[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by Sheel

In this post, I make a comment. Now, is the word sense appropriate to be used? I feel it is not, hence I landed here.

The second para that is

I think 'doesn't make sense' is correct

Originally Posted by Samurai

But... after reading about 25% I have serious doubts about finishing it. The book was published in 1826, about an incident that happened in 1757, so it is written in the English of those days.

Tell me about it! It took me about a month to read Scarlet Letter (1850) a much smaller book. Thanks for the link, I've downloaded it

[Thad E Ginathom]

Ha ha, it's because this was the only English they knew and could write without making an effort!
English as she was spoke.

American as she was spoke!

And, I suspect that it was rather stylised at the time of writing, and took a lot of effort. Perhaps the author's intent at conveying the historical setting? It is not the English of Dickens, Collins, or other Victorian writers that I have read and enjoyed.

Making allowance for small usage changes even in 200 years, reading classic literature is a great way to learn good English.

I think 'doesn't make sense' is correct

In the context, It doesn't make much sense is fine.

[Gansan]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Making allowance for small usage changes even in 200 years, reading classic literature is a great way to learn good English.

Absolutely right.

I doubt if it can be called literature, but I love to read "Three men in a boat (Not forgetting the dog!)" by Jerome K Jerome any number of times! And laugh heartily every single time!

Talking of humour, there were some books by another 19th century author named W.W.Jacobs. The setting of most stories will invariably be a ship and centre around it's captain and crew. And the humour will literally be side splitting! I have read many of his books from our college library during the late 70's, but search as I might, I have never found them at the book shops.

Available online at Amazon etc, but cost many $$.

[Farukh]

In the forum OR On the forum?

Which one is correct?

While posting in/on(? again) a thread, I used 'probably the hottest Rapid on the forum'. Should I have used in?

[Guite]

In both cases it should be IN. The thread that you started will become and integral part of the forum, not floating around in the perimeter, which is not even possible. Similarly the case with a post. Another way to look at is: you have to log in and enter to post. So you are now inside the forum, and the posting you do is inside the forum.

When referring to content already existing in (not on) the forum, correct usage in your example would be, "probably the hottest Rapid in the forum".

[Samurai]

Today in an office meeting with nearly 20 people, I called somebody MCP. Instead of laughter I only got blank looks. Turns out not one of them knew the meaning of MCP. I felt really old. I not only had to expand it, but had to explain it.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Add another two here who don't know... Mrs G and I.

Please?

[Samurai]

Et tu, Nick?

MCP=Male Chauvinist Pig.

[noopster]

Samu, clarity of thought of the author has a lot with quick comprehension of the written word. If you read Conan Doyle, you will be hard pressed to tell the difference between that stuff written in the late 19th century and the novels of today, stylistically speaking. But there are enough Victorian authors who would be incomprehensible to us.

To be fair, Sherlock Holmes was targeted at the lay magazine/"pulp" reader while literary works are typically more high brow. Surprisingly, Shakespeare is relatively easy to understand considering he wrote in the 15th century. There are exceptions from even within his repertory but by and large the popular plays are, for want of a better term, "user friendly".

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by noopster

.... Shakespeare is relatively easy to understand considering he wrote in the 15th century. There are exceptions from even within his repertory but by and large the popular plays are, for want of a better term, "user friendly".

I have my doubts about this.
How many can make sense of this today?

No, ’tis not so deep as a well nor so wide as a church-door, but ’tis enough, ’twill serve. Ask for me tomorrow, and you shall find me a grave man.

[Thad E Ginathom]

I never found Shakespeare easy to read, but for something incomprehensible, go back to Chaucer, who has to be translated to make sense to some of us! Look at this.

I don't know enough literature to be sure if there are not as many hard-to-read authors in the 20th and 21st century as there were in the 19th. I find that Dickens varies a lot. He is very wordy, and labours his points, but not hard to understand. A contemporary social-issues novelist was Wilkie Collins. His writing is cleaner, because he finds less need to make caricatures with funny names of his characters, and I think he is even sharper on the social stuff than Dickens is, but his romances are wonderfully romantic, and his adventures are wonderfully exciting. Gripping stuff!

Originally Posted by Samurai

Et tu, Nick?

MCP=Male Chauvinist Pig.

Oh! of course! I wonder what it says about me that I had forgotten

~

[CaliAtenza]

I had a question; why is that people cannot speak in real english either online or in text messages (SMS)? I mean i cannot for the life of me understand this SMS language when people post on fb or on online forums. Is it that hard to type out English words and sentences?

[noopster]

Originally Posted by CaliAtenza

I had a question; why is that people cannot speak in real english either online or in text messages (SMS)? I mean i cannot for the life of me understand this SMS language when people post on fb or on online forums. Is it that hard to type out English words and sentences?

Gd qn. Gr8 tht ppl lyk u stl xist. Itz diff 2 undstd sms slng smtyms. Kthxbye. Ttyl.

Seriously, how difficult *is* it to be grammatical in a text? Sometimes the shortened forms are tougher to type than the long forms!

[CaliAtenza]

Originally Posted by noopster

Gd qn. Gr8 tht ppl lyk u stl xist. Itz diff 2 undstd sms slng smtyms. Kthxbye. Ttyl.

Seriously, how difficult *is* it to be grammatical in a text? Sometimes the shortened forms are tougher to type than the long forms!

Lol thats exactly what i am talking about. Although what you wrote is really bad, it still illustrates my point. I mean, is English that hard of a language? Hell students and people in India should be better at it because of learning "British English" in school. My American english is considered the wrong English!

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by noopster

Surprisingly, Shakespeare is relatively easy to understand considering he wrote in the 15th century. There are exceptions from even within his repertory but by and large the popular plays are, for want of a better term, "user friendly".

You think? Watch the movie Much Ado About Nothing, based on Shakespeare's play of the same name.

Though the movie was made in 2012 and based in 21st century, they use the original speaking style. It has dialogues like "Is there no young squarer now that will make a voyage with him to the devil?"