• lemillionsocks@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I find people who actually study language are more tolerant toward different pronunciations and informal speech and colloquialisms and less likely to be grammar nazis.

    • SuiXi3D@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Probably because they understand that all language is made up and they all change constantly. There’s no hard and fast rules.

  • blindsight@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    Obligatory alt text:

    “Do you feel like the answer depends on whether you’re currently in the hole, versus when you refer to the events later after you get out? Assuming you get out.”

    XKCD should always include the alt text, imho. It’s often the better punchline (as in this case, imho.)

  • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    To me, if you partially fall into a hole, ie. foot falls into a small pothole, you’ve fallen in it but not down it.

    • MBM@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I’m walking around in a hole and stumble, I’ve also fallen in a hole (but not into/down)

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, although I think that’s parsed differently-- you’ve [fallen] [in a hole] not [fallen in] [a hole]

    • rbits@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah. I feel like fell down implies you travelled some not insignifcant distance while falling.

  • rhythmisaprancer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well this changes that Alice In Chains song for me 🕳️

    But this is something that makes English both frustrating and fascinating!

  • MadPlaid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Out of curiosity, shouldn’t there be a comma after the “or” in the third panel?

    • radix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Grammatically, no, because “or” is a coordinating conjunction (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so), and coordinating conjunctions are a way to join two independent clauses, like a semicolon. They are used after an independent clause and a comma, and they are followed by another coordinating conjunction.

      Here’s two independent clauses: I got scratched by a cat. I’m sad.

      Here’s a way to join them with a semicolon: I got scratched by a cat; I’m sad. The semicolon replaces the period.

      Here’s a way to join them with a coordinating conjunction: I got scratched by a cat, so I’m sad. The , so replaces the semicolon/period.

      Note that I got scratched by a cat so, I’m sad is incorrect, because to join two independent clauses, you’re supposed to put the comma first and then the conjunction, in that order. Colloquially, people will often omit the comma entirely, to reflect pronunciation I guess. But as far as I can tell, people don’t generally pronounce a pause between the coordinating conjunction and the following independent clause, so they don’t put a comma there either.

        • radix@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m so glad it didn’t come off as passive-aggressive or rude. Thank you for this message. I hope you have a truly wonderful day, my friend.