Who writes the Pinkun front page?

[Yellow Shirt 17]

This form of quoting drives me mad!"Said Butterworth: “We''re looking at him and the manager will assess the situation after the games in Scotland.”"Once in a while, OK; but it''s horrible all the time and seems to be the only way these people know to structure a sentence.PLEASE can we have a simple:“We''re looking at him and the manager will assess the situation after the games in Scotland.” said Butterworth.  ---Just wanted to say. Doesn''t it get on anyone elses nerves?

[Shyster 0]

There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.And it''s getting worse.

[Unhinged Canary 375]

[quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.And it''s getting worse.[/quote]Shouldn''t start a sentence with ''and''.............. [;)]

[Shyster 0]

[quote user="Clipped Canary"][quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.And it''s getting worse.[/quote]Shouldn''t start a sentence with ''and''.............. [;)][/quote]

Very true - I stand corrected.Actually, I did that on purpose to see if anyone noticed.Well done. [:D]

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.

Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.

And it''s getting worse.
[/quote]

Shall we conduct a poll to see which government these Archant employees were educated under [:O][:P][:D]

[Unhinged Canary 375]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Clipped Canary"][quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.And it''s getting worse.[/quote]Shouldn''t start a sentence with ''and''.............. [;)][/quote]

Very true - I stand corrected.Actually, I did that on purpose to see if anyone noticed.Well done. [:D][/quote]I thank you! [:)] [*]

[LQ 0]

Well, you shouldn''t start a sentence with ''and'' or any conjunction.But ([;)]) these days it''s put down to artistic licence! Where would we be if language didn''t evolve? Reading the Pink Un in the words of Chaucer?

[Dean Coneys boots 1,531]

Bad grammar, up with which I shall not put!

[James Kent 0]

It''s acceptable to start sentences with and in casual web writing and even some newspapers. It is only really not acceptable in professional writing like academic writing and novels.

Notice on Rick Waghorn''s website he constantly starts sentences with And. The reason is not that he doesn''t know how to write. But more to do with the fact it flows better and is easier to read.

Try replacing his Ands with therefore, furthermore or also it will make it harder to read and it wouldn''t flow so well.

[Shyster 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"]

[quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.And it''s getting worse.[/quote]

Shall we conduct a poll to see which government these Archant employees were educated under [:O][:P][:D]

[/quote]

I''ll tell where it started to go wrong, Shack - when Corporal Punishment was abolished, and I believe the Tories were responsible for that.They can''t get things right all of the time. [;)]

[Pete Raven 276]

Said Sports Desk Pete: "I blame Thatcher."

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Shack Attack"]

[quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.

Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.

And it''s getting worse.
[/quote]

Shall we conduct a poll to see which government these Archant employees were educated under [:O][:P][:D]

[/quote]


I''ll tell where it started to go wrong, Shack - when Corporal Punishment was abolished, and I believe the Tories were responsible for that.

They can''t get things right all of the time. [;)]
[/quote]

Bless you Shyster that was a very good reply.

Are we friends again [{][:D][:$][}]

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="LQ"]Well, you shouldn''t start a sentence with ''and'' or any conjunction.

But ([;)]) these days it''s put down to artistic licence! Where would we be if language didn''t evolve? Reading the Pink Un in the words of Chaucer?


[/quote]

Definately my cup of tea!

Oh sorry only mugs these days!!

I think that it is ok to use artistic licence if you know you are doing it.

Know what I mean, at the end of the day and all that.

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]Said Sports Desk Pete: "I blame Thatcher."[/quote]

You leave her alone. She was a better man that anything we have had since.[;)]

[Yellow Shirt 17]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]Said Sports Desk Pete: "I blame Thatcher."[/quote]

AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

[quote user="Clipped Canary"]

Shouldn''t start a sentence with ''and''.............. [;)][/quote]Drat. That means the Bible is going to have to be rewritten...

	Page 1 of 1189
	Genesis 1 1 First God made heaven & earth 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. 3 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. 6 And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." 7 And God made the firmament and separated the waters... And so it goes on like that...

[LQ 0]

Yes, but that''d be the King James version - post Chaucer, see? Artistic licence.The Codex Sinaiticus bods would never have started a sentence with ''and''.[:)]

[Shyster 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Shack Attack"]

[quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.And it''s getting worse.[/quote]

Shall we conduct a poll to see which government these Archant employees were educated under [:O][:P][:D]

[/quote]

I''ll tell where it started to go wrong, Shack - when Corporal Punishment was abolished, and I believe the Tories were responsible for that.They can''t get things right all of the time. [;)][/quote]

Bless you Shyster that was a very good reply.

Are we friends again [{][:D][:$][}]

[/quote]

[:O]  I never even realised we''d fallen out.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Shack Attack"]

[quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.

Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.

And it''s getting worse.
[/quote]

Shall we conduct a poll to see which government these Archant employees were educated under [:O][:P][:D]

[/quote]


I''ll tell where it started to go wrong, Shack - when Corporal Punishment was abolished, and I believe the Tories were responsible for that.

They can''t get things right all of the time. [;)]
[/quote]

Bless you Shyster that was a very good reply.

Are we friends again [{][:D][:$][}]

[/quote]



[:O]  I never even realised we''d fallen out.
[/quote]

I hated you last Tuesday and was quite annoyed by you the Thursday before [;)]

Only kidding. But you did call me a w*nker a few weeks back when we were ''discussing'' politics.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]

I hated you last Tuesday and was quite annoyed by you the Thursday before

Only kidding. But you did call me a w*nker a few weeks back when we were ''discussing'' politics.

[/quote]

When he called you that, I took it to mean that he agreed with you... [;)]

[Shyster 0]

[quote]Drat. That means the Bible is going to have to be rewritten...[/quote]

It''s been rewritten many times.You should see my version. [:D]

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Clipped Canary"]

Shouldn''t start a sentence with ''and''.............. [;)][/quote]Drat. That means the Bible is going to have to be rewritten...

	Page 1 of 1189
	Genesis 1 1 First God made heaven & earth 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. 3 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. 6 And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." 7 And God made the firmament and separated the waters... And so it goes on like that...

[/quote]

And to a different point, how the fffflip did God make Earth the sky, stars, planets etc etc.  In the flippin'' dark!!

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

[quote user="LQ"]Yes, but that''d be the King James version - post Chaucer, see? Artistic licence.The Codex Sinaiticus bods would never have started a sentence with ''and''.[:)]

[/quote]LQ, I bow to your superior knowledge of the Codex Sinaiticus. Don''t forget, though, that the world''s oldest book, the 4,000-year-old Epic of Gilgamesh, starts with a present participle ("Surpassing all other things..."), which probably had Sumerian lexicographers and grammarians all in a tizzy.Perhaps the Greeks who wrote the Codex thought that if the Sumerians had already broken the rules then an "And..." here and there was allowable! 

[Shyster 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Shyster"][quote user="Shack Attack"]

[quote user="Shyster"]There''s poor grammar and spelling all over the Archant rags.Wasn''t that way years ago, which says a lot about the standard of education in this country today.And it''s getting worse.[/quote]

Shall we conduct a poll to see which government these Archant employees were educated under [:O][:P][:D]

[/quote]

I''ll tell where it started to go wrong, Shack - when Corporal Punishment was abolished, and I believe the Tories were responsible for that.They can''t get things right all of the time. [;)][/quote]

Bless you Shyster that was a very good reply.

Are we friends again [{][:D][:$][}]

[/quote]

[:O]  I never even realised we''d fallen out.[/quote]

I hated you last Tuesday and was quite annoyed by you the Thursday before [;)]

Only kidding. But you did call me a w*nker a few weeks back when we were ''discussing'' politics.

[/quote]

Sticks and stones, Shack - as you already know, in my estimation you are one of the top contributors to this forum, so if I were you I''d rather see my derogatory remark as a compliment. [:)]

[Andy Larkin 15]

Load of old cock.Starting a sentence with ''and'' is perfectly acceptable. It has been used that way for decades… nay, centuries."And lo", "And thus" etc ad nauseum (New Testament granted but that should be good enough for most!)

[RustysRevenge 0]

[quote user="Sports Desk - Pete"]Said Sports Desk Pete: "I blame Thatcher."[/quote]

Finally someone talking sense on this forum!

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="Andy Larkin"]Load of old cock.Starting a sentence with ''and'' is perfectly acceptable. It has been used that way for decades… nay, centuries."And lo", "And thus" etc ad nauseum (New Testament granted but that should be good enough for most!)[/quote]Starting sentences with ''and'' are little idiosyncrasies of thick people, other examples are, spelling ''definitely'', definately  and bunging an apostrophe on any plural they fancy at the time, like DVD''s CD''s  U18''s instead of the correct DVDs CDs and U18s.

[Hackney Canary 0]

Making sweeping statements about grammar is the preserve of pretentious

people who don''t have a clue what they are talking about. There is

nothing - NOTHING - wrong with beginning a sentence with ''and'' (or,

indeed, ''but'', or any other conjunction).

And that, my friends, is a fact.

The injuction against conjunctions is no more than a method employed by

schoolteachers to discourage their pupils from writing incomplete

sentences. Gowers - who knew a thing or two about grammar and language

use - had the following to say in his edition of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage:

"That

it is a solecism to begin a sentence with and is a faintly lingering

superstition. The OED gives examples ranging from the 10th to the 19th

c.; the Bible is full of them."

While we''re on the subject of debunking grammatical superstitions, you should also feel free to split your infinitives.

[Andy Larkin 15]

[quote user="Ackney Canary"]

Making sweeping statements about grammar is the preserve of pretentious

people who don''t have a clue what they are talking about. There is

nothing - NOTHING - wrong with beginning a sentence with ''and'' (or,

indeed, ''but'', or any other conjunction).

And that, my friends, is a fact.

The injuction against conjunctions is no more than a method employed by

schoolteachers to discourage their pupils from writing incomplete

sentences. Gowers - who knew a thing or two about grammar and language

use - had the following to say in his edition of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage:

"That

it is a solecism to begin a sentence with and is a faintly lingering

superstition. The OED gives examples ranging from the 10th to the 19th

c.; the Bible is full of them."

While we''re on the subject of debunking grammatical superstitions, you should also feel free to split your infinitives.

[/quote]At long last… a man of intelligence!Thanking you!

[William Darby 0]

[quote]

Making sweeping statements about grammar is the preserve of pretentious

people who don''t have a clue what they are talking about. There is

nothing - NOTHING - wrong with beginning a sentence with ''and'' (or,

indeed, ''but'', or any other conjunction).

And that, my friends, is a fact.

The injuction against conjunctions is no more than a method employed by

schoolteachers to discourage their pupils from writing incomplete

sentences. Gowers - who knew a thing or two about grammar and language

use - had the following to say in his edition of A Dictionary of Modern English Usage:

"That

it is a solecism to begin a sentence with and is a faintly lingering

superstition. The OED gives examples ranging from the 10th to the 19th

c.; the Bible is full of them."

While we''re on the subject of debunking grammatical superstitions, you should also feel free to split your infinitives.

[/quote]That merely is another opinion concerning English is it not? A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, not The Dictionary of Modern English Usage:You saying starting a sentence with ''and'' is OK, that''s a fact.  Is not of course a fact, it is a matter of opinion, because a purist would say, starting a sentence with ''and'' is just wrong in correct usage (their opinion). Me, in my opinion.  It is used too often,  some ramblings I''ve read instead of making the article easier to read,  make the article ''hard work''.