Originally posted by fryet:Originally posted by buck:Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.
You might want to include some of the backups fighting for a spot on the team. How about:
1) Barry Sims- with one M. Possibly the most evil person to put on a Niners jersey since Derek Smith or Kwame Harris. Only a handful of terrible people think he will make the team, including MD. Yikes!! Run for the hills!!
2) Alex Boone- One of the greatest players in the modern NFL. Future starter and ten time Pro-Bowler.
3) Jacob Bender- Would be a much better player if he changed his name to Zeigler or Clayton or Lelie. Unfortunately, he stubbornly insists on keeping his current name.
Cheers.
P.S. I'll be hosting the first annual 49ers Webzone Spelling Bee soon. Some words for the board to work on (we'll start with the tough four letter words first): Sims, Baas. I told you they were tough! We will then increasingly move to MENSA level words: Heitmann, Zeigler.
I promise to not include former 49ers player: Babatunde Oshinowo. However, his roster replacement Chris Francies is fair game.
While you are working on the spelling, you might want to think about taking on the writing skills of our webzoners.
An example (from your post).
Only the ding-dongs hate Heitmann (even though he was the best lineman on the team last year), so it not even worthy putting on your review. I'd edit that right out.
Your use of it is incorrect.
It is a pronoun. Pronouns replace nouns. The noun that a pronoun replaces is called an antecedent. Every pronoun must have an antecedent, and that antecedent must be clearly and immediately understandable.
In your sentence, the pronoun it, which is singular, does not have an antecedent.
If Heitman were the antecedent, the pronoun would be him.
Dingdongs can not be the antecedent. The word "dingdongs" is plural and therefore the proper antecedent would be they, not it.
Furthermore, the pronoun it is the subject of the clause. Every subject must have a verb. The verb that is missing is "be." Be should be either in the present tense (is) or the past tense (was).
As a teacher, and as the self-appointed webzone authority on writing, you really should do much better than this.
Your grade on your post can not be more than a solid D. The skills exhibited just do not match the attitude embedded in your post.
Back to class.
I think the "it" was referring to the controversy that he was expecting to occur. If it was referring to Heitmann than I think it would be "he" not "him". I do agree that a verb is missing.
If you have to think, as in you are not sure, about what the the "it" is referring to, the sentence is not, or was not, written well.
It would be he if the it is the subject of the clause and it would be him if the it were the object in the clause.
Since what Maddog wrote was not comprehensible, it is hard to know for sure, if the it was a subject or the object. But based upon position, I assume that it was a subject.
There are more mistakes in the original post. I did not talk about them because this is a football, not a English composition, forum. But, if necessary I will continue with the lessons in basic English usage.
I do this work for a living. I train teachers how to teach TOEFL, GRE, and GMAT classes. And, to tell the truth my spelling is atrocious.
[ Edited by buck on Aug 22, 2009 at 12:49 PM ]