Treks
Well-Known Member
Jayhawker, why did you put the 'f' in 'fast' in brackets in your above quote? Is it because you changed it from upper to lower case?
Thanks
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A puzzle for the grammar police.
- Thread starter Alceste
- Start date
Jayhawker, why did you put the 'f' in 'fast' in brackets in your above quote? Is it because you changed it from upper to lower case?
Thanks
Skwim
Veteran Member
Unless there are elements of the supernatural in the scenario, the "of nature" is superfluous. All creatures are of nature.
I'd also put it in the active voice, which is better prose.
"All creatures fear the fast, vicious, and strong blood-sucking man-bat."
Last edited:
Alceste
Vagabond
It's poor grammar but it's the latter not the former. Prescriptively, an adjectival or similar phrase that beings a sentence or clause and is followed by a comma should describe the NP that follows the comma ("all creatures of natures"). However, language is fuzzy, flexible, and frequently not used according to any grammatical rules as grammar isn't really about rules the way traditional grammarians taught or generative linguists sought. There is no reason for the descriptors to precede "all creatures of nature" given that they are identified as fearing one entity and the description should only be applied to a single entity ("the blood-sucking man-bat").
What the sentence conveys differs from what we could determine from some prescriptive grammarian analysis.
So, what's the project? They sound like cards for a Magic: The Gathering style slugfest.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
........... dunno....
I never learned nuffin'.
It looks like an advert for the Twilight saga.....
Wirey
Fartist
Frankly, I just want to know what's being done about the man-bat!
Drolefille
PolyPanGeekGirl
Actually I'd say the latter, because of the "and." Had it been "or" it would have applied to "all creatures." All creatures aren't Fast, Vicious AND Strong, but listing them as an "or" makes them a subset of qualities that all creatures have.
The bat can't be "fast, vicious OR strong" because it's one type of creature, that doesn't make as much sense.
The bat can't be "fast, vicious OR strong" because it's one type of creature, that doesn't make as much sense.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
The man-bat has absolutely no natural predators?
Wirey
Fartist
The blood-sucking she-bat.
I studied a terminology in English called sentence ambiguity. I say it could mean either, depending on the context.
"The chicken is ready to eat" could mean either the chicken is ready to be eaten, or a living chicken is ready to eat something. There are many examples in English like that. I guess graduating with English major paid off
This thread is great! The internet; the thinking machine.
I go with this answer. It is not because it is the longest. It is well said I say! And I agree with it. The adjectives describe the bat even though the elementary teacher will say it describes all creatures. Written language is for conveying thoughts. I can see the right thought in the first sentence.
Last edited:
I studied a terminology in English called sentence ambiguity. I say it could mean either, depending on the context.
"The chicken is ready to eat" could mean either the chicken is ready to be eaten, or a living chicken is ready to eat something. There are many examples in English like that. I guess graduating with English major paid off
This is some good sharing! Interesting and frubal worthy but I frubaled you for asking in that other thread. Haha
Eeek, now they know. This is embarrassing (and flattering btw)
Thank you for the thought
Eeek, now they know. This is embarrassing (and flattering btw)
Thank you for the thought
I am tempted to go off topic. OMG I just did. and........surprise!....said nothing. :candle: Here's a candle and you're welcome.
I... I think I like you :hearts:
My natural reading of the sentence implies that the manbat is fast, vicious and strong.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
The Oxford comma varies by the style you're using and what you're doing. Some times you will have to use it, sometimes the style guide lines prohibit it. But as long as your sentence is clear you'll be alright without it (the fast, vicious and strong man-bat vs the strippers, JFK and Stalin). It can be quite a pain, and unless style guides say otherwise you're better off using it to maintain consistency when making sure your sentences have clarity. The fast, vicious and strong man-bat certainly works, and there is nothing grammatically incorrect about it, but when you add the strippers, JKF and Stalin, it's confusing without so it should be used, which mandates for consistencies sake (assuming it would be the same document) that you have a fast, vicious, and strong man-bat and the strippers, JFK, and Stalin.
Last edited:
FearGod
Freedom Of Mind
The same here.
Actually it is the reason for why all creatures of nature fear the blood-sucking man-bat for being Fast, vicious and strong.
Alceste
Vagabond
It's a remake of a really fun 1985 video game. I don't like to connect RF me with real me in a browser friendly way, but I can Pm you.