Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

30

I'm Indian. And I assure you there's no such thing as the lowercase 'i'. No grammar teacher of mine -- and I've had quite a few good ones -- ever so much as mentioned it. In fact, this is the first I'm hearing of it. The tendency of Indians to write in textspeak is unfortunate, but 'i' is as erroneous as 'u' EDIT: I'd like to point out that almost all of ...


20

Jeega's post has a number of features.  It shows Jeega's awareness of the usual convention.  It hints that Jeega used to follow that convention.  It mentions a reason to defy that convention and follow an alternate.  It alludes to but does not cite a source which would support that reason. There are also, of course, a number of ...


5

I'm not aware of any specific link with Indian English ("indian english"?) but I do have an addendum to your list: (4) - Stylistic reasons. One might disagree with it, but the lowercase "i" is often a deliberate stylistic choice, a flouting of convention for effect. It's particularly closely associated with poet e.e. cummings, who also rejected the ...


3

Picture nouns are a well-known special case for reflexivization, and possibly your grammar checker has special rules built in about that case. Do a web search for "picture nouns reflexivization" and you'll get lots of references. But no one understands reflexivization very well, and I certainly wouldn't accept the judgement of a grammar checker. In your ...


3

I thought to quote these 2 posts from Quora, which enlarges on the existing answers: User 'Rob Weir' 's answer: It was common in letters to sign it with a statement of your relationship to the person, e.g.: Your faithful Son, Your loving Uncle Your most obedient and humble servant And so on. It became quite elaborate in some cases. ...


3

At Google Books "I saw myself in the mirror" About 16,500 results is quite common, while "I saw me in the mirror" 5 results is rare. It sounds uneducated and dialectal. The first is what you should use.


2

There is no rule for this pathological example. Aside from rewording, the best solution I can think is to italicize or otherwise use a different font from the body text for it and then use an apostrophe + s in the normal font. It's first letter is i.


1

Pronouns can be syntactically ambiguous, but relative clauses can't (at least when the subject is a noun). The difference can be subtle: "The secretaries will destroy the documents after being digitized." "The secretaries will destroy the documents after they've been digitized." Sentence 1 clearly says it's the secretaries that will be digitized. ...


1

Yes, "one" can precede its antecedent. Here is an example. "Before I had actually seen one, I wanted a 4K TV very badly." The antecedent of "one" is the following "a 4K TV". Generally this works when the "one" is within a clause which is subordinate to the clause containing the antecedent. In your example, however, the antecedent of "one" must have come ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible