Forums | MacLife

all right

I still want to know why do we drive on parkways and park on driveways?

I think grammarians, people who research the roots of words and other anal-retentive types take issue with the fact that "all right" and its informal friend "alright" have the same meaning whereas other words containing the prefix "al" do not. Take, for example, the difference between "all ready" and "already."
   Is everyone all ready for the exam? (as in completely prepared)
   John and Beth left for the concert already. (as in previously)

or

"all together" means "everyone gathered" while
"altogether" means entirely.

And now that I've already explained all this, I'm altogether certain that I'm seriously anal retentive, and I'm not alright with that. 

That was a great explanation. Sounds like the most probably answer to me as well.

From Greg the Bunny: Ahi Iget

Count Blah.  Classic stuff.

PuddleMonkey has it about right.  In the end, there's no real reason for "alright" to be ... uh ... all right, because "all right" was doing fine by itself.  It's essentially lazy to not want to add another "l" and a space.  And the other words ("altogether"/"all together", etc) have different meanings from each other.

The only grammar thing that continually irritates me more than this is the misuse of "your" and "you're".  But hey, it's the Internet -- whaddayagonnado?  It's a casual forum.  Not that I wouldn't mind if people were to use the correct spelling for things -- oh frabjous day!  But that ain't gonna happen.  People who try to get away with using "alright" in papers they turn in to me get that marked off, though, and that's just the name of that tune. 

One good thing you can say for those that use "alright" is at least they're not as lazy as those who substitute "u" for "you" or "ur" for "your".  That makes me wanna lay the grammar smack down on 'em, posthaste.

Ted Striker: I flew single engine fighters in the Air Force, but this plane has four engines. It's an entirely different kind of flying altogether.

Everyone else, speaking all together: It's an entirely different kind of flying.

(from the Zucker/Abrams/Zucker glory days....)

Ted Striker: I flew single engine fighters in the Air Force, but this plane has four engines. It's an entirely different kind of flying altogether.

Everyone else, speaking all together: It's an entirely different kind of flying.

(from the Zucker/Abrams/Zucker glory days....)

surely, you cannot mean there glory days have past....


(set-up)

Actually, by definition, grammar is for everyone who uses language.  English grammar is for those who use the English language.  Grammar is an inherent part of language, can't get away from that.

wrong, asswipe.  it's for everyone who follow the rulez.   

Hey, nice argumentative skill there, Mr. Stream-of-Consciousness.  I realize you're trying to be a "rebel", and are enamored of Joyce and Faulkner and all that -- so are a lot of people -- but that doesn't give you the right to remake the systems whereby things function.  Hey, guess what?  If you use the English language, you use English grammar, simple as that.  If you don't like it, that's too bad.  I'm sure it makes the Baby Jesus cry. 

In other words, if you're too stupid to realize that grammar is the system in which inflection, syntax and word formation make up a language, then that's your problem.  I'm not saying you have to follow the rules -- unless you take one of my classes -- but you do need to realize that some things are just the way they are.  I'm not talking about correct spelling, or correct grammar, or anything like that, just that grammar is -- again, by definition -- an inherent part of language.

Oh, and smurf you, too. 

your making yourself a target...

1) who needs Jesus?

2) i use words, not grammar.  grammar is a verb you twit.  if you are a teacher, it better not be English, or we live in a world of smurf.

definition:
1 a : the study of the classes of words, their inflections, and their functions and relations in the sentence b : a study of what is to be preferred and what avoided in inflection and syntax
2 a : the characteristic system of inflections and syntax of a language b : a system of rules that defines the grammatical structure of a language
3 a : a grammar textbook b : speech or writing evaluated according to its conformity to grammatical rules
4 : the principles or rules of an art, science, or technique <a grammar of the theater>

so, really, smurf you!   

Heh.  Look at definition number two, again, you rube.  "I use words, not grammar"!  "Grammar is a verb..."! Ha!  You're unintentionally pretty funny.  You really "grammared" up that post, for sure.

OK, don't see the obvious right in front of you.  Make yourself look stupid.  I'm done with you.

(Save me from those who've just recently read a few existentialist writers, lord!  They know not what they read, though they think they do.)

Two non-words that annoy the hell out of me:

1) "Irregardless" & 2) "Agreeance"

I'm in agreeance with you...er...I mean...oh, never mind. 

I dislike "proactive" a lot, as well.  There are others, but, what can you do?  People use words, and the more they use them, the more standard they get, until they become the standard.  Trying to hold back the evolution of language is like fighting against the waves.  But, sometimes it's fun to bitch about it...irregardless.   

your making yourself a target...

1) who needs Jesus?

2) i use words, not grammar.  grammar is a verb you twit.  if you are a teacher, it better not be English, or we live in a world of smurf.

definition:
1 a : the study of the classes of words, their inflections, and their functions and relations in the sentence b : a study of what is to be preferred and what avoided in inflection and syntax
2 a : the characteristic system of inflections and syntax of a language b : a system of rules that defines the grammatical structure of a language
3 a : a grammar textbook b : speech or writing evaluated according to its conformity to grammatical rules
4 : the principles or rules of an art, science, or technique <a grammar of the theater>

so, really, smurf you!   

Heh.  Look at definition number two, again, you rube.  "I use words, not grammar"!  "Grammar is a verb..."! Ha!  You're unintentionally pretty funny.  You really "grammared" up that post, for sure.

OK, don't see the obvious right in front of you.  Make yourself look stupid.  I'm done with you.

(Save me from those who've just recently read a few existentialist writers, lord!  They know not what they read, though they think they do.)

bigger target.

you jack-ass, an existentialist knows that you cannot "know" anything, only relative meanings which are nearly impossible to relate.

so, you don't even have a vague understanding of existientialism, which is really funny.  and those aren't exisitentialist writers in the philosophical sense.  in the modern day romance style, maybe.  i'd say kafka, sarte, camus, hegel...

of course grammar is "used".  hell, you already knew i required it iTunes... you referenced that thread yourself....

http://www.macaddict.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=18219

so, to sum: it would be "existentionally" correct to say; i do not use grammar, much, or well

and you don't do a good job of looking smart, either 

INCONCEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEIBLE !


ok, ill take that iocane power now.