We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
Posts must be:
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
I've always found it weird how Americans mandate putting punctuation inside quotes at all times.
Wait, is it an American thing? I thought it was an English language thing.
Edit: yup. English language thing. I do concede that it took me a while to get used to it, since in Spanish we don't do that.
Where else would the punctuation go except inside the quote? If you are quoting the end of a sentence then wouldn’t it make sense to have it there? Having the quote stop then just having a period floating in the abyss at the end would not only look stupid but defeat the point of the quote!
But the punctuation isn't part of the original text, and putting the punctuation inside the quote marks loses information on the original text's punctuation. Periods do not need any puny comfort from two fucking lines.
As an American I wholeheartedly agree. I HATED learning about that dumb rule and refuse to use it to this day. The punctuation, I would say more often than not, has nothing to do with the quote and should be outside the quotation mark.
I mean we can change the rules, they’re not set in stone. Join me in placing punctuation that is not part of a quote outside the quotation marks!
“Periods do not need any puny comfort from two fucking lines.”.
😱
when you quote a complete sentence, and the sentence only consists of that sentence, you can just omit the period after the final quote mark
It looks better the way I do it.
Username checks out
By some style guides, if you are ending your sentence with a quote but the quote is not the end of a sentence, your end-of-sentence period goes inside the quotation marks even though it is not part of the quote.
Generally this style is called 'traditional quotation', while the verbatim style is called 'new' or 'logical' quotation. Traditional quotation was preferred for typesetting or prettiness reasons, but is going out of vogue because it is illogical.
Why the fuck are we discussing nothing other than the punctuation question?
Cuz it's interesting? What the "fuck" else do we need to discuss about this actual event?
Narrator:
He was incredibly thirsty
In the thumbnail, he looks downright dehydrated for booty.
Wow 🙂🙂❤️
😍😍
So we're all just gonna talk like middle schoolers now huh
I'm on board with original punctuation going inside the quote, but then to be consistent, capitalization has to as well. So instead of "This comment..." it should be "this comment..." since in the original quote that was just a clause separated by a comma, not its own sentence.
I usually try to avoid that scenario and put the first character in brackets if I absolutely need to do that.
Having reviewed the aforementioned account very carefully, I have come to the conclusion that Wow is the appropriate reply here.
The punctuation inside quotes thing is one of those rules where I know what the correct way of doing it is, but I intentionally do it wrong because I think more people do it the wrong way in practice. I guess it depends on context; I might do it the correct way in formal work correspondence.
FWIW my teachers in school always said it was a thing that came from typesetting. But I have no idea if that's actually true.
In the days of the printing press, it was not feasible to have type blocks for single punctuation marks. The blocks would be too small and fragile. Punctuation marks were appended to the end of the letter. Instead of having a single block with a period (.) they had a block for each letter of the alphabet with a period. (a.), (b.), etc. Making blocks for both (",) and (,") was an unnecessary expense, so they went with (,"), and the convention stuck. —@[email protected]
At least, it stuck in the USA.
Interesting. I was taught that if the punctuation was in the quote, put it within the quotation marks. Otherwise I was to put it outside the marks. (American)
Whoever posted this put the thing about punctuation in there so we’d focus on that instead of the story.
I mean honestly I could give two shits about what the antivaxxer does. There's zero chance I vote for him anyway.
I intentionally break that rule often, unless I'm writing a narrative or something for consumption by an audience of people senior to me.
Outside is much more logical.
This is what’s called a “hit piece”. It is an example of “propaganda”, which falls under the broader category of “bullshit”.
I think the phrase you're looking for is "soft news", which does, in fact, have its place in society.