Go Down

Topic: Punctuation Marks and Etc. of the English Language  (Read 9678 times) previous topic - next topic


Was the word 'science' formed based on the stated rules?
I doubt if any word was formed based on rules - the rules came after.

If not, why are we so aware about the syntactical and semantic rules
I suspect the vast majority of the population is not so aware.

Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.


"There are lots of rules like 'i' before 'e' except after 'c' , but not much science."

or words that have gh

Oh there are so many rules. :(

No technical PMs.
If you are asked a question, please respond with an answer.
If you are asked for more information, please supply it.
If you need clarification, ask for help.



I think you will discover that the I before E rule only applies when the sound is an eee

Ah, that is another layer to the rule (it is a bit like the rule for leap years).
The basic rule is "i before e" so "Science" should be spelled "Science".
However; the "except after c" part means it should be spelled "Sceince".
However; because the sound is not "eee" it should be spelled "Science"!
Of course it is not that simple :)

There are words like "height" and "weight" where there is no 'c' but 'i' does not come before 'e'.

I had a go at some pseudo code, but I think the rule is that there is no rule;

Code: [Select]
if following 'c'
if sound is not 'eee'
"i before e"  // e.g. science - shot down by ?
"e before i" // e.g. fluorescein - but shot down by specie
if sound is not 'eee'
"e before i" // e.g. height - but shot down by identifier
"i before e" // e.g. field - but shot down by seize

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored" - Aldous Huxley


Jun 02, 2019, 01:56 am Last Edit: Jun 02, 2019, 01:59 am by GolamMostafa
The next time that someone makes such a claim politely ask them to provide mathematical proof that the source is very inefficient then sit back and enjoy the show as they trip over their own tongue from their linguistic gymnastics.
The above sentence is found in some other Section of this Forum. In this sentence, 'someone' is singular noun; but, the corresponding pronoun 'them (they/their)' is plural which has apparently (to me as a non-native) broken the noun-pronoun agreement rule. Is it acceptable in the English Language? If so, how/why?      


Is it acceptable in the English Language? If so, how/why?      
For me, not a grammarian, yes, it is acceptable.  Someone may be singular but it's still vague, as in you aren't given a gender.  If the only possible respondents were male you could say, "If someone calls tell him I'm out."  However the gender isn't known so, what is left?  You could say "Tell that person..." or "Tell whomever calls..." but those are awkward.  A nice example or two.
I don't trust atoms.  They make up everything.

No private consultations undertaken!

Coding Badly

Jun 02, 2019, 06:49 am Last Edit: Jun 02, 2019, 06:50 am by Coding Badly
Is it acceptable in the English Language?
From the online Oxford dictionary...

Quote from: them
1.2 {singular} Referring to a person of unspecified sex.
...which fits perfectly with the usage.

I do, however, tend to write grammatically challenging prose so your confusion is certainly justified.


Everything runs on smoke, let the smoke out, it stops running....

Go Up