<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2604" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>Not to be *really* annoying, but:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Merely that we are talking about this at all (most especially the original
poster on this topic) means that we already understand the meanings
conveyed by the words we use. Clearly there is an epistemic
"convention" that must be known already if we are to judge such uses of language
"wrong" in the first place. The point is - no matter the incorrect
grammar, we "know" what the other means in a sort of informal way. If we
did not, we could not question the usage in the first place. Does correct
grammar always assume correct usage/vice versa? Or do certain contexts convey
meaning better than, say, formal rules?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Well, a bit of both. Point is, we do a pretty good job already of
"getting" what someone is trying to say, especialy in these decidedly informal
formats, i.e., email.</DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>