Nothin’ quite like a substantial book for thumpin’
I have the Ontario Highway Traffic Act for that (1500+ pages) but it really doesn’t spark a lot of controversy
And, lo, the government decreeth that, for each kilometer ye exceed over the speed limit posted upon the highways of the land, ye shall be fined $3. And the government also spake that unto him that exceedeth 16 over the limit 3 points of his license points shall be forfeit.
It doesn’t cause controversy? Where the hell do you live?
Here in Germany people can go into serious fits over speeding fines. Or the fact that the state has the gall to enforce speed limits at all, actually.
Sorry to get all grammars on y’all, Adam, but you use “comprised” wrong. In that sentence, it should be “… composed of McCalls thumpers.” To use “comprise,” you should have written something like, “I prefer protest groups comprising McCalls thumpers.”
I admit it; I am a member of the Punctuation and Spelling Police Department, though I’m actually part of the apostrophe squad.
Sorry for being nitpicky, but since this is a thing, I have to say that Saskfan is right. Look at the examples in the link you shared: comprised/comprising is never followed by ‘of’.
Well I’ll be darned. I just looked that up and you’re right. It’s not correct to follow “comprised” with “of.” I never heard of that rule. I found a site talking about that (click here to check it out) and they posted an interesting study:
“The American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style (6), however, has noticed an interesting trend. In 1965, 54% of the usage panel disapproved of the phrase “is comprised of,” whereas in 2005, 65% approved, which I take to mean that only 35% disapproved. As with a number of constructions we’ve discussed here on the Grammar Girl podcast, they say “the traditional distinction may be destined to fall by the wayside.” This guide does suggest that you observe the traditional rule though.”
So at least I’m not alone. I went ahead and removed “comprised of” from that strip. But don’t worry, I took “comprised of” to a big farm where he can run around with other grammatical imperfections.
Whoa whoa whoa! American English may be the lingua franca here, but my Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (ed. 1983) actually does list “comprised of” (“A cricket team is comprised of eleven players”. No, it really is that British a book.)
Given the British heritage of the English language, I’m pretty sure you can just use this construct and forget all the local majority nonsense that shouldn’t be trusted to determine what is grammatically correct, anyway. This expression was correct, is correct, who cares if it is frowned upon. Hell, there’s people who think ‘civilization’ is written with an ‘s’ in the UK *because* it is written with a ‘z’ in the USA.
As a former member of the Grammar Squad, I have to agree with Adam on this one. There are greater horrors out there for you to quiff on (what has happened to “fast” and “fewer”, f’instance?). The language evolves whether we like it or not; thus, his usage is just as correct as anything you or I might prefer. Returning you now to your regularly scheduled caviling.
Your titles are always clever and witty. that’s what I like about you, Mr. Huber.
Also, your comics are always clever and witty. I like that too.
“I’m pro McCalls, Yalls!” I mean that’s just genius.
Thanks!
My Mom was a “McCalls Mom”. Redbook was too racy for her.
Nothin’ quite like a substantial book for thumpin’
I have the Ontario Highway Traffic Act for that (1500+ pages) but it really doesn’t spark a lot of controversy
And, lo, the government decreeth that, for each kilometer ye exceed over the speed limit posted upon the highways of the land, ye shall be fined $3. And the government also spake that unto him that exceedeth 16 over the limit 3 points of his license points shall be forfeit.
Thou I drive through the valley of the township of Death, I shall fear no potholes…
It doesn’t cause controversy? Where the hell do you live?
Here in Germany people can go into serious fits over speeding fines. Or the fact that the state has the gall to enforce speed limits at all, actually.
Sorry to get all grammars on y’all, Adam, but you use “comprised” wrong. In that sentence, it should be “… composed of McCalls thumpers.” To use “comprise,” you should have written something like, “I prefer protest groups comprising McCalls thumpers.”
I admit it; I am a member of the Punctuation and Spelling Police Department, though I’m actually part of the apostrophe squad.
The definition of comprised is: “to consist of; be composed of.”
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/comprised?s=t
Sorry for being nitpicky, but since this is a thing, I have to say that Saskfan is right. Look at the examples in the link you shared: comprised/comprising is never followed by ‘of’.
Well I’ll be darned. I just looked that up and you’re right. It’s not correct to follow “comprised” with “of.” I never heard of that rule. I found a site talking about that (click here to check it out) and they posted an interesting study:
“The American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style (6), however, has noticed an interesting trend. In 1965, 54% of the usage panel disapproved of the phrase “is comprised of,” whereas in 2005, 65% approved, which I take to mean that only 35% disapproved. As with a number of constructions we’ve discussed here on the Grammar Girl podcast, they say “the traditional distinction may be destined to fall by the wayside.” This guide does suggest that you observe the traditional rule though.”
So at least I’m not alone. I went ahead and removed “comprised of” from that strip. But don’t worry, I took “comprised of” to a big farm where he can run around with other grammatical imperfections.
Well look at that. Bug not only makes me laugh, it makes me learn.
Whoa whoa whoa! American English may be the lingua franca here, but my Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (ed. 1983) actually does list “comprised of” (“A cricket team is comprised of eleven players”. No, it really is that British a book.)
Given the British heritage of the English language, I’m pretty sure you can just use this construct and forget all the local majority nonsense that shouldn’t be trusted to determine what is grammatically correct, anyway. This expression was correct, is correct, who cares if it is frowned upon. Hell, there’s people who think ‘civilization’ is written with an ‘s’ in the UK *because* it is written with a ‘z’ in the USA.
Pet peeves out.
Yeah. And, thanks to those dang Brits over there I keep forgetting if the correct spelling is “theatre” or “theater”.
As a former member of the Grammar Squad, I have to agree with Adam on this one. There are greater horrors out there for you to quiff on (what has happened to “fast” and “fewer”, f’instance?). The language evolves whether we like it or not; thus, his usage is just as correct as anything you or I might prefer. Returning you now to your regularly scheduled caviling.
Which is why I just don’t use “comprise” in my writing. I may or not get it right, and my readers are likely to get it the other way round.
Just avoid it. Many other ways to say the same thing.
Agreed.
I’m christian, yet I still found this funny! I can tell that you are at least somewhat religious, considering how God is a reoccurring character.
I tell you what you could thump… that’d be a Bug Martini Comic Book!
And the bug sayeth: “Our father who art in heaven, is thy refrigerator running?”
Ha! I love that one!
I agree.
I prefer thumping a big ol’ science book. Cause then you can follow up with http://i.imgur.com/ePLIJUu.jpg
I love the Old Biddy Bugs