Do they really think that it is demeaning to be called by your first name instead of taking it to mean familiarity?

Eddy Privitera

If these are the arguments Simon hopes to convince voters, God Help the PN !!! Dr. Muscat will blast his arguments up to now, so easily !!!
(Times comments board)

I agree with these rules. The internet is currently the wild-west of grammar and syntax.

I was only referring to the use of ‘shall’ as substitute or alternative to ‘will’ as a future simple. There, it’s use is archaic but it still makes me chuckle in delight when I hear an older Maltese or Anglo-Indian, who learnt proper imperial English under the British, use it.

Of course ‘shall’ can also be used when asking for instructions and decisions: ‘shall I open the window’ (Practical English Usage, Swan, Oxford University press, 2013, page 193).

As for th last point, ‘”fish” has a rare plural “fishes”, but the normal plural is “fish”‘ (Ibid., page 516).

Daphne!! You used “basically” … the infamous non-word! I’m shocked!! :-O

Seriously though, those are very sensible rules. Thank you.

I will take that as meaning that both will still be accepted. Both ‘English Grammar in Use’ and ‘New English File’ have ‘shall’ down as a rather virtually unused future form; it still says that it can be accepted though.

Think ‘fish’ ‘fishes’.

[Daphne – Fishes is a plural form that indicates different varieties/species. Fish is a plural form that just means lots of them, generally of the same kind.

‘Shall’ is not defunct. In the construction of the interrogative form, largely for the first person singular and plural, it can’t be replaced by ‘will’. Shall I go? Shall we buy that? Shall I get the blue one or the red one?]

In my younger days, the school I attended — a public (government) one — boasted teachers who were absolute sticklers for punctuation and I’m still grateful to them for what they managed to teach me. At that time, English was the most important subject in the curriculum. The exclamation mark has a place in punctuation. May I suggest this link which is both succinct and clear?

http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/punctuation/when/when-to-use-exclamation-marks.html

[Daphne – The link you’ve given here explains exactly why you shouldn’t use exclamation marks, and not why you should. Basically, they’re childish. In fact, all the examples of exclamation-mark-use which the site gives are ‘teenage’. Wow this and wow that. English is extremely precise, and one of the hallmarks of being able to use it well is being able to use it precisely. Aside from the fact that British English is the language of a culture that does not allow for excitability and in fact disapproves of it (unlike American English), and hence exclamation marks are deeply at odds with its nature, there is no need of them. If you can’t make your point without the crutch of an exclamation mark, then you haven’t used the language well. Precisely because of this, in any form of professional writing – journalism, fiction, academic papers, biographies, and so on – exclamation marks are an absolute no-no except when between inverted commas in quoted speech (and even so, they are frowned upon). At most, you might find a couple in books for infants.]

The use of ellipses was not encouraged but they too have a place, especially to insert clarifications in the text. I would submit that the judicious use of them should be permitted.

This blog is yours and you may upload or trash any contribution but rule by diktat where grammar and language are concerned has proved to be ineffective or counter-productive whenever tried. I hasten to add, though, that bad grammar or misuse of vocabulary should be actively discouraged. As to pronunciation…well that is a matter on which volumes could be written and this blog is written not spoken.

[Daphne – Basically, I wish to avoid all the things which make other comments-boards so trashy and uninspiring. I have identified what most of those things are, and I am going to stick to it. Anybody who comes in here with Facebook shorthand, smilies, mile-long ellipses, exclamation marks, multiple interrogation points, and cruddy spelling is going to have their comment edited or deleted.]

Surely you will allow an acceptable measure of poshness in those who still insist on using ‘shall’ as a substitute for ‘will’? Some old fuddy duddies may get cross about this one.

[Daphne – http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/shallwillglossary.htm%5D

He is a character that’s for sure, and the internet — for as long as it exists — will be forever etched with his outrageous comments for centuries, if not millennia.

I shudder to think what the sociologists of the 25th century will be saying about this gentleman; what will they say he symbolised? The pinnacle of freedom of speech?

The access to the public domain of a private citizen and the far-reaching nature of their commentary on just about any subject?

With all the methods of control that governments can employ in controlling people’s thoughts, it would not surprise me if we have indeed reached a milestone in human history and maybe this man exemplifies it. God help us.

That’s specifically why it was “Eddie” and “Guido”, especially in the dark eighties. With Eddie particularly, the Nationalists (and all those of good will) felt he was one of them.