For Chung and Asher

In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

On Oct 7, 6:29Â*pm, Michael Press wrote:
Â*Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:

Only because the incorrect usage is endemic among
casual speakers and writers.

On the other hand "I am older than he" and "I am older
than him" don't have the same duality of meaning
because of the intransitive verb.

So perhaps I and others are used to using the objective
pronoun because using the nominative by itself, as in
"than she," has a tendency to lead to ambiguity and
is avoided?

I do not know. "He" and "him", "I" and "me" are a
sensitive subject for many who react in different ways
such as disdain for learning, puzzlement, or feeling
inferior; but rarely do they remedy their ignorance.

Many grammatical mistakes are made because the sentence
has an ellipsis. Adding in the missing words makes
the correct usage obvious.

Trust me, my original wise crack was meant to be taken
for a joke; and I was surprised to end up arguing English
usage. I am not interested enough in defending the
language to initiate discussions about correct usage.

That's where you and I differ. I have enough interest to point out
how stupid a language is that has grown people arguing minutiae about
correct usage, and I make a point of not using outdated and stupid
constructions to help hasten their demise.

Language wants to evolve - let it. Unless you're one of those
Creationists you won't have a problem with that.

And I have your ellipsis right here... ~

You show too much energy in your reply to be
as disinterested as you would have us believe.

--
Michael Press

On Oct 8, 3:29*am, Michael Press wrote:
*RicodJour wrote:

That's where you and I differ. *I have enough interest to point out
how stupid a language is that has grown people arguing minutiae about
{snip}
You show too much energy in your reply to be
as disinterested as you would have us believe.

I don't mean to DIS you but I said I have enough interest.

Correct usage is usually important, but reading comprehension and
understanding are always so. ~

R

In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

On Oct 8, 3:29Â*am, Michael Press wrote:
Â*RicodJour wrote:

That's where you and I differ. Â*I have enough interest to point out
how stupid a language is that has grown people arguing minutiae about
{snip}
You show too much energy in your reply to be
as disinterested as you would have us believe.

I don't mean to DIS you but I said I have enough interest.

Correct usage is usually important, but reading comprehension and
understanding are always so.

[...]

How is it those interested in letting the language
evolve do not apply the same laissez faire attitude
to those who are interested in the minutia?

--
Michael Press

On Oct 8, 1:19*pm, Michael Press wrote:
*RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 8, 3:29*am, Michael Press wrote:
*RicodJour wrote:

That's where you and I differ. *I have enough interest to point out
how stupid a language is that has grown people arguing minutiae about
{snip}
You show too much energy in your reply to be
as disinterested as you would have us believe.

I don't mean to DIS you but I said I have enough interest.

Correct usage is usually important, but reading comprehension and
understanding are always so.

[...]

How is it those interested in letting the language
evolve do not apply the same laissez faire attitude
to those who are interested in the minutia?

Because we've evolved.

R

In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

On Oct 8, 1:19Â*pm, Michael Press wrote:
Â*RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 8, 3:29Â*am, Michael Press wrote:
Â*RicodJour wrote:

That's where you and I differ. Â*I have enough interest to point out
how stupid a language is that has grown people arguing minutiae about
{snip}
You show too much energy in your reply to be
as disinterested as you would have us believe.

I don't mean to DIS you but I said I have enough interest.

Correct usage is usually important, but reading comprehension and
understanding are always so.

[...]

How is it those interested in letting the language
evolve do not apply the same laissez faire attitude
to those who are interested in the minutia?

Because we've evolved.

If disparaging your inferiors is evolved.

--
Michael Press

On Oct 8, 4:53*pm, Michael Press wrote:
*RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 8, 1:19*pm, Michael Press wrote:

How is it those interested in letting the language
evolve do not apply the same laissez faire attitude
to those who are interested in the minutia?

Because we've evolved.

If disparaging your inferiors is evolved.

The Morlocks ate the Eloi.

It's a tough world.

R

In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

On Oct 8, 4:53Â*pm, Michael Press wrote:
Â*RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 8, 1:19Â*pm, Michael Press wrote:

How is it those interested in letting the language
evolve do not apply the same laissez faire attitude
to those who are interested in the minutia?

Because we've evolved.

If disparaging your inferiors is evolved.

The Morlocks ate the Eloi.

It's a tough world.

Speak for yourself.

--
Michael Press