Talk:Not X
From Homestar Runner Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
m (Hey!) |
(providing opinion) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:: I agree that "Are you ever not running out of ink" is a not good example, but I think the page otherwise should be in the "Not to be deleted" list. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 06:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC) | :: I agree that "Are you ever not running out of ink" is a not good example, but I think the page otherwise should be in the "Not to be deleted" list. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 06:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::Yes, I agree. There are several instances that ''are'' remarkable enough to make a page of, I think. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 06:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC) | :::Yes, I agree. There are several instances that ''are'' remarkable enough to make a page of, I think. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 06:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == inclusion == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Okay, so I agree that the little girl one is the only one I removed which clearly doesn't fit. I'll go ahead and address the others: | ||
| + | :[[marzipan]]: The page talks about context. While "not" is used ingrammatically, the context doesn't seem odd. He's clearly just trying to make a confusing use of multiple negatives. It's not exactly the same gag. | ||
| + | :[[carve-nival]] and [[other days]]: It seems to me hard to determine the grammatical intent of a single noun being negated (admittedly, this objection is dubious) | ||
| + | :[[personal favorites]]: This is similar, but it's different, because like the little girl one, it's negating an adjective. While it does follow the "Not X" pattern, it doens't seem ungrammatical at all. | ||
Revision as of 07:48, 30 November 2007
I took a stab at describing this, and I could only remember four instances off the bat. --Jnelson09 20:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
So, I'm not gonna nominate this for deletion yet, but I am gonna ask, do people think that this is important enough to document? Dagron 20:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think it should be refined a little bit. It should only include unusual instances, which would be evidenced by weird grammar ("a bigger waste of not water", for example). "Are you ever not running out of ink" just doesn't fit. --DorianGray 20:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that "Are you ever not running out of ink" is a not good example, but I think the page otherwise should be in the "Not to be deleted" list. --Jay (Gobble) 06:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. There are several instances that are remarkable enough to make a page of, I think. --DorianGray 06:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that "Are you ever not running out of ink" is a not good example, but I think the page otherwise should be in the "Not to be deleted" list. --Jay (Gobble) 06:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
inclusion
Okay, so I agree that the little girl one is the only one I removed which clearly doesn't fit. I'll go ahead and address the others:
- marzipan: The page talks about context. While "not" is used ingrammatically, the context doesn't seem odd. He's clearly just trying to make a confusing use of multiple negatives. It's not exactly the same gag.
- carve-nival and other days: It seems to me hard to determine the grammatical intent of a single noun being negated (admittedly, this objection is dubious)
- personal favorites: This is similar, but it's different, because like the little girl one, it's negating an adjective. While it does follow the "Not X" pattern, it doens't seem ungrammatical at all.
