Jᴀᴄᴜʀᴜᴛᴜ - Tʜᴇ Cᴀsᴛ Oᴜᴛ

I feel your pain ... well, second-hand. My wife is ready to ship her 6th-grade class off to some remote island that does not appear on any known map.

I have a seventh grader.

Robspierre wrote:I asked my Grammar professor about this. Technically, because could of and should of do not exist, it is not case of mixed-up homophones. Technically, to be considered homophones, could of and should of need to exist. Also to be considered a homophone, could of and could've must have different meanings. They can be considered contrived contractions similar to I'll and eye'll (as in my eye'll be on you.) Contrived contractions come out of conversation, which brings us back to, it is a case of how people speak that finds its way into written English.

Yes, this all hinges on could of and should of not " technically existing." if they did "technically exist" it would be a case of mixed-up homophones.

Okay, my point was that 've and of are homophonic enclitics - SandChigger, any input on this? Okay, regardless of terminology, I see your point, thanks for filling me in (And everyone else, sorry for this distraction)

Well, damn, I was just going to ignore this and let it go away.

"should of" is, well ... it's just wrong. That's me with my prescriptivist hat on speaking. But even if I swap it for the descriptivist hat, it's not interesting except, minimally, as an orthographic error that indicates some of the things that go on in some people's heads when they write. It's no different than, say, something like "I new what he mint." It's just someone unthinkingly substituting a homophonous but erroneous (because meaningless) series of written words for the correct one. I can't see any evidence for supposing there's some kind of linguistic change in progress here.

Duke Leto would no doubt censure Robbo ("Damn sloppy way to [communic]ate!"), but I know we all make mistakes.

Edit: Oh, right: the homophonic clitics bit. Of course 've is a clitic, but in general I wouldn't think of of as being one, although it definitely acts as one in things like adverbial kind of and sort of, as shown by their reduced forms kinda and sorta. Maybe that's where the verb usage originates, by some sort of weird analogy? ???

Maybe the fact that "kind of " and "sort of" exist makes "should of" sound like it might be correct, which is why some people interpret "should've" that way.

HBJ

MrFlibble wrote:

Robspierre wrote:I asked my Grammar professor about this. Technically, because could of and should of do not exist, it is not case of mixed-up homophones. Technically, to be considered homophones, could of and should of need to exist. Also to be considered a homophone, could of and could've must have different meanings. They can be considered contrived contractions similar to I'll and eye'll (as in my eye'll be on you.) Contrived contractions come out of conversation, which brings us back to, it is a case of how people speak that finds its way into written English.

Yes, this all hinges on could of and should of not " technically existing." if they did "technically exist" it would be a case of mixed-up homophones.

Okay, my point was that 've and of are homophonic enclitics - SandChigger, any input on this? Okay, regardless of terminology, I see your point, thanks for filling me in (And everyone else, sorry for this distraction)

No worries. Language and the differences between how it is spoken and written can be interesting.

I'm thinking that should of and could of MAY of come about due to people hearing could've and should've spoken and when they tried to spell them,ended up with the "of" instead of have. Which would then bring about the your point as far as writing goes and then Chigger goes all College Professor.

Rob

I think the worst brain fart I ever had... and I will always remember it for its magnitude... was when once I forgot how to spell "of". I think some strong narcotics were wearing off at the time.

Freakzilla wrote:I think the worst brain fart I ever had... and I will always remember it for its magnitude... was when once I forgot how to spell "of". I think some strong narcotics were wearing off at the time.

What's the number for 911!

Rob

Robspierre wrote:No worries. Language and the differences between how it is spoken and written can be interesting.

Always!

and then Chigger goes all College Professor

Borrace wrote:I was thinking about something...kind of a "what if" scenario...and this thought came from reading another thread in this paticular forum about Leto's "four deaths"...

WHAT IF...

After Leto II dies and goes back into the sand...and 1000 years pass...and sandworms retake the face of arrakis...and sandtrout once again flop in the sand...

WHAT IF another Atreides (or other person) who is capable of supersaturating their body with spice put the Leto II "pearl of awareness" skin on their own body and underwent the transformation??? Would Leto II reappear?

just thoughts.

I would imagine that each pearl would be required to completely reassemble Leto's consciousness.

SandChigger wrote:Well, damn, I was just going to ignore this and let it go away.

Thank you for finding some time to comment on this

SandChigger wrote:I can't see any evidence for supposing there's some kind of linguistic change in progress here.

Well, the cases of could of/should of certainly stand out as strikingly unusual because the reader expects something different from a preposition between the modal verb and the main verb, so I thought I'd ask I wonder if such errors, given that they become regular, could actually affect grammar to any extent in the future?

SandChigger wrote:Oh, right: the homophonic clitics bit. Of course 've is a clitic, but in general I wouldn't think of of as being one, although it definitely acts as one in things like adverbial kind of and sort of, as shown by their reduced forms kinda and sorta.

Oh yes, I had kind of and sort of in mind when talking about of as an enclitic

SandChigger wrote:Maybe that's where the verb usage originates, by some sort of weird analogy? ???

Heh, analogy is generally a pretty weird thing

Once again, sorry for going astray of the discussion!

reverendmotherQ. wrote:I would imagine that each pearl would be required to completely reassemble Leto's consciousness.

Don't give KJA ideas! I've already imagined a new novel (series?): "Heroes of Dune on the Quest of Assembling the Pearls of Leto's Consciousness" (which are now scattered across the universe)

If Duncan could get all his serial life memories back without a complete set of cell samples, I think a KH could share Leto's OM with an incomplete set of sandtrout.

The Franklin-Habanaya Mint is Proud to Present

For Discriminating Connoisseurs throughout the Universe

A Complete Partial Set of Beautifully Hand-Bound Arrakeen Sandtrout

Each Guaranteed to Contain a Limpid Pearl of Awareness

of the God Emperor Leto Atreides II




I don't know, something about the phrase "incomplete set" set me off!

SandChigger wrote:

...A Complete Partial Set...[/i]

...

MrFlibble wrote:
Once again, sorry for going astray of the discussion!

Don't apologize, nothing wrong ith thread drift, especially when it brings about new understanding or clarification. I know that there are area's concerning and grammar I want to explore more for my understanding, despite the extensive education I received, there are area's that I feel were lacking.

So, relax, pull up a chair and keep on participating.

Rob

SadisticCynic wrote:

SandChigger wrote:
...A Complete Partial Set...

...

Liked that one, did ya?

Freakzilla wrote:If Duncan could get all his serial life memories back without a complete set of cell samples, I think a KH could share Leto's OM with an incomplete set of sandtrout.

According to an interview I read, it depends on what his "Star Wars rulebook" says.

http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/nonfiction/intkja.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

D Pope wrote:According to an interview I read, it depends on what his "Star Wars rulebook" says.

http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/nonfiction/intkja.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hack wrote: Wells himself has always been a huge influence on me, and Dickens is a spiritual brother (a popular tale-spinner).

Dickens is rolling in his grave.


EDIT:
However, there is an interesting quote from the review of KJA's Hopscotch from the same website:

Infinity Plus wrote: "a couple of times Anderson is moved to notch up the hellish pathos of it all by starting to quote Sidney Carton from Dickens's A Tale of Two Cities: "It is a far, far better thing..." At this stage this reviewer entered a state of paralysis, unable to decide whether to throw the book at the wall or just to fold up in giggles."

And a review of Book 1 of The Saga of Seven Suns

Ibid wrote: Hidden Empire is not simply bad, it's embarrassingly bad, especially when you realise just how many books Kevin J. Anderson has produced previously. The individual motivations, galactic politics, technologies, culture - everything, in fact, seems crushingly predictable, poorly reasoned and frankly rather na&iumlve.

Earthlight publish a lot of good sf, so why they should feel the need to print this monstrosity is beyond me. Innocent trees have died to make this book, and such senseless slaughter should make you angry!

But I digress... (maybe this should be in a KJA review discussion)

EDIT: Nevermind.

I like to view my best novels as literary "widescreen CinemaScope" productions, such as my Dune prequels with Brian Herbert, or my forthcoming multi-volume science fiction epic, The Saga of Seven Suns.

Emphasis mine.

So they are HIS prequels, Bobo is just along for the ride.

Brian Herbert, of course, brings with him a legitimacy and a deep understanding of Frank Herbert's work,

Rob

Well, that was just cruising right along as the typical Journeyman cut-and-paste interview ... until the Dickens thing. ZOMG!

After the shock wore off, my first thought was: "Well, there's the one and only time Anderhack will ever be mentioned in the same breath as Dickens."

KJA has compared the Chapterhouse:Dune cliffhanger to Dickens' "The Mystery of Edwin Drood" a few times in interviews, just to show his familiarity with the classics. So I'm not surprised he would take that one step further and claim a spiritual kinship with the guy.

I imagine we'll soon be hearing that he was going to send a signed copy of his first novel to Dickens, but Dickens passed away before he had the chance.

HBJ

Hunchback Jack wrote:I imagine we'll soon be hearing that he was going to send a signed copy of his first novel to Dickens, but Dickens passed away before he had the chance.

ZING!!!

Dayum, are you on a roll today or what?

Heh. Thanks, but this is KJA we're talking about. Easy target.

HBJ

Hunchback Jack wrote:I imagine we'll soon be hearing that he was going to send a signed copy of his first novel to Dickens, but Dickens passed away before he had the chance.

Yeah, I thought Frank Herbert was his spiritual brother from a different mother. I've always thought, though, that Omnius was like the Ghost of Christmas Past with some Mengele.