On 12/04/2010 08:36 PM, Klaus on-rev wrote:
Hi Richmond,
On 12/04/2010 08:23 PM, Klaus on-rev wrote:
Hi Mr. Tight-lipped,
Do you really want me to return to my previous blabber-mouthed incarnation?
Oh, NOOOOO! :-D
But a complete sentence wouldn't have hurt! ;-)
Some sentences can, when one pauses to reflect on, meditate on, and inwardly
digest them,
drag on in a way, which with their multiple subordinate, embedded clauses,
caveats (and, come to
think of things, extra twiddly bits in parentheses (often multiply
parenthesised (to a seemingly absurd
degree))), serve only to irritate, annoy and otherwise provoke the reader,
recipient, interlocutor or
other interpreter to shout an extremely non-sentential "F*ck", owing to their
final, and ultimately
slow, almost stupid, realisation, that sentences are not always so
cut-and-dried as to sport only
a single, easily identifiable, subject, a verb (possibly phrasal or involving,
especially in English,
the use of an auxiliary such as "have" or "do", or a modal such as "should", "might",
"may", "can/could",
"ought to", or "have to") and a simplistic, one-word object (as opposed to a
complex noun phrase,
possiby also involving multiple embedded clauses); or, to put it another way,
or, possibly more
idiomatically, "to cut a long story short" (or, when one reflects upon ths
sentence, more appositely,
"to cut a short story long"); some sentences are, unequivocally, "a pain in the
nether regions" (and
those for the metaphorically challenged mean the buttocks, bottom, dowp,
bottom, arse) that can
drive a good man (and, one should add in these egalitarian days that the word
'man' here is
used in an all-inclusive fashion embracing women, transgendered people and
eunuchs as well
as men Ding-an-Sich) to thoughts of despair or even suicide.
Some sentences can hurt a lot . . . :)
Love, kisses and funny moises, Richmond.
