• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Gramar Nazis Help Please

J

JDawg1536

Golden Member
In the following sentence, should the word "that" be left out as an unnecessary word? It sounds funny without it in there, but would it be correct?


They share much more than just the fact [that] each has its own delicious taste.
 
Originally posted by: bolomite
Now that that's out of the way, tackle your spelling -- grammar has two M's 🙂
Click to expand...

A poor attempt at subtle irony. 😎

Can anyone tell me why the word should stay in the sentence?
 
Originally posted by: JDawg1536
Originally posted by: bolomite
Now that that's out of the way, tackle your spelling -- grammar has two M's 🙂
Click to expand...

A poor attempt at subtle irony. 😎

Can anyone tell me why the word should stay in the sentence?
Click to expand...

Why, what word?
 
It's a grammatically necessary conjunction, introducing the following noun phrase, as opposed to being used as the object of the verb or in the conditional case.

In both of the latter cases, you can remove "that" and the sentence is still fine and complete.
 
Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I invoke Godwin's law. Everybody out.
Click to expand...

Gott Im Himmel!

<---- Secretes his iron cross and swastika and gingerly goosesteps away.
 
<----- Disguised in civilian Swiss lederhosen, he briefly returns . . .

Originally posted by: Howard
They share much more than just delicious taste.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah-uhhhh . . . Tits!

Originally posted by: Drako
I would leave "just" out of the sentance.
Click to expand...

But you'd leave "the fact" in? :shocked:

(snide snigger, delciate half goosestep, involuntary Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove salute)
 
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Originally posted by: zinfamous
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I invoke Godwin's law. Everybody out.
Click to expand...

Gott Im Himmel!

<---- Secretes his iron cross and swastika and gingerly goosesteps away.
Click to expand...

eeewwwwwww
Click to expand...

That sounds downright painful.
Click to expand...

Silly semi-literate untermenschen, "secretes" doesn't specifically mean what you might assume it does:

se·crete 2 (s-krt)
tr.v. se·cret·ed, se·cret·ing, se·cret·es
1. To conceal in a hiding place
Click to expand...

. . . As in any hiding place, such as the inner pocket of one's black leather Gestapo coat.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Silly semi-literate untermenschen, "secretes" doesn't specifically mean what you might assume it does:

se·crete 2 (s-krt)
tr.v. se·cret·ed, se·cret·ing, se·cret·es
1. To conceal in a hiding place
Click to expand...

. . . As in any hiding place, such as the inner pocket of one's black leather Gestapo coat.
Click to expand...

True, but the primary definition is still to form and give off as in a secretion. Like my mother always said, if you start secreting iron crosses, you should probably skip the doctor and go straight for the priest.
 
Since you asked the question you probably already know the word THAT is the most overused word in the english language.

The easiest way to tell is by taking it out and then reading the sentence again. If it reads OK you could probably leave it out. Unless you are trying to increase the word count in a college paper. Then you should scatter them like shit on a fan.
 
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Originally posted by: Perknose
Silly semi-literate untermenschen, "secretes" doesn't specifically mean what you might assume it does:

se·crete 2 (s-krt)
tr.v. se·cret·ed, se·cret·ing, se·cret·es
1. To conceal in a hiding place
Click to expand...

. . . As in any hiding place, such as the inner pocket of one's black leather Gestapo coat.
Click to expand...

True, but the primary definition is still to form and give off as in a secretion. Like my mother always said, if you start secreting iron crosses, you should probably skip the doctor and go straight for the priest.
Click to expand...

If YOU only know the primary definition of any English word, then your education date-raped you and posted the pics on-line.

IOW, you cannot call yourself fluent in English.
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
Originally posted by: Perknose
Silly semi-literate untermenschen, "secretes" doesn't specifically mean what you might assume it does:

se·crete 2 (s-krt)
tr.v. se·cret·ed, se·cret·ing, se·cret·es
1. To conceal in a hiding place
Click to expand...

. . . As in any hiding place, such as the inner pocket of one's black leather Gestapo coat.
Click to expand...

True, but the primary definition is still to form and give off as in a secretion. Like my mother always said, if you start secreting iron crosses, you should probably skip the doctor and go straight for the priest.
Click to expand...

If YOU only know the primary definition of any English word, then your education date-raped you and posted the pics on-line.

IOW, you cannot call yourself fluent in English.
Click to expand...

First off, whether or not I knew the secondary definition of secretes is irrelevant, as my interpretation of it was based on finding humor in what you wrote, and the idea of someone secreting iron crosses from any orifice or pore on their body is inherently amusing (and disturbing). In point of fact I do know the word secretes as you used it, though I will profess that I had incorrectly assumed it was spelled secrets in that particular conjugation (my own ignorance, as you correctly point out).

However, to equate incorrectly assuming one form of a homonym when the other was intended in written speech as being equivalent to not being fluent... well that's just completely fucking nuts. But I like it; from now on, I'm declaring that no one may claim fluency in a language lest they know the proper spelling and conjugation of every single word in said language.

I'm now fluent in exactly zero languages. Booyah.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top