Editing Talk:1771: It Was I

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 15: Line 15:
 
:::: Modern English doesn't really have linking verbs anymore. Linking verbs only really make sense in languages where adjectives agree in case with nouns, like German, Latin, or in Slavic languages, which makes the construction "X is Y" where Y is an adjective really common, and since Y agrees in singular/plural and gender already, it makes sense to apply agreement to case also, and that usage spreads to cases where Y is a noun as well. None of this applies to English: nouns have lost case and gender, adjectives have completely lost agreement and case and gender and plural, pronoun case has become limited to subject vs object-and-everything-else. Other West-European languages that have lost case have followed a similar pathway (ex: French "C'est moi", where "moi" is caseless). In the case of "X is Y", Y is an attribute to the subject, and in linking verb languages this gets nominative case (and likewise, attributes to the object get accusative case). Modern English applies the rule that it's not a subject, so it falls into the object-and-everything-else category.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.91|108.162.219.91]] 17:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 
:::: Modern English doesn't really have linking verbs anymore. Linking verbs only really make sense in languages where adjectives agree in case with nouns, like German, Latin, or in Slavic languages, which makes the construction "X is Y" where Y is an adjective really common, and since Y agrees in singular/plural and gender already, it makes sense to apply agreement to case also, and that usage spreads to cases where Y is a noun as well. None of this applies to English: nouns have lost case and gender, adjectives have completely lost agreement and case and gender and plural, pronoun case has become limited to subject vs object-and-everything-else. Other West-European languages that have lost case have followed a similar pathway (ex: French "C'est moi", where "moi" is caseless). In the case of "X is Y", Y is an attribute to the subject, and in linking verb languages this gets nominative case (and likewise, attributes to the object get accusative case). Modern English applies the rule that it's not a subject, so it falls into the object-and-everything-else category.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.91|108.162.219.91]] 17:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 
:Correct; "Luke" was wrong. And if the point - wrongly - is that there is no right or wrong then Luke was wrong in saying anything at all, because he was thus opposing something that wasn't wrong, and he was wrong to defend his point. "Vader" was right. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.10|198.41.238.10]] 23:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 
:Correct; "Luke" was wrong. And if the point - wrongly - is that there is no right or wrong then Luke was wrong in saying anything at all, because he was thus opposing something that wasn't wrong, and he was wrong to defend his point. "Vader" was right. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.10|198.41.238.10]] 23:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
βˆ’
:: No, a) English doesn't use that kind of grammar anymore. And b) "is" has multiple meaning. If you are to use double nominative, you should only do it when stating a link where the order is irrelevant "It was I" <-> I was it/the one", but if you are doing that you are also invoking an achaic grammar structure where you can say things like "So say I". "You hate I" and "Me loves She". While not technically incorrect, you should leave it to old sayings. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.17|162.158.92.17]] 18:57, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 
  
 
Reminds me of this: https://youtu.be/IIAdHEwiAy8 --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.81.44|141.101.81.44]] 12:09, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 
Reminds me of this: https://youtu.be/IIAdHEwiAy8 --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.81.44|141.101.81.44]] 12:09, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: