stupid first world problems you're dealing with

  On 12/13/2020 at 1:46 PM, IDEM said:

A comma would have sufficed imho; or rather, two commas, as there should be one between you and google as well, making the correct sentence, "Fuck you, [G]oogle, suck my dick." Also, an exclamation mark would not be untoward.

Expand  

English tends to be much less strict than German when it comes to comma placement. Rule of thumb is you can do whatever the fuck you want as long as it reads well. But you are still right.

Using an exclamation mark for all imperatives is also a German thing and not necessarily done in English. And even in German nobody does it.

  On 12/13/2020 at 7:27 PM, dingformung said:

English tends to be much less strict than German when it comes to comma placement. Rule of thumb is you can do whatever the fuck you want as long as it reads well. But you are still right.

Using an exclamation mark for all imperatives is also a German thing and not necessarily done in English. And even in German nobody does it.

Expand  

I'm aware of all that, and yet I'm exclusively talking about English grammar here. The direct address comma is a beautiful thing and helps clarify the meaning of this specific clause which, foregoing the comma, could be read as either "Fuck, you google", or "Fuck you, google". Either qualifies as an exclamation, btw.

But you would have to be pretty stupid to read it as "Fuck, you Google".

  On 12/13/2020 at 6:31 PM, IDEM said:

It's called a "direct address comma", you can look it up. It's the same as in "Yes, sir", "Sean, pls" or "Fuck me, IDEM, you're actually right".

Expand  

You’re not setting google aside from “fuck you” though. Also, he’s not addressing google directly (he’s not speaking to google but expressing a thought) as google isn’t standing in front of him.  
It could be acceptable, but it’s not needed. 
I spend too much time writing policy documents, so I almost never use direct speech, which is why I interpret that particular clause that way. 

  On 12/13/2020 at 8:03 PM, IDEM said:

I'm aware of all that, and yet I'm exclusively talking about English grammar here. The direct address comma is a beautiful thing and helps clarify the meaning of this specific clause which, foregoing the comma, could be read as either "Fuck, you google", or "Fuck you, google". Either qualifies as an exclamation, btw.

Expand  

It’s impossible to read it as the former because of the second clause where google is the (implied) subject in an imperative clause. It’s also why I’d say the direct address comma is unnecessary since a noun of direct address can never be a subject. 

SFWP: my drunken belligerence post caused a grammar ruckus.

  On 12/13/2020 at 8:20 PM, chenGOD said:

You’re not setting google aside from “fuck you” though. Also, he’s not addressing google directly (he’s not speaking to google but expressing a thought) as google isn’t standing in front of him.  
It could be acceptable, but it’s not needed. 
I spend too much time writing policy documents, so I almost never use direct speech, which is why I interpret that particular clause that way. 

Expand  

  On 12/13/2020 at 8:33 PM, chenGOD said:

It’s impossible to read it as the former because of the second clause where google is the (implied) subject in an imperative clause. It’s also why I’d say the direct address comma is unnecessary since a noun of direct address can never be a subject. 

Expand  

This is puzzling. Are you completely sure you know what a grammatical subject is?

  On 12/13/2020 at 8:45 PM, Zephyr_Nova said:

SFWP: my drunken belligerence post caused a grammar ruckus.

Expand  

Your right sorry

  On 12/13/2020 at 8:48 PM, IDEM said:

 

This is puzzling. Are you completely sure you know what a grammatical subject is?

Your right sorry

Expand  

How is it puzzling?

Also “you’re”. 

  On 12/13/2020 at 8:20 PM, chenGOD said:

Also, he’s not addressing google directly (he’s not speaking to google but expressing a thought) as google isn’t standing in front of him.  

Expand  

Grammatically that doesn't matter. It's normal to leave out the comma but technically, "Google" should be separated by a comma because vocative expressions are treated as their own sub clauses. Where IDEM is wrong is that it's a rule. It's more a suggestion.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:06 PM, dingformung said:

Grammatically that doesn't matter. It's normal to leave out the comma but technically, "Google" should be separated by a comma because vocative expressions are treated as their own sub clauses. Where IDEM is wrong is that it's a rule. It's more a suggestion.

Expand  

Technically, the direct address comma is used when you know, directly addressing the subject. He’s not.

  On 12/13/2020 at 7:27 PM, dingformung said:

Rule of thumb is you can do whatever the fuck you want as long as it reads well; but you are still right.

Expand  

The thing that bothers me is that in recent years, in the English language, the question mark and exclamation mark have somehow become placed exclusively at the end of sentences.  What happened to people asking questions inside sentences ?  because I find it happens pretty often in my personal dialogue.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:21 PM, chenGOD said:

Technically, the direct address comma is used when you know, directly addressing the subject. He’s not.

Expand  

If English still had a case system, "Google" would probably be in the vocative case here, which in modern English is expressed by separating the expression with a comma. Often the comma disturbs the flow of reading, so it's left out. With the imperative "fuck you", he addressed "Google". Even if he didn't mean to literally address Google, in the grammatical sense he did.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:22 PM, drillkicker said:

The thing that bothers me is that in recent years, in the English language, the question mark and exclamation mark have somehow become placed exclusively at the end of sentences.  What happened to people asking questions inside sentences ?  because I find it happens pretty often in my personal dialogue.

Expand  

What happened to people asking questions inside sentences? Because I find it happens pretty often in my personal dialogue.

You don't really need it mid-sentence, but I've seen it done in literature.

  On 12/13/2020 at 8:53 PM, chenGOD said:

How is it puzzling?

Also “you’re”. 

Expand  

It is puzzling in that it seems incoherent. See @dingformung's post for an explanation.

Also, the comma between right and sorry was missing too. Please tell me the irony did register.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:06 PM, dingformung said:

Grammatically that doesn't matter. It's normal to leave out the comma but technically, "Google" should be separated by a comma because vocative expressions are treated as their own sub clauses. Where IDEM is wrong is that it's a rule. It's more a suggestion.

Expand  

No, it's not a suggestion, it is a bonafide rule. I didn"t make it though, I'm just the messenger.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:21 PM, chenGOD said:

Technically, the direct address comma is used when you know, directly addressing the subject. He’s not.

Expand  

Of course he is.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:34 PM, dingformung said:

What happened to people asking questions inside sentences? Because I find it happens pretty often in my personal dialogue.

Expand  

See, the problem with that is you're starting a sentence with a conjunction.

FWP: Tried to open one of those little vacuum-packed bags of peanuts with a sharp knife, punctuated my left forefinger, then found the tear-open flap.

Bit my inner cheek while chewing.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:44 PM, IDEM said:

FWP: Tried to open, one of those little vacuum-packed bags, of peanuts with a sharp knife; punctuated my left forefinger! then found the tear-open flap.

Bit my inner cheek, while, chewing.

Expand  

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:34 PM, dingformung said:

If English still had a case system, "Google" would probably be in the vocative case here, which in modern English is expressed by separating the expression with a comma. Often the comma disturbs the flow of reading, so it's left out. With the imperative "fuck you", he addressed "Google". Even if he didn't mean to literally address Google, in the grammatical sense he did.

 

Expand  

Fuck you is not an imperative. Fuck yourself would be the imperative form. The second clause “suck my dick” is the imperative. 

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:38 PM, IDEM said:

It is puzzling in that it seems incoherent. See @dingformung's post for an explanation.

Also, the comma between right and sorry was missing too. Please tell me the irony did register.

Of course he is.

Expand  

Ding’s post is also incorrect, because as he correctly pointed out, English doesn’t have a vocative case anymore. 

It was also missing a period, so really hard to interpret any irony in there.  

Of course he’s not. Was google in the room with him? 

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:41 PM, drillkicker said:

See, the problem with that is you're starting a sentence with a conjunction.

Expand  

So what? View it as an ellipsis more than as a sentence if that makes you feel better.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:57 PM, chenGOD said:

Ding’s post is also incorrect, because as he correctly pointed out, English doesn’t have a vocative case anymore. 

Expand  

It doesn't have a vocative as a grammatical form but it has vocative expressions, which just don't have their own ending anymore.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:57 PM, chenGOD said:

Fuck you is not an imperative. Fuck yourself would be the imperative form. The second clause “suck my dick” is the imperative. 

Expand  

While it is true that "fuck you" doesn't necessarily have to be interpreted as an imperative, your explanation is wrong. Both "fuck you" and "fuck yourself" can be interpreted as imperatives. "Fuck you" can also be interpreted as an interjection.

  On 12/13/2020 at 9:57 PM, chenGOD said:

Of course he’s not. Was google in the room with him? 

Expand  

No disrespect, but at this point it is a bit hard to tell if you're being wilfully obtuse or winding me up. Grammatically speaking, that doesn't matter in the least.

Anyway, off to bed, have fun(,) guise!

How can “fuck you” be an imperative? Imperatives are commands. 

  On 12/13/2020 at 10:10 PM, IDEM said:

No disrespect, but at this point it is a bit hard to tell if you're being wilfully obtuse or winding me up. Grammatically speaking, that doesn't matter in the least.

Anyway, off to bed, have fun(,) guise!

Expand  

Context matters. Have, a,  good night!

  On 12/13/2020 at 10:11 PM, chenGOD said:

How can “fuck you” be an imperative? Imperatives are commands. 

Expand  

It doesn't actually matter whether it's in imperative form or any other form, "google" is still addressed.

yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, uh, your opinion, man, ,, ,,,, ,

,

,,

This is my new favorite WATMM thread.

  On 12/13/2020 at 10:16 PM, dingformung said:

It doesn't actually matter whether it's in imperative form or any other form, "google" is still addressed.

Expand  

Clearly not. Context matters in language and grammar, and the word direct in means exactly that in a noun of direct address. 
A noun of direct address is the person directly being spoken to or written to. 
 

Clearly this is not the case in this sentence. 
 

  On 12/13/2020 at 10:24 PM, brian trageskin said:

yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, uh, your opinion, man, ,, ,,,, ,

,

,,

Expand