Please wait...
Wed Sep 19 2018 05:58:58 PM EDT from IGnatius T FoobarAdvisory Message has been issued by the Yorktown Police Department.
Wednesday September 19, 2018 5:57 PM EDT
Vehicle fire on Rt 202 in front of BJs. Heavy traffic as a result. Avoid
That's an odd post. Would that be Yorktown Virginia, Yorktown Heights NY, or some other place?
I actually used Macy's in the Yorktown Heights Mall as the "Shopping" link in the HTML menu I posted to the "Programming" room. Amazing coincidence, if that's what it is, since I picked it at random and don't live in New York.
Happy Anniversary to the coolest couple I know.... that being Ig and Boo a/k/a Art and Missy
That's an odd post. Would that be Yorktown Virginia, Yorktown
Heights NY, or some other place?
Yorktown Heights, NY
That's where I live. In fact, I visited the mall-that-has-Macy's this past weekend. They also have Sears, which is currently being consolidated to half its previous size (AMAKHAAAAAAAAAAN!).
The grammar checker on my slurd processor doesn't like the phrase "in order
to". For example, "xxx must be done in order to avoid problem yyy". Flags
it every time. I have told it to STFU because I like it that way.
I am a grammar nazi and I've never seen this phrase cited as problematic.
WTF?
I am a grammar nazi and I've never seen this phrase cited as problematic.
WTF?
"In order to" is redundant. If it can be replaced simply with "to", then
simplify.
"xxx must be done to avoid problem yyy".
"xxx must be done to avoid problem yyy".
Anywhere I've ever replaced "in order to" with "to", the sentence immediately
started looking obtuse.
The phrase "in order to" must be used in order to keep the sentence from looking obtuse.
The phrase "in order to" must be used in order to keep the sentence from looking obtuse.
The phrase "in order to" must be used to keep the sentence from looking obtuse.
I dunno... that scans properly to me.
The phrase "to" must be used to keep the sentence from looking obtuse.
Well, that one looks a bit weird.
Well, if they can add "irregardless" to the dictionary, and declare that the wrong meaning of "beg the question" is now acceptable, I'm going to keep my "in order to". I've also started putting punctuation outside of quotation marks in places where I believe it looks better.
I also like Oxford commas, and Pluto is still a f***ing planet.
I'm with you on 'irregardless' (bullshit word), and I'm not keen on the many other ways people misuse language consistently enough to enter these into the dictionary... but I understand where the folks making the dictionaries come from, in that it isn't up to them to dictate how people should use English, only how people actually do use English. So, eh, I get it, even if I think it's daft.
I've only ever put the punctuation outside when stuff gets technical, and not doing so obfuscates meaning in some way. For ordinary English, though, I still puctuate within the quotes, even if I'm not particularly well educated as to why we do that (I know there's a reason, I just don't know what it is).
I think don't exactly use Oxford commas anymore, preferring a more journalistic approach. Maybe. Perhaps.
Pluto? Pluto is a dog, with amazing skill at footwork, and an expressive face to make up for not having a voice.
I've only ever put the punctuation outside when stuff gets technical,
Exactly. I write a lot of technical documentation so there are a lot of time where placing a bit of punctuation inside the quotation marks changes the meaning of what's inside the quotation marks.
The rule was written at a time when, if a sentence ended with a quotation, the quotation was likely to be "the end of another sentence." Like that.
I'll still put the period inside the quotes in that case.
I'm a grammar nazi. But that rule has always bugged me, and I choose to break it when I want to.
However ... the word "pants" (when used as a noun referring to trousers) is ALWAYS PLURAL. There is no singular.
However ... the word "pants" (when used as a noun referring to
trousers) is ALWAYS PLURAL. There is no singular.
How about when you are being referred to as one?