Of. Something can be "spun off from" but it can only be a spin-off OF.
― Tottenham Heelspur (in orbit), Thursday, 15 August 2013 13:30 (ten years ago) link
Never had this mental image of an All In the Family carousel spinning out of control with Maude and the Jeffersons flying off out of its orbit.
― pplains, Thursday, 15 August 2013 15:46 (ten years ago) link
agree with in orbit
― k3vin k., Thursday, 15 August 2013 16:12 (ten years ago) link
film in "off of" foofaraw
― TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Thursday, 15 August 2013 16:13 (ten years ago) link
i went with "spin-off of" in the end yeah
― lex pretend, Thursday, 15 August 2013 16:44 (ten years ago) link
if one were speaking of, say, A.J. Pierzynski and A.J. Burnett, would one call them a pair of A.J.s or a pair of A.J.'s?
i support the former, but it looks weird with the periods
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 18 September 2013 21:02 (ten years ago) link
"a pair of men sharing the initials A.J."
― Aimless, Wednesday, 18 September 2013 21:11 (ten years ago) link
"a pair of A's J."
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 18 September 2013 21:14 (ten years ago) link
In serious I'd probably just do some variant on what Aimless said, as there's no real gain in meaning or literary flair in referring to them as "A pair of A.J.'s" imo.
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 18 September 2013 21:16 (ten years ago) link
yeah, that's actually what i did -- i was just curious about the official ruling
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 18 September 2013 21:19 (ten years ago) link
plus that way I get to avoid the problem, and I have an avoidant personality
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 18 September 2013 21:20 (ten years ago) link
The former is fine. You'd only use the latter if there was some ajs word that would confuse the reader.
― pplains, Wednesday, 18 September 2013 21:56 (ten years ago) link
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/30/10-grammar-rules-you-can-forget
― Hamburglar's smiling too (Nasty, Brutish & Short), Monday, 30 September 2013 20:46 (ten years ago) link
fucking apostate
― druhilla (k3vin k.), Monday, 30 September 2013 20:49 (ten years ago) link
Much of what may be safely ignored depends upon the context in which it shall be applied. Calling many of these strictures "rules" is an overstatement, because the authority on which they are based is nothing more than highly inflated opinion. Breaking them does not cause any ambiguity or loss of information. Such rules only matter who insist on them, due to their innate inflexibility. A few of the rules mentioned do introduce minor problems in some cases, such as the one regarding the double negative, but they are hardly fit excuses for shaming and finger pointing.
― Aimless, Monday, 30 September 2013 22:17 (ten years ago) link
the subjunctive is great and should not die
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Monday, 30 September 2013 22:20 (ten years ago) link
^^ agreed. it has a purpose and adds information and clarity when used properly.
― Aimless, Monday, 30 September 2013 22:21 (ten years ago) link
already dead outside america
― Hamburglar's smiling too (Nasty, Brutish & Short), Monday, 30 September 2013 22:22 (ten years ago) link
nah, I like a subjunctive
― kinder, Monday, 30 September 2013 22:36 (ten years ago) link
enfeebled
― Aimless, Monday, 30 September 2013 22:37 (ten years ago) link
whom, subjunctive and other american pedantries
― caek, Monday, 30 September 2013 22:53 (ten years ago) link
just thought I would share this headline that suffers from awkward phrasing/lack of punctuation:
"15 Celebrities Most People Don't Know Are Black"
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 23 October 2013 18:44 (ten years ago) link
#1: Darth Vader
― Aimless, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 18:45 (ten years ago) link
oh, i definitely know that celebrity.
― pplains, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 18:51 (ten years ago) link
If you only knew...
― Aimless, Wednesday, 23 October 2013 18:52 (ten years ago) link
I really initially read it as meaning "Here are 15 black celebrities most people have never heard of (because society is racist)"
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 23 October 2013 19:04 (ten years ago) link
Exactly 15 celebrities are black, but most people have never heard of them.
― Unsettled defender (ithappens), Wednesday, 23 October 2013 19:31 (ten years ago) link
or "The 15 least-known celebrities are all black"
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 23 October 2013 19:42 (ten years ago) link
Or, everyone has a list of 15 celebrities they don't know - every person's list might be different – and in each case, all those celebrities are black.
― Unsettled defender (ithappens), Wednesday, 23 October 2013 20:53 (ten years ago) link
"Coming in at #12 on my list: Alphonso Ribeiro. Who the fuck is that? I have no idea."
― #fomo that's the motto (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 23 October 2013 21:01 (ten years ago) link
How would you style John Cage's 4'33" if you usually put the titles of short works (like songs) in quotation marks? Wiki seems to italicize it.
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Saturday, 26 October 2013 22:01 (ten years ago) link
I think the rule would say to use '4'33"'.
― pplains, Saturday, 26 October 2013 23:27 (ten years ago) link
You mean switch from double quotes to single quotes?
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Saturday, 26 October 2013 23:40 (ten years ago) link
http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/book.asp?isbn=9780300136999
italicized throughout
― j., Saturday, 26 October 2013 23:54 (ten years ago) link
since there are three movements in it you are justified in italicizing it as you would other works with three movements, as opposed to songs, it seems to me
― zvookster, Sunday, 27 October 2013 00:35 (ten years ago) link
Nothing like editing a story for space/clarity and somehow adding 100 words.
― pplains, Monday, 18 November 2013 16:14 (ten years ago) link
Improved clarity accounts for the extra words. Now remove the extraneous words and bob's your uncle. Of course, the story will lose some of its effect if you pare it down to bare bones.
― Aimless, Monday, 18 November 2013 19:56 (ten years ago) link
should it be "...provides a leveller playing field" or "...provides a more level playing field"? I prefer the first, but I wonder if the second is more correct.
― ʎɐpunsunɾɐɔ (cajunsunday), Saturday, 7 December 2013 14:08 (ten years ago) link
second one sounds better to me
― one sexual away from HOOOOOOOOOOMO (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 7 December 2013 14:10 (ten years ago) link
or eliminate both -- it's a cliche.
― the objections to Drake from non-REAL HIPHOP people (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 7 December 2013 14:12 (ten years ago) link
Alfred OTM. So go for No. 2 if you have no choice, that's the way it's said.
― pplains, Saturday, 7 December 2013 14:17 (ten years ago) link
I mean, a field is level or it's not. Saying some fields are leveler than other fields or that they are more level when the speaker really means they've been leveled better or that they are flatter -- it's not a pleasant situation to be in as a copywriter.
― pplains, Saturday, 7 December 2013 14:21 (ten years ago) link
i think you're talking about scalar/absolute adjectives? empty, bald, pregnant. level.
― sweat pea (La Lechera), Saturday, 7 December 2013 16:02 (ten years ago) link
yeah you're right. level. thanks guys.
― ʎɐpunsunɾɐɔ (cajunsunday), Saturday, 7 December 2013 16:18 (ten years ago) link
I can easily assign a meaning to "more level", and I can't think of a better way to express that meaning (I'm ignoring the "playing field" part of the idiom here). I'm sure I say things like "more linear" all the time, even if some people would consider that infelicitous.
― freemen (on the) space (seandalai), Sunday, 8 December 2013 03:11 (ten years ago) link
ok "flatter" conveys a similar meaning but pplains would presumably argue that a field is either flat or not flat and we're back where we started
― freemen (on the) space (seandalai), Sunday, 8 December 2013 03:12 (ten years ago) link
http://www.hum.uu.nl/medewerkers/a.toledo/papers/Absolute_Relative_Variance.pdf
― bamcquern, Sunday, 8 December 2013 04:36 (ten years ago) link
"Flat" doesn't necessarily mean "horizontal," does it?
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Sunday, 8 December 2013 05:06 (ten years ago) link
second option, and no there's nothing wrong with the concept of a more level playing field
― mind totally brown (darraghmac), Sunday, 8 December 2013 09:33 (ten years ago) link
Late to this party. I would encourage the construction "more nearly level", because level is a state more than a quality. To my mind, either something is 'level' or it is 'not level'.
― Aimless, Sunday, 8 December 2013 19:35 (ten years ago) link