Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: OT language stuff (was Re: Class.forName().newInstance() vs new)
Date: 20 Jun 2011 19:18:39 GMT
Organization: None
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <969koeFjduU4@mid.individual.net>
References: <it07on$ilc$1@speranza.aioe.org> <a4567ca3-6268-41e7-8293-b6f9121c2765@y7g2000prk.googlegroups.com> <itdo3m02lcd@news2.newsguy.com> <e43ff9cb-73a9-4d24-8dae-4b0e7ec6d4d1@s41g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
X-Trace: individual.net u3V8tUudSJrhNOKzFOLUIwUZ/80Ini8z/NZTL7RzMGR+BWRfMB
X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xGuRosHSCcD+2/iBRljwT0auItI=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:5426

In article <e43ff9cb-73a9-4d24-8dae-4b0e7ec6d4d1@s41g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
lewbloch  <lewbloch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 8:21 am, Michael Wojcik <mwoj...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > lewbloch wrote:
> > > On Jun 11, 12:50 pm, "John B. Matthews" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > >> In article <nospam-BA6E1B.15432711062...@news.aioe.org>,
> > >>  "John B. Matthews" <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > >>> There's some
> > >> There are some
> >
> > > "There's some [plural] ..." is quite common in idiomatic American.
> >
> > True, which is an argument for avoiding it (or correcting it, as John
> > did in his edit).
> >
> > Though it's not quite as grating as, say, the use of "would" to
> > indicate the subjunctive mood. ("If I would have knowed there's some
> > cupcakes, I would have totally ate them all.")

Sing it.

> > I've pretty much given up on nominative/objective case of pronouns as
> > a shibboleth ("between you and I") - I suspect more people in the US
> > now ignore traditional pronoun case than attempt to apply it - 

Me and you agree about that.  (I hope I won't regret posting a sentence
I can hardly type without wincing.)

> > but
> > attentive writers do still try to watch agreement in number, I think.
> >
> 
> Your comments are appropriate for formal writing.  Usenet is
> conversational, ergo one should accept idiomatic expressions.
> Otherwise we'd insist that no one use "doubt" to mean a mere question
> without suspicion.

Oh, but some people do (insist .... ) -- there's been a recent thread
in comp.lang.c in which a few speakers of the non-Indian Englishes
have tried to object to use of "doubt" to mean "question".  I doubt
they'll succeed, but -- <shrug>.

> I do aver that one should spell nouns, particularly proper nouns,
> correctly in technical speech, which this is for all its informality,
> and it only makes sense to spell the first-person singular nominative
> pronoun in English correctly as it's short enough to remember.
> 
> There's some folks even more pedantic than I, apparently.  

*Oh* yes, though some of us aren't quite as vocal about our pedantry.

> Welcome to the club, Michael.

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.