Heheh

[Gibsie]

I only really read the first post of this thread, but I do hope there has been a sufficient amount of s******ing over Fez getting "backstabbed". chuckle.

[Mercator]

Originally posted by curtsibling
So I imagine your ego is getting good exercise too?

What with a whole thread to work out on.

A thread you keep alive by posting in it. Me too, of course, but I'm not complaining.

There's nothing wrong with flaunting your ego a bit, especially on the Internet... So, I wouldn't mind any pictures either (they'll be coming one way or another, with Fez back). Of course, I won't be looking either, but then who gives a ****?

Of course, with all the hostility, you can bet your ass you'll get some nasty comments on it. But a flame war a day keeps the um... whatever.

Originally posted by Agathon
I've seen it used both ways in academic writing, you get the second way a lot when reading about older stuff written in English/

In what way is this a "second way"? It fits the definition Fez gave just fine. And since you said you didn't know how to spell the word, how can you intentionally misspell it? It's really hard admitting you're wrong, isn't it?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Mercator

In what way is this a "second way"? It fits the definition Fez gave just fine. And since you said you didn't know how to spell the word, how can you intentionally misspell it? It's really hard admitting you're wrong, isn't it?

If you know that you've misspelled it - you don't need to know how to spell a word to know you've misspelled it. Idiot.

[Mercator]

You could have spelled it correctly by chance. And the issue stands. Sic simply is not ever used in the way you used it.

Of course, I stand corrected if you can give me a quote of someone adding "sic" to his own unquoted modern English writing.

[General Ludd]

Agathon's definition makes more sense. If sic is just a way of say "hur hur, this person can't spell" then, well, anyone who uses it deserves to be punched. I'd like to think it has more redeeming qualities than that.

[Mercator]

So, how often do you intentionally misspell something, and feel the need to explicitly point out you did so intentionally? And how often do you think that is the case in literature that is supposed to be serious (who would really care otherwise)? Not very redeeming, is it?

It's used in academic sources like that to be absolutely sure you're quoting correctly, not just to be pedantic (edit: well, I guess it IS just to be pedantic, but sometimes that is necessary). If you miss a typo in a quote, or misspell the quote yourself, how can the reader be sure the quote is accurate at all? In case of unconventional spellings (e.g. old English), it's used to indicate that that is actually the way it should be spelled and it's not just a typo of yours.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Mercator
So, how often do you intentionally misspell something, and feel the need to explicitly point out you did so intentionally? And how often do you think that is the case in literature that is supposed to be serious (who would really care otherwise)? Not very redeeming, is it?

sic is used when reporting an incorrect spelling or weird belief (yes, it is not just about spelling) to indicate that the writer knows it is incorrect to save pedants the effort of pointing it out.

In this case I was reporting my own error. There's no reason to cut out self reporting, which is what is happening here.

In this case I knew I'd misspelled it because I knew that what I'd written was wrong, but I couldn't remember the correct spelling. That sort of thing happens all the time. There's no general reason why someone has to know the correct spelling to know that they have spelled it incorrectly. For example, I don't know how to spell the full name for CFCs, but I could approximate it since I vaguely remember how it is spelt.

It's used in academic sources like that to be absolutely sure you're quoting correctly, not just to be pedantic (edit: well, I guess it IS just to be pedantic, but sometimes that is necessary). If you miss a typo in a quote, or misspell the quote yourself, how can the reader be sure the quote is accurate at all? In case of unconventional spellings (e.g. old English), it's used to indicate that that is actually the way it should be spelled and it's not just a typo of yours.

It's also used in the case of reporting seemingly weird beliefs to indicate that that is actually what is believed. I've seen it used this way.

I've also seen it used when someone uses a slightly odd expression to express themselves.

from my previous link

Used to mean "Yes, the text preceding this is intended to be written exactly this way.

Isn't that what I done[sic]?

again:

Means "so" or "thus." Use within brackets, in italics, after a printed word or passage to indicate that it is intended exactly as printed, or that it exactly reproduces an original: He said, "I seen [sic] it all." "Sic" is a complete word and does not require a period. AP discourages the use of "sic" in news releases.

[Italics Mine]

http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/stylebook/r2z.html

I had a look around and I can find no consensus on whether it is only to be used one way or not. So shoot me.

[Cruddy]

Hi Fez. Nice to know your back.

[Alex]

Come on, Fez, post that shirtless pic. We need some fun.

[Giancarlo]

Guys if you want to talk about the use of "sic" go open a thread on it.

Originally posted by Mercator
There's nothing wrong with flaunting your ego a bit, especially on the Internet... So, I wouldn't mind any pictures either (they'll be coming one way or another, with Fez back). Of course, I won't be looking either, but then who gives a ****?

Of course, with all the hostility, you can bet your ass you'll get some nasty comments on it. But a flame war a day keeps the um... whatever.

In that case I won't post it.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Fez
Guys if you want to talk about the use of "sic" go open a thread on it.

Liar, we know you love it when we bump your threads with inane ramblings

[Mercator]

Originally posted by Agathon
In this case I was reporting my own error. There's no reason to cut out self reporting, which is what is happening here. [...]

OK, I see your point. I still think it's at least a rather unorthodox use, but we're not getting anywhere...

But I'll just shoot you all the same.

Originally posted by Fez
In that case I won't post it.

See! It's possible to convince Fez not to post shirtless pics without being mean.

[Az]

For example, I don't know how to spell the full name for CFCs

Typical arts bull****.

Chloro-Flouro-Carbons.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Azazel

For example, I don't know how to spell the full name for CFCs

Typical arts bull****.

Chloro-Flouro-Carbons.

Hmmph.

Typical scientific illiteracy and arrogance.

It is of course chlorofluorocarbons.

From fluor, fluorine, gem like mineral, and non metallic element grouped with bromine, iodine and chlorine.

From the Latin fluo, flow, from which we also derive fluent.

Not from flour. That might be a different kind of compound altogether-

'Tasty slice of chloroflourocarbon toast dear?'

[Barinthus]

Fez - go ahead and post that picture... and have a poll so people can rate it

I've seen 'sic' being used in newspapers when they quote someone.