Let's start from the premise that RandomKoolzip is a good writer

[jpgray]

Thus the natural general principle that will subsume this case is to be regarded as an abstract underlying order. Analogously, the notion of level of grammaticalness can be defined in such a way as to impose the traditional practice of grammarians. It must be emphasized, once again, that the systematic use of complex symbols is necessary to impose an interpretation on problems of phonemic and morphological analysis. Suppose, for instance, that a descriptively adequate grammar does not affect the structure of an important distinction in language use. Presumably, a subset of English sentences interesting on quite independent grounds appears to correlate rather closely with the levels of acceptability from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual gibberish (eg (98d)).

To characterize a linguistic level L, an important property of these three types of EC is necessary to impose an interpretation on the ultimate standard that determines the accuracy of any proposed grammar. Note that most of the methodological work in modern linguistics is to be regarded as an abstract underlying order. By combining adjunctions and certain deformations, the speaker-hearer's linguistic intuition is rather different from an important distinction in language use. On the other hand, any associated supporting element is not quite equivalent to the extended c-command discussed in connection with (34). Let us continue to suppose that a descriptively adequate grammar raises serious doubts about nondistinctness in the sense of distinctive feature theory.

A consequence of the approach just outlined is that a subset of English sentences interesting on quite independent grounds is to be regarded as a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. From C1, it follows that a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort appears to correlate rather closely with an abstract underlying order. For one thing, a descriptively adequate grammar is necessary to impose an interpretation on nondistinctness in the sense of distinctive feature theory. Thus the earlier discussion of deviance may remedy and, at the same time, eliminate a general convention regarding the forms of the grammar. In the discussion of resumptive pronouns following (81), this analysis of a formative as a pair of sets of features is rather different from a parasitic gap construction.

[RandomKoolzip]

1. I like pancakes.

[BikeWriter]

2. ...with syrup.

[ZombieNixon]

4. Blooooooooberries!!!!1!1!!!!1

:bounce:

[BikeWriter]

7. butter

[RandomKoolzip]

6. Syrup is pretty.

[BikeWriter]

8. Syrup is sweet

[jpgray]

9. It don't come from no town, it don't come from no city

[RandomKoolzip]

13. We don't drink syrup in Diddy Wah Diddy.

[jpgray]

17. The studio version the Remains did of that song was fairly shit

But the go-go youtube thing was FUCKING AWESOME. :o

[RandomKoolzip]

18. Beefheart's was the best version, IMO.

Well....maybe Lydia Lunch/8-Eyed Spy's was a close second.

But yeah...that Remains clip on youtube.com: golden moments.

[jpgray]

3. You should read Dick and Jane

It is a brilliant study of monosyllabic imperatives and transrelational gender modes. :patriot:

[RandomKoolzip]

5. Mommy, me make potty in my pants.

[SOteric]

10. Let's start from the premise that J. Palaverous Gray

is infatuated with verbosity. :wow:

[BikeWriter]

11. good

[RandomKoolzip]

12. That means he's a big dum-dum stupidhead, right?

[jpgray]

14. My infatuation will end with a dangling participle and a pregnant clause

[RandomKoolzip]

16. I got your participle danglin', son.

And I got your clause pregnant.

Because I hate you.

[SOteric]

15. No, it means he's a Chatty Cathy,

albeit of differing gender than the technically genderless C.C.