"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

Yawn! Ok, apparently you need some help
here. I *think* that what you meant to say
goes something like this: "It's a pretty near
given that neither I, nor many others in
this newsgroup, would find anything like the
death of someone else "hilarious."" (snip)


You must be getting old or something, Larry. You gave up much too quickly.
It was surely a mistake when she first wrote it, but a real surprise when
she actually wrote it again without catching the mistake.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

Yawn! Ok, apparently you need some help
here. I *think* that what you meant to say
goes something like this: "It's a pretty near
given that neither I, nor many others in
this newsgroup, would find anything like the
death of someone else "hilarious."" (snip)


You must be getting old or something, Larry. You gave up much too
quickly.
It was surely a mistake when she first wrote it, but a real surprise when
she actually wrote it again without catching the mistake.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


Ask an English professor, Dwight.

Kim W5TIT

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Ask an English professor, Dwight.


Writing is something I greatly enjoy, Kim. As written, your sentence,
without the reference to others, basically says "it's a pretty near given
that I would find anything like the death of someone else "hilarious.""
Clearly, something else is needed to change that to fit your intent (for
example, "...I would NOT find..."). With your reference to others, the
missing "neither" is necessary (the basic "neither/nor" grammar rule, as in
"neither I nor others would find").


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

Yawn! Ok, apparently you need some help
here. I *think* that what you meant to say
goes something like this: "It's a pretty near
given that neither I, nor many others in
this newsgroup, would find anything like the
death of someone else "hilarious."" (snip)


You must be getting old or something, Larry. You gave up much too
quickly.
It was surely a mistake when she first wrote it, but a real surprise when
she actually wrote it again without catching the mistake.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


I meant to add that I'll check with our grammar department today...

Kim W5TIT

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

Yawn! Ok, apparently you need some help
here. I *think* that what you meant to say
goes something like this: "It's a pretty near
given that neither I, nor many others in
this newsgroup, would find anything like the
death of someone else "hilarious."" (snip)


You must be getting old or something, Larry. You gave up much too
quickly.
It was surely a mistake when she first wrote it, but a real surprise
when
she actually wrote it again without catching the mistake.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


I meant to add that I'll check with our grammar department today...

Kim W5TIT



ACK!!! Man, I am still stunned over this one--I *must* be getting old. The
grammar department indeed reminded me of the old "either/neither"
"neither/nor" argument to be used in deciding upon correct grammar! So,
yes, Larry was correct! Wow, what a hoot! Larry being correct Big Evil
Grin. However, it was stated that, in a casual conversation, inference is
98% of the communication. Deductive reasoning would lend itself to knowing
what was intended to be said (sorry, Jim). I did remind them that I do not
consider this venue as much "casual" as I do a debate environment. So, they
said in a debate I'd lose points. Consider the points lost.

Anyway, yep, the sentence should have been as Larry stated in the above
reposted, reposted, reposted(?) post. All I can say is I am proud to have
given Larry the opportunity to be correct *and* intellectual, for
once...Big Evil Grin again. What a hoot, eh? Oh wait, upon review, could
it look to JJ like I am backpedaling? Hmmm.....nope, don't think so...

Now, back to cooking a fine, fine cook-ahead Thanksgiving dinner that
neither I nor anyone could deny being delightfully delicious!

Kim W5TIT

"Kim W5TIT" wrote:

ACK!!! Man, I am still stunned over this
one--I *must* be getting old. The grammar
department indeed reminded me of the old
"either/neither" "neither/nor" argument to be
used in deciding upon correct grammar! So,
yes, Larry was correct! Wow, what a hoot!
Larry being correct Big Evil Grin. (snip)


Ah, I see you've already figured it out. Ignore my last message.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes:

"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

Yawn! Ok, apparently you need some help
here. I *think* that what you meant to say
goes something like this: "It's a pretty near
given that neither I, nor many others in
this newsgroup, would find anything like the
death of someone else "hilarious."" (snip)


You must be getting old or something, Larry. You gave up much too
quickly.
It was surely a mistake when she first wrote it, but a real surprise
when
she actually wrote it again without catching the mistake.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


I meant to add that I'll check with our grammar department today...

Kim W5TIT



ACK!!! Man, I am still stunned over this one--I *must* be getting old. The
grammar department indeed reminded me of the old "either/neither"
"neither/nor" argument to be used in deciding upon correct grammar! So,
yes, Larry was correct! Wow, what a hoot! Larry being correct . However,
it was stated that, in a casual conversation, inference is
98% of the communication. Deductive reasoning would lend itself to knowing
what was intended to be said (sorry, Jim). I did remind them that I do not
consider this venue as much "casual" as I do a debate environment. So, they
said in a debate I'd lose points. Consider the points lost.

Anyway, yep, the sentence should have been as Larry stated in the above
reposted, reposted, reposted(?) post. All I can say is I am proud to have
given Larry the opportunity to be correct *and* intellectual, for
once... again. What a hoot, eh? Oh wait, upon review, could
it look to JJ like I am backpedaling? Hmmm.....nope, don't think so...

Now, back to cooking a fine, fine cook-ahead Thanksgiving dinner that
neither I nor anyone could deny being delightfully delicious!

Kim W5TIT

Well, how about THAT? Kim, in her own way, actually admitting that she
was wrong about something! Gee, if only this would become a trend…

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article .net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

You must be getting old or something, Larry. You gave up much too quickly.
It was surely a mistake when she first wrote it, but a real surprise when
she actually wrote it again without catching the mistake.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Dwight:

Yes, she did make a mistake, but I recognized it as such, and instead of
beating up on her, I made an attempt to help her out. I now find it necessary
to go a step farther, and say that since she did make a simple (and common)
grammatical error, that I apologize to Kim for the inference that she would
have found the death of your brother to be "hilarious." Of course, had she
not used that term in the first place, the confusion never would have
occurred. Perhaps she will be more careful in the future.

73 de Larry, K3LT