New words

I ploughed through all of it and understood maybe 2%. The four page
interlude called "Crab Canon" is a work of inspired genius however, and was
worth the price of the book.

Manning

 

Andy Wegg wrote

Nick was an 'eading aircraftman though wannee?

 

Champ wrote

I got 10" here doing bugger all if it is any use.

 

HooDooWitch wrote

ISTR being informed that the ffaq also contained links to sites that did
explain that sort of thing though.

 

ITYM "It's on the Internet, somewhere."

 

HooDooWitch wrote

No. I meant what I wrote.

 

and, more to the point, does anyone give a flying ****?

 

Search the FFAQ for "grammar". Nada (well, one article but actually
found "Cramer" from a fuzzy search).
Search for "spelling". Nada, nada. (Again fuzzy searches on "spell"
and "spells")

OK, you STR being informed that there's a link to a site which covers
this topic. What f*cking good's that?

There's lots of links in the FFAQ and the only people that would
possibly have read more than a smattering of those before posting
here, are the sort that actually read the *entire* toaster manual
before daring to risk a slice of bread in it.

 

No, I don't. What I'm arguing about is whether what you are calling
'rules' are really 'rules' at all, because, in most languages they've
never been codified, analysed, taught, etc *and* because they are so
open to being changed, broken, etc.

Somewhere up there, where this all started, you were lamenting the
braking of some labguage rule. I said it didn't matter cos language
is self-correcting. Let's get back to the point, shall we.

 

Exactly. Even though English is a growing and flexible language, at any
one time we have a reference/baseline that we know is the 'correct' use
of the language and we can deviate from that to our heart's content in
our own groups. Those who know grammatically correct English can still
communicate in local slang very effectively without corrupting the
language core. We all carry at least two versions of the language within
us.

[1] You could substitute Scotsman here, for me.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#16? FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19

 

ITYF that a "lawnmower", being an inanimate object used to mow lawns,
has no gender.

OTOH, a "lawn mower", being a person who mows lawns, will probably
have a gender. Of sorts.

 

**** off. I was a SeniorAircraftsman, I was. As was him.

Three blades on my prop, matey.

 

With a dodgy ponytail as well?

 

Salad Dodger wrote

Sergeant type rank?

Not enough to make me salute you.

 

HooDooWitch wrote

You could try etiquette or netiquette. Dunno if they would work though.

None at all in your case.

See there you go again, judging folks by your own low standards.

 

Nowhere near.

AC;LAC;SAC;JT;Cpl;ST;Sgt;FSgt;WO in the ranks.

Junior/Senior Technician are more trade related.

Ac when you start, LAC when you've finished basic, SAC when you've
demonstrated competence and stuff.

As an example, when I was an LAC, I wasn't allowed to use the
photocopier at Northwood whilst unsupervised. Seriously.

Quite.

 

No, you were correct previously.
All philosophy is mere mental masturbation. ;-)

 

Salad Dodger wrote

So you was an oik then?

LOL.

 

I was.

 

Sensible policies, etc.