Paris Most Shocking

[13788]

hung_big: Yah...get out more Steve...

 

[Pecker]

Simplify = dumbing down.

For instance, it's common now, but sill incorrect, to use a collective pronoun rather than to refer to him/her or his/her (i.e. "A good parent helps their child with homework") for PC expediency, not because it's good grammar.

My surname ends with an 's' and I always make it possessive by simply adding an apostrophe, as another 's' would be redundant.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by prepstudinsc@Apr 9 2005, 03:20 AM
I remember being taught that if a word ended in "s" and it was to be made possesive, one would add the apostrophe after the s, rather than making the word end in "s's". When writing about Chris and his bike, I wouldn't write Chris's bike, I'd just write Chris' bike. Jacinto, correct me if I'm wrong here...you're the English teacher and I graduated high school in 1987, so some of my proper grammar may a little rusty.

[post=298653]Quoted post[/post]​

Well, since you asked ... that particularly issue in in flux in the U.S. In most of the English speaking world Chris's is correct and preferred. In the U.S. Chris's is not incorrect, but currently Chris' is commonly used and is considered acceptable. Forty years ago, that was not the case: the pronunciation is [krisiz] or [kris@z] and the extra syllable required 's to represent it in orthography. So either Paris's or Paris' would be acceptable in America, but to avoid the awkward spelling question, The No-Talent Media Whore's Most Shocking would be my suggested alternative

 

[13788]

hung_big: Jacinto...would you mind answering my questions on the previous page?

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by hung_big@Apr 9 2005, 06:56 AM
Jacinto...would you mind answering my questions on the previous page?

[post=298706]Quoted post[/post]​

I teach three senior and one freshman classes. They're all pretty good about attendance and being on time, but with rare exceptions, their normal conversational grammar sucks. I live in a Southern town where curious redneck constructions like quadruple negatives are not unusual. I'm about to pick on fellow board member and real-life student of mine PonyPete. I overheard some of his friends asking him if he was planning on watching a certain movie. His answer: "I been done seen it." I shuddered. But Pete is a straight A student and would never perpetrate such an outrage against the English language while in my classroom.

About contractions: of course they aren't allowed to use them in term papers and such, but they are still taught how to use them properly for use where they're appropriate. Correct spelling of common contractions is, after all, a point of English.

 

[PonyPete]

Originally posted by DoubleMeatWhopper@Apr 9 2005, 07:10 AM
I'm about to pick on fellow board member and real-life student of mine PonyPete. I overheard some of his friends asking him if he was planning on watching a certain movie. His answer: "I been done seen it." I shuddered.

I know, I know. I should've said "I been done saw it." :lol:

 

[13788]

hung_big: I said something about contradictions?

And from what I've read of PonyPete's posts, he is brilliant and definetly has a gift with words. Of course, I am guilty of dumbing myself down with my friends as well, sadly. I suppose I shouldn't, but not much dumbing down to do in the first place ^_^!

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by PonyPete@Apr 9 2005, 07:14 AM
I should've said "I been done saw it." :lol:

Grrr! :grr:

 

[D_Barbi_Queue]

Originally posted by Pices2325@Apr 8 2005, 10:04 PM
I like Paris and I doubt that she made that shirt herself. So to blame the spelling mistake on her would be stupider than she is. Although she probably never noticed, I doubt anyone really cares because she is hott. I really dont care if she gets different forms of words mixed up because I do too. No one is perfect, but we try

P.S. in your title "Paris' Most Shocking" technically it should be "Paris's Most Shocking" because there is only one Paris (singular form). So you really should cut her some slack.

[post=298642]Quoted post[/post]​

Calm down, little one.

First of all, yes- I very seriously doubt the she made the shirt herself. But the fact remains that she is weraring it and therefor "endorsing" it.

Second, my point wasn't so much that she was weraing a shirt that had a grammer mistake, but that VH1 failed to point it out when they were making fun of her for everything else.

Third, even if I had improperly used Paris' instead of Paris's, the fact remains that Paris' was used in the title of the show and since I was directly referring to that particular show, I still did such correctly.

 

[B_RoysToy]

[quote=steve319,Apr 9 2005, 02:20
But in message boards and the like, it doesn't bother me. It's colorfully fun. Maybe for me it's a matter of "abusing the rules only after you have mastered them" thing.
(The instant messaging phenomenon is only going to make it worse, don't you think?)

You're a guy of my own thinking, steve. It's great having you aboard.

 

[13788]

hung_big:

I like Paris and I doubt that she made that shirt herself.  So to blame the spelling mistake on her would be stupider than she is.  Although she probably never noticed, I doubt anyone really cares because she is hott.  I really dont care if she gets different forms of words mixed up because I do too.  No one is perfect, but we try

P.S. in your title "Paris' Most Shocking" technically it should be "Paris's Most Shocking" because there is only one Paris (singular form).  So you really should cut her some slack.

Calm down, little one.

Cute ^_^

First of all, yes- I very seriously doubt the she made the shirt herself.  But the fact remains that she is weraring it and therefor "endorsing" it. 

TAG's correct hun. If you are endorsing a product that makes you look pompous, then you are guilty of that yourself. Of course nobody is perfect, but there was what...a whole three words to read?

Second, my point wasn't so much that she was weraing a shirt that had a grammer mistake, but that VH1 failed to point it out when they were making fun of her for everything else.

Third, even if I had improperly used Paris' instead of Paris's, the fact remains that Paris' was used in the title of the show and since I was directly referring to that particular show, I still did such correctly.

She's right hun. When you are paraphrasing, quoting or referencing something you directly copy it - errors and all.

As for what you said abour Paris being hot:

1. She looks like she was beaten with the anorexic stick...
2. That's the kind of attitude that puts unfitting people in every one of our systems (school, justice etc.); 'I don't care because she is hot'. Okay there. Just because one is physically attractive doesn't give them the right to be an imbecile.

 

[steve319]

Originally posted by Pecker@Apr 9 2005, 12:58 AM
Simplify = dumbing down.

[post=298682]Quoted post[/post]​

Yeah, to some extent, I agree. It's interesting to note, though, that the English language only began using the apostrophe in the 16th century and then only as a signal of omission (think contractions, such as it's with the apostrophe signaling the exclusion of the letter “I”—I’d bet you fight the battle of the its/it’s thing daily, don’t you, DMW?). It wasn't until the 1600's, though, that we began imposing it on the possessive case.

According to Lynne Truss in her hilarious look at punctuation, Eats, Shoots and Leaves , there's disagreement over that point. She writes:

At some point in the 17th century, however, printers started to intrude an apostrophe before the "s" in singular possessive cases ("the girl's dress"), and from then on quite frankly the whole thing has spiraled into madness. In the 18th century, printers started to put it after plural possessives as well (“the girls’ dresses”). Some historians of grammar claim, incidentally, that the original possessive use of the apostrophe signified a contraction of the historic “his” and personally, I believed this attractive theory for many years, simply on the basis of knowing Ben Johnson’s play Sejanus, his Fall , and reasoning that this was self-evidently halfway to “Sejanus’s Fall.” But blow me, if there aren’t differences of opinion. There are other historians of grammar who say this Love-His-Labour-Is-Lost explanation is ignorant conjecture and should be forgotten as soon as heard. Certainly the Henry-His-Wives (Henry’s Wives) rationalization falls down noticeably when applied to female possessives, because “Elizabeth Her Reign” would have ended up logically as “Elizabeth’r Reign,” which would have had the regrettable result of making people sound a ) a bit stupid, b ) a bit drunk, or c ) a bit from the West Country.

She’s so witty! (Please excuse my alteration of the “Briticisms” in spelling and punctuation in the quote, such as moving the commas inside the ending quotation marks—I couldn’t help myself. Plus, did you notice how much fun I'm having playing fast and loose with italics, bold, and underline practices? No, I'm not being consitent. I'm in that giddy moment when you first begin to learn the html code, I guess. Or maybe I'm feeling the freedom of liberation from the APA gestapo that make grad school such a tribulation for us fans of MLA form.)

Anyway, she goes on to point out that, according to the Oxford Companion to English Literature, “There never was a golden age when the rules for the possessive apostrophe were clear-cut and known, understood, and followed by educated people.” And I find that pretty plausible.

When all is said and done, yeah, I’m fairly consumed with impotent rage when I see uninformed usage on signs saying things like “Kountry Kid’s Day Care” (besides the cutesy spelling thing, there’s the fact that the punctuation indicates that the place is for one really lucky kid).

I know the rules as they currently “stand” (long may they shift and crumble as I wail), and I beat that dead horse almost weekly in class. But only when we’re editing (yes, I started the sentence with “but” and I know someone out there is rolling his/her eyes--I stand by my choice; so sue me).

I have to spend far more time encouraging (pushing? harassing?) students to gain the confidence and fluency to express themselves smoothly in the first place, so why sabotage that so early in the process?

I should stop now as this is probably not all that interesting to you guys! But the Truss book is a fun read and reminds me to relax about this stuff, which I need sometimes. Anyone else read it? It reminds me of the old text The Transitive Vampire . (Am I dating myself here?) :tinfoilhat:

(Thanks for the words of assent, Luke&#33

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by hung_big@Apr 9 2005, 07:16 AM
I said something about contradictions?

Contractions, not contradictions. You had said in an earlier post:

We're not allowed to use coloquial or abbreviated terms in our classroom, especially in formal writing such as essays and exposes.

Though you didn't use the word contraction, that was the type of "abbreviated term" in question.

BTW ... exposés? Why was a high school teacher training students to be gossip columnists?

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by steve319@Apr 9 2005, 04:32 PM
I’d bet you fight the battle of the its/it’s thing daily, don’t you, DMW?).

Constantly. Thank you for bringing up a painful reminder of fighting a losing battle, Steve. Maybe you'd like to give me a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it, while you're at it?

According to Lynne Truss in her hilarious look at punctuation, Eats, Shoots and Leaves .....
But the Truss book is a fun read and reminds me to relax about this stuff, which I need sometimes.

Eats, Shoots and Leaves is a great book, and it does take some of the pain out of punctuation. Excerpts from the book are required reading for my senior English classes, and, wonder of wonders, some of my students have actually bought the book and read it cover to cover! At the high school, Eats, Shoots and Leaves has gained a small readership cult right up there with Gödel, Escher, Bach!

 

[13788]

hung_big:

Originally posted by DMW
Constantly. Thank you for bringing up a painful reminder of fighting a losing battle, Steve. Maybe you'd like to give me a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it, while you're at it?

Better yet, why doesn't he rip off your fingernails and rub salt on them? That was a Nazi torture method if I'm not mistaken and also something to do with boiling oil. YOUCH!

And Jac...when I said expose (accent agu...I'm too lazy), I meant a personal opinion peice. An expose on Euthanasia...based on facts, not rumours of falacities.

And I only do this for extra credit - I tend to be ahead of my grade levels and I always already writing persuasive arguments in grade 6 or 7, though I have lost that skill.

 

[steve319]

Constantly. Thank you for bringing up a painful reminder of fighting a losing battle, Steve. Maybe you'd like to give me a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it, while you're at it?

I feel your pain, man! I do! I might remind you that one of Truss's (notice my usage there, so you see the camp into which I fall) recommendations for grammar sticklers is a toolkit for the apostrophe war, including such items as correction fluid, big pens, a stick with an apostrophe on the end, stickers to cover unneeded apostrophes, paint to add them in where needed, guerrilla-style clothing, a gun, and, perhaps most importantly in this case, strong medicine for personality disorder.

Therapy and medication might work wonders, DMW. Failing that, there’s always self-medicating to consider. Perhaps gouging out our eyeballs with a red pen? :freak:

(<whew>…deep breaths…calm blue ocean, calm blue ocean…OK…)

[OK, quick aside here: I&#39;m asking you message board vets to enlighten the newbie here--how long till the fascination with those smiley face icons fades? I&#39;m feeling the need to stop those now but seem unable to.]

Anyway, I’m thrilled to hear that you’ve been able to spark some student interest by using bits of the text&#33; I’ve been considering choosing it as a selection for our campus Reading Group for fall semester, and this news bolsters my confidence for making the leap. Thanks&#33;

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Originally posted by hung_big@Apr 9 2005, 06:59 PM
And Jac...when I said expose (accent agu...I&#39;m too lazy), I meant a personal opinion peice. An expose on Euthanasia...based on facts, not rumours of falacities.

Firstly: Jac is not an acceptable diminutive of my name.

Secondly: Falacities? Is that really a word?

 

[13788]

hung_big: Sorry Jacinto, I meant to say Falsities. I don&#39;t even know where I got falacities. :huh:

 

[steve319]

Originally posted by DoubleMeatWhopper@Apr 10 2005, 02:46 AM
Falacities? Is that really a word?

[post=299100]Quoted post[/post]​

Maybe not, but perhaps it should be? Sometimes I think I live there.

 

[jonb]

Well, what is the accepted diminutive? Jacintito? Jacintico? Jacintino? Jacintillo? Romance languages have too many affixes which mean the same thing.

@Chris:
DON&#39;T argue with Jacinto about grammar. At least not in any Romance or Germanic languages.