Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Do The Decemberists have people fooled?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedDo The Decemberists have people fooled?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1213141516 19>
Author
Message
moreitsythanyou View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: April 23 2006
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 11682
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 19:56
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

hahahah...  as if I didn't love the Decemberists enough...

thanks to them... we now have this trainwreck of a thread.

LOLClap



More than happy to be of service.
<font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR]

Back to Top
Raff View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24429
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:02
That's one for my friend Pablo...


I was there in the audienceWink!


Edited by Raff - June 15 2009 at 20:02
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:02
Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

hahahah...  as if I didn't love the Decemberists enough...

thanks to them... we now have this trainwreck of a thread.

LOLClap



More than happy to be of service.


Clap now we just need one of the Decemberists to drop in and say Hi.  We know they are out there.  What better way to introduce them to our site. 


and who says Prog fans have sticks up their asses hahaha
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
MovingPictures07 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Beasty Heart
Status: Offline
Points: 32181
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:03
Don't forget Fooling Yourself by Styx. Wink
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:03
^yeah! Spot on! "Fool for your lovin' no more!" haha
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:03
Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

That's one for my friend Pablo...


I was there in the audienceWink!


WHITESNAKE!!!!????.... in our Decemberists thread...



alrighty... now it's gone too far LOL
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
The Quiet One View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:06
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

Originally posted by Raff Raff wrote:

That's one for my friend Pablo...


I was there in the audienceWink!


WHITESNAKE!!!!????.... in our Decemberists thread...



alrighty... now it's gone too far LOL


No it hasn't, they played steel guitar, didn't they?Tongue That's pretty much as on topic as that so-called Aretha or whateverWink
Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3449
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:06
Frankly, I think the only thing this thread is now missing is perhaps, a decent reference to the Mud Shark Dancing Lesson.  I choose that because pretty much any of FZ's songs will generally contain the word fool.
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.
Back to Top
micky View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46838
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:11
I suspect by tomorrow... this thread will have left it's current orbit and will next orbit some other distant celestial body.  


god knows what... but that is why we love the forum... tune in tomorrow to see Willie Nelson performing his ode to the Decemberists classic album The Hazards of Love....  the Rake.

Alright... Alright...All Right...


nighty night my fellow fools, suckers, and Decemberists fans hahah.

The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
Back to Top
ClemofNazareth View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Folk Researcher

Joined: August 17 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4659
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 20:54

Well it's not Willie but I suppose it was inevitable....

"Peace is the only battle worth waging."

Albert Camus
Back to Top
moreitsythanyou View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: April 23 2006
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 11682
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 21:29
Originally posted by ClemofNazareth ClemofNazareth wrote:

Well it's not Willie but I suppose it was inevitable....



There needs to be more techno songs about infanticide
<font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR]

Back to Top
~Rael~ View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: April 11 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 247
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 21:30
Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by ~Rael~ ~Rael~ wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by WalterDigsTunes WalterDigsTunes wrote:

his/her


their

Actually Walter is right (something I thought I'd never say). He used artist as a singular so the pronoun should be singular as well.


'His/her' or 'his or her' are very clumsy ways of circumventing problems with gender in pronouns though. Enter the plural form, convenient and accepted as an alternative, despite its conflict with the singular form of 'artist'.
And it's logical, too. Walter really means the totality of pre-'89 artists here, not just a single one.



Actually, it is not acceptable to match a singular pronoun with a plural counterpart, or vice versa. The best alternative would have been to write "you're neglecting a pre-1989 artist and that artist's masterpieces." Less clunky than "his or her" or "his/her." And I do not think Walter meant the totality of pre-'89 artists, because all of Walter's grammar seems competent, so his use of  "his/her" was obviously intentional. Plus, "his/her" or "his or her" is perfectly accpetable. And grammatical correctness always supersedes style. 

Using "they" after a singular pronoun is starting to become okay in writing, but it still has a couple decades to integrate itself fully into the English language and become truly acceptable. And even then, it won't be correct to everyone.


And the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary agrees with me too - though it does admit that the use of 'they/their/etc." after a singular noun or pronoun is considered erroneous by some.

Isn't language fun?


In that case, could you e-mail all my college professors and inform them of this, because they have been way off.

And I kind of feel sorry for anyone who can't find music he likes post '89. Too much good stuff to be missed.


Edited by ~Rael~ - June 15 2009 at 21:33
I repeat myself when under stress, I repeat myself when under stress, I repeat myself when under stress, I repeat myself when under stress, I repeat myself when under stress . . .
Back to Top
jammun View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3449
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 15 2009 at 21:45
Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by ClemofNazareth ClemofNazareth wrote:

Well it's not Willie but I suppose it was inevitable....



There needs to be more techno songs about infanticide
 
Wait 'til they trot out the children's choir for the follow-up.


Edited by jammun - June 15 2009 at 21:46
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.
Back to Top
Visitor13 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: February 02 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 4702
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 16 2009 at 01:41
Originally posted by ~Rael~ ~Rael~ wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by ~Rael~ ~Rael~ wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by WalterDigsTunes WalterDigsTunes wrote:

his/her


their

Actually Walter is right (something I thought I'd never say). He used artist as a singular so the pronoun should be singular as well.


'His/her' or 'his or her' are very clumsy ways of circumventing problems with gender in pronouns though. Enter the plural form, convenient and accepted as an alternative, despite its conflict with the singular form of 'artist'.
And it's logical, too. Walter really means the totality of pre-'89 artists here, not just a single one.



Actually, it is not acceptable to match a singular pronoun with a plural counterpart, or vice versa. The best alternative would have been to write "you're neglecting a pre-1989 artist and that artist's masterpieces." Less clunky than "his or her" or "his/her." And I do not think Walter meant the totality of pre-'89 artists, because all of Walter's grammar seems competent, so his use of  "his/her" was obviously intentional. Plus, "his/her" or "his or her" is perfectly accpetable. And grammatical correctness always supersedes style. 

Using "they" after a singular pronoun is starting to become okay in writing, but it still has a couple decades to integrate itself fully into the English language and become truly acceptable. And even then, it won't be correct to everyone.


And the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary agrees with me too - though it does admit that the use of 'they/their/etc." after a singular noun or pronoun is considered erroneous by some.

Isn't language fun?


In that case, could you e-mail all my college professors and inform them of this, because they have been way off.

They should simply read more grammar books, such as Quirk's and Greenbaum's humongous Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, which is another authority that agrees with me - and also condemns his/her as cumbersome. So my suggestion stands - unless there has been some academic backlash against it recently that I'm simply not aware of.

 
And I kind of feel sorry for anyone who can't find music he likes post '89. Too much good stuff to be missed.

Really, the only person who's ever posted here who hates anything post '89 would probably be Karnevil9, though his cut-off point was '73. Walter is just looking for attention. 
Back to Top
Visitor13 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: February 02 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 4702
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 16 2009 at 01:48
Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by ~Rael~ ~Rael~ wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by WalterDigsTunes WalterDigsTunes wrote:

his/her


their

Actually Walter is right (something I thought I'd never say). He used artist as a singular so the pronoun should be singular as well.


'His/her' or 'his or her' are very clumsy ways of circumventing problems with gender in pronouns though. Enter the plural form, convenient and accepted as an alternative, despite its conflict with the singular form of 'artist'.
And it's logical, too. Walter really means the totality of pre-'89 artists here, not just a single one.



Actually, it is not acceptable to match a singular pronoun with a plural counterpart, or vice versa. The best alternative would have been to write "you're neglecting a pre-1989 artist and that artist's masterpieces." Less clunky than "his or her" or "his/her." And I do not think Walter meant the totality of pre-'89 artists, because all of Walter's grammar seems competent, so his use of  "his/her" was obviously intentional. Plus, "his/her" or "his or her" is perfectly accpetable. And grammatical correctness always supersedes style. 

Using "they" after a singular pronoun is starting to become okay in writing, but it still has a couple decades to integrate itself fully into the English language and become truly acceptable. And even then, it won't be correct to everyone.


And the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary agrees with me too - though it does admit that the use of 'they/their/etc." after a singular noun or pronoun is considered erroneous by some.

Isn't language fun?

It is fun, that's why I'm such a grammar nazi. But a plural pronoun taking the place of a singular noun is just plain wrong no matter how many people mess it up.


I think we all agree that one word can have many meanings. Personally I see 'their' as used in my suggestion as a singular pronoun with the same form as a plural one. Is it a perfect use? No, but his/her looks like crap in mine, and at least some authorities' opinion, and so 'their' is preferable. And until a better alternative shows up (unlikely), it stands.


Edited by Visitor13 - June 16 2009 at 01:59
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 16 2009 at 01:57
I have no intention of getting into a long discussion into the finer aspects of English grammar, but I have to agree with moreyouthanitsyou, his/her is the correct usage. There may be zillions of artists pre-89, but since Walter used "a pre-89  artist", his/her is correct. Give Walter credit where it's due. LOL
Back to Top
KingCrimson250 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 29 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 573
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 16 2009 at 02:02


Come on. And you call yourselves a prog forum. Wink
Back to Top
moreitsythanyou View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: April 23 2006
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 11682
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 16 2009 at 02:39
Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by ~Rael~ ~Rael~ wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by WalterDigsTunes WalterDigsTunes wrote:

his/her


their

Actually Walter is right (something I thought I'd never say). He used artist as a singular so the pronoun should be singular as well.


'His/her' or 'his or her' are very clumsy ways of circumventing problems with gender in pronouns though. Enter the plural form, convenient and accepted as an alternative, despite its conflict with the singular form of 'artist'.
And it's logical, too. Walter really means the totality of pre-'89 artists here, not just a single one.



Actually, it is not acceptable to match a singular pronoun with a plural counterpart, or vice versa. The best alternative would have been to write "you're neglecting a pre-1989 artist and that artist's masterpieces." Less clunky than "his or her" or "his/her." And I do not think Walter meant the totality of pre-'89 artists, because all of Walter's grammar seems competent, so his use of  "his/her" was obviously intentional. Plus, "his/her" or "his or her" is perfectly accpetable. And grammatical correctness always supersedes style. 

Using "they" after a singular pronoun is starting to become okay in writing, but it still has a couple decades to integrate itself fully into the English language and become truly acceptable. And even then, it won't be correct to everyone.


And the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary agrees with me too - though it does admit that the use of 'they/their/etc." after a singular noun or pronoun is considered erroneous by some.

Isn't language fun?

It is fun, that's why I'm such a grammar nazi. But a plural pronoun taking the place of a singular noun is just plain wrong no matter how many people mess it up.


I think we all agree that one word can have many meanings. Personally I see 'their' as used in my suggestion as a singular pronoun with the same form as a plural one. Is it a perfect use? No, but his/her looks like crap in mine, and at least some authorities' opinion, and so 'their' is preferable. And until a better alternative shows up (unlikely), it stands.

Well actually like I mentioned earlier, the idea of gender neutral pronouns is starting to form but probably won't be in mainstream usage for some time. For example, the word that could be used in this scenario would be "hir." But for now, we just have his/her or one's or there is the alternative of just using the noun itself instead of a pronoun.
<font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR]

Back to Top
Visitor13 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member

VIP Member

Joined: February 02 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 4702
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 16 2009 at 03:02
Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by ~Rael~ ~Rael~ wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by moreitsythanyou moreitsythanyou wrote:

Originally posted by Visitor13 Visitor13 wrote:

Originally posted by WalterDigsTunes WalterDigsTunes wrote:

his/her


their

Actually Walter is right (something I thought I'd never say). He used artist as a singular so the pronoun should be singular as well.


'His/her' or 'his or her' are very clumsy ways of circumventing problems with gender in pronouns though. Enter the plural form, convenient and accepted as an alternative, despite its conflict with the singular form of 'artist'.
And it's logical, too. Walter really means the totality of pre-'89 artists here, not just a single one.



Actually, it is not acceptable to match a singular pronoun with a plural counterpart, or vice versa. The best alternative would have been to write "you're neglecting a pre-1989 artist and that artist's masterpieces." Less clunky than "his or her" or "his/her." And I do not think Walter meant the totality of pre-'89 artists, because all of Walter's grammar seems competent, so his use of  "his/her" was obviously intentional. Plus, "his/her" or "his or her" is perfectly accpetable. And grammatical correctness always supersedes style. 

Using "they" after a singular pronoun is starting to become okay in writing, but it still has a couple decades to integrate itself fully into the English language and become truly acceptable. And even then, it won't be correct to everyone.


And the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary agrees with me too - though it does admit that the use of 'they/their/etc." after a singular noun or pronoun is considered erroneous by some.

Isn't language fun?

It is fun, that's why I'm such a grammar nazi. But a plural pronoun taking the place of a singular noun is just plain wrong no matter how many people mess it up.


I think we all agree that one word can have many meanings. Personally I see 'their' as used in my suggestion as a singular pronoun with the same form as a plural one. Is it a perfect use? No, but his/her looks like crap in mine, and at least some authorities' opinion, and so 'their' is preferable. And until a better alternative shows up (unlikely), it stands.

Well actually like I mentioned earlier, the idea of gender neutral pronouns is starting to form but probably won't be in mainstream usage for some time. For example, the word that could be used in this scenario would be "hir." But for now, we just have his/her or one's or there is the alternative of just using the noun itself instead of a pronoun.


Copperud considered this usage established (though still somewhat controversial) as far back as the early '80s. Ditto Quirk, Greenbaum et al. , and they say it was American English that was the fastest in adopting it 
I can see there is some resistance to it, but unless it was first gaining ground since the early '80s, only to be almost unanimously rejected somewhere in the mid-to-late '90s probably and is being slowly brought back now.... what you and Rael say is somewhat at odds with the sources I provide.

'Hir' sounds and looks dreadful, BTW. I can see it being rejected only because it looks so artificial.
Back to Top
el dingo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 08 2008
Location: Norwich UK
Status: Offline
Points: 7053
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 16 2009 at 03:21
Originally posted by KingCrimson250 KingCrimson250 wrote:



Come on. And you call yourselves a prog forum. Wink
 
Now come on, please... there's absolutely NO need for that, not even in this threadLOL
It's not that I can't find worth in anything, it's just that I can't find worth in enough.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 1213141516 19>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.352 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.