The only English, I'd have you know.Originally posted by The Z
Yep...the mother tongue
None of that 'aboot' or 'eh', around here please.
(I love it when they say 'eh'. "You'd better watch it, eh?" Man, I loved Canada. )
so what changed your mind about Canada? (you were using past tense..... )Originally posted by Nippy
(I love it when they say 'eh'. "You'd better watch it, eh?" Man, I loved Canada. )
Ah, so u used to live there..... that explains it....Originally posted by Nippy
The fact that I came back from there?
I seem to be making wrong assumptions all over the place..... I think I better shut up now for a while....Originally posted by Nippy
Nope. I went there for two weeks and experienced the 'eh'ness of Canada.
Shouldn't that be incantation and then rather than than? Also, I don't think the comma after "fools" is neccesary. I'm not positive, so get a second opinion.Originally posted by The Z
Who were they to kill with a flick of the wrist, and utter an encantation that could burn all the trees in an Elven Vale to the ground?
If the law couldn't hunt down these fools, than someone should, Mordred reasoned.
Jon Irenicus, plague of Bhaalspawn, destroyer of life and defiler of nature stood watching the carnage that his dragon caused in the fair Elven city of Suldanessalar. A tight, raw feeling tugged inside of him, a small twinge of emotion managed to eak out a response from his normally stony and hard exterior. Fear? No. Anticipation was the only thing he felt.
The Bhaalspawn had beaten Bodhi. Irenicus knew he was coming. And he also knew that he would win...
Its incorrect. Why use it? "And" is supposed to be used a bridge between two sentences or ideas. If you start a new sentence with "and" that bridge is non existant. Its like building a bride from land into the middle of the ocean. Theres nothing to connect. If you can avoid excess words: DO IT! And at the beginning of a sentence can be avoided, and when writing professionally, always should be avoided.Originally posted by Skooter327
I like this thread. What do you all think about starting a sentence with "and?"
I would point out that it is only used at the end of the piece. This is all very similar to what a recent college English teacher stressed. In her class, we were only permitted to use fragments at the end of our conclusion paragraphs, and then only to emphasize something. While that was more of a formal than creative writing class, I think the rules apply here as well. Also, that teacher stressed the use of transisions in writting as well. The only sentences that were allowed without transistions were the first sentence of a paragraph, topic, overview, & thesis sentences, and the last sentene of a conclusion. "And" is not a transition, but there are many transitional words that work better in its place.Originally posted by Nippy
Starting with "and" is (I think!) gramatically wrong, but it is a useful anchor in the beginning of a sentence. Take this I suppose:Irenicus knew he was coming. And he also knew that he would win...
I probably should be told the same, but I haven't yet, so I contiune on like a raging lunatic!!!Originally posted by Aegis
Firstly, I've tried to avoid going really in depth, as I've been told by people before that I really wreck a good thing.
As for using 'and' to start a sentecne. Thats a no-no, unless it was preceded by a ';' (can't recall what thats called). Then, and only then, is it alright to start a sentence with 'and', IMHO.
...is Aegis now into Deconstruction?Originally posted by The Z
@Aegis...I don't mind if you tear it apart
Originally posted by Maharlika
...is Aegis now into Deconstruction?
...it's not Derrida's quotes that you must be wary about... it's the method Mr. Jacques uses in tearing your arguments apart --- THEN analyzing them after.Originally posted by dragon wench
Just as long as he does not begin quoting Derrida in which case I shall personally throttle him....