The poor card counter?
- Thread starter sidthesquid
- Start date
Au contraire, mon ami; it is especially relevant for discussion on an American board.
While the American English tradition of 'punctuation-always-inside' quotes was an early adaptation for printers' convenience, this style has always been recognized as frequently illogical; hence the British English flexibility of placing punctuation inside or outside quotes, depending on context, is considered the "logical method".
A clear trend away from traditional American English method for this so-called rule is increasingly apparent because logic is more compelling than tradition.
For example, Language, the journal of the Linguistic Society of North America, has now embraced the "British way". The first item under "Punctuation" in its Style Sheet now says:
Far and away, the greatest source-example of logical quote-punctuation today is found in Wikipedia, which was started by two Americans. Wikipedia's style guide notes that ...
June Casagrande, author of The Best Punctuation Book, Period has opined: "I think our American punctuation-always-inside is beginning to fail because it's hard to follow; and that makes it hard to continually justify."
While the American English tradition of 'punctuation-always-inside' quotes was an early adaptation for printers' convenience, this style has always been recognized as frequently illogical; hence the British English flexibility of placing punctuation inside or outside quotes, depending on context, is considered the "logical method".
A clear trend away from traditional American English method for this so-called rule is increasingly apparent because logic is more compelling than tradition.
For example, Language, the journal of the Linguistic Society of North America, has now embraced the "British way". The first item under "Punctuation" in its Style Sheet now says:
The second member of a pair of quotation marks should precede any other adjacent mark of punctuation, unless the other mark is part of the quoted matter: The word means `cart', not `horse'. He writes, `This is false.'
Far and away, the greatest source-example of logical quote-punctuation today is found in Wikipedia, which was started by two Americans. Wikipedia's style guide notes that ...
"logical punctuation … is used here because it is deemed to be more in keeping with the principle of minimal change." That is, if you put a period or comma inside quotation marks, you are wrongly suggesting that the period or comma is part of the quoted material, and thus you have "changed" it.
June Casagrande, author of The Best Punctuation Book, Period has opined: "I think our American punctuation-always-inside is beginning to fail because it's hard to follow; and that makes it hard to continually justify."
Last edited:
I don't see what this has to do with Don's point. If you want to post like you are ignorant, there is nothing wrong with that. You have every right to do so. But acting like doing so is the correct way to do things is wrong. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
You remind me of one of the people that like free speech, but fail to understand that what you say with that freedom may still have consequences. Free speech means you have the right to say almost anything you want. It doesn't mean that saying something can not get you fired, or banned from a forum, or have any other consequences that anyone sees fit to levy.
You remind me of one of the people that like free speech, but fail to understand that what you say with that freedom may still have consequences. Free speech means you have the right to say almost anything you want. It doesn't mean that saying something can not get you fired, or banned from a forum, or have any other consequences that anyone sees fit to levy.
June Casagrande, author of The Best Punctuation Book, Period has opined: "I think our American punctuation-always-inside is beginning to fail because it's hard to follow; and that makes it hard to continually justify."[/QUOTE]
You're not teaching me anything. Meanwhile, the sources you quote aren't exactly the Chicago Manual of Style or the New York Times or AP Style Sheet. Quote the sources that make you happy. I'll stay with mine.
Don
You're not teaching me anything. Meanwhile, the sources you quote aren't exactly the Chicago Manual of Style or the New York Times or AP Style Sheet. Quote the sources that make you happy. I'll stay with mine.
Don
Yeah, but that means nothings since we have no idea how much Don plays these days or ever. I mean suppose he only plays 2-3 times a year now. It would be pretty easy to experience negative variance with such a small sample size.
I would love to know more about Don's playing experience and results, but he has made it clear he doesn't wish to share that stuff.
I would love to know more about Don's playing experience and results, but he has made it clear he doesn't wish to share that stuff.