richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Tue Jul 4 21:55:01 CEST 2017
Thou hast no need at all to be pompous, just a wee bit old-fashioned.
Thou art more than welcome me to the extremely select club of language
nutters (current membership: 1 and a few stray Mennonites)
who want to bring Thou, thee, they and thine back into mainstream
Membership is free, and thou art not required to wear a daft uniform,
change thy dietary habits, take any odd vows, or
reassess thy personal hygiene regime . . .
However, if thou usest the middle-finger in any way whatsoever thou wilt
be expelled forthwith, fifthwith and sixthwith!
None of our membership have become obsessive enough to remove their
On 7/4/17 10:43 pm, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote:
> On 07/04/2017 11:34 AM, Mark Waddingham via use-livecode wrote:
>> It was a generic 'you' and not you 'you' :)
>> I think part of my brain decided on 'one' there but my fingers
>> objected ('when' should have been 'one').
>> Indeed in this instance 'one' in both places probably would have been
>> better, however I always feel like that sounds slightly pompous...
> Yes, "one" would maybe have been more syntactically correct but made
> you feel pompous. "You" in both places emphasizes the lexical
> ambiguity. So even though the sentence would be diagrammed the same
> way (the bytecode implementation would be identical) they feel
> completely different.
> So... aren't you glad we have synonyms? <g>
> And placing the sentence in passive voice would eliminate the above
> problems by allowing a different creative process to take place. Thus
> my argument for synonyms: not that it makes much (if any) difference
> at the engine level, but it allows for some right-brain interaction in
> what would otherwise be a completely left-brain activity.
More information about the use-livecode