The perils of "search & replace" in documentation.

Wrong. I'm sure the kind folks in a.u.e can explain why. Or the unkind ones.

BW

Reply to
barbara
Loading thread data ...

"ehsjr" wrote

It tolls for thee, silly.

--oTTo--

Reply to
Otto Bahn

Would you care to explain the basis of your hypercorrection? I understand that you might have some difficulty, since you are without any doubt completely wrong.

Reply to
Martin Ambuhl

You missplet "trolls".

Reply to
Adam Funk

I don't know, which do you think is uncalled for? We usually end questions with question marks (or interrobangs) around here, by the way. And just how many ways can it appear that Kevin has called you "idiot," anyway?

¬R
Reply to
Glenn Knickerbocker

"Adam Funk" wrote

Uh, no. That was a reference to a Steinbeck novel.

--oTTo--

Reply to
Otto Bahn

Nice try, but I fear you might need to be less subtle.

Reply to
Tonto Goldstein

All of them.

Matthew

Reply to
Matthew L. Martin

Hi, Glenn. Are you still singing? We visited Russia last summer, but didn't get to Georgia.

The only question in what you quoted has a question mark.

Good question. I don't know the answer.

Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------- Reverse parts of the user name for my e-address

Reply to
Bill McCray

Around here, that's fightin talk.

Thanks, Don

Reply to
Don Salad

"whomsoever"?

Dave

Reply to
David DeLaney

Because someone has to:

"One. Two. Threeee. ... Three!"

Dave "sometimes I do wish it wasn't my turn in the platen though" DeLaney

Reply to
David DeLaney

Wrong again. The relative pronoun is in the nominative (or subjective) case, and therefore "whoever", because it's the subject (or predicate nominative, if you think of the clause as inverted) of the dependent clause in which it appears: "whoever that plural you might be." The entire clause is a noun clause in apposition to (or modifying) "all of you".

The general rule, of which this is an instance, is that the relative pronoun "who" takes its case form from the clause in which it appears, without regard to how that clause is used in the sentence as a whole. Hence:

  1. Give it to whoever finishes first.

but

  1. Give it to whomever you select.

Lots of people use "whoever" in the second example, even though it's technically incorrect, but there's no justification (aside from ignorance) for "whoever" in the first.

Reply to
Robert Lieblich

Now I'm wrong. It's "whomever" "whomever" "whomever" in the first that is inexcusable. Pardon me while I moisten a noodle for some self-flagellation.

Reply to
Robert Lieblich

Total bullshit, but Kevin and his troll friends and of course his afro wife will love it. I can see why your name has "Moron" in it.

Reply to
Dan

This is the modern laser printed world.

There are no platens ("We don' need no stinking platens!").

The corona wire can sting a bit at times, however.

Reply to
JackShephard

Brilliant. Including the sig, which got snipped... :-]

Reply to
JackShephard

Al Denté

Reply to
JackShephard

Total bullshit, but Kevin and his troll friends and of course his afro wife will love it. I can see why your name has "Moron" in it.

Reply to
Dan

Okay, so "whomsnoever". Got it.

Dave

Reply to
David DeLaney

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.