Dixie Schools Trog on English Grammar

Dixie's Original Statement:
"You've not said a damn thing, other than to hurl a few pejoratives my way..."

Trog's Asserted Grammar Correction:
Psst- your sentence should be corrected to read "other then"

After several 'pokes-n-prods' from Trog to "man up to the challenge" of proving I am smarter than he, I offer the following from American Heritage....

then
–adverb
1. at that time: Prices were lower then.
2. immediately or soon afterward: The rain stopped and then started again.
3. next in order of time: We ate, then we started home.
4. at the same time: At first the water seemed blue, then gray.
5. next in order of place: Standing beside Charlie is my uncle, then my cousin, then my brother.
6. in addition; besides; also: I love my job, and then it pays so well.
7. in that case; as a consequence; in those circumstances: If you're sick, then you should stay in bed.
8. since that is so; as it appears; therefore: You have, then, found the mistake? You are leaving tonight then.
–adjective
9. being; being such; existing or being at the time indicated: the then prime minister.
–noun
10. that time: We have not been back since then. Till then, farewell.
—Idioms
11. but then, but on the other hand: I found their conversation very dull, but then I have different tastes.
12. then and there, at that precise time and place; at once; on the spot: I started to pack my things right then and there. Also, there and then.


than
–conjunction
1. (used, as after comparative adjectives and adverbs, to introduce the second member of an unequal comparison): She's taller than I am.
2. (used after some adverbs and adjectives expressing choice or diversity, such as other, otherwise, else, anywhere, or different, to introduce an alternative or denote a difference in kind, place, style, identity, etc.): I had no choice other than that. You won't find such freedom anywhere else than in this country.
3. (used to introduce the rejected choice in expressions of preference): I'd rather walk than drive there.
4. except; other than: We had no choice than to return home.
5. when: We had barely arrived than we had to leave again.
–preposition
6. in relation to; by comparison with (usually fol. by a pronoun in the objective case): He is a person than whom I can imagine no one more courteous.

So, as we can see, Trog's assertion that I should have typed "then" instead of "than" is incorrect. I did indeed use the proper gramatical context and word in the sentence in question. This did not stop Trog from continuing to harrass me and antagonize me about it, as if he had won some tough-guy contest of smartness. Even after I politely informed him, I thought he was wrong, he maintained I was 'avoiding' the issue. Never offered any evidence to support his view, but insisted I was a moron and he was brilliant.

In fairness, his misconception of the proper usage of "then" an "than" is common among lesser educated people in America. Although it is seldom misused to prove a point of "intellectual superiority", that is indeed rare. It takes a special kind of stupid to do this, and to continue on with your flawed argument, without even checking your facts. Certainly, the argument can be made, that Trog is not only ignorant, but also stubborn, and stubborn ignorance is the worst kind.

Now, I am not a Grammar Nazi, I often type the way I speak, which is grammatically incorrect, but this is not an English Comp class, it is an Internet Message Forum!!! I do, however, have a minor in journalism, (thank God for spell check!) My contention is, Trog has something else on his mind, and he seeks to inflict insult upon me because of this seething hatred and bitterness from whatever is bothering him. I have been asking him about it, but for some reason, he doesn't want to discuss it with me, he just wants to continue trying to make a fool of me, but keeps making a fool of himself in the process. I would like to encourage you all to have a chat with Trog, and see if you can determine what his problem is, because this sort of pent up bitterness and hate can be dangerous. We need to find out what's eating Trog, and see if we can deal with it, because this sort of thing ends up like Columbine if we ignore it.
 
Ohh ? That must hurt Trog. I really don't pay too much attention to dixies posts, they make my head hurt trying to figure them out.
 
Ok, I was wrong.

Now quit stalling on the issue of oil, jackass.
 
Ohh ? That must hurt Trog. I really don't pay too much attention to dixies posts, they make my head hurt trying to figure them out.

That's funny, you sure as hell respond to my threads and posts. Maybe that explains why you almost never make a point? I mean, if you haven't read the thread you are responding to, that would explain it. I try to make a point to read the threads I respond to, in fact, I will sometimes read them two or three times, to insure I have understood what is being said, before I open my mouth.

I must admit, I have sometimes read a thread and not fully understood the point being made or what the author was trying to convey, and whenever I encounter such a thread, I just refrain from responding. It seems to make practical sense to me to do this, since I have no idea of what has been said, and any contribution I would make, would most likely be invalid because of this. I guess you are operating on the 'blind squirrel finds a nut' theory?
 
Ok, I was wrong.

Now quit stalling on the issue of oil, jackass.

Well thank you for admitting you were wrong and I am smarter than you when it comes to grammar. That takes a big man! Kudos!

As for oil, I have not stalled one bit. I have been having a very active debate with uscitizen and care4all in damos thread, and you are welcome to participate as well. So far, you have made some vague statement about Gold markets and "economic" Gold and Oil, but you have not elaborated on what you are talking about, or made a point of contention with anything I have said, other than grammatical errors you thought you spotted. I can't really argue with no point and no refutation of a point. So, I am not "stalling" as much as I am "waiting" for you to actually say something worth responding to.
 
Well thank you for admitting you were wrong and I am smarter than you when it comes to grammar. That takes a big man! Kudos!

As for oil, I have not stalled one bit. I have been having a very active debate with uscitizen and care4all in damos thread, and you are welcome to participate as well. So far, you have made some vague statement about Gold markets and "economic" Gold and Oil, but you have not elaborated on what you are talking about, or made a point of contention with anything I have said, other than grammatical errors you thought you spotted. I can't really argue with no point and no refutation of a point. So, I am not "stalling" as much as I am "waiting" for you to actually say something worth responding to.
It's hard to converse with someone ignorant of the language. I'd be speaking 'French" and you'd be speaking your usual gibberish. "Economic oil" and "economic gold" are very basic terms like conjugating a verb {je suis, tu es, il est, nous sommes, vous etes, ils ont}.

Why do you require that all information be predigested for you? You must be a democrat.
 
It's hard to converse with someone ignorant of the language. I'd be speaking 'French" and you'd be speaking your usual gibberish. "Economic oil" and "economic gold" are very basic terms like conjugating a verb {je suis, tu es, il est, nous sommes, vous etes, ils ont}.

Why do you require that all information be predigested for you? You must be a democrat.

Well now, it seems to me we've already determined who is ignorant of the language and who is speaking gibberish. All I can say about your "economic oil" and "economic gold" argument is, the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain.

You see, you have made an opening statement relating world oil markets to world gold markets and used the terms "economic gold" and "economic oil" but you haven't presented anything else. I am unclear as to what your argument is, or point of contention with my argument, or what would prompt you to instruct me to retake economics class and learn something. You seem to be arguing with a shadow or ghost, and I am not clear as to what you are arguing about. It's really bizarre, and it's starting to freak me out a little. Why don't you stop, go back to the start of your argument, and post something that makes sense, and indeed, an argument or refutation of a point?
 
Trog, you don't know the difference between "then" and "than"?

I used to think you were cool too. And Sophia.

But this is elementary shit. Its like not knowing the difference between "their" and "they're".

:(:(:(:(:(:(:(
 
Back
Top