Cheerio

GT

I confess that I nitpick sometimes, but I try to make it about substantive issues (in the piece on anosognosia I commented on the other day, I pointed out that the pons asinorum was usually a reference to Euclid's fifth PROPOSITION or POSTULATE, not Euclid's fifth "theorem" as the writer had claimed… y'see?).

And let's not even start talking about 'M'rkin orthography – the inability to properly render words like 'colour'. And "different THAN"? Gah.

But seriously: language is about the transmission of ideas – it is only the soi-disant elite who invented stupid grammatical rules (esp. the split infinitive) and – to a lesser extent – 'proper' orthography. And that was really only in order to create an artificial "barrier to entry" ito the market for ideas: if your material was not properly rendered, you were a dunce. (Shakespeare would have had a hard time in England after the mid-1700s – he had a tendency to neologise, and spelt his name at least 7 different ways).

If you want to see how badly language works when you have some self-appointed arbiters of rightness (who then proceed to ignore the big flaws), look no further than French and German (and non-English european language, actually). You spend more time (either consciously or otherwise) conjuugating and getting gender and number agreement on adjectives, than you do actually putting together a thought. Madness.

In time, we will dispense complete with stupid verb conjugation (it will become "I have, you have, he/she/it have", "I be, you be, he/she/it be") and move even closer to perfection in the structure of our language – and then there will be a Websterian overhaul of orthography (which already takes place in informal communications, innit).

English's strength is that it is NOT overseen by some bunch of political hacks like the Academie Francaise: English evolved organically (quasi-anarchically) and continues to do so – which is why it is quite simply the best language for expression of IDEAS on the planet. Once we slough off conjugation and return to 'laissez faire' orthography, our domination of the world's languages will be complete.

Yors sinseerlee

Jefree

“Especially since every court ruling in America at every level of the State-monopolized dispute resolution system have concluded that the police – and other government entities – are under no obligation to protect you or I.”

"Every court ruling" is singular, so the word "has," rather than the word "have," should have been used.

Sorry for the nitpicking, Alex.

"Especially since every court ruling in America at every level of the State-monopolized dispute resolution system have concluded that the police – and other government entities – are under no obligation to protect you or I."

The correct usage is "to protect you or me."

Alex, your grammar needs work. Perhaps a proofreader would have helped. You have a lot of good things to say, and I do agree with you. However, as you can see for yourself, grammatical errors in an otherwise great article ultimately become the focus of attention, rather than the ideas within that article. That is a real shame.

Excellent article. I just want to mention something grammatical. In the second paragraph from the end – "I could care less what…." It should be, "I COULDN'T care less what…." Saying that you could care less implies that you have some cares about the subject – I'm sure that you don't care what the Second Amendment says. Thanks for your time.

Daniel Wulsch