Casebook Examiner No. 4 (October 2010)

[lynn cates]

prepositions 'n' more

Hello Caz. In that case, my bowler's off to you.

What you said about prepositions was offered to me by a student 20 years ago when I chastised her for splitting infinitive verbs--"that's a holdover from Latin."

My take is that prepositions must take objects, else there is no prepositional phrase. But if one terminates the sentence with a preposition, where is the object to be placed?

Thus I recall the old rule:

"Prepositions should never be used to end sentences with." (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[mariab]

Protohistorian wrote:
I will say this however, language is a living thing. Change is inevitable. While our versions of English differ, they are not yet mutually unintelligible.
Completely agree: Language is a naturally, “organically“ evolving entity, and as such it cannot be controlled. And, Lynn, one cannot speak of “being bilingual“ between British English and American English.

[Tom_Wescott]

David Gates is a fine writer and Don Souden is a fine Editor and chief. What's all the talk about typos every time an issue comes out? Man alive.

Phil Carter,

I hear what you're saying about Jabez's Mitre Square faux pas, but keep in mind that he was writing that from hearsay, only having been out of prison weeks at the time of writing. But his notes and conversations regarding the Whitechapel murders occurred prior to his going to prison (which I believe was 1895). So you really can't judge the one from the other. But of course you're correct in that his second and third-hand information must be taken with caution. I would think that is true with any source.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

typos

Hello Tom. No typos to be found and no discussion of them (as far as I know). Caz won't permit them.

I was sharing a light hearted moment with Don about degrees of uniquesness. He apologised--in Latin no less.

Seriously, this is all a backhanded compliment to both Don and Caz. Their writing standards are very high, and that's grist for my mill.

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

Hello Caz. In that case, my bowler's off to you.

What you said about prepositions was offered to me by a student 20 years ago when I chastised her for splitting infinitive verbs--"that's a holdover from Latin."

Hi Lynn,

Bright student you had there. In Latin, of course, an infinitive is a single word so splitting it would not have applied in Rome anyway. It's not a rule as such these days, more a matter of style. If it sounds horrible to boldly split an infinitive, then avoid doing so. But there are occasions where splitting is quite fitting.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I was sharing a light hearted moment with Don about degrees of uniquesness. He apologised--in Latin no less.

By the way, Lynn, Don apologised because that's just the kind of guy he is. As I explained there was no need in this instance, since 'quite' was not used in a 'degree' sense. It was used in the 'undoubtedly' or 'quite surely' sense.

As I'm quite sure you can see from reading the complete sentence.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

to boldly go . . .

Hello Caz.

"In Latin, of course, an infinitive is a single word so splitting it would not have applied in Rome anyway."

Precisely. And that is why we must not separate them. What Cicero hath joined together let no man put asunder.

Seriously, in my dottage I have begun to neglect the rule--to my horror!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

tribute

Hello (again) Caz. I think Don apologised because he, too, has a great sense of humour.

In all seriousness, if degrees of uniqueness were the worst transgression of all written boo boos, what a tribute that would be! Hence, when I read posts and see (for example) apostrophes with a certain possessive pronoun, "it's," I cringe and, like Graham Chapman, avert my eyes.

That I even mentioned "quite unique" is a tribute to Don (and you)--REALLY!

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

well done

Hello Dave. I forgot to praise your Examiner article. That may be because I was fortunate enough to have read an early copy.

This kind of research is long overdue.

Cheers.
LC

[protohistorian]

You will love act two

I have mapped crimes listed on the old bailey online, I need more online sources or a london cohort to proceed. The results are surprising, even for me. Dave

[Natalie Severn]

Joking aside, I was really impressed by this publication particularly the content but also the sheer professionalism of the publication ....and by the way I think Caz did a brilliant job! Mind this doesnt surprise me much because of all the contributors over the years, Caz surpasses many of us when it comes to being able to liven up a phrase!But being a talented writer doesnt always mean someone will be equally talented as an editor---as is the case here!

[Natalie Severn]

I have mapped crimes listed on the old bailey online, I need more online sources or a london cohort to proceed. The results are surprising, even for me. Dave

Chris might help Dave----I don"t think I have the time at the moment, Good Luck though,it sounds fascinating.AP Wolf did a fair bit in this regard before he "left"![and they were some amazing cases he dug up too!]
Norma

[Supe]

All our editors--Jen, Caz, even Don--do a splendid job and back each other up throughout the editing process. That said, prolonging this discussion would seem a disservice to our contributors. I am assuredly biased, but I think the latest issue contains a lot of interesting articles, reviews and other features and they, rather than editing nuances, ought to be fodder for discussion.

Don.

[protohistorian]

That D.M. Gates seems like one fart smella......ummmm....stoopid dyslexia, smart fella. Dave

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Don,indeed ofcourse yourself and Jenny---and all your contributors did a really splendid job! No question.
I just knew from a discussion with Caz at the WS mtg that she worked extremely hard on the issue and put many, many hours into it, so it seemed only fair to redress the balance a bit here and say something ---aside from the fun quips---just how great the final product was and how brilliantly she---and all of you---had done----!