Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!GAFFA.MIT.EDU!Love-Hounds-request
From: Love-Hounds-request@GAFFA.MIT.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Subject: KaTe and grammar
Message-ID: <1989Aug17.222455.16637@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 17 Aug 89 22:24:55 GMT
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Love-Hounds@GAFFA.MIT.EDU
Organization: UC Berkeley Math Dept
Lines: 30
Approved: love-hounds@eddie.mit.edu

Really-From: adams%bosco.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Jeffrey P. Adams)


Okay, now we're up to three examples of Kate using improper grammar.
Can we agree that, grammatical-wise [No flames - it's a joke.], she
is not perfect?  No need to invent stories explaining the phenomena.

I must admit, though, that it bothers me greatly to see professional
users of English, Kate included, make fundamental mistakes of grammar
and usage.  It also bothers me that so many people want to justify
the perversion of formal rules of language.  Some people claim that
"You and I like Kate" sounds stilted and unnatural, but "You and me
like Kate" sounds OK.  To whom?  Certainly not to me.  It only sounds
unnatural if you are uncomfortable speaking properly, and you convey
this through your voice.  If you pay close attention, you'll notice
that lots of people you know speak properly and it doesn't sound
unnatural.

It amuses me that many of these same people complain about exceptions
to the rules of grammar, yet advocate creating many more such
exceptions by making "street English" acceptable.





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jeff Adams                 "Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part
adams@bosco.berkeley.edu    that wonders what the part that isn't thinking
                            isn't thinking of."   -They Might Be Giants