Text 9359, 81 rader
Skriven 2006-10-13 23:04:16 av Wesley Struebing
Ärende: Re: Ron Howard's Changeling project falls through?
==========================================================
From: Wesley Struebing <strueb@carpedementem.org>

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 17:56:51 GMT, Amy Guskin <aisling@fjordstone.com>
wrote:

>>> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:47:08 -0400, kruegerb76@hotmail.com wrote
>(in article <1160761628.343914.295260@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>):
>
>> 
>> Amy Guskin wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 10:54:09 -0400, Rob Perkins wrote
>>>> I challenge you to a grammar-off.
>>>> 
>>>> It can be either "from those to WHOM the NBS pays frequent visits," or
>>>> it can be "from those WHOM the the NBS frequently visits," but it cannot
>>>> be "from those who the NBS frequently visits," because that third one
>>>> conflates NBS and the object of the visit; "who" is a subject pronoun.
>>>> "Whom" belongs to the direct objects or prepositional objects.
>>>> 
>>>> The fact that we let it slide in sentences like "Who do you serve? Who
>>>> do you trust?" is out of acknowledgement of common speech patterns. Sort
>>>> of like never noticing any longer that "John went out with Mary and I"
>>>> is cringe-worthy.
>>>> 
>>>> Dontcha think? Prove me wrong! <<
>>> 
>>> Eh, I'm not that wedded to whether it's who or whom, so I'm happy to let
you
>>> have this one.  But as I said in my reply to Barbara, in almost every case,
>>> it's accepted that "who" may be used in place of "whom" (although not the
>>> reverse).  Probably that's grown out of usage, though, so you may be
>>> strictly, by-the-(older)-book correct.
>> 
>> Ah, but that's the rub when it comes to this stuff: if language
>> _didn't_  grow, it would be useless, wouldn't it?
>> 
>> I'm pretty sure Rob is correct if you want to get technical.  That's
>> what I thought you did with your nitpicking, though.  LOL
>> 
>> Here's another question for you language lot:
>> 
>> eons ago when the dinosaurs roamed the earth and I was a child, the
>> word "an" instead of "a" would be used in front of certain "h-" words.
>> 
>> Like was was trained to say:
>> 
>> "an honorable decision"
>> "an hyperbola is what we're graphing now"
>> "an historical note"
>> 
>> I am seeing in common usage now, the use of "a" instead of "an".
>> 
>> Does that make me wrong now?  LOL
>> 
>> Should it be "an historical note" or "a historical note"?  Or will
>> either do, like the who and whom thing? <<
>
>This is an easy one.  If the "h" is voiced, never use "an."  So, "a 
>historical," "a hyperbola," and "a helium-filled balloon is good for making 
>silly voices."  If the "h" is silent, use "an."  So, "an hour," "an honorable 
>decision," etc.  It was always that way, but there has been an inclination 
>toward using the more pretentious-sounding "an" in front of voiced "h"s.
>
Of course, unless I'm using it by itself (or the noun form) I tend to
"drop" the h from words like historical.  So, it IS correct for me to
say "an historical novel" - I drop the "h" and then "an" becomes the
proper term.  As a noun, though, I do say "a history", since I don't
drop the "h"...

Go figure.

--

Wes Struebing

I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America,
and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples,
promising liberty and justice for all.

--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
 * Origin: *READ ONLY* rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated (3:640/1010)