Re: WSJ anacoluthon

Ron Hardin wrote:

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Amazing how you never manage to find a single linguistic oddity in any
liberal columnist!

I don't read liberal columnists. They're not interesting. They don't
have anything to say.

If you don't read them, how do you know whether they're interesting, or
whether they have nothing to say?

Mostly conservative columnists are the same, but you get surprised once
in a while.

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

No, they never cease to amaze.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@xxxxxxx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: WSJ anacoluthon
    ... Peter T. Daniels wrote: ... I don't read liberal columnists. ... Mostly conservative columnists are the same, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Syllepsis exemption
    ... >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: ... But ''lede'' winds up meaning the opening lines owing to cases where you'd start ... Ron Hardin ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: apostrophe with compound name?
    ... >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: ... nobody knows you're a jerk. ... Ron Hardin ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Syllepsis exemption
    ... >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: ... >> where ``burying the lead'' would not be. ... Ron Hardin ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: cleft / pseudo-cleft or what?
    ... >> Peter T. Daniels wrote: ... >> Its inelegance consists of what? ... Ron Hardin ...
    (sci.lang)