > > > who was being pedantic in order to discredit my post.
> > > > > > > > > > > > hmmm,
> > > > > > > > > > > > nothing
> > > > > > > > > > > > new from you though is it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > "Anyones"? "Grammer"? "Illrelevant"? "Speeling"?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > You're not related to George Bush, by any chance, are you?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > William Clark
>
> > > > > > > > > > Yeah well spooted, haven't you spotted the planted
> > > > > > > > > > grammatical
> > > > > > > > > > errors
> > > > > > > > > > either?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Is that your GW Bush moment!
>
> > > > > > > > > So we're supposed to believe that these are all deliberate
> > > > > > > > > spoofs
> > > > > > > > > planted by a Mensa genius.
>
> > > > > > > > > Yeah, right.
>
> > > > > > > > > William Clark- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > Maybe you should read the thread where its quite clear I am
> > > > > > > > putting
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > plants! I thought the speeling one would really give it away
> > > > > > > > though,
> > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > thought it was obvious, though I also noticed you didn't pick up
> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > the less obvious grammar errors(oh is that a grammatical error).
> > > > > > > > Yet
> > > > > > > > another from the self proclaimed grammer, spelling or typo
> > > > > > > > brigade
> > > > > > > > sorry we bow to your superior intelect. (you think maybe thats to
> > > > > > > > obvious).
>
> > > > > > > So you take pride in deliberately trying to appear thick? I have a
> > > > > > > bridge for sale you might be interested in . . . .
>
> > > > > > > William Clark
>
> > > > > > you see I think you have a problem with equating formal grammar with
> > > > > > intelligence so maybe you should jump of the bridge you have for
> > > > > > sale!
>
> > > > > John Milton said "the chid is the window to the man". I would
> > > > > paraphrase
> > > > > that to "literacy is the window to the intellect".
>
> > > > Was it John Milton who put the spelling mistake two grammatical errors
> > > > in "The child is the window to the man." Or was that just you showing
> > > > us your apparent intelligence? Don't you feel foolish making not only
> > > > a spelling error but several grammatical errors while quoting John
> > > > Milton as evidence of a link of literacy and intelligence. For example
> > > > should that be a capital T? Should the full stop be inside quotes or
> > > > is that an american english grammar you are using? Its almost as
> > > > foolish as Wigan MP Neil Turner in 2001 returned a letter to a
> > > > constituent having added his own handwritten corrections of the
> > > > correspondent's mistakes. The man he was hectoring, psychiatric nurse
> > > > Stephen Halsall, turned out to be dyslexic. So much for the self
> > > > imposed grammar police.
>
> > > Not at all - one typo, but the capitalisation is quite optional in this
> > > context. So not "several grammatical errors". However at least you admit
> > > you are in a class with a dyslexic - but we had all worked that out for
> > > ourselves.
>
> > Really and what is the context of this quotation? Do you even know if
> > Milton wrote or said it? Do you know if this is actually a title of
> > one of Miltons poems? Do you know if it was direct quotation of a full
> > sentence or partial? Though hey even us dyslexics know these things
> > after all Milton is regard as one of the 17th centauries greatest
> > poets. lol. Though you never mentioned the missing comma or colon
> > after said. John Milton said "the chid is the window to the man".
>
> Aren't "cantauries" those half horse, half man, things that run around
> in the forest, scaring young virgins?

I couldn't resist that plant, I even put an lol at the end of the line
to mark it. Even then though you got it wrong. I typed "centauries "
not "cantauries" you know with your doctorate I would expect you to be
able to quote a single word correctly. Have Oxford really become so
slack. Centauries is a type of plant your thinking of Centaurs.

>
>
>
> > Not to do so would result in a failure at Oxford I won't mention the
> > course though clearly you would fail. Direct quotion from my style
> > guide. Though it has been a while.
>
> Oh, dear, I must have slipped through Oxford's net, since they gave me a
> doctorate. Too bad for you.

Really with such bad grammar standards must be slipping.  After all
Oxford is only third.

>
>
>
> > "So a quotation from inside a sentence reads:
> >       According to Smith 'comparative legal studies is a field which
> > needs radical reform'.
>
> > And a quotation which starts with the beginning of a sentence reads:
> >       According to Smith 'There are numerous ways of approaching
> > comparative law methodology.' "
>
> Your point being?

Why do you ask what my point is now, I thought you could only respond
to a grammatical error. Its only a style guide, not an entire
curriculum. So don't get too wound up about it?

>
>
>
> > > > "Deep-versed in books and shallow in himself."
> > > > To quote your very own John Milton.
>
> > > > How would you paraphrase Milton in this regard?
>
> This has nothing whatever to do with grammar and literacy. It's that
> simple!
>

Really, I think a quotation from a dead person especially a poet is
pretty much open to interpretation. Though how can literacy have
anything to do with being deep-versed in books I don't know. Though it
is strange how Americans attribute that quote to Kissinger. Though
since he won the Nobel Peace prize and is currently and advisor to
George W Bush I suppose the federal court does not really care about
plagiarism at all.

>
>
>
>
> > > > First things first - remembering facts
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

freeireland wrote:

> 
> 
> So the questions I ask are ?


Are you still working on the typos?

G.

In article ,
 freeireland  wrote:


Snip a lot of BS


SInce you seem to think that cutting and pasting a lot of barely 
relevant nonsense is a proper substitute for actually listening to the 
discussion, let's make it simple.

1) "Due to" is an adjective (or adjectival phrase). Therefore, in the 
sentence "Payment of all fees due to OUDCE is required in full before 
the first day of the course", "due to" is an adjective describing 
"fees". This is correct usage.

2) "The game was cancelled due to the rain" uses "due to" as a compound 
preposition whose meaning is "because of". This is not correct.

Of course, if you prefer to think that continued incorrect usage then 
justifies simply abandoning the rules of grammar, go ahead. It is at 
least consistent with your cavalier attitude to the rest of the language.

Now, are you willing to put your faith in your assertion that I don't 
have a degree from Oxford to the $100 test? If not, then you can 
apologize for saying so, since I doubt you are good for the money 
anyway. Or would you rather just go on weaseling?

William Clark

William A. T. Clark wrote:

> 2) "The game was cancelled due to the rain" uses "due to" as a compound 
> preposition whose meaning is "because of". This is not correct.

Bill, I'm not taking sides here, because I realize it's only a pissing 
contest. However, I believe *due to* as a preposition is correct in 
Americanized grammar, at least. I'm not sure of the Queen's version. It 
generally takes the place of *because of* or *as a result of.* What 
makes you think otherwise?