Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot I (talk | contribs) m Robot: Archiving 1 thread from Talk:Common English usage misconceptions. |
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) from Talk:Common English usage misconceptions) (bot |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 238:
:::::Now that the archiving has occurred, I see that the Guidelines section that opened the page is no longer there. We probably need to make that "sticky". [[User:Mr swordfish|Mr. Swordfish]] ([[User talk:Mr swordfish|talk]]) 01:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
:::::: <strike>Good point. I'll see about doing that.</strike> Done. --[[User:0x0077BE|0x0077BE]] ([[User talk:0x0077BE|talk]]) 01:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
== Bizarre entry ==
A previous user had hidden the following text, commenting--sagely, I think--that "this needs to be re-written to be more understandable, or removed. Perhaps better examples would help, assuming this entire entry is not merely a hoax."
{{bq|'''Misconception:''' ''All phrases in speech that include a preposition are considered to be prepositional phrases''. This misconception originates from a misunderstanding of the word "preposition".{{citation needed|date=January 2012}} For a complement to be defined as a preposition, the word must be positioned before the other parts of speech in the phrase; e.g., "I walked home '''from the park'''". An [[adpositional phrase]], on the other hand, represents all complements of a phrase that the prepositional phrase is a subset of. [[Preposition and postposition|Circumpositions and postpositions]] also fall under the adposition category.}}
I've gone ahead and removed it, given its unsourcedness, its pedantry, and its (as far as I can tell) total irrelevance and lack of notability. Made me chuckle, though.--[[User:Lemuellio|Lemuellio]] ([[User talk:Lemuellio|talk]]) 04:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
: Ouch ... now that I read the above, I notice how mean it sounds in print. My sincere apologies to the writer of the entry!--[[User:Lemuellio|Lemuellio]] ([[User talk:Lemuellio|talk]]) 04:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
== Academic/Scientific Writing ==
Academic writing in the sciences such as dissertations and journal submissions follow many of these rules. For example double spacing sentences and not using contractions. You can check guidelines for submitting articles to Royal Society of Chemistry Journals. Scientific writing is also supposed to be written in passive voice. Furthermore Shakespeare was a poet? author? so why is his grammar being used to prove misconceptions? Authors have poetic license to do as they please it would similar to saying sentences do not need to be capitalized because e e cummings wrote without capitalizing his works.
[[Special:Contributions/163.118.206.80|163.118.206.80]] ([[User talk:163.118.206.80|talk]]) 06:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
:"Scientific writing is also supposed to be written in passive voice."
:The American Psychological Association prefers the active voice: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/15/ [[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 22:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
== Split infinitives ==
For the new editor adding the material to the infinitives section, please provide a source before adding the material again. Please also familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:BRD|reverting and discussing]].
A relevant source is needed because many people have their opinions on English, but it may not be the case that a particular opinion is held in high regard by [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]], or that those sources think a particular fact has any bearing on a topic. As editors, we don't note our opinions here; only the opinions of reliable sources. Thanks for your interest. [[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 19:43, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
| |||