Discussion:
substitute
Add Reply
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-26 22:59:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The following sentence is excerpted from <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinusoidal_plane_wave>:

The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.

But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?

Regards,
HY
Mark Brader
2021-04-26 23:33:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
The following sentence is excerpted from
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using
a complex-valued amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
Yes, it's wrong. In addition to the second clause being ungrammatical,
it's missing a hyphen in "real-valued".
--
Mark Brader|"But how can we do something about something that isn't happening?"
Toronto |"It's much easier to solve an imaginary problem than a real one."
***@vex.net| --Lynn & Jay: "Yes, Prime Minister" (2013)
Peter T. Daniels
2021-04-27 14:00:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
No, It's an imperative.

"Macy*s can be reached by driving three blocks. Turn right at the next light."
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-28 01:40:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
No, It's an imperative.
I still can't understand your meaning here for this case.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
"Macy*s can be reached by driving three blocks. Turn right at the next light."
Jerry Friedman
2021-04-27 14:10:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
There's no comma in the original.
Post by ***@gmail.com
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It's certainly wrong as it is. Something a little close would be "by using
a complex-valued amplitude C as a substitute for the real-valued
amplitude A."

The most straightforward way to say it would be "by replacing the
real-valued amplitude A with a complex-valued amplitude C."
--
Jerry Friedman
s***@my-deja.com
2021-04-27 23:59:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.

You have introduced a comma between "C" and "substitute" which is not in the original.
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-28 01:46:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
Do you wording correctly here, i.e., with the following:

the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.

More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Post by s***@my-deja.com
You have introduced a comma between "C" and "substitute" which is not in the original.
Yep. My typo.
Chrysi Cat
2021-04-28 03:19:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".

If the problem is the phrase "tidy up", that would refer to "replacing
the non-standard English in the wiki text with more nearly-standard
English".

You can see by the character count why we might lean towards calling it
"tidying up" instead.
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
You have introduced a comma between "C" and "substitute" which is not in the original.
Yep. My typo.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
s***@my-deja.com
2021-04-28 10:41:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody
will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
If the problem is the phrase "tidy up", that would refer to "replacing
the non-standard English in the wiki text with more nearly-standard
English".
You can see by the character count why we might lean towards calling it
"tidying up" instead.
That is a nice clarification. Thank you.
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
You have introduced a comma between "C" and "substitute" which is not in the original.
Yep. My typo.
And mine. Skitt's Law refuses got go away!
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-28 13:35:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
I think the complete form should read like the following:

the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Post by Chrysi Cat
If the problem is the phrase "tidy up", that would refer to "replacing
the non-standard English in the wiki text with more nearly-standard
English".
You can see by the character count why we might lean towards calling it
"tidying up" instead.
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
You have introduced a comma between "C" and "substitute" which is not in the original.
Yep. My typo.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Chrysi Cat
2021-04-28 14:02:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Chrysi Cat
If the problem is the phrase "tidy up", that would refer to "replacing
the non-standard English in the wiki text with more nearly-standard
English".
You can see by the character count why we might lean towards calling it
"tidying up" instead.
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
You have introduced a comma between "C" and "substitute" which is not in the original.
Yep. My typo.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
David Kleinecke
2021-04-29 20:44:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
Maybe I am confused by the pronouns but I rise to defend the
honor of the verbless English sentence. A nice example of the
"The X-er the Y-er" pattern.
Jerry Friedman
2021-04-29 21:13:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
...
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
Maybe I am confused by the pronouns but I rise to defend the
honor of the verbless English sentence. A nice example of the
"The X-er the Y-er" pattern.
We've been on tenterhooks waiting for your opinion of sentences like
"It's gets easier the more you practice it."
--
Jerry Friedman
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-30 00:00:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
...
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
Maybe I am confused by the pronouns but I rise to defend the
honor of the verbless English sentence. A nice example of the
"The X-er the Y-er" pattern.
We've been on tenterhooks waiting for your opinion of sentences like
"It's gets easier the more you practice it."
I think the following form is more natural/intuitive:

The more you practice, the easier it will be.

HY
Post by Jerry Friedman
--
Jerry Friedman
David Kleinecke
2021-04-30 03:45:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Jerry Friedman
...
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
Maybe I am confused by the pronouns but I rise to defend the
honor of the verbless English sentence. A nice example of the
"The X-er the Y-er" pattern.
We've been on tenterhooks waiting for your opinion of sentences like
"It's gets easier the more you practice it."
Assuming you mean "It gets easier the more you practice it":
IMO it is a transform of "The more you practice it the easier it gets.
I suspect this was once a conscious pedantic avoidance of the
verbless sentence (because "all sentences have a verb") but I'm
not prepared to prove it.
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-30 04:37:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Jerry Friedman
...
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
Maybe I am confused by the pronouns but I rise to defend the
honor of the verbless English sentence. A nice example of the
"The X-er the Y-er" pattern.
We've been on tenterhooks waiting for your opinion of sentences like
"It's gets easier the more you practice it."
IMO it is a transform of "The more you practice it the easier it gets.
I suspect this was once a conscious pedantic avoidance of the
verbless sentence (because "all sentences have a verb") but I'm
not prepared to prove it.
Do you mean you have never planned to do that, or you will do it at some point in the future?

HY
Jerry Friedman
2021-04-30 14:27:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Jerry Friedman
...
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
Maybe I am confused by the pronouns but I rise to defend the
honor of the verbless English sentence. A nice example of the
"The X-er the Y-er" pattern.
We've been on tenterhooks waiting for your opinion of sentences like
"It's gets easier the more you practice it."
I do.
Post by David Kleinecke
IMO it is a transform of "The more you practice it the easier it gets.
I suspect this was once a conscious pedantic avoidance of the
verbless sentence (because "all sentences have a verb") but I'm
not prepared to prove it.
The possibly interesting thing is that a "the" got lost in the transformation.
Actually, I wonder whether a "the" got lost historically.

"With regard to Frederick, he liked him the better the more he saw of him..."

"Paul Creyton" (J. T. Townsend), /Kate the Accomplice; or, The Preacher
and the Burglar. (1849)

But on the other hand,

"...though her heart beat with a thick and hurried apprehension, her soul
grew calmer the more closely approached the danger."

William Gilmore Simms, /Guy Rivers: A Tale of Georgia/ (1834)

COHA just goes back to 1800, which probably isn't far enough to settle
the question. I need a Shakespeare with part-of-speech tags.
--
Jerry Friedman
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-29 23:55:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
, not = and not

Am I right?
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
If the problem is the phrase "tidy up", that would refer to "replacing
the non-standard English in the wiki text with more nearly-standard
English".
You can see by the character count why we might lean towards calling it
"tidying up" instead.
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
You have introduced a comma between "C" and "substitute" which is not in the original.
Yep. My typo.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Chrysi Cat
2021-05-01 08:12:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by s***@my-deja.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
The introduced complex form of the plane wave can be simplified by using a complex-valued
amplitude C, substitute the real valued amplitude A.
But, it seems that the verb *substitute* used above should be written in one of the non-finite
forms of the verb / non-predicate form. Am I right?
It is worth saying that anything from Wikipedia can be in non-standard English so should not
be taken as a model. There is no sub-editor, and the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
the more specialised the subject, the less likely
is it that anybody will will tidy up the text.
More specifically, it's difficult for me to understand the part "is it that anybody will will tidy up the text" in it.
Oy. That's likely a typo in its own right-- if so, then the phrase
you're having trouble with would be the conditional "the less likely IT
IS that anyone will tidy up the text".
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Not in virtually any NATIVE English that I know. That's one of the few
cases where even English-speakers can and will omit the verb, because we
treat it as a conditional phrase, not as even a dependent clause.
, not = and not
Am I right?
No, once again, you're not. There's no conjunction needed here. What
there IS is an elision of either one or two words.

If I wrote it, "NO, IT'S not in virtually any NATIVE English that I
know", would that have made more sense to you?

I'm not sure if it was fitting or ironic, but I tried to explain a
sentence that didn't need a verb by--umm--using another sentence that
required no verb to act upon the SUBJECT.

What it was NOT, was "intentional". Oops.
<snip earlier discussion that somehow was never snipped before this>
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Lewis
2021-04-29 23:38:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Neither 'is' is needed.

"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone will tidy
up the text."

This construction is very common in English.

The more wine, the more dancing.

"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)

"No Comment." (countless politicians).

"Good game!"

Etc etc.
--
oh no! there's been unauthorized access to my paypal account!!! ...
how nice of someone at a grade school in korea to notice and
inform me of it
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-30 00:05:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lewis
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Neither 'is' is needed.
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone will tidy
up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Post by Lewis
This construction is very common in English.
The more wine, the more dancing.
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
Post by Lewis
"No Comment." (countless politicians).
"Good game!"
Etc etc.
--
oh no! there's been unauthorized access to my paypal account!!! ...
how nice of someone at a grade school in korea to notice and
inform me of it
Mark Brader
2021-04-30 00:36:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone will tidy
up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence easier
to read when it's fairly long.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Show that 17x17 = 289. Generalise this result."
***@vex.net | -- Carl E. Linderholm
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-30 04:31:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone will tidy
up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence easier
to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Show that 17x17 = 289. Generalise this result."
CDB
2021-04-30 11:27:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
J. J. Lodder
2021-04-30 12:01:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by CDB
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
And to the point, in one rather ludicrous episode
they time travel to seek out Van Gogh in Auvers sur Oise,
hoping to be able to prevent his suicide.

They take him to the Musee D'Orsay
to see the great Vincent exhibition,

At least they found a good look-alike,

Jan
hongy...@gmail.com
2021-04-30 13:13:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
And to the point,
Why do you use this phrase here?
Post by J. J. Lodder
in one rather ludicrous episode
they time travel to seek out Van Gogh in Auvers sur Oise,
hoping to be able to prevent his suicide.
They take him to the Musee D'Orsay
to see the great Vincent exhibition,
At least they found a good look-alike,
What do you want to express in this context?

HY
Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
Chrysi Cat
2021-05-01 08:23:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
And to the point,
Why do you use this phrase here?
Because for those of us who run a threaded, or "tree", view, this is in
the middle of a thread where another line of discussion is how to
pronounce the notoriously-earless man's name.

That you weren't any longer aware of it is the most stinging indictment
of Google-Groups-as-a-newsreader that I've ever seen.

It's also ridiculous, because the whole reason my main EMAIL ADDRESSES
are Gmail is that it automatically threads email, which annoyingly
often, I cannot get to occur in my standalone mail clients.

I wonder if they're going to strip threading from email next. And if the
answer is "yes", I have no idea _what_ I'll start doing to be able to
read my email in logical, rather than chronological, order.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
in one rather ludicrous episode
they time travel to seek out Van Gogh in Auvers sur Oise,
hoping to be able to prevent his suicide.
They take him to the Musee D'Orsay
to see the great Vincent exhibition,
At least they found a good look-alike,
What do you want to express in this context?
It would appear that Jan finds this ludicrous enough that in his
opinion, the writers shouldn't have done it.

But since they dared do so, at least the actor portraying VVG had
verisimilitude.
Post by ***@gmail.com
HY
Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
J. J. Lodder
2021-05-01 16:01:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
And to the point,
Why do you use this phrase here?
Because for those of us who run a threaded, or "tree", view, this is in
the middle of a thread where another line of discussion is how to
pronounce the notoriously-earless man's name.
That you weren't any longer aware of it is the most stinging indictment
of Google-Groups-as-a-newsreader that I've ever seen.
It's also ridiculous, because the whole reason my main EMAIL ADDRESSES
are Gmail is that it automatically threads email, which annoyingly
often, I cannot get to occur in my standalone mail clients.
I wonder if they're going to strip threading from email next. And if the
answer is "yes", I have no idea _what_ I'll start doing to be able to
read my email in logical, rather than chronological, order.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
in one rather ludicrous episode
they time travel to seek out Van Gogh in Auvers sur Oise,
hoping to be able to prevent his suicide.
They take him to the Musee D'Orsay
to see the great Vincent exhibition,
At least they found a good look-alike,
What do you want to express in this context?
It would appear that Jan finds this ludicrous enough that in his
opinion, the writers shouldn't have done it.
Why? It is their thing. Let them do their thing.
I'm like Alice:
I'm so glad I don't like Dr Who.
For if I did I would have to see more of it,
and I would hate that.
Post by Chrysi Cat
But since they dared do so, at least the actor portraying VVG had
verisimilitude.
Like so,

Jan

<https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.VIaeDE606WDirB4HrX3HtgHaEL%26pid%3DApi&f=1>
<Loading Image...&f=1&nofb=1>
<https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse3.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.gOsqk7pHCZf74dRsLGGOQwAAAA%26pid%3DApi&f=1>
J. J. Lodder
2021-05-02 10:37:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
And to the point,
Why do you use this phrase here?
Because for those of us who run a threaded, or "tree", view, this is in
the middle of a thread where another line of discussion is how to
pronounce the notoriously-earless man's name.
That you weren't any longer aware of it is the most stinging indictment
of Google-Groups-as-a-newsreader that I've ever seen.
It's also ridiculous, because the whole reason my main EMAIL ADDRESSES
are Gmail is that it automatically threads email, which annoyingly
often, I cannot get to occur in my standalone mail clients.
I wonder if they're going to strip threading from email next. And if the
answer is "yes", I have no idea _what_ I'll start doing to be able to
read my email in logical, rather than chronological, order.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
in one rather ludicrous episode
they time travel to seek out Van Gogh in Auvers sur Oise,
hoping to be able to prevent his suicide.
They take him to the Musee D'Orsay
to see the great Vincent exhibition,
At least they found a good look-alike,
What do you want to express in this context?
It would appear that Jan finds this ludicrous enough that in his
opinion, the writers shouldn't have done it.
Why? It is their thing. Let them do their thing.
I'm so glad I don't like Dr Who.
For if I did I would have to see more of it,
and I would hate that.
[continued] Dutch has 'tenenkrommend' for such things.
(lit. toe-curling. Google gives some hits, are these Dunglish?)
Here is more on it.
<http://www.dwotd.nl/2011/12/987-tenenkrommend.html>

Any suggestions other than cringeworthy??

Jan
Sam Plusnet
2021-05-01 18:54:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
this is in the middle of a thread where another line of discussion is
how to pronounce the notoriously-earless man's name.
That made me ponder on a VVG painting of a lop-eared rabbit.
This was evidently not an original thought.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/16536723608273494/
--
Sam Plusnet
Wales, UK
J. J. Lodder
2021-05-01 09:06:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
And to the point,
Why do you use this phrase here?
Do you read only the threads that you initiated yourself?

Jan
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by J. J. Lodder
in one rather ludicrous episode
they time travel to seek out Van Gogh in Auvers sur Oise,
hoping to be able to prevent his suicide.
They take him to the Musee D'Orsay
to see the great Vincent exhibition,
At least they found a good look-alike,
What do you want to express in this context?
HY
Post by J. J. Lodder
Jan
Chrysi Cat
2021-05-01 08:15:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes.  It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror.  The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
Past tense? Do you know something about a cancellation that should last
longer than "into 2025" that I should also know about?
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Lewis
2021-05-01 09:58:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone
will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes.  It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated elements of
fantasy, comedy, and horror.  The "Weeping Angels" were a predatory race
of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you might see in a
graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
Past tense? Do you know something about a cancellation that should last
longer than "into 2025" that I should also know about?
I would use past tense for the Weeping Angels, heir epsidoes were a few
years ago. Of course, like all Dr Who villains they will probably
returns, but right now, past tense seems acceptable.

OTOH, I would use the present tense for, say, the Daleks because while
there is no current Doctor Who, the Daleks have a track record of
showing up, so it wold be odd to think they were not returning. Also,
they were i the last season, so much more recent than the Weeping
Angels.
--
So now you know the words to our song, pretty soon you'll all be
singing along, when you're sad, when you're lonely and it all
turns out wrong...
Peter Moylan
2021-05-01 09:17:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lewis
OTOH, I would use the present tense for, say, the Daleks because
while there is no current Doctor Who, the Daleks have a track record
of showing up, so it wold be odd to think they were not returning.
Also, they were i the last season, so much more recent than the
Weeping Angels.
Many years ago I watched Dr Who regularly. I stopped watching the first
time the Daleks appeared, because they were such implausible villains,
but I went back to watching when the Daleks went away.

These days I might start watching an episode, but rarely stay for the
end, because ALL of the plots look silly to me. In my opinion the series
has gone badly downhill over the years. It's as if the writers have
developed a preference for self-satire.

For our university open days I always intended to mount a metal garbage
bin on wheels, and have it wandering the corridors saying
"Exterminate!", but I never got around to putting the thing together.
--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org
Lewis
2021-05-01 14:52:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lewis
OTOH, I would use the present tense for, say, the Daleks because
while there is no current Doctor Who, the Daleks have a track record
of showing up, so it wold be odd to think they were not returning.
Also, they were i the last season, so much more recent than the
Weeping Angels.
Many years ago I watched Dr Who regularly. I stopped watching the first
time the Daleks appeared, because they were such implausible villains,
So you stopped watching nearly instantly, as the Daleks were introduced
in the second Doctor Who story back in 1963.
Post by Peter Moylan
but I went back to watching when the Daleks went away.
I wonder when that was?

I think only the 8th Doctor, who is a bit of an exception to many
things, did not have Daleks. Certainly the 1st 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th,
11th, 12th, and 13th have dealt with the Daleks, and I am pretty sure
that the 2nd, 6th, and 7th did as well.

They are THE enemy of The Doctor, and have been since the beginning, as a
thinly veneered version of the Nazis.
--
If it wasn't for the pirates, I bet Star Wars: Ep III would have mad
$50 million its first DAY!
Kerr-Mudd, John
2021-05-02 16:44:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 1 May 2021 14:52:43 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Lewis
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lewis
OTOH, I would use the present tense for, say, the Daleks because
while there is no current Doctor Who, the Daleks have a track record
of showing up, so it wold be odd to think they were not returning.
Also, they were i the last season, so much more recent than the
Weeping Angels.
Many years ago I watched Dr Who regularly. I stopped watching the first
time the Daleks appeared, because they were such implausible villains,
So you stopped watching nearly instantly, as the Daleks were introduced
in the second Doctor Who story back in 1963.
Post by Peter Moylan
but I went back to watching when the Daleks went away.
I wonder when that was?
I think only the 8th Doctor, who is a bit of an exception to many
things, did not have Daleks. Certainly the 1st 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th,
11th, 12th, and 13th have dealt with the Daleks, and I am pretty sure
that the 2nd, 6th, and 7th did as well.
They are THE enemy of The Doctor, and have been since the beginning, as a
thinly veneered version of the Nazis.
Unless they were being introduced by the British in their (anti-nazi, in case it needs pointing out!) war-effort:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_of_the_Daleks
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Peter Moylan
2021-05-02 23:51:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lewis
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by Lewis
OTOH, I would use the present tense for, say, the Daleks because
while there is no current Doctor Who, the Daleks have a track record
of showing up, so it wold be odd to think they were not returning.
Also, they were i the last season, so much more recent than the
Weeping Angels.
Many years ago I watched Dr Who regularly. I stopped watching the first
time the Daleks appeared, because they were such implausible villains,
So you stopped watching nearly instantly, as the Daleks were introduced
in the second Doctor Who story back in 1963.
I don't think we had a TV set in 1963. I probably started watching in a
Dalek-free period.
--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org
Sam Plusnet
2021-05-01 19:00:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Of Doctor Who
Post by Lewis
Post by Chrysi Cat
Past tense? Do you know something about a cancellation that should last
longer than "into 2025" that I should also know about?
I would use past tense for the Weeping Angels, heir epsidoes were a few
years ago. Of course, like all Dr Who villains they will probably
returns, but right now, past tense seems acceptable.
OTOH, I would use the present tense for, say, the Daleks because while
there is no current Doctor Who, the Daleks have a track record of
showing up, so it wold be odd to think they were not returning. Also,
they were i the last season, so much more recent than the Weeping
Angels.
It's sensible to use the past tense when describing anything about Dr Who.
You evidently know a great deal about past episodes, but you cannot
guarantee that they will not now veer off into some wildly different genre.
--
Sam Plusnet
Wales, UK
CDB
2021-05-01 12:57:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by CDB
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that
anyone will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes. It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated
elements of fantasy, comedy, and horror. The "Weeping Angels" were
a predatory race of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you
might see in a graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
Past tense? Do you know something about a cancellation that should
last longer than "into 2025" that I should also know about?
I know I've stopped watching it. My hope that Alex Kingston (River
Song) would be the next Doctor has been dashed.
Lewis
2021-05-01 14:54:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by CDB
I know I've stopped watching it. My hope that Alex Kingston (River
Song) would be the next Doctor has been dashed.
Jodie Whittaker is no slouch.

I have no idea if Alex Kingston even wanted to do it.
--
Margo: Give me a phaser and a red shirt.
Male centurion: What?
Peter T. Daniels
2021-05-01 15:41:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
["The Doctor"]
Post by Chrysi Cat
Past tense? Do you know something about a cancellation that should
last longer than "into 2025" that I should also know about?
I know I've stopped watching it. My hope that Alex Kingston (River
Song) would be the next Doctor has been dashed.
Oh, I just remembered that she was on *E.R.* for about the second half
of the run, as a doctor and someone-or-other's love interest. (Was George
Clooney still around then?) She, or he, had no chemistry whatsoever.

The series pretty much jumped the shark when a helicopter blade
amputated nasty Paul McCrane's arm -- yet now he is, somehow
fully-limbed, a rather nasty Municipal Court judge on *All Rise*.
CDB
2021-05-02 12:59:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
["The Doctor"]
Post by Chrysi Cat
Past tense? Do you know something about a cancellation that
should last longer than "into 2025" that I should also know
about?
I know I've stopped watching it. My hope that Alex Kingston (River
Song) would be the next Doctor has been dashed.
Oh, I just remembered that she was on *E.R.* for about the second
half of the run, as a doctor and someone-or-other's love interest.
(Was George Clooney still around then?) She, or he, had no chemistry
whatsoever.
The series pretty much jumped the shark when a helicopter blade
amputated nasty Paul McCrane's arm -- yet now he is, somehow
fully-limbed, a rather nasty Municipal Court judge on *All Rise*.
So much wasteland, so little time.

We are like dogs to The Doctor: loveable and reasonably intelligent and
brief. We die and break his heart, every time.
Chrysi Cat
2021-05-01 19:41:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chrysi Cat
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that
anyone will tidy up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, but I prefer to include it. It can help make the sentence
easier to read when it's fairly long.
Is *that* used here as a conj.?
Yes.  It is the conjunctive "that" that is easiest to omit.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
A famous British science-fiction TV series.
The series was not serious science fiction; it incorporated
elements of fantasy, comedy, and horror.  The "Weeping Angels" were
a predatory race of aliens that froze into statues, of the kind you
might see in a graveyard, while anyone was looking at them.
Past tense? Do you know something about a cancellation that should
last longer than "into 2025" that I should also know about?
I know I've stopped watching it.  My hope that Alex Kingston (River
Song) would be the next Doctor has been dashed.
I was pulling for Daphne Ashbrook myself, because if the Doctor could
become a woman, why couldn't they also have an accent other than "some
flavour of BrE"?

Canonically, the Doctor--and I THINK other Time Lords and Ladies as
well, as I seem to recall Romana's second form was also inspired by a
mortal she met--has been known to take the form of another person their
life crossed along the way, as a tribute (this was the explanation as to
why Capaldi, who'd been in "The Fires of Pompeii", was allowed to look
the same when he donned the coat).

As for Ms. Kingston, she has the issue that THAT relationship seems
close enough that the Doctor wouldn't think it nearly as great a tribute
as a torture to see the face of their spouse in every mirror. And of
course, to a far greater degree than "was this a Grace Holloway
characteristic?", people would be constantly judging her to see if
something was part of River's characterisation.
--
Chrysi Cat
1/2 anthrocat, nearly 1/2 anthrofox, all magical
Transgoddess, quick to anger. [she/her. Misgender and die].
Call me Chrysi or call me Kat, I'll respond to either!
Lewis
2021-04-30 01:03:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Neither 'is' is needed.
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone will tidy
up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
This construction is very common in English.
The more wine, the more dancing.
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
That is the source of the quote.
--
I never wanted to do this in the first place.
Peter T. Daniels
2021-04-30 14:44:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Neither 'is' is needed.
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone will tidy
up the text."
Can the word *that* also be omitted here?
Yes, and it should be.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Lewis
This construction is very common in English.
The more wine, the more dancing.
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
What's the meaning of *Doctor Who*?
An unaccountably popular, decades-old British TV series.
Peter T. Daniels
2021-04-30 14:41:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Lewis
the more specialized the subject *is*, the less likely it
is that anyone will tidy up the text
Neither 'is' is needed.
"The more specialized the subject, the less likely that anyone will tidy
up the text."
This construction is very common in English.
The more wine, the more dancing.
"Fascinating race, the Weeping Angels." (Doctor Who)
"No Comment." (countless politicians).
"Good game!"
Etc etc.
Those are most certainly not all the same construction.

The wine one is the same construction. The Angels one
is an appositive. The other two are noun phrases.
Loading...