LawTalkers
Page 4 of 126 « First 23 4 561454104 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Fashionable (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=840)

LessinSF 06-15-2009 07:18 PM
Ironweed's Going to Jail For Sure
 
N.J. Stat. Ann. § 9-6-1 provides that:

"Abuse of a child shall consist" of, among other things, "the habitual use by the parent or by a person having the custody and control of a child, in the hearing of such child, of profane, indecent or obscene language."

§ 9-6-3 makes such abuse a crime.

From Volokh.

Atticus Grinch 06-15-2009 07:49 PM
Actual fashion post.
 
It's been a while since I've had my Allen-Edmonds shoes recrafted, partly because I now own so many pairs that it takes longer to wear them out. I sent in two pairs a week ago, with a five to six week estimated turnaround. Today I got an e-mail telling me the shoes were done and being shipped. And each e-mail came with before-and-after photos of each shoe, showing how sad and forlorn each one was when they got it, and how shiny and happy and like-new each one is now.

Allen-Edmonds rocks. It just does. If I had money I'd buy stock.

Adder 06-15-2009 09:10 PM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch (Post 392614)
It's been a while since I've had my Allen-Edmonds shoes recrafted, partly because I now own so many pairs that it takes longer to wear them out. I sent in two pairs a week ago, with a five to six week estimated turnaround. Today I got an e-mail telling me the shoes were done and being shipped. And each e-mail came with before-and-after photos of each shoe, showing how sad and forlorn each one was when they got it, and how shiny and happy and like-new each one is now.

Allen-Edmonds rocks. It just does. If I had money I'd buy stock.
You might be able to if you stopped wasting it on overpriced shoes.

Atticus Grinch 06-15-2009 09:16 PM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 392615)
You might be able to if you stopped wasting it on overpriced shoes.
Your resentment is delicious.

Hank Chinaski 06-15-2009 09:48 PM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch (Post 392614)
It's been a while since I've had my Allen-Edmonds shoes recrafted, partly because I now own so many pairs that it takes longer to wear them out. I sent in two pairs a week ago, with a five to six week estimated turnaround. Today I got an e-mail telling me the shoes were done and being shipped. And each e-mail came with before-and-after photos of each shoe, showing how sad and forlorn each one was when they got it, and how shiny and happy and like-new each one is now.

Allen-Edmonds rocks. It just does. If I had money I'd buy stock.
if you owned stock, first thing you'd do is insist they stop wasting money on the photos and other needless service perks. think about it.

Tyrone Slothrop 06-15-2009 10:12 PM
Re: This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 392585)
Warning: even if you have safesearch turned "On" on Firefox, do not GIS for the shocker. You will see one. Literally.*

*and I don't mean something that will shock you. Or maybe it will.
Thanks to Bil Keane, even kids know about the shocker now.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_fAJIWY5uxM...er_cartoon.jpg

Icky Thump 06-15-2009 10:13 PM
Re: Ironweed's Going to Jail For Sure
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 392613)
N.J. Stat. Ann. § 9-6-1 provides that:

"Abuse of a child shall consist" of, among other things, "the habitual use by the parent or by a person having the custody and control of a child, in the hearing of such child, of profane, indecent or obscene language."

§ 9-6-3 makes such abuse a crime.

From Volokh.
Holy fucking shit.

Icky Thump 06-15-2009 10:15 PM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 392617)
if you owned stock, first thing you'd do is insist they stop wasting money on the photos and other needless service perks. think about it.
The second thing you'd do is insist they made the shoes in China using slave child labor out of pleather.

Icky Thump 06-15-2009 10:17 PM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch (Post 392614)
It's been a while since I've had my Allen-Edmonds shoes recrafted, partly because I now own so many pairs that it takes longer to wear them out. I sent in two pairs a week ago, with a five to six week estimated turnaround. Today I got an e-mail telling me the shoes were done and being shipped. And each e-mail came with before-and-after photos of each shoe, showing how sad and forlorn each one was when they got it, and how shiny and happy and like-new each one is now.

Allen-Edmonds rocks. It just does. If I had money I'd buy stock.
Best shoes for me. They just fit. Have tried Aldens and others but still come back to AE though they are not as good as they were ten years ago.

Hank Chinaski 06-15-2009 10:26 PM
Re: This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 392618)
Thanks to Bil Keane, even kids know about the shocker now.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_fAJIWY5uxM...er_cartoon.jpg
Ty, Seinfeld never worked "blue." Think about it.

Atticus Grinch 06-15-2009 10:43 PM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 392617)
if you owned stock, first thing you'd do is insist they stop wasting money on the photos and other needless service perks. think about it.
Just because you've never seen a repeat customer doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 06-15-2009 10:43 PM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 392617)
if you owned stock, first thing you'd do is insist they stop wasting money on the photos and other needless service perks. think about it.
Yes, the customer was so impressed by the improvement of the rebuild program that there's no need to remind him in the future how good it is. Your marketing skills make it seem like you're from Detroit or something.

Fugee 06-16-2009 08:48 AM
Re: Actual fashion post.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch (Post 392614)
It's been a while since I've had my Allen-Edmonds shoes recrafted, partly because I now own so many pairs that it takes longer to wear them out. I sent in two pairs a week ago, with a five to six week estimated turnaround. Today I got an e-mail telling me the shoes were done and being shipped. And each e-mail came with before-and-after photos of each shoe, showing how sad and forlorn each one was when they got it, and how shiny and happy and like-new each one is now.

Allen-Edmonds rocks. It just does. If I had money I'd buy stock.
Thanks for reminding me how sad I am they quit making women's shoes and that I waited too long to send my favorite pair of Allen-Edmonds loafers to be recrafted and they couldn't resurrect them.

dtb 06-16-2009 10:30 AM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 392603)
I have lost all respect for dtb

http://chronicle.com/free/v55/i32/32b01501.htm
You won't find me touting the wonders of Strunk & White as a grammar book. It's more of a substantive guide for writing that I really don't have an opinion about. I can't really recall any grammar sections, but I won't swear that there aren't any.

I'm more of a Chicago Manual gal. And I really love the book "Woe is I".

Fugee 06-16-2009 10:43 AM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtb (Post 392626)
You won't find me touting the wonders of Strunk & White as a grammar book. It's more of a substantive guide for writing that I really don't have an opinion about. I can't really recall any grammar sections, but I won't swear that there aren't any.

I'm more of a Chicago Manual gal. And I really love the book "Woe is I".
My favorite grammar book is "The Deluxe Transitive Vampire: A Handbook for the Innocent, the Eager and the Doomed" by Karen Elizabeth Gordon. The examples are hilarious -- it's like Edward Gorey for grammar.

For your big-time editor job (and for the laughs), you also need "The New Well-Tempered Sentence: A Punctuation Handbook for the Innocent, the Eager and the Doomed." And possibly "Torn Wings and Faux Pas: A Handbook of Style, A Beastly Guide Through the Writer's Labyrinth," also by the same author, though I haven't read this one.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 06-16-2009 12:04 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtb (Post 392626)
You won't find me touting the wonders of Strunk & White as a grammar book. It's more of a substantive guide for writing that I really don't have an opinion about. I can't really recall any grammar sections, but I won't swear that there aren't any.

I'm more of a Chicago Manual gal. And I really love the book "Woe is I".
We have been suffiering through my daughter's teacher's obsession with MLA. Both the grammar and the citation elements of the MLA would make y'all wish for old Strunk and White. They may have been idiots, but they were at least sensible and consistent idiots.

The citation is particularly horrid, since it is neither treated as a separate grammatical statement, as in Blue Book or Chicago, nor as a pure parenthetical reference outside the grammatical structure. Instead, it's a little of each.

All this is to say, be careful when proofing a child's paper for citations, lest you "fix" something by breaking it.

Pretty Little Flower 06-16-2009 12:11 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 392628)
We have been suffiering through my daughter's teacher's obsession with MLA. Both the grammar and the citation elements of the MLA would make y'all wish for old Strunk and White. They may have been idiots, but they were at least sensible and consistent idiots.

The citation is particularly horrid, since it is neither treated as a separate grammatical statement, as in Blue Book or Chicago, nor as a pure parenthetical reference outside the grammatical structure. Instead, it's a little of each.

All this is to say, be careful when proofing a child's paper for citations, lest you "fix" something by breaking it.
Does anyone even care about the "that vs. which" distinction any more? I am pretty strict about changing "which" to "that" when which is used in a restictive clause, per the examples found here:

http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw...rsus_Which.htm

But it is happening so often, I am beginning to wonder whether this rule is obsolete.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 06-16-2009 12:16 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 392629)
Does anyone even care about the "that vs. which" distinction any more? I am pretty strict about changing "which" to "that" when which is used in a restictive clause, per the examples found here:

http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw...rsus_Which.htm

But it is happening so often, I am beginning to wonder whether this rule is obsolete.

I expect my associates to fix that when I screw up. And to do it Strunk and White Style, like you do.

Here's the MLA approach to the same problem:

Quote:
that / which

There several cases when that is more appropriate than and is preferred to which:
After the pronouns all, any(thing), every(thing), few, little, many, much, no(thing), none, some(thing):
The police usually ask for every detail that helps identify the missing person. - that used as the subject

Marrying a congressman is all (that) she wants. - that used as the object
After verbs that answer the question WHAT? For example, say, suggest, state, declare, hope, think, write, etc. In this case, the whole relative clause functions as the object of the main clause:

Some people say (that) success is one percent of talent and ninety-nine percent of hard work.

The chairman stated at the meeting (that) his company is part of a big-time entertainment industry.
After the noun modified by an adjective in the superlative degree:

This is the funniest story (that) I have ever read! - that used as the object
After ordinal numbers, e.g., first, second, etc.:

The first draft (that) we submitted was really horrible. - that used as the object
If the verb in the main clause is a form of BE:

This is a claim that has absolutely no reason in it. - that used as the subject

Flinty_McFlint 06-16-2009 12:19 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 392629)
Does anyone even care about the "that vs. which" distinction any more? I am pretty strict about changing "which" to "that" when which is used in a restictive clause, per the examples found here:

http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw...rsus_Which.htm

But it is happening so often, I am beginning to wonder whether this rule is obsolete.
It's been keeping me up late at night, actually. It's the one thing which does that.

greatwhitenorthchick 06-16-2009 12:20 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 392629)
Does anyone even care about the "that vs. which" distinction any more? I am pretty strict about changing "which" to "that" when which is used in a restictive clause, per the examples found here:

http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw...rsus_Which.htm

But it is happening so often, I am beginning to wonder whether this rule is obsolete.
I care about it. And it burns me up beyond description when a certain partner changes my "thats" back to "whichs". Drives me fucking insane.

Speaking of being driven nuts, I have PMS. Last night I was rushing to get to my therapist because, goddamit, time is money and I haz problems. Anyhoo, there was a geriatic posse in front of me taking up the whole sidewalk and taking their sweet time strolling along. I cursed them under my breath a few times but they didn't move out of the way. Finally I stepped on the street to get around them -- well, it was sweet little Dr. Ruth and her entourage. I felt ashamed. She's one of my heroes. And so cute! About two feet tall in sensible shoes.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 06-16-2009 12:21 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 392629)
Does anyone even care about the "that vs. which" distinction any more? I am pretty strict about changing "which" to "that" when which is used in a restictive clause, per the examples found here:

http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw...rsus_Which.htm

But it is happening so often, I am beginning to wonder whether this rule is obsolete.
I am quite sure I've always used "which" and "that" properly without really ever knowing that rule. Substituting "that" for "which" (and vice-versa) in the examples from your link just sounds/feels...wrong.

Shape Shifter 06-16-2009 12:23 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtb (Post 392626)
You won't find me touting the wonders of Strunk & White as a grammar book. It's more of a substantive guide for writing that I really don't have an opinion about. I can't really recall any grammar sections, but I won't swear that there aren't any.

I'm more of a Chicago Manual gal. And I really love the book "Woe is I".
"C" is for cookie. That's good enough for me.





Or is it "which"?

greatwhitenorthchick 06-16-2009 12:25 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 392633)
I am quite sure I've always used "which" and "that" properly without really ever knowing that rule. Substituting "that" for "which" (and vice-versa) in the examples from your link just sounds/feels...wrong.
You have a finely-honed grammar instinct? Kudos.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 06-16-2009 12:29 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shape Shifter (Post 392634)
"C" is for cookie. That's good enough for me.





Or is it "which"?
Please don't use contractions in formal writing.

-1

Gattigap 06-16-2009 12:32 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shape Shifter (Post 392634)
"C" is for cookie. That's good enough for me.





Or is it "which"?
I believe it's "dat."

Did you just call me Coltrane? 06-16-2009 12:36 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhitenorthchick (Post 392635)
You have a finely-honed grammar instinct? Kudos.
I don't think so, but I can't explain it.

Somewhat apropos, I have an okay memory, but not a fantastic one. I still don't understand how I'm able to remember all of my passwords for different sites/email addresses/etc. I have about 20 different passwords, and I (seemingly) subconsciously type in the right one 98% of the time. Is that normal? Or am I amazing?

I've thought about it. Not amazing. I suppose we all knew every single HS friend's phone number before cell phones.

greatwhitenorthchick 06-16-2009 01:02 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 392638)
I don't think so, but I can't explain it.

Somewhat apropos, I have an okay memory, but not a fantastic one. I still don't understand how I'm able to remember all of my passwords for different sites/email addresses/etc. I have about 20 different passwords, and I (seemingly) subconsciously type in the right one 98% of the time. Is that normal? Or am I amazing?

I've thought about it. Not amazing. I suppose we all knew every single HS friend's phone number before cell phones.
You're amazing. Between this and the November Rain church visit, I declare this the week of Coltrane.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 06-16-2009 01:18 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhitenorthchick (Post 392639)
you're amazing. Between this and the november rain church visit, i declare this the week of coltrane.
What about the rattlesnake?

Hank Chinaski 06-16-2009 01:57 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 392640)
What about the rattlesnake?
rattlesnakes are like super heroes- only Ameircans get them.

can you describe your role in the killing? was it more in the location end, say, "holy crap, there's a snake, i ain't going over there."

Or do you claim to have pulled a trigger?

Did you just call me Coltrane? 06-16-2009 01:58 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 392641)
rattlesnakes are like super heroes- only Ameircans get them.

can you describe your role in the killing? was it more in the location end, say, "holy crap, there's a snake, i ain't going over there."

Or do you claim to have pulled a trigger?
I hit it with a cinder block.

And we only killed it because it was directly in front of the entrance to the casita.

futbol fan 06-16-2009 02:05 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 392642)
I hit it with a cinder block.

And we only killed it because it was directly in front of the entrance to the casita.
Nerves of steel, a head full of passwords and an instinctive flair for grammar. It's like a focus group designed you specifically to get the FBetties all hot and bothered.

Shape Shifter 06-16-2009 02:07 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane? (Post 392642)
I hit it with a cinder block.

And we only killed it because it was directly in front of the entrance to the casita.
Heretic.

Quote:
16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

dtb 06-16-2009 02:37 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 392629)
Does anyone even care about the "that vs. which" distinction any more? I am pretty strict about changing "which" to "that" when which is used in a restictive clause, per the examples found here:

http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw...rsus_Which.htm

But it is happening so often, I am beginning to wonder whether this rule is obsolete.
Keep fighting the good fight, man! Stem the tide!

Pretty Little Flower 06-16-2009 03:00 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dtb (Post 392646)
Keep fighting the good fight, man! Stem the tide!

Thank you. Late Sunday night, I was reviewing the work of a rising star associate, a former teacher, when I saw the the word "which" used in the restrictive setting. Twice. I felt the overwhelming urge to stop fighting against rising waters and succumb to the darkness. But with your words I am reenergized to continue the battle. We shall overcome!

LessinSF 06-16-2009 03:01 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhitenorthchick (Post 392632)
I care about it. And it burns me up beyond description when a certain partner changes my "thats" back to "whichs". Drives me fucking insane.
I often prefer to omit the "that" as is suggested in one of the MLA sentences above:

"Some people say (that) success is one percent of talent and ninety-nine percent of hard work."

but I have a partner who always inserts the "that."

Adder 06-16-2009 03:06 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 392650)
I often prefer to omit the "that" as is suggested in one of the MLA sentences above:

"Some people say (that) success is one percent of talent and ninety-nine percent of hard work."

but I have a partner who always inserts the "that."
That use of that is not introducing a restrictive clause, but instead is simply unnecessary.

1436 06-16-2009 03:14 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 392652)
That use of that is not introducing a restrictive clause, but instead is simply unnecessary.
That that usage of that comes up often always puzzles me.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 06-16-2009 03:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1436 (Post 392653)
That that usage of that comes up often always puzzles me.
I thought it was a good example of the silliness engaged in by the MLA.

Flower, you're correcting the associates' grammah?! Don't you have someone to do that for you?

Hank Chinaski 06-16-2009 03:22 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 392650)
I often prefer to omit the "that" as is suggested in one of the MLA sentences above:

"Some people say (that) success is one percent of talent and ninety-nine percent of hard work."

but I have a partner who always inserts the "that."
I had a partner that would see this sentence:

D. says the law says X, however, that is no longer true.

He would say "however" should almost never be used in the middle os a sentence- that is, he mirrored the Stunk rule, or inverted it. He was far to senior for me to call bs on, and I know modern usage is breaking up the S&W rule as being a rule, but it hasn't inverted the rule.

My only response was to eliminate "however" from my brief writing toolbox.

Replaced_Texan 06-16-2009 03:25 PM
Re: i wonder if she's even really rich
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 392657)
I had a partner that would see this sentence:

D. says the law says X, however, that is no longer true.

He would say "however" should almost never be used in the middle os a sentence- that is, he mirrored the Stunk rule, or inverted it. He was far to senior for me to call bs on, and I know modern usage is breaking up the S&W rule as being a rule, but it hasn't inverted the rule.
The partner I worked with was the opposite, and said that "however" could never start a sentence.

Quote:
My only response was to eliminate "however" from my brief writing toolbox.
The result, though, was the same.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:31 PM.
Page 4 of 126 « First 23 4 561454104 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com