22 replies to this topic

[Marguerite]

Thanks for the info. Perhaps the ? is not as redundant as it seems, if it indicates that this is a genuine question and not a rhetorical one. If you look at the example from Lolita, that too could be considered a rhetorical question. I'm sure she doesn't expect HH to comply.

Sticking with my question marks until further notice,
M

[thealtruismsociety]

I can't change the topic title, sorry.

I think it's so interesting that some things in writing have no hard and fast rules. I kind of expected these questions to have iron clad specifications to use.

[Thoth]

thealtruismsociety, on 30 April 2011 - 06:36 PM, said:

I can't change the topic title, sorry.

No problem. Thanks for trying.

thealtruismsociety, on 30 April 2011 - 06:36 PM, said:

I think it's so interesting that some things in writing have no hard and fast rules. I kind of expected these questions to have iron clad specifications to use.

I know what you mean. I always run into people who insist that there are "iron clad" rules for spelling and grammar. Personally, I don't think it's the rule that makes the usage so much as it's usage that makes the rule. Consider old Mark Twain and his use of dialect in dialogue; you just didn't do that, at least until the popularity of his books made it acceptable. And will someone explain to me how "...in Order to form a more perfect Union..." got past the editors of the Preamble to the United States Constitution? More perfect? Really? I thought something was either perfect or it wasn't. They couldn't just say "better"? Okay, I'm rambling now.

Iron clad—which makes it hard to type.
- Thoth