Anonymous
08/16/2021 04:47
Subject: Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Yeah, linking verbs can go, too. Zero copula FTW!
Anonymous
08/15/2021 18:31
Subject: Re:Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not absolutely necessary to have articles in English. It’s just that I language has them and so they have meeting and we use them. They’re useful for adding a little bit more clarity to a sentence or a situation.
You know what else we have an English that we don’t have absolutely need? Synonyms. We have the word drinkable which means the exact same thing as potable. In German they just have one word: trinkbar. In French they just have one word: potable. But in English we have both.
The amazing thing about English is the "synonyms"!! They add so much nuance and complexity. So for the examples you used. I would say that the red wine I had at dinner was "perfectly drinkable." That means it was a decent wine but nothing special. I woudn't use "potable" in that case. I would reserve that for water that wasn't going to give me diarrhea.
Right -- we happen to have synonyms in English so we use them, and it adds a little element of style. But it isn't necessary. Other languages would translate them exactly the same.
So the point of all communication is just the facts. That's all that's "necessary." Style and nuance aren't necessary. If that's what you are saying I think that's very sad.
Articles also add nuance and style. They aren’t necessary for getting your basic point across, though.
Water no drink! Bad!
The water is not drinkable.
This water (from this faucet) is not potable.
All convey the same basic message but with different nuances.
Anonymous
08/13/2021 15:11
Subject: Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
I am [the] Liquor.
Anonymous
08/13/2021 15:06
Subject: Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
OP here. I rather enjoy synonyms in English. They are helpful in writing more elegantly and avoiding the repetition of the same exact word and the same sound in texts.
I do think that many languages have synonyms.
I do think that many languages have synonyms.
Anonymous
08/13/2021 14:57
Subject: Re:Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not absolutely necessary to have articles in English. It’s just that I language has them and so they have meeting and we use them. They’re useful for adding a little bit more clarity to a sentence or a situation.
You know what else we have an English that we don’t have absolutely need? Synonyms. We have the word drinkable which means the exact same thing as potable. In German they just have one word: trinkbar. In French they just have one word: potable. But in English we have both.
The amazing thing about English is the "synonyms"!! They add so much nuance and complexity. So for the examples you used. I would say that the red wine I had at dinner was "perfectly drinkable." That means it was a decent wine but nothing special. I woudn't use "potable" in that case. I would reserve that for water that wasn't going to give me diarrhea.
Right -- we happen to have synonyms in English so we use them, and it adds a little element of style. But it isn't necessary. Other languages would translate them exactly the same.
So the point of all communication is just the facts. That's all that's "necessary." Style and nuance aren't necessary. If that's what you are saying I think that's very sad.
Anonymous
08/13/2021 14:55
Subject: Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A bison
And. if you just said: bison.
You would know exactly what you mean, and everyone would know it too.
No, stupid. The PP's point, which you missed because your English isn't very good, is that "bison" can be either singular or plural. "A bison" means one bison. Just saying "bison" can mean any number of bison; removing the article removes the precision of indicating a singular item only here.
Sadly, the fact that you think I missed the point is more a reflection of your intellect than mine.
No OP. You missed the point. "Bison" could mean one or multiple of the same shaggy cows. "Bison" is both the singular or plural version of the noun. It is very different to say A Bison vs Bison. If you just yelled BISON I wouldn't know if it was one or a whole stampede.
OMG! Give it up. Nobody missed that meaning!
But what I'm saying directly contradicts the bolded statement.
Anonymous
08/13/2021 14:44
Subject: Re:Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It’s not absolutely necessary to have articles in English. It’s just that I language has them and so they have meeting and we use them. They’re useful for adding a little bit more clarity to a sentence or a situation.
You know what else we have an English that we don’t have absolutely need? Synonyms. We have the word drinkable which means the exact same thing as potable. In German they just have one word: trinkbar. In French they just have one word: potable. But in English we have both.
The amazing thing about English is the "synonyms"!! They add so much nuance and complexity. So for the examples you used. I would say that the red wine I had at dinner was "perfectly drinkable." That means it was a decent wine but nothing special. I woudn't use "potable" in that case. I would reserve that for water that wasn't going to give me diarrhea.
Right -- we happen to have synonyms in English so we use them, and it adds a little element of style. But it isn't necessary. Other languages would translate them exactly the same.
Anonymous
08/13/2021 14:39
Subject: Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A bison
And if you just said: bison.
You would know exactly what you mean, and everyone would know it too.
No, stupid. The PP's point, which you missed because your English isn't very good, is that "bison" can be either singular or plural. "A bison" means one bison. Just saying "bison" can mean any number of bison; removing the article removes the precision of indicating a singular item only here.
Sadly, the fact that you think I missed the point is more a reflection of your intellect than mine.
No OP. You missed the point. "Bison" could mean one or multiple of the same shaggy cows. "Bison" is both the singular or plural version of the noun. It is very different to say A Bison vs Bison. If you just yelled BISON I wouldn't know if it was one or a whole stampede.
OMG! Give it up. Nobody missed that meaning!
Anonymous
08/13/2021 14:30
Subject: Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:A bison
And if you just said: bison.
You would know exactly what you mean, and everyone would know it too.
No, stupid. The PP's point, which you missed because your English isn't very good, is that "bison" can be either singular or plural. "A bison" means one bison. Just saying "bison" can mean any number of bison; removing the article removes the precision of indicating a singular item only here.
Sadly, the fact that you think I missed the point is more a reflection of your intellect than mine.
No OP. You missed the point. "Bison" could mean one or multiple of the same shaggy cows. "Bison" is both the singular or plural version of the noun. It is very different to say A Bison vs Bison. If you just yelled BISON I wouldn't know if it was one or a whole stampede.
Anonymous
08/13/2021 13:20
Subject: Re:Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:I have actually been impressed by the critical reasoning skills, logic, and command of the English language of some of the people on this thread. It does give me hope that there are still some sparks of true intellect out there.
(Obviously, I am excepting the people whose thinking wasn't elevated enough to grasp what was going on.)
I suspect some of people offering compelling arguments are pretty fantastic lawyers.
I have enjoyed reading this thread. Go, OP.
Oops! Posted incorrectly. Thank you!
Anonymous
08/13/2021 13:19
Subject: Re:Articles are completely useless in the English language, grammar police where are you to weigh in?
Anonymous wrote:I have actually been impressed by the critical reasoning skills, logic, and command of the English language of some of the people on this thread. It does give me hope that there are still some sparks of true intellect out there.
(Obviously, I am excepting the people whose thinking wasn't elevated enough to grasp what was going on.)
I suspect some of people offering compelling arguments are pretty fantastic lawyers.
I have enjoyed reading this thread. Go, OP.
Thank you so much! Have a nice weekend.