In article , Ginge
wrote:
In article , Allan Bennett says...
In article ,
pseudoplatypus URL:mailto
The plod go out looking for drunks at xmas. Other times of year,
detection is left to the safety cameras. I thought that would have
been obvious.

Obvious - but completely wrong.



Check your spelling, bloody useless drunk driver

So, how long have you been trying to use English for, sonny?


That should read:

"So, for how long have you been trying to use English, sonny?"

Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.

But in both cases the sentence ends with "sonny".

Cor! You write good, dunnit?

1. "Prepositions are not words to end sentences with." is an example of
irony. In your case, wasted irony.

2. Try to use punctuation correctly: ie "But, in both cases..."

3. Try to understand sentence formation - and for what commas can be used -
got that, sonny? (expl: both sentences end with ", sonny", not just "sonny".

4. And never start a sentence with a conjunction.


Let that be a lesson to you.


Allan Bennett
Not a fan of corrective institutions




--

In article , Allan Bennett says...
In article , Ginge
wrote:
But in both cases the sentence ends with "sonny".

Cor! You write good, dunnit?

aussie accent
Best 'ad to say it though, but.
/aussie accent

1. "Prepositions are not words to end sentences with." is an example of
irony. In your case, wasted irony.

2. Try to use punctuation correctly: ie "But, in both cases..."

It seems you imagine my speech would pause after the word 'but', is that
the case? I wrote that line exactly as I'd say the sentence, I'd not
pause after the word 'but'.


3. Try to understand sentence formation - and for what commas can be used -
got that, sonny? (expl: both sentences end with ", sonny", not just "sonny".

I can see how if I'd written something along the lines of - 'The sky is
blue. But, sometimes clouds obscure the sky.' the word 'But,' would be
correct, in that context it sounds correct.

In a single sentence I'd not make a pause, there's no point in doing so,
it's a one line interruption.

4. And never start a sentence with a conjunction.


Let that be a lesson to you.

Boring, boring, boring.

You and Des should meet up.

Ginge wrote ...

{ snip }

You and Des should meet up.

Why, so that I can kick him up and down the newsgroup ? Come on, Ginge: my
spelling and grammar flames are _class_.

--
genuine_froggie |****#1 YGL#4 YFC#1 YFB#1 UKRMMA#14 two#38
|BONY#48 ANORAK#11
Yamaha YZF-R1, FJR1300i, GSX1400i, 996i (for sale)

In article , Ginge
wrote:
In article , Allan Bennett says...
In article , Ginge
wrote:
But in both cases the sentence ends with "sonny".

Cor! You write good, dunnit?

aussie accent
Best 'ad to say it though, but.
/aussie accent

1. "Prepositions are not words to end sentences with." is an example of
irony. In your case, wasted irony.

2. Try to use punctuation correctly: ie "But, in both cases..."

It seems you imagine my speech would pause after the word 'but', is that
the case? I wrote that line exactly as I'd say the sentence, I'd not
pause after the word 'but'.

I did not imagine anything. Just because you don't talk proper doesn't mean
that not writing proper should be a natural consequence.


3. Try to understand sentence formation - and for what commas can be used
- got that, sonny? (expl: both sentences end with ", sonny", not just
"sonny".

I can see how if I'd written something along the lines of - 'The sky is
blue. But, sometimes clouds obscure the sky.' the word 'But,' would be
correct, in that context it sounds correct.

Invoke article 4:
4. And never start a sentence with a conjunction.

Rules for correct written English are not governed by what 'sounds correct'
to you.


In a single sentence I'd not make a pause, there's no point in doing so,
it's a one line interruption.

Errrk! Could you repeat that, using sensible punctuation, so that it makes
sense to the reader rather than just the speaker?

Perhaps not.

4. And never start a sentence with a conjunction.


Let that be a lesson to you.

Boring, boring, boring.

Ah! The simple, cheap, throwaway line. Always useful when you have no lucid
argument to offer.


Allan Bennett
Not a fan of bad examples

--

In article , Allan Bennett says...
In article , Ginge

It seems you imagine my speech would pause after the word 'but', is that
the case? I wrote that line exactly as I'd say the sentence, I'd not
pause after the word 'but'.

I did not imagine anything. Just because you don't talk proper doesn't mean
that not writing proper should be a natural consequence.

How do you know I don't talk properly, have we met? :-)

When on Usenet I generally reply in a quickly typed, highly informal,
conversational style. I never spell-check and I very rarely proof read -
there are better things to waste my time upon. I find the informal
approach lends itself to the kind of lively banter often seen in
uk.rec.motorcycles, the newsgroup where I'm currently reading this
delightful cross-post.

In a single sentence I'd not make a pause, there's no point in doing so,
it's a one line interruption.

Errrk! Could you repeat that, using sensible punctuation, so that it makes
sense to the reader rather than just the speaker?

Perhaps not.

Treat it as though I was rudely interupting your diatribe, butting in
without drawing a single breath.

"Anyhow, I see no point in carrying on with this...

....At least not until I find my ingerlish teecher and sew hymn fer knot
teaching me write.... I were just a GCSE guinea-pig, for crying out
loud... They aint not teached us nuffink!"

In article , Ginge
wrote:
In article , Allan Bennett says...
In article , Ginge

It seems you imagine my speech would pause after the word 'but', is
that the case? I wrote that line exactly as I'd say the sentence,
I'd not pause after the word 'but'.

I did not imagine anything. Just because you don't talk proper doesn't
mean that not writing proper should be a natural consequence.

How do you know I don't talk properly,

You claim that the way you write is how you speak: "I wrote that line exactly
as I'd say the sentence..."


When on Usenet I generally reply in a quickly typed, highly informal,
conversational style. I never spell-check and I very rarely proof read -
there are better things to waste my time upon. I find the informal
approach lends itself to the kind of lively banter often seen in
uk.rec.motorcycles, the newsgroup where I'm currently reading this
delightful cross-post.

Thanks for sharing that with us. It's always rewarding when first
impressions are proved accurate.


In a single sentence I'd not make a pause, there's no point in doing
so, it's a one line interruption.

Errrk! Could you repeat that, using sensible punctuation, so that it
makes sense to the reader rather than just the speaker?

Perhaps not.

In article , Ginge
wrote a few words
illustrating emphatically that he doesn't talk properly:

Treat it as though I was rudely interupting your diatribe, butting in
without drawing a single breath.

Thanks for sharing that with us. It's always rewarding when first
impressions are proved accurate.


"Anyhow, I see no point in carrying on with this...

...At least not until I find my ingerlish teecher and sew hymn fer knot
teaching me write.... I were just a GCSE guinea-pig, for crying out
loud... They aint not teached us nuffink!"

Thanks for sharing that with us. It's always rewarding when first
impressions are proved accurate.



Allan Bennett
Not a fan of repetition
Not a fan of repetition

--

Allan Bennett wrote:
snip

Thanks for sharing that with us. It's always rewarding when first
impressions are proved accurate.

You know, I'd never realised how true that is.

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7
Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

Allan Bennett wrote:

In article , Ginge
wrote:

snip

Boring, boring, boring.

Ah! The simple, cheap, throwaway line. Always useful when you have no
lucid argument to offer.

But *oh* so true in your case

Allan Bennett
Not a fan of bad examples

That would be the sig you don't use again

--

That, on the other hand, would be the sig separator that is
a) Broken
b) In the wrong place.


--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7
Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

In article , Catman
wrote:
Allan Bennett wrote:

In article , Ginge
wrote:

snip

Boring, boring, boring.

Ah! The simple, cheap, throwaway line. Always useful when you have no
lucid argument to offer.

But *oh* so true in your case

Your contribution to the discussion, the uk.rec.cars.classic ng or the topic
being...?


Allan Bennett
Not a fan of bad examples

That would be the sig you don't use again

No, it wouldn't. It is not a sig. The sig would follow the -- things.


--

That, on the other hand, would be the sig separator that is
a) Broken
b) In the wrong place.

No. It means you have a duff news prog.


Allan Bennett
Not a fan of duffers

There now follows a sig separator:
--

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 20:47:01 +0000, Allan Bennett
wrote:

Ah! The simple, cheap, throwaway line. Always useful when you have no lucid
argument to offer.

I say, this is jolly interesting.

Popcorn, anyone?

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19