Why Grammar Matters: A Place To Discuss Matters Of Grammar

[Browncoat]

There is apparently a criminal in my area who is wanted for "felony alluding" according to the local news.

[SoMuchTV]

1 hour ago, Browncoat said:

There is apparently a criminal in my area who is wanted for "felony alluding" according to the local news.

Wink wink, nudge nudge. 

[EtheltoTillie]

3 hours ago, SweetieDarling said:

Would "Vaccines cause adulthood" be better/ less confusing?

No because it wouldn't have the right rhythm/parallel structure for the desired effect.  I find it odd that people are not getting the understood words. 

[StatisticalOutlier]

12 hours ago, Milburn Stone said:

Example: "He is much more enthusiastic than I." The understood word at the end of the sentence is "am." It doesn't need to be said.

It does when I'm talking because it sounds pretentious to me to say "than I" so I always go the full "than I am."  Plus I'm not 100% solid on the "I" in that situation, but I definitely know it's not "than me am." 

Same with "It is I."  I think it's "It is I" but it sounds pretentious but there's no word to put on the end to confirm it.  So I just avoid it entirely.  😀

[Browncoat]

14 hours ago, Browncoat said:

There is apparently a criminal in my area who is wanted for "felony alluding" according to the local news.

Quoting myself because the newspaper article on the subject said the same thing!  Is there a definition of "alluding" that I'm missing?  Am I losing my mind?  What are they alluding to that's a felony?  Should I e-mail the newspaper reporter and ask what the hell?

 

[Yeah No]

11 hours ago, EtheltoTillie said:

No because it wouldn't have the right rhythm/parallel structure for the desired effect.  I find it odd that people are not getting the understood words. 

I'm getting the understood words. What I'm not getting is the logic. Vaccines don't cause adults. I don't think there's a direct cause and effect relationship between the two things. They may indirectly allow people to reach adulthood by preventing disease, but I don't see how they make adults happen directly. I understand the liberties being taken here and why but it still bugs me.

[EtheltoTillie]

24 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

I'm getting the understood words. What I'm not getting is the logic. Vaccines don't cause adults. I don't think there's a direct cause and effect relationship between the two things. They may indirectly allow people to reach adulthood by preventing disease, but I don't see how they make adults happen directly. I understand the liberties being taken here and why but it still bugs me.

  It's a humorous comment.  You are overthinking it. 

[Yeah No]

4 minutes ago, EtheltoTillie said:

  It's a humorous comment.  You are overthinking it. 

No I can appreciate it as a humorous comment and the logic can still bug me at the same time. The two aren't mutually exclusive, at least not with me, lol.

[fairffaxx]

1 hour ago, Browncoat said:

Is there a definition of "alluding" that I'm missing?  Am I losing my mind?  What are they alluding to that's a felony?

It's a felony to elude the cops.

[shapeshifter]

16 hours ago, Browncoat said:

There is apparently a criminal in my area who is wanted for "felony alluding" according to the local news.

Ooo. It might be a contest to see whether the criminal, the arresting officer, or the reporter can rack up the most counts of "felony alluding" here on the grammar thread. 😆

1 hour ago, Browncoat said:

Quoting myself because the newspaper article on the subject said the same thing!  Is there a definition of "alluding" that I'm missing?  Am I losing my mind?  What are they alluding to that's a felony?  Should I e-mail the newspaper reporter and ask what the hell?

I would. I'd probably begin with something like, “Although I am still amused by your piece…unintended…”

[Browncoat]

2 hours ago, fairffaxx said:

It's a felony to elude the cops.

Elude, yes.  Allude, perhaps not.

[Yeah No]

16 hours ago, Yeah No said:

No I can appreciate it as a humorous comment and the logic can still bug me at the same time. The two aren't mutually exclusive, at least not with me, lol.

I'm confused. Is there a reason to be "sad" about my comment above? It was made halfway in jest, although it is genuinely how my quirky mind works. Nothing sad about that from my POV. Unless it was meant to dis me....😕

[SVNBob]

18 hours ago, Yeah No said:

They may indirectly allow people to reach adulthood by preventing disease,

This is it.  And that's all there is to it. 

It's commentary about things like the (at least) two unvaccinated children in west Texas that died because of the measles outbreak... and the father of one of them that said that if he had another child, he wouldn't get them vaccinated despite what's happening now.

 

[Yeah No]

1 minute ago, SVNBob said:

This is it.  And that's all there is to it. 

It's commentary about things like the (at least) two unvaccinated children in west Texas that died because of the measles outbreak... and the father of one of them that said that if he had another child, he wouldn't get them vaccinated despite what's happening now.

Yes, you don't have to explain that to me. None of that is lost on me at all. I'm talking about the logic of the sentence as written. That is all. I get its intended meaning and I support that intent. I'm just picking on a logical error just as this thread exists to pick on grammatical errors. Again, that is all. Technically speaking vaccines don't cause adults. They cause bodies to produce antibodies to prevent disease. So technically, it's not using correct logic to put it that way. That's my only point, period, the end. Hair splitting? Perhaps. But a lot of people think picking apart grammar is hair splitting too.

Honestly, I didn't think picking on a logical error would be misunderstood in a thread about grammatical errors. 

[SVNBob]

14 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

Technically speaking vaccines don't cause adults. They cause bodies to produce antibodies to prevent disease.

That allow those bodies to live long enough to mature and grow into adults.

Hence, vaccines "cause" adults.

[Yeah No]

Just now, SVNBob said:

That allow those bodies to live long enough to mature and grow into adults.

Hence, vaccines "cause" adults.

That's a jump in logic that's about 3 steps ahead so it's still not a direct cause and effect relationship. It doesn't have to be a direct cause and effect relationship in its intended meaning but as written it's too much of a stretch to be a direct one like it implies. Logic was always one of my strong suits. If I ever tried to get away with that in my logic class I'd have gotten an earful about it from the professor!

[SVNBob]

11 minutes ago, Yeah No said:

That's a jump in logic that's about 3 steps ahead so it's still not a direct cause and effect relationship.

Of course not.  It's a JOKE!  Jokes do not have to be entirely logical.

[Yeah No]

1 minute ago, SVNBob said:

Of course not.  It's a JOKE!  Jokes do not have to be entirely logical.

No, they don't but they also don't have to be grammatically correct, although I'm sure no one would criticize me here if I picked one apart for its poor grammar.

Saying that vaccines cause adults would be like saying farming causes poop, LOL. Like you know, people eat the food and it comes out as poop. Yeah, it's late, I really should go back to bed....😉

[SVNBob]

1 hour ago, Yeah No said:

No, they don't but they also don't have to be grammatically correct, although I'm sure no one would criticize me here if I picked one apart for its poor grammar.

True.  But this one is grammatically correct.

 

1 hour ago, Yeah No said:

Saying that vaccines cause adults would be like saying farming causes poop, LOL. Like you know, people eat the food and it comes out as poop.

Yup.  Same kind of joke.  Same logical structure.  And also grammatically correct.

[shapeshifter]

41 minutes ago, SVNBob said:

True.  But this one is grammatically correct.

 

Yup.  Same kind of joke.  Same logical structure.  And also grammatically correct.

But semantically incorrect?

[SVNBob]

[Yeah No]

3 hours ago, SVNBob said:

True.  But this one is grammatically correct.

 

Yup.  Same kind of joke.  Same logical structure.  And also grammatically correct.

I never disputed that. So what is your point and why do you have to keep belaboring that with me? I've already agreed with that a few times already. I can't discuss a sentence's logic in a thread about grammar? Excuse me for being slightly OT. Geesh.

Oh no, I get it, I just have to be proven wrong, isn't that it? Thanks but no thanks. I have real life problems right now, I don't need this.

If you want a grammar pet peeve, here's one:

The phrase "I appreciate you". It's not strictly grammatically correct but somehow it's become a saying, a meme, an emoji, whatever, and Google AI is accepting it as "informally correct" even though several sources don't agree. And I don't either.

And BTW, I wasn't wrong about the logic of that sentence. There is no direct causal relationship between vaccines and adulthood. It just bothered me because it skipped over all the extra steps in getting there. I already acknowledged and accepted the intent of the sentence and the humor involved, so why bother me about my pet peeve? What's the big deal?

My pet peeve is my pet peeve and I'm entitled to it without being criticized for it, especially after I've already given a reasonable explanation for it. I can find a statement humorous and still find something a little irritating about it in other ways. So what? Is that so ridiculous? Not as far as I'm concerned. AFAIK there aren't any rules about that. If we disagree, fine but at least acknowledge that it's a difference of opinion instead of acting like I'm ridiculous for feeling the way I do about it.

3 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

But semantically incorrect?

Thank you. It could be.

Edited Sunday at 12:54 PM by Yeah No

[Absolom]

To me it's a Kenny Rogers time thing: know when to walk away and know when to run.  Some days a discussion is simply not profitable.  

I'm running now.

[Milburn Stone]

On 4/19/2025 at 1:48 AM, StatisticalOutlier said:

It does when I'm talking because it sounds pretentious to me to say "than I" so I always go the full "than I am."  Plus I'm not 100% solid on the "I" in that situation, but I definitely know it's not "than me am." 

Same with "It is I."  I think it's "It is I" but it sounds pretentious but there's no word to put on the end to confirm it.  So I just avoid it entirely.  😀

In informal, spoken English, I might even (in fact, undoubtedly would) say "he is more enthusiastic than me." Grammatically incorrect but colloquially correct, I guess would be the term. Yet if I were writing something intended to be taken seriously by educated people--who know the difference between good grammar and bad--I would use "I." And I wouldn't feel compelled to add the understood word "am," because the sentence would still be scrupulously grammatical without it.

P.S. There's an example of an understood word in the above paragraph. In the phrase "between good grammar and bad," I do not need to add the word "grammar" after the word "bad," because it is understood. 

Edited Sunday at 05:32 PM by Milburn Stone

[SoMuchTV]

On 4/11/2025 at 2:06 PM, SoMuchTV said:

I've been seeing this a few places recently:

"Vaccines causes adults"

While I agree with the sentiment, shouldn't it be "Vaccines cause adults"?  Is there some way I'm not parsing it that would make it make grammatical sense?

As the person who apparently started this whole kerfuffel, I hope it’s okay for me to pop in and say, (in my opinion) disagreeing with someone’s opinion, and giving reasons for that disagreement, is not the same as telling someone they aren’t entitled to their opinion or that their opinion is “wrong”.

Vaccinate your horses, people!  Or we know what happens!

[Absolom]

Today I learned that the New York Times no longer employs copy editors.  The quality of publications has appeared to me to drop precipitately in the last 10 years.  One of the way to increase spelling and grammar skills used to be reading extensively.  I fear for our children and grandchildren that what they will be learning by reading will be sloppy thinking and writing.