Not to me. It is unclear. It may be "grammatically correct" but it is still unclear. PROVING that grammar is not the be-all, end-all to making a point clear.
This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at April 4, 2019 9:24 AM MDT
Parse---analyze (a sentence) into its parts and describe their syntactic roles.
I do agree that grammar (just like "words") should also serve speech---and syntactical construction outside of normal speech may occasionally impede communication.
But I personally not want to sacrifice the additional comprehension that can be when an apparently "awkward" construction may provide insight as well as momentary pause.
Well, yeah, Tom. I agree. If I cannot understand someone, I'm going to point it out. But what is next? Should paragraphs be also criticized? That could make a statement much clearer as well. Why not have Randy just go down and re-write everything so it suits his desire to correct?
NO.
This is not a site where you need to worry about every comma unless you are in some sort of debate that begs for accuracy and bad grammar would be an obstacle. We are not writing term papers here. I think of this site as more of an ongoing conversation. ALSO, there are a lot of people on here that are not even from this country or may be a little less than average intellectually. Is it a big accomplishment to make them feel less than?
Interesting enough, I don't recall ever seeing a whole paragraph on this site that needed the sentence order changed to align it with the "rules of paragraphs" that probably most of us came across in high school---which I suppose begs the question.
But I do think the problem is self limiting---as you suggest, the corrections are usually limited in scope and seem to be primarily associated with grammar rather than syntax.
And generally speaking, I am a big believer in "poetic license" for any author of anything written---and I will accept their reasons for phrasing and punctuating their works as they do.
OH yeah. I can correct half the site that way. Come on. (re: the paragraph structure)
But the salient point is unwarranted interjections that are critical. For zero reason other than to be a snot? That is funny once a year.
This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at April 4, 2019 12:03 PM MDT
Ok that is fair. Now. Consider the definition of a social web site.
Social. That means we are a group of people who are socializing. We interject, sure. There is a difference between irritating interjections and TROLLING people.
There is NO fine line either. Trolling is incessant harrassment for no reason.
I took a helicopter ride over the Grand Canyon when I was in my early 20's. The heliport was located a short distance from the rim and the pilot flew just above tree top level and then plunged into the canyon just beyond the rim.
It was a "bubble" style helicopter---lots of windshield, not unlike a bridge made of glass.
The pilot obviously enjoyed freaking out the customers.
Most one-engine aircraft (other than experimental) can glide or auto-rotate considerably better than a rock---but admittedly that is not much help if you are flying in the mountains or over a forest.
No, I have been in helicopters many times. My friend here was a helicopter pilot in Viet Nam. He ran a charter service here in Florida an treated us to several rides over the ocean and Disney World. It was fun except for the hot dogging moves he made to impress me.
I have indeed been in a helicopter once. It was scary and I made them land prematurely to let me off. That is something I have done a number of times during off-the-ground adventures. I like being on the ground.
WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH 