home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.fan.dan-quayle
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!wrldlnk!usenet
- From: "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com>
- Subject: Re: Periods in Quotes (was Re: Have some respect)
- In-Reply-To: <18NOV199212274610@cl2.cl.uh.edu>
- Message-ID: <2931209902.0.p00168@psilink.com>
- Sender: usenet@worldlink.com
- Nntp-Posting-Host: 127.0.0.1
- Organization: Semper Excelsior
- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:13:46 GMT
- X-Mailer: PSILink (3.2)
- Lines: 71
-
- >DATE: 18 Nov 1992 12:27 CST
- >FROM: Unbeliever <byers@cl2.cl.uh.edu>
- >
- >In article <BxvBEH.439@mail.boi.hp.com> rdetweil@boi.hp.com (Richard Detweiler) writes:
- >>AND NOW....
- >>For something completely different:
- >
- >>In article <1992Nov17.130605.2568@gvl.unisys.com> train@gvls2.gvl.unisys.com (Herbert Rutledge) writes:
- >>>
- >>> [Lots of discussion about NPR deleted]
- >>>
- >>> A small grammatical flame. The characters .". I assume to be punctuation
- >>> marks rather than UNIX C shell metacharacters. If so, please be advised
- >>> that periods never appear outside of double quotation marks.
- >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- >
- >>This is one rule of grammar I have never understood. I didn't understand
- >>it in grade school and I still don't get it. I have always gone out
- >>of my way to make sure I break this rule. To me it makes perfect sense
- >>that the punctuation belongs to the sentence not the quotation - why
- >>put it in there where it doesn't belong? The grammar police have a slow
- >>day at the office or what?
- >
- >FINALLY, someone who agrees with me! Of COURSE the punctuation belongs to the
- >SENTENCE, rather than to the quote.
- >
- >Consider the sentence pair:
- >
- >She said, "What's that?"
- >She said, "What's that"?
- >
- >The first sentence is a STATEMENT about what she said.
- >The second sentence is a QUESTION asking if I heard her right.
- >
- >In my case, I >ALWAYS< put the quote inside the quote marks, and then end my
- >sentence with the punctuation of my choosing. Thus:
- >
- >I said, "This is how punctuation SHOULD be used.".
- >I asked, "Doesn't this make sense?".
- >Did you say, "I agree with you."?
- >
- > PEOPLE AGAINST BLINDLY MAIMING
- > LITERAL QUOTATIONS
- > WITH EXTRANEOUS PUNCTUATION
- > UNITE!!!
- >
- >ObDanQuayleReference: DAN QUAYLE would fully support the maiming of innocent
- > quotations. After all, maiming one of HIS quotes
- > could only improve it...
- >
- > Be True...
- > -=*> Unbeliever <*=-
- >
- >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- >|* * * * * * Preferred Address: byers@cl.uh.edu * * * * * *|
- >| * * * * * Emergency Backup Address: reed@unkaphaed.gbdata.com * * * * * |
- >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- >Quote of the Day:
- > Appearances are not everything; it just looks like they are.
-
- "Eureka!"! I've been after this for about 40 years. Of course. Do
- both. And of course the literal quote is impossible without both
- punctuations.
-
-
- --
- jim tims
- "And if you're a miner, when you're too tired and old and sick and stupid
- to do your job properly, you have to go, whereas just the opposite applies
- with the judges." Beyond the Fringe
-
-