Lurker > BigOlePappy

blorfenburger posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

"People who leave their shopping carts in parking spaces"

This was mine. I don't know why, but this makes me irrationally enraged.

It's not irrational

The degree that it makes me angry seems disproportionate to the crimein that sense it seems to not correspond. Also, you could argue all anger is irrational since emotions are illogical functions.

That said, it drives me crazy. I lose my mind when I'm in a hurry to grocery shop and I finally find a parking space to find a shopping cart in it. I don't understand why people don't simply put them back.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

I give up, holy fuck. If you're just going to keep dropping obscure grammar terms you don't fully understand and not bother to post any actual examples to prove your point, there's no point in continuing to argue over it.

I posted a lot of examples on page 2-3.

I think I am actually wrong, though. Not in the idea of the structure (what people think I am making up) but it should be "that" instead of "whom" make it a correct relative clause. Also, because an English professor just told the previous.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Golden Road posted...

"Whom like Subway" is a clause. A dependent clause, but still a clause, so it still follows the standard subject and object rules. Subway is the object. Whom is the subject, so it should be who.

Really though, just use who when you aren't sure which is right. Hardly anyone cares if you misuse who, but if you misuse whom... well, you just saw what happened XD

Whom is not the subject "whom like Subway." If you used, "that", for example, it would be "For those of you that like Subway." Of course, "that" wouldn't be the subject but a connector to the first clause; in the same way, "whom" is functioning the same way as a relative pronoun.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

"Whom" never makes sense as a subject.

I agree, that's why it is used as a relative pronoun for an indirect object.

For example: "For those of you that like Subway"
"That" references the previous clause, connects them, but could not be called a subject for the clause "That like subway."
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

It's not an object of any sort

Those is an in director objective because it is receiving "for" ("for" implying the topic question.)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

And I'll reiterate that just because it's not a complete sentence, it doesn't mean the rules of subject-verb-object agreement don't apply. "Although I don't like Subway" is not a complete sentence, but it has a subject, verb and object. They are used the same way as if I made a complete sentence: "I like Subway."

Not all incomplete sentences are the same. The example you showed is different than the title, which has an indirect object clause and then a clause relative to it.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

I'm not familiar with those terms, but looking them up doesn't do anything to prove your point. If anything, it only just gives further examples to why you are wrong. Don't just throw out niche terms if you don't have anything to back them up. Show me one credible example that indicates you're using this correctly. You can't, because you're fucking wrong, period.

They aren't niche terms, they are fundamental to linguistics (i.e. clauses, pronouns, inflection.)

You can't, because you're fucking wrong, period.

Wow, you really got me in the checkmate with that one.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

Just because it has the word "for" doesn't mean you use whom. "For whom are you looking?" would be an example of correct usage, but in that case "You" is the subject, "looking" is the verb, and "whom" is the object. In your clause, "like" is the verb and "Subway" is the object, so the subject is... that's right, "who."

Not correct, there is no subject. There is an indirect object clause and a referential relative clause (referring the indirect object clause.)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

Have you ever heard the expression "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach"? Notice how it's the word "who", not "whom"

That isn't the same syntactically because they aren't indirect objects (indirect objects inflect to "whom.")

"Those" in the title is the indirect object and its objects and relative pronouns/clauses could not reference it as a subject or a nominative.

E.g. "For whom can teach" (also not a complete sentence)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Ogurisama posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

Ogurisama posted...

People who leave dogs in hot cars.

I dont really need to see why you need to take your dog everywhere to begin with. Its dangerous to have an animal freely roam the cabin of your vehicle to begin with.

The vet? The park?

I am talking about when they take them everywhere, like are just running to grab groceries. Or doing some shopping at the mall and thats it.

Ah, that makes sense. No clue why people do that.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Ogurisama posted...

People who leave dogs in hot cars.

I dont really need to see why you need to take your dog everywhere to begin with. Its dangerous to have an animal freely roam the cabin of your vehicle to begin with.

The vet? The park?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

Who is a relative pronoun for referencing the subject of a sentence.

Yes, exactly... like I said, the word you are looking for is a subject, not an object, therefore "who" and not "whom"....

"For those of you whom like Subway" has no subject.

Whom like Subway is subordinate to the prepositional clause of "For those of you."
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

I hate to make the topic all about grammar arguments but it's very frustrating when the TC won't admit his mistake and keeps trying to make an argument that amounts to "the word whom exists so it must be right"

Yikes, you have fundamentally misinterpreted what I posted intentionally or unintentionally.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

I hate to make the topic all about grammar arguments but it's very frustrating when the TC won't admit his mistake and keeps trying to make an argument that amounts to "the word whom exists so it must be right"

I am fairly certain I am correct.

Whom is referencing "those" as a relative pronoun." "Those" is an indirect object (indirect objects take whom in English, and cui in Latin). "Who" (which references only subjects) would be incorrect for referencing an indirect object.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Technically, though, (this is being very pedantic) one cannot truly parse the topic title because it isn't a complete sentence. There is no subject and it functions as a "lead in" to the poll.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

I've never heard (or at least don't recall hearing) the term "relative pronoun" but that doesn't mean anything, because I looked it up and "who" is a relative pronoun as well.

Who is a relative pronoun for referencing the subject of a sentence.

"Which/That" are the most common English relative pronouns.

Relative Pronouns Examples
The following sentences contain examples of relative pronouns. The relative pronoun in each example is italicized.

The cyclist who won the race trained hard.
The pants that I bought yesterday are already stained.
The four team leaders, whomever the committee selects, will be at tomorrows meeting.
Spaghetti, which we eat at least twice a week, is one of my familys favorite meals.
Where did you buy the dress what you wore last week?
The book, when it was finally returned, was torn and stained.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

No, you're wrong. "Who" is a subject, "whom" is an object. This is equivalent to saying "Him likes Subway" instead of "He likes Subway."

No. It is the equivalent to saying "I gave the gift card to him whom likes Subway." Whom is functioning as a relative pronoun in the dative case.
The pronoun is syntactically referencing the object in the previous clauseit is acting as a relative pronoun.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Metalsonic66 posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

Are you sure? I thought it was functioning as a relative pronoun for an indirect object?

Hmm. Maybe I'm wrong. I've always been told it should be used when saying "to whom", "by whom", "for whom", etc. But technically your title says "For those of you whom..."

English was my best subject in high school, but that was more than ten years ago now.

I could be wrong, too. The way I understood its syntax was "whom" is referencing "those" as a relative pronoun. "Those" is an indirect object (For those) and, thus, would take "whom" if "those" was referenced again.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

From Purdue OWL:

---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

SteamedHams posted...

Metalsonic66 posted...

Also, the topic title is a misuse of "whom".

This is like when people use "___ and I" as an object, trying to sound smart but end up just making a fool of themselves. I say if you can't figure it out, just use me/who always, since it's better to misuse those than to misuse I/whom, IMO

I think it is "whom" though in the topic title as a relative pronoun.

This chart is where I learned relative pronouns (in a different language) but concept of relative dative case is the same:


---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Metalsonic66 posted...

Also, the topic title is a misuse of "whom".

Are you sure? I thought it was functioning as a relative pronoun for an indirect object?

E.g it would function similarly to "cui" in Latin in that context.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

"People who leave their shopping carts in parking spaces"

This was mine. I don't know why, but this makes me irrationally enraged.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Topic.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

What do you normally get at Subway?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

1. The Catcher in the Rye
2. Euclid's Window: The Story of Geometry from Parallel Lines to Hyperspace
3. Heart of the World
4. The Evidential Power of Beauty
5. The Souls of Black Folk
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Being a wallflower.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Renraku_San posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

Renraku_San posted...

It's 3do, not 3d0.

Semantics.

Lol, walk into any Gamestop and see how fast you would get owned saying "3d0" like some noob.

---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Any of those, with a beer, is heaven.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Renraku_San posted...

It's 3do, not 3d0.

Semantics.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Topic.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Please semantically define culinary terms or people will start threatening to kill each other over misunderstandings.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

From now on people need to cite sources, of the last twenty years, on topping preference, have an annotated bibliography, and defend their argument among a panel of Cambridge experts on pizza.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

People care a lot about pizza. Evidenced by people accusing others of pedantically structured arguments about toppings and culinary linguistics.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

McSame_as_Bush posted...

WarGreymon77 posted...

Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake... as long as you have a guide for some parts.

That game sucked when it came out. The story was nonsensical, and half of the game was cutscenes.

It is kind of funny in a "The Room" kind of way.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Krazy_Kirby posted...

just because you throw crap together and call it a pizza doesn't make it a pizza.

like a veggie "burger" isn't actually a burger

Define Burger?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Dikitain posted...

I have had artichoke, bell peppers, red onions, shrimp and shredded pork on pizza before (not all at once obviously) and they were all pretty good. Feta cheese might not be bad, but I have never had it melted/cooked so IDK. I don't know about chives, and I dislike olives so no to those.

I would skin my parents alive and wear their husks as a poncho before I touch a pizza with pineapple on it.

What did you think of shrimp?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Are there other fruits on pizza besides pinapple and tomato?
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

People have very strong opinions on pizza.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Krazy_Kirby posted...

BigOlePappy posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

feta cheese, shredded pork, and green olives all don't belong on pizza.

Feta cheese and green olives have been a part of pasta for longer than most contemporary toppings.

thats nice. pizza isn't pasta

They come from the same culinary tradition, though.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

slacker03150 posted...

bbq pulled pork pizza is delicious.

---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Krazy_Kirby posted...

feta cheese, shredded pork, and green olives all don't belong on pizza.

Feta cheese and green olives have been a part of pasta for longer than most contemporary toppings.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Topic
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

It isn't very good quality, the fit is for fat people, and the warranty isn't as good as Patagonia's.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Viva Pinata (bought it for my nephew to play and it was way too complicated for him)
Dark Souls (Was very boring, I didn't feel like I could be creative)
BlazBlue (bought an old edition that nobody plays)
Bioshock Infinite (was ok, but got repetitive and I predicted the ending)
Resident Evil 5 (I would rather just play 4 over and over)
Final Fantasy X-2 (Didn't gave a good plot or gameplay mechanics)
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Reality TV shows from the 00s were worse.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Any form of Cap'n Crunch is like eating razor wire.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

I worked at Abercrombie before; everyone was racist and condescending (they would take polaroids of the applicants and laugh at them in the stock room.)

I also used to pee in the mop bucket in hopes they would coat the floor with my urine.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."

Topic.
---

"Oh, you think lag is your ally. You merely adopted lag. I was born in it, molded by it. I didnt have cable until I was already a man."