Anal? I'se this.

[MajGenl.Meade]

For the past 3.5 years my best friend Brian and I have exchanged emails on a weekly basis and I have saved all of them. The current-year file is on my PC; prior years on a backup CDR.

My wife thinks it outrageous that after copying each of Brian's emails to my saved folder (and before actually reading his latest missive) I run the spelling and grammar programme and correct it. Then when I read it, I correct all the errors that such programmes can never catch - 'threw' for 'through' and so on. She believes I am adulterating and irrevocably altering not only the language but also the very character of my friend's communications and even, were it possible, of he himself.

I on the other hand can scarce believe that any right-thinking person would not applaud my example.

Meade

PS I have never corrected any PM.

PPS Despite the temptation.

PPPS Yet.

[Sean]

Well sir, apart from the fact that your title should probably read: 'Anal? I is this'...
I have, on first reading, noticed one punctuation and two grammatical errors in your post. Please correct these forthwith and we shall say no more about it!

[MajGenl.Meade]

'Anal? I is this'...

Ebonics

I have, on first reading, noticed one punctuation and two grammatical errors in your post. Please correct these forthwith and we shall say no more about it!

Oh yeah? You wish.

[Sean]

LMAO - Now admit it... You read through your post a couple of times before replying, didn't you?

[MajGenl.Meade]

Rubbish. No, of course not. It was three times. I did wonder if 'scarce' rather than 'scarcely' might cause consternation and it is lazy (and bad form) to type 3.5 rather than spelling out 'three and a half'. Also I am critical of having typed "on my PC" but excused it as a generally understood colloquialism.

'Of he himself' is not beyond criticism. Perhaps "his very nature" would have more accurately expressed the idea.

I do apologise for the delay in replying. I was forced to read this one five times before submitting it. Be thankful you only have to read it once.

Meade

[rubato]

"I'd rather be anal-retentitve then whatever the opposite is."

SDG
from Herb Caen


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

My wife thinks it outrageous that after copying each of Brian's emails to my saved folder (and before actually reading his latest missive) I run the spelling and grammar programme and correct it. Then when I read it, I correct all the errors that such programmes can never catch - 'threw' for 'through' and so on. She believes I am adulterating and irrevocably altering not only the language but also the very character of my friend's communications and even, were it possible, of he himself.

Sensible woman, your wife...

Can't for the life of me imagine how she puts up with you....

[MajGenl.Meade]

LJ, she's a wise woman and makes this contribution to my Facebook page 'favourite quotations' section:

"I hate you. And you make me sick." (LRH)

You may find it difficult to believe but I hear that one quite a lot. I criticise her for commencing a sentence with the word 'and'.

BTW my other favourite quotes are:

"Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?" (Sundance Kid)

"Quality beans!" (my Dad) - after a fart.

"A good dryer would have got that" (Dad-in-law) - challenging quality control issues when he washed dishes

Meade

rube: shurely, anal-retentive & than. No? Mind you, it could be interesting to be anal-retentive and then (suddenly) become the opposite.

[Joe Guy]

I on the other hand can scarce believe that any right-thinking person would not applaud my example.

When you see your friend in person do you always correct his grammar before your respond to him? Do you tell him that his choice of clothing doesn't meet your standard, his hair looks wrong (or his bald head is lumpy or needs polishing) and his posture isn't quite right? Do you check his ears for wax and smell his breath for sour odors?

If he dies before you do you plan to fix all of those things before his body is stored?

Have you run the spell & grammar checker on your bible and made the necessary corrections?

You quite obviously have a need to change everything you see in this world to a way that fits your view. You believe you are never wrong about anything and you just can't understand why nobody else realizes that. If you were king of the world you wouldn't allow anyone to be around you unless they speak your version of English. Since you aren't king of the world you are forever irritated by the imperfect creatures around you.

That's why you spend a lot of time in a third world country. Long ago you figured out that the best way to repair the human race is to go to where it originated and start from scratch. You reasoned that if you can't understand the language you won't get irritated at people's bad grammar and it will be easier to fix them.

Now go do the right thing.

[MajGenl.Meade]

How did you know about his bald and lumpy head. D_ _ n, you're good!

[alice]

PPS Despite the temptation.

PPPS Yet.

Read your post once.
Immediately noticed these errors - quoted above.
Lack of correct punctuation.
Bad sentence construction.
Returned to your post to retrieve the above so I could quote it in this post.
Wouldn't have commented except for the whole "people in glass houses" thing.

My wife thinks it outrageous that after copying each of Brian's emails to my saved folder (and before actually reading his latest missive) I run the spelling and grammar programme and correct it. Then when I read it, I correct all the errors that such programmes can never catch - 'threw' for 'through' and so on. She believes I am adulterating and irrevocably altering not only the language but also the very character of my friend's communications and even, were it possible, of he himself.

I agree with Lord Jim.
Sensible woman, your wife.

[MajGenl.Meade]

. . . and yet she married me . . .

A postscript, abbreviated PS or P.S., is writing added after the main body of a letter (or other body of writing). The term comes from the Latin post scriptum, an expression meaning "written after" (which may be interpreted in the sense of "that which comes after the writing").

A postscript may be a sentence, a paragraph, or occasionally many paragraphs added to, often hastily and incidentally, after the signature of a letter or (sometimes) the main body of an essay or book. . . Sometimes, when additional points are made after the first postscript, abbreviations such as PPS (post-post-scriptum, or postquam-post-scriptum) and PPPS (post-post-post-scriptum, and so on, ad infinitum) are used, though only PPS has somewhat common usage.

[dales]

post scriptum - should be lower case.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Where is it not?

[TPFKA@W]

PS I have never corrected any PM.

PPS Despite the temptation.

PPPS Yet.

They would all appear to be written in capitals.

Perhaps if you give the spiked stick that is stuck up your kaboose a good quarter turn it will clear up your vision?

[MajGenl.Meade]

No, that makes my eyes water.

The abbreviations are and should be capitalised as was originally quoted:

A postscript, abbreviated PS or P.S.,

and

abbreviations such as PPS (post-post-scriptum, or postquam-post-scriptum) and PPPS (post-post-post-scriptum, and so on, ad infinitum) are used, though only PPS has somewhat common usage.

The fully written out Latin words are and should be lower case, with perhaps an argument to be made in favour of using italics as dales did.

When tempted to use postscript or post scriptum at the beginning of a sentence, it would be more useful to change the word order rather than capitalise the first letter of either.

"Postscript is the word that describes ....." would be slightly less clear than "The word that describes ..... is postscript or post scriptum."

Neither should be confused with scrote postum which is closely allied to the spiked stick previously alluded to.

Meade

[TPFKA@W]

Giving that stick a quarter turn might afford other benefits such as focusing on your friend's meaning rather than his grammar and spelling which is of course supposed to be one of the benefits of having a best friend.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Well @M of course I do focus on what he says (after having corrected all those annoyingly underlined words/sections in Word which make it look like an outbreak of . . . well, some kind of skin disease. And I hope it's clear that I never criticise him for his typos any more than he criticises me for mine. No, I'm a very responsible correspondent; ensuring that I respond to each of his news items, questions, jokes, whatever. Very few people seem to do that; one can rattle off a couple of thousand words in a letter or email and the person responding reacts to none of it, solely concerned with their own doings.

(Another confession: sometimes I correct my own Word copies after I've sent them - months or years later. Doesn't work for 'read-only' archived stuff though - more's the pity).

Even worse - and you can recommend a half-turn - is when my Christian friends pray out loud and I find myself counting the Lords on one hand vs. the justs on the other. 'Lord, we just want to ask that you Lord will just take this situation and just . . ." Usually the Lords win out over justs but it's close. No idea what they are praying about.

I think it's a disease (me, not them)

Meade

[TPFKA@W]

Oh dear oh dear. I am overflowing now with pity for your poor, tortured soul. I will
pray that you have a stick removal in your future. Shall I send proctofoam?

[Joe Guy]

Proctofoam (sung to the tune of Kodachrome)

When Meade looks back at all the crap he's had to let out
It's a wonder he can crap at all
There was a stick implanted up his butt one day
Now he corrects the writing on the wall

Proctofoam
Would give him a great relief
Then he'd give us less grief
It would make his grammar phobia go away
I have some latex gloves on
I need some help to pull it out
Then we'll have a less anal General Meade today....