Re: Dajatlhbogh

["Sangqar (Sean Healy)" <sangqar@hotmail.com>]

>The difference is that some insist that Question As Object *is* correct,
>it's *obviously* correct, and anyone who disagrees is just plain wrong.
>The closest we get to that with Headless Relatives is that both its
>strongest detractors and most zealous supporters say it's *probably* not
>breaking any rules, while usually agreeing that it's undesireably vague in
>most cases.

I've been on the list almost a year, and I've seen QAO rear its head twice.  
Both times it's been those against QAO who have insisted that it isn't 
correct, that it obviously isn't correct, and that anyone who disagrees is 
just plain wrong, to the point of invective when I asked (as someone who 
knew nothing about the long-standing feud) for canon support that it was 
ungrammatical.  Apparently in the past it was the pro-QAO faction who 
adopted this strategy.

But you haven't really answered my question.  If the difference between 
headless relatives and QAO is that some get fanatical over QAO, what is the 
difference between them that causes that fanaticism?  Or is that just one of 
the Mysteries of the List?

>-- ghunchu'wI'

Sangqar


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com