English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

terdon

15:00

@Cerberus Which witch would a witchchuck chuck if a withchuck chucked their witch?

Cerberus

Ha.

You win.

terdon

Yay!

Rand al'Thor

@terdon How much cous cous would a cuscus cuss if a cuscus could cuss cous cous?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

bring -> brang, everyone knows that

Mitch

OK about whether, do you say 'Whether x is the case' or do you say 'whether or not x is the case'?

terdon

15:00

@Randal'Thor Heh, nice one.

Mitch

or 'whether x is the case or not'

terdon

Depends on context, doesn't it? [that will depend on] whether X is the case But, whether X is the case or not [, I'm still going]

Martin AJ

Is this correct as a title of a banner? "Shavadoon printing and advertising"

Mitch

@MartinAJ Maybe capitalize? "Shavadoon Printing and Advertising"

terdon

@MartinAJ Could be, yes. If Shavadoon is the name of the business, I'd set it apart with a colon though. Like this: "Shavadoon: Printing and Advertising"

Hmm. Now that I look at it again, I'm not sure.

Nah, no colon.

Mitch

15:03

@terdon That's it, I just don't know. I remember someone saying years ago to remove the 'or not'. and they didn't explain why.

Lawrence

@Mitch If you had "regardless of whether ...", then "or not" is redundant. Likewise with @terdon's "depends on whether ...". Otherwise, "whether" just gives you the positive case, and "or not" is required for the negative.

Rand al'Thor

@terdon :no colon:

Martin AJ

Ah ok ... thank you guys

Mitch

@Lawrence ok. that makes sense.

Cerberus

> Regardless of whether it will be raining, I'm going to church on Sunday.

Mitch

15:06

Whether it will be raining or not, I'm not going to church.

Lawrence

@Cerberus Yes, the "or not" is latent in "regardless".

terdon

@Cerberus I think you meant irregardless. Tsk.

Mitch

so both cerb's and my statements are OK?

@terdon literally

Cerberus

I think or not is still possible in that example.

@terdon Silence!

Lawrence

@Cerberus But maybe "regardless of whether it rains ..."

terdon

15:08

I do find Cerb's example a bit odd. I would probably have said something like regardless of the rain, I'll be going

Mitch

argh! so complex!

Rand al'Thor

> I'm going to church on Sunday whether it rains or not.

Helmar

Regardless of the weather, I'm not going to church.

Lawrence

@Cerberus Possible, but redundant. :)

Rand al'Thor

@Lawrence Agreed.

terdon

15:08

Yeah, I think the regardless . . . verbING is what makes it strange.

Cerberus

@Lawrence Yes, I changed my tenses so many times...

Mitch

I think redundancy is the context problem altogether

Cerberus

@terdon I agree: the whole whether thing is redundant there.

Mitch

@terdon I think verbing weirds language

@Cerberus 'whether' is redundant?

Cerberus

I should have constructed a better example...

@Mitch When it can be replaced with a simpler construction.

Preposition + whether + clause is more complex than preposition + noun.

Kit Z. Fox

15:10

@Mitch meh.

And thanks.

Cerberus

Regardless of whether it rains → regardless of the rain.

Kit Z. Fox

regardless of rain.

Cerberus

Although the latter may suggest that it will be raining for sure?

Kit Z. Fox

yeah, that.

Rand al'Thor

Regardless of potential rain?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

15:12

I think a normal human would say "Whether it's raining or not"

Or, if they're being funny, "Weather it's raining or not..."

Cerberus

@Lawrence I would say you need or not when the whether clause is elliptical, i.e. when the clause that it depends on is omitted.

Helmar

"Whether the weather allows it or not. ;)

Kit Z. Fox

regardless of the weather.

Rand al'Thor

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Is anyone in here a normal human?

Cerberus

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 In which sentence?

Kit Z. Fox

15:13

or regardless of weather...hmm.

Lawrence

@Cerberus Example, please?

Helmar

What's a normal human?

Cerberus

I would say weather permitting...

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Cerberus Instead of "Regardless of rain" or whatever.

Cerberus

@Lawrence Whether it's raining or not, she's still going.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

15:14

@Cerberus That doesn't meant the same thing though

Rand al'Thor

@Cerberus But if the weather literally doesn't permit it, you aren't going. It's only if the weather hampers you that you can still go anyway.

Cerberus

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 OK it works in that construction, when you have regardless, but not in all other situations.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Whether it's raining or not, I'm going shopping != Weather permitting, I'm going shopping

Cerberus

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 No.

Helmar

Whether my weather gear allows me to weather the weather?

Rand al'Thor

15:15

"Weather permitting, I'm going to church" means you're only going if it doesn't rain.

Helmar

It all depends on the strength of the rain

Kit Z. Fox

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Rain or shine.

Lawrence

@Cerberus That doesn't have "regardless". The "or not" is needed if there's no regardless or similar.

Cerberus

@Randal'Thor I'm not one to out when it's raining. I'm made of sugar.

Rand al'Thor

@Cerberus Yes.

:-)

Cerberus

15:15

@Randal'Thor The dots were meant to indicate a twist!

@Lawrence Yes, and I was trying to generalise that by calling it elliptical.

It works just like whatever.

Mitch

Religious wars were started over less.

Rand al'Thor

> Whether weather permits or not, I'll go. I'll not let rain reign over me nor wind wind me up.

Mitch

Whether permitting

Cerberus

@Randal'Thor Maybe.

@Randal'Thor Ha!

Mitch

@Randal'Thor of if it be bees

OK, now that that has been totally muddied...

'lightening' is not and has not ever been a word, right?

unless you're trying to lighten the load

and that act is called 'lightening the load'

right?

Helmar

15:20

Actually odo lists it

A drop in the level of the womb during the last weeks of pregnancy as the head of the fetus engages in the pelvis.

Mitch

I'm doing my part to keep things on topic.

You can't say now that I'm always off topic.

Lawrence

@Cerberus But I don't think "whether it rains or not, I'm going to church" has any ellipsis, other than with "or (does) not (rain)". I don't think it's fair to say that "whether it rains, I'm going to church" is ungrammatical because of ellipsis when the ellipsis comes into play only when you add "or not". :)

Cerberus

Hehe.

Mitch

@Helmar Oh...that's perfectly fine, as an extension of lighten meaning to lessen the weight of

Cerberus

@Lawrence Oh, no, those are two different instances of ellipsis.

The or not is or may be elliptical.

But the ellipsis I was talking about is [regardless of] whether...

> [Regardless of] whether it rains or not, I'm going to church.

Helmar

15:22

@Mitch Well, the baby is still getting heavier until it's out

Mitch

lightening as a variant spelling of false/flok etymology of 'lightning' that bright flashy stuff in the sky during thunderstorms.

Cerberus

This seems elliptical to me ^.

Mitch

@Helmar OMG and they keep getting heavier

Helmar

@Mitch Very true :D

Rand al'Thor

@Mitch Or the mood.

Lawrence

15:22

@Cerberus But is it valid to say that "regardless of" was ellipsed in that case?

Rand al'Thor

Or the sky?

Mitch

@Randal'Thor ye, metaphorically.

Cerberus

@Lawrence I'm wondering whether it is valid, and I'm tending towards "yes" at the moment!

Lawrence

:)

Mitch

I feel like some people have made a case for 'lightening bug'.

I have negative tendentious words for those people.

Helmar

15:24

MW actually lists lightening with lightning

to give out flashes of lightning

Mitch

I'm still folowwing the 'whether' discussion. Just... I have no comment yet. when the decision is made to push the button to release the warheads, then I'll show up.

Helmar

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lightening

Mitch

@Helmar God damn them

Cerberus

@Lawrence What is it called when a subordinating word can be attached to any kind of main clause, like if or because, as opposed to e.g. relative and interrogative pronouns, which can only be used when the main clause meets certain conditions?

Helmar

@Mitch Indeed xD

Lawrence

15:25

@Cerberus The fact that the words aren't needed doesn't mean that the words are missing, right?

Cerberus

@Lawrence Indeed not. But I think they may be missing here.

I'm arguing that whether is of the latter category, like relative and interrogative pronouns.

Mitch

@Helmar They all seem to be right all up until this one: "2: to give out flashes of lightning"

Lawrence

@Cerberus Aye, there's the rub.

Cerberus

Perhaps whether is best considered an interrogative pronoun, according to my theory?

Helmar

@Mitch Yeah, that totally steps out of line

Mitch

15:26

that is the kind of devolution into swamp creatures we should all endeavor stamp out.

along with consistent metaphors.

Lawrence

@Cerberus @Mitch here come the warheads. :)

Mitch

sticking with one metaphor as bridge we won't count

Cerberus

@Lawrence I don't know that they are warheads.

Tchrist often uses the that construction.

Mitch

coordinate clause?

Lawrence

@Cerberus Sorry, noob here as far as Linguistics is concerned.

Mitch

15:28

adverbial clause?

Cerberus

Which to me sounds pleasantly old fashioned.

@Lawrence Oh OK.

Mitch

Where is schoolhouse rock to tell us the answer?

Oh. Youtube.

Lawrence

@Cerberus Still trying to parse this. What's the latter category - "missing", or "interrogative pronouns"?

Cerberus

@Mitch You forgot the diaeresis.

Mitch

@Cerberus This ain't the New YOrker

Or maybe it needs to be...

here's a pet peeve of mine...

The Dorgi.

a pet peeve pet.

Cerberus

15:29

@Lawrence The category of subordinating words that only work with certain kinds of main clauses. Unlike if and because, which work with any kind of main clause.

Mitch

wait..here's ther real peeve.

Cerberus

> *John lived in the forest, why the witch desired him.

> *The forest was thick, who liked to eat children.

Mitch

People who pronounce the abbreviation for a commonly held store (where the owners are also the primary customers in bulk) as though it were housing for poultry.

Lawrence

@Cerberus Can't whether be used everywhere if or because is used?

Cerberus

Why and who don't work in those sentences. ^

@Lawrence I would argue that it cannot. Except with ellipsis.

Mitch

15:32

The abbreviation for cooperative pronounced 'coop' rather than 'co op'

this is the only confusion in english orthography that would be helped by the diaeresis.

Cerberus

@Mitch We use diaeresis in the English room!

@Mitch Ow, that's silly.

I wouldn't.

Mitch

but anybody who knows anything should pronounce 'coop', as short for cooperative, in two syllables.

Cerberus

People might think noone were an old spelling variant of noon.

Mitch

@Cerberus that's why you spell that 'no one'

Cerberus

Or noöne.

Mitch

15:34

cut out the middle man by introducing a middle space

Lawrence

@Cerberus There may be instances that whether can be used when if can't - e.g. "Whether it rains depends on several things" - but for the reverse, nothing comes to mind immediately.

Cerberus

People don't like no one because it's everyone, someone.

Mitch

@Cerberus then we're reduced to communicating on macs.

@Cerberus Anyone?

Lawrence

... Oops, scrap that.

Mitch

Bueller?

Rand al'Thor

15:35

@Lawrence No. "If X is true, Y is also true" =/= "Whether X is true, Y is also true".

Mitch

Nobody.

Nothing

Cerberus

@Lawrence I would say it's also elliptical in that example.

Mitch

Never

Cerberus

@Mitch Whaaat?!

@Mitch Exactly.

Lawrence

@Cerberus Hmm, things that aren't there are really hard to spot. :)

Rand al'Thor

15:37

@Lawrence Sometimes "whether" should be used because "if" would be ambiguous. "They'll ask me if I eat" could mean either "they'll ask me whether I eat" or "if I eat, they'll ask me".

Lawrence

@Randal'Thor Yup, I got that. Brain's in a slow gear at the moment.

Cerberus

@Lawrence Quite!

Lawrence

@Cerberus I'd go along with an ellipsed "Regardless of ..." in that example. Ok, I can see where you're coming from now.

@Randal'Thor (... But thanks, all the same. :) )

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

FYI Mod election nominations close in 4 hours

Kit Z. Fox

Last call. Last call, everyone!

Rand al'Thor

15:44

You hoping for a primary? ;-)

Kit Z. Fox

Kinda.

Mostly just for giggles.

Mitch

an extra week of giggles

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

Where's the evan carrol when we need him?

Kit Z. Fox

coughs

Also, ohai @Randal'Thor. Didn't see you come in.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

or the time cube guy

Mitch

15:46

some peoples personality changes when they're typing.

Kit Z. Fox

omg the time cube guy. forgot about him.

Mitch

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 ??

Rand al'Thor

I can run, if you really want an 11th candidate :-P

Mitch

and some people not.

Kit Z. Fox

um.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

15:46

@Mitch do you know what time cube is?

I don't think he's on SE.

Mitch

is that some reference to Dr Who?

or Marvel comics?

or a new energy candy bar?

Rand al'Thor

@KitZ.Fox waves I just came in to mention that a question I'd found in the CV queue here would be great for SFF, and then Cerb and people lured me into conversation.

Kit Z. Fox

I do kind of wonder why The Evan didn't run.

@Randal'Thor Oh, which?

Did you flag it?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

aw, timecube.com is offline

@Mitch web.archive.org/web/20150818094035/http://www.timecube.com

Mitch

have I forgotten things embedded in our culture? like the water fish swim through, I am unaware of what is unspoken?

Kit Z. Fox

15:48

@Randal'Thor Oh, I see it.

Rand al'Thor

@KitZ.Fox This one, currently with 3 CVs. Yep, I flagged it.

Mitch

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I won't regret seeing that will I? Will I be able to unsee it?

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Mitch it's more "reading" than "Seeing"

also, the wayback link is wonky, the page redirects. hit "stop" before it does that.

Helmar

@KitZ.Fox I can run and blame your desire for a primary in my application ;)

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

> Belly-Button Is the Signature
Of Your Personal Creator -
I Believe Her Name Mama.

Pastor Told His Flock That
God Created All Of Them -
Truth Was That They All had
Mama Made Belly Buttons,
Church Was Full Of Liars.

I'd say "you can't make this stuff up", but clearly, someone did.

Kit Z. Fox

15:51

@Randal'Thor I think it's fine to stay here.

Mitch

@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Oh. I only vaguely remember that.

Makes a lot of sense.

Kit Z. Fox

But I did prune the comments.

Mitch

Everything except the margins. Now that is crazy

Kit Z. Fox

Let me know if it does get closed though. I'd be happy to migrate it.

Mitch

@KitZ.Fox where would it go?

Rand al'Thor

15:53

@KitZ.Fox OK, I'll try to keep an eye on it.

Kit Z. Fox

I'll leave the flag for now too, to help me remember.

Rand al'Thor

@KitZ.Fox Yeah, some of those comments were kinda nasty.

Kit Z. Fox

It's not a good place to discuss a person's qualifications.

Cerberus

@Lawrence Oh, yay!

happy dance

Lawrence

16:09

On that note, ... see you all in the transcripts! Nice chatting with you all. Happy start of the next phase of the elections, when it starts, regardless of whether it's the second or third phase :) .

Helmar

Shouldn't the side bar say "current events" instead of "upcoming events" when referring to the ongoing moderator elections?

Tonepoet

Why should it even be qualified?

Helmar

@Tonepoet Good point, "Events" would be totally sufficient

Kit Z. Fox

@Helmar It's the ending that's upcoming.

Helmar

The end is nigh.^^

So it's more an announcement of less trolling to be expected in eight days, than an information for people to engage in the event?

Rand al'Thor

16:20

@Helmar Most events last for much less time than mod elections. It makes sense for something like a movie night or other chatroom event to be marked several days in advance as an "upcoming event" even if it only lasts an hour or two, and elections just use the same framework even if they're technically ongoing events rather than upcoming.

Mr. Shiny and New 安宇

@Randal'Thor yeah, but they could also just use a better label for it.

Helmar

@Randal'Thor Ah, good to know, I wasn't aware of that. Did they announce the elections in that box before the nomination phase?

Rand al'Thor

@Helmar I don't think it's public knowledge that there's going to be an election until the nomination phase starts.

Helmar

@Randal'Thor Of course it isn't unless it's announced anywhere

I was just wondering if I didn't see it before, or if it wasn't even there.

I am just guessing, but probably the mods didn't spontaneously start it ;)

Cerberus

16:47

@Lawrence I wish you the same thing!

Keep these mind

What's the general rule (if any) for modeled/modelled, organisation/organization etc.? Suppose I'd like to write BrE.

Rand al'Thor

@Keepthesemind Modeled and organization are AmE; modelled and organisation are BrE.

For BrE, use a double L for the past tense of verbs like model, travel, channel, and always use S instead of Z for "-ise" verbs.

Cerberus

Well, the z is used by some Brits.

Keep these mind

@Randal'Thor Super. Thanks.

Cerberus

I think it was Oxford that spelled organize?

Keep these mind

16:52

@Cerberus Now what?

Cerberus

> In fact, the ‘-ize’ forms have been in use in English spelling since the 15th century: they didn’t originate in American use, even though they are now standard in US English. The first example for the verb organize in the Oxford English Dictionary is from around 1425, from an English translation of a treatise on surgery written by the French physician Guy de Chauliac:

The brayne after þe lengþ haþ 3 ventriclez, And euery uentricle haþ 3 parties & in euery partie is organized [L. organizatur] one vertue.

blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/03/ize-or-ise

Rand al'Thor

Do Americans say "advertise" or "advertize"?

Cerberus

No idea.

Tonepoet

Advertise I think.

I've never seen anybody spell it with a z.

Keep these mind

Embedded link: oxforddictionaries.com/words/ize-ise-or-yse

Tonepoet

16:57

Sometimes the reason American English differs from British English is because the American variation is actually more traditional. Keep in mind that different habits will be the ones that wane among different groups of divergent people.

Cerberus

So it is.

Keep these mind

@Tonepoet Why do you say 'wane'?

Tonepoet

Because I thought it would be more literal than die.

Transcript for

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…