>from whence

File: tmp_8558-cringe-624354483.gif (2MB, 380x285px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 380x285px

>for lack of a better word

File: 1463724007306.png (122KB, 281x314px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 281x314px

>>8303864

And but so

File: 1453907658013.jpg (97KB, 720x516px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 720x516px

>peoples

File: 1463257995749.png (87KB, 297x333px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 297x333px

>>8303864
>that that

>Quoth.

>>8304013

This bothered me a lot in Arlas Shrugged.

File: 1442184457384.jpg (88KB, 757x820px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 757x820px

>to-morrow

File: cheryl_cole.gif (2MB, 408x215px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 408x215px

>but of course

>>8304013
Fuuuuuug, I hate this too, but I can't find another way to put "that that" in better words.

How would you write "I want you to know that that's the truth"?

Could you simply write "I want you to know it's the truth"? Or what about "I want you to know that's the truth"?

What works best in your opinion?

English is fucking disgustan

Good for small talk and internet chat rooms, nothing else

Using 'most' for 'almost'.
Not using adverbs at all.

>hither and tither

>>8304009
>>8304013
>>8304015
>>8304043
All fine.

>>8304283
> Tither
It's 'thither'.

'Hither', 'thither', 'whence', and 'whither' are fine words and people should use them more.

>>8304291
It's perfectly fine, but Virgina Woolf uses the expression a lot and since I don't run into it anywhere else it can get somewhat grating.

>>8304291
'From whence', rather than just whence, is degenerate though

File: 1468791999911.jpg (79KB, 491x262px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 491x262px

>hitherto
>now ..., now ...,

>>8304364
Now... Now...
Is a Latin device copied into English.

>>8304399
I'm just jealous because I don't have the confidence to use it myself

>>8304404
> Confidence in writing
Just write it, mang.

He was a writer: now scared, now rampant.

>>8303992
no one uses this. source

>cannot
ishygddt

>unbeknownst

>countenance


For fucks sake Poe, how many times can you use that word?

>>8304729
>raven
What is raven?
We just don't know

>>8304743

Ohhhh so spooky le raven le never leaves! And says nevermore a ton! Wow it rhymes with lenore!! Bravo Edgar

>>8304266
As long as readers bear in mind that that "that" that appears first serves a different purpose than that "that" that comes second they should have no trouble understanding.

File: fam.png (79KB, 167x202px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 167x202px

>>8304030
What, are you reading comics from the 1910s? It's just how they wrote that word about 100 years ago. you dont see it anymore

>>8304848
>pic related

>>8304277
>t. Esperanto speaker

>>8304848
hahahahahahahahaha

>>8304279
>Using 'most' for 'almost'.
Never once seen this.

>>8304932
It's like that in Huck finn

>>8304876
>What, are you reading comics from the 1910s?

I read The Big Sleep for you and that shit drove me up the fucking wall, he kept using the word(s?) over and over and over again too

>>8304932
You will. Especially from Americans.

>in and of itself

> overuse/misuse of 'per se'

>using an inflexed creole
>like "English"

>Alas,...

File: tmp_13723-Captain-Picard-Facepalm1877126987.jpg (15KB, 500x324px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 500x324px

>shewn

>the trash heap of history

>chapter ends with the character falling unconscious

>>8303864
>you came
>>>/r9k/

'...' instead of "..."

"..." said the character instead of "..." the character said.

>>8305704
in your muslim mummy

>aforementioned

>>8303864
I can no longer say "I'm coming", or "He's coming", or anything of that sort ever again without taking myself seriously anymore.

Even when I'm speaking to another person, I hesitate when I have to tell someone that "I'm coming" or that "My friend came".

FUCK YOU, SEX SLANG. STOP DEGENERATING THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. REEEEEEEEEEE.

>>8305717
The first one is preferred in British English. There's nothing wrong with the second.

>>8305837
Grow up.

>>8305747
>>8305085
>>8304709
>>8304718
Nothing wrong with these.

I wonder how many people in this thread understand that the issue with 'from whence' is that it's tautological, and not that it's uncommon in contemporary usage.

>>8305871
And whence also sounds like the word wince. so cringe

>>8305871
It's a meme, Nigel. You wouldn't understand.

>>8305889
Where are you from that that's the case?

>"Words". Instead of "Words."

yes, I know it is a birtbong vs amerifat thing

>>8304932
most everything

>>8305936
Which is which? I always include the full stop in my quotation marks, but only because that's how it works in German and nobody has thus far told me it's wrong.

>>8305965
Punctuation goes inside the quotation marks in America and outside in England. I don't know if that holds when quoting an entire sentence.

File: disgusted-cat.jpg (53KB, 650x487px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 650x487px

>>8304848
>different purpose than

>>8305982
Sorry, I should have said periods and commas, not "punctuation." Other punctuation doesn't always follow this rule.

>>8305936
As a bona fide bong, I find that I have been so completely and utterly subject to these particular American quirks, that I cannot use punctuation outside of quotes or single quote marks for speech without wanting to tear my eyes out.

>>8305934
Central florida

>>8305982
Just do it outside, it's a useful habit for academic writing.

>>8305994
innit m8 lol dont be jelly. I saw a thing that said americans have the original english pronounciation, but some noble dorks around the 1800s made the british accents as we hear now

>>8306000
>it's a useful for habit for masturbation

>>8306010
Doing that outside will probably get you in trouble.

>>8306000
Depends entirely on the academic area. For example, legal scholarship is written with American rules.

You should perfectly follow the grammar rules of your area in all writing that is not "literary."

>>8306000
In what field? I had to write papers for literature, psychology, history, and anthropology and all used American conventions.

>>8306017
What are the 'rules' for the area regarding using semen to write on your mother's face, 'your mum is a slut' or words to that effect?

>>8306035
The general rule for that is "Do not do it." Of course, like all good rules, there are exceptions.

Grammar quiz:

How do you make "McDonald's" possessive?

>>8306002
More likely is that pronunciation was more nasal (which admittedly can seem like the main characteristic of american accents now)

>>8306044
It's already possessive :^)

>>8304284
No, "but of course" is dumb, just say, "of course". "From whence" is also terrible since it is redundant, since "whence" means "from where".

>>8306049
Incorrect. No gold star for you, anon. Try a little harder next time.

>>8306044
McDonald'z

>>8306054
McDonald's is already possessive. Not in the way you were asking though. Hence the smug emoticon.

>>8306061
No, it's not.

>>8306064
Are you pretending to be retarded?

From whence shall we expect the approach of danger?
Shall some trans-Atlantic military giant step the earth and crush us at a blow?
Never.
All the armies of Europe and Asia could not by force take a drink from the Ohio River
or make a track on the Blue Ridge in the trial of a thousand years.
No, if destruction be our lot
we must ourselves be its author and finisher.
As a nation of free men we will live forever or die by suicide.

THERE'LL BE NO MORE COUNTING THE CARS ON THE GARDEN STATE PARKWAY

>>8306069
It is a name. It isn't possessive. Just because it has a "'s" doesn't make it possessive. You sure are bad at this quiz.

>>8306074
10/10 came here to post this

>>8304013
O, that that earth which kept the world in awe. Should patch a wall t' expel the winter's flaw!

>>8306101
Can't hear those words without hearing that album

>>8306053
Never said 'from whence' was fine.

But 'but of course' has added sense of disjunction from the preceding clause. It's fine.

>>8306044
Possessive of 'McDonald's' is 'McDonald's'.

>>8306084
What is the apostrophe-s for then?
McDonald's Hamburgers, you retard

>>8304015

almost threw siddhartha out of the window cos of this shit

>>8306084
I think he was joking about McDonald's being pretty known throughout the world senpai

shall we expect the approach of danger

Ta forever

>>8306522
It's just part of the name. You're awfully slow.

>>8306494
Nope. Nice try though.

>>8306635
This just proves that people were dumber back then

File: Screen Shot 2016-07-22 at 01.51.27.png (34KB, 1236x172px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 1236x172px

>>8306654
Stop being a contrarian teenager.

From their website.

>>8306654
Mc'Donald's's?

>>8304848
9/10 desu

>>8306677
Yis like yer mcdonald'ses don't yis ya cunts yis

>>8306670
They are wrong too. You think McDonald's hired a grammarian to write their website?
>>8306677
Nope.

The correct answer is that you can't make it possessive. You have to restructure your sentences to avoid the issue.

>>8306663
Well the gap has narrowed between whence and from whence so if you're arguing that from whence is an illegitimate grammatical construct it would follow that we are actually getting dumber over time.

>>8306731
>it's a rule because I say it is

>>8306741
The correct whence slope changed more drastically, but whence the useage of the word whence faded over time and thus a smaller sample size into the future, thence the singularity approaches, hence a smarter future than past.

[Spoiler]I barely glanced at it before my original post and just saw the filename as "from whence is legitimate", so presumed the red was from whence, hehe whoops[/spoiler]

>>8306670
Lick Strunk's nuts:

Form the possessive singular of nouns with 's.
Follow this rule whatever the final consonant.
Thus write,

Charles's friend
Burns's poems
the witch's malice

This is the usage of the United States Government Printing Office and of the
Oxford University Press.

>>8306801
So you would get rid of the apostrophe in the non-possessive Mc'Donald's? That apostrophe is a key part in their name as registered for business, so spelling it McDonalds's would be spelling a non-existing entity...

>>8306849
I don't see what this has to do with my post, we weren't talking about that apostrophe.

>>8304013
This is perfectly correct and understandable. You're autistic

>>8306857
ah, my bad. Didnt realize that you were the same anon that said you would have to reword the sentence rather than try to make M'cDonald's possessive.

>>8306936
He not. That anon is me and it was my last post in this thread. His post made no sense in the context of the discussion.

>>8305097
stopped reading Proust because of this shit

>>8306044
"of McDonald's"

>spake

>>8306044
de McDonald's

>>8304015
Kvothe.

>>8306731
>the answer is no answer
Its a shitty rule desu senpai

File: qq.jpg (31KB, 384x253px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 384x253px

>inconceivably
>beyond description
>other such copouts used by people with poor imaginations and even poorer writing ability

File: 1445040653604.jpg (45KB, 291x280px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 291x280px

>>8305982
>and outside in England

Barbarians.

>>8307990
"and outside in England" sounds like something one would randomly insert into a sentence to deliberately confuse the person reading it and outside in England

Im confused, wouldnt it depend on the meaning?
Suddenly, the man calmly said "hello"!
Expectedly, the man shouted "hello!".

>saying 'of which' instead of just 'which'

my english teacher does this all the time, slappin' a fancy ol' of in front of her which-es to sound clever its fucking infuriating fuck

>>8304973
I hate good philosophy the post.

>>8308026
But it doesn't mean the same thing...

>>8308026
if bait pls ignore
these do not mean the same thing:
try substituting "which" (in relative clauses at least) with the noun phase and see if it makes sense. it can be modified by any proposition.

eg.

"The man opened the door, which was locked" not "The man opened the door, of which was locked"
because "the door was locked" not "the door of which was locked"

"The door, the colour of which was brown, was open" not "The door, the colour which was brown, was open"
because "The colour of the door was brown" not "the colour the door was brown"

note that
"The man, who I knew, was black" has a slightly different meaning from
"The man who I knew was black"
as the former relative clause adds information, but the latter identifies the man. the same rules apply though.

this works for all propositions, and "who" or "that" instead of "which". "whose" is the possessive, which can often substitute "of which"


"The door, behind which I was hiding, was red"
"I was hiding behind the door, which was red"
"I was hiding behind the door which was red"
"The door, which was red, I was hiding behind"
"Behind the door, whose colour was red, I was hiding"
"Behind the door, of which the colour red, I was hiding"
"Behind the door, the paint, which was fading and crumbled, was the colour of my mothers pearls, which she had brought from the shop, the owner of which I had met, was white, was I, of who this sentence, of which the length is excessive, discusses, hiding."

>>8308261
correction
"Behind the door, the paint, which was fading and crumbled, was the colour of my mothers pearls, which she had brought from the shop, the owner of which I had met, OF WHICH was white, was I, of who this sentence, of which the length is excessive, discusses, hiding."

File: 1464834922602.png (154KB, 430x540px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 430x540px

>a real page turner

>>8308002
Lol holy shit. No, it's not that at all. You can't double up on punctuation.

>he smiled thinly
>he said sardonically
>he said calmly
>he raised an eyebrow

"Fromwhencefrotoalongweighedgatheringwitsdasapfelstrudellkrieg"

>>8308261
>"The man, who I knew, was black"
is ungrammatical. Did you perhaps mean
>"The man, whom I knew, was black"?

>"The man who I knew was black"
is fine though.

File: 1467870850054.jpg (81KB, 680x458px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 680x458px

>>8304266
you switch to a latin language you fucking scum

File: 1460213296869.png (274KB, 739x739px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 739x739px

>>8307219
you are reading a text with latin words without equivalencies in your barbaric commercial language, of course proust is gonna sound weird