[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Part 2 of 2 -- Re: GDP: NR 1.1 Pitches 2008-01-26 [OT]
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: Part 2 of 2 -- Re: GDP: NR 1.1 Pitches 2008-01-26 [OT] |
Date: |
Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:42:48 -0800 |
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 14:34:43 -0500 (EST)
Ralph Little <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Accidentals are only printed on tied notes which
> > begin a new system:
>
> Each to his/her own I guess.
>
> In this case "that" is correct and "which" is incorrect.
> To me, "which" sounds strange in this context.
> It implies to me that tied notes begin a new system
> *which* is, of course, untrue. :)
I think that's a different meaning of "which". Hmm... if we had a
comma before the "which", I'd buy into your reading.
I think we're getting into silly territory here. (or rather, I
think we wandered into silly territory about 8 emails ago :)
> What people think of as strange or normal depends on their
> common usage in spoken language I find.
>
> That's why you still see people writing
> "there" instead of "they're" and
> "where" instead of "we're".
>
> Don't even get me started on "its" :D
No, those are clearly just idiots. Nobody whose [sic] intelligent
can possibly disagree over those things. :)
Cheers,
- Graham