"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
snip
I doubt that I'm more intelligent than anyone else here, which is doubless
why I posted multiple times on the subject.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com


You should have typed 'doubtlessly" (not doubless). Aside from the incorrect
spelling of the root word you compounded your folly by not using it as an
adjective. "Which is (doubtlessly) why."

You and Dave are equally illiterate. Or, perhaps I should say "equal
illiterate?? Bwaahahhahahah.


Wilbur Hubbard

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:11:47 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

You should have typed 'doubtlessly" (not doubless). Aside from the
incorrect
spelling of the root word you compounded your folly by not using it as an
adjective. "Which is (doubtlessly) why."

You need to clear up your muddled thought and expression, Neal. Are you
alleging that "doubtless" is an adjective, or that "doubtlessly" is an
adjective?

Without a doubt, it's doubtlessly when used as an adjective.

Perhaps I should commence writing to you using lower Flesch-Kincaid grade
level scores?

Wilbur Hubbard

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:25:31 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

You should have typed 'doubtlessly" (not doubless). Aside from the
incorrect
spelling of the root word you compounded your folly by not using it as
an
adjective. "Which is (doubtlessly) why."

You need to clear up your muddled thought and expression, Neal. Are you
alleging that "doubtless" is an adjective, or that "doubtlessly" is an
adjective?

Without a doubt, it's doubtlessly when used as an adjective.

Perhaps I should commence writing to you using lower Flesch-Kincaid grade
level scores?

It would be better, perhaps, if you commenced by learning the difference
between an adjective and an adverb.

Maybe you should learn how to diagram a sentence. Let's take a look, shall
we?

"Which is (doubtlessly) why."

Which = Subject = noun
is = Verb
why = Object = noun

doubtlessly is a modifier of why. Therefore, it follows that doubtlessly is
an adjective, not an adverb.

ad.jec.tive \"a-jik-tiv\ n : a word that typically serves as a modifier of a
noun - ad.jec.ti.val \'a-jik-"tï-v?l\ adj - ad.jec.ti.val.ly adv

Go back to school for a refresher course in remedial English, barrister!

Wilbur Hubbard
(purveyor of lawyer smackdowns, both in court and here)

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:03:42 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

Let's take a look, shall
we?

"Which is (doubtlessly) why."

Which = Subject = noun
is = Verb
why = Object = noun

doubtlessly is a modifier of why. Therefore, it follows that doubtlessly
is
an adjective, not an adverb.

Not even close, Neal. Did your grammar lessens end in the third grade?


Sorry, Dave, but vague insults in lieu of reasoned rebuttal makes you a
loser in any debate.

Wilbur Hubbard

wrote in message
...
On 6 Jan 2009 13:40:01 -0600, Dave wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:03:42 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

Let's take a look, shall
we?

"Which is (doubtlessly) why."

Which = Subject = noun
is = Verb
why = Object = noun

doubtlessly is a modifier of why. Therefore, it follows that doubtlessly
is
an adjective, not an adverb.

Not even close, Neal. Did your grammar lessens end in the third grade?

Lessens?

Debating with Neal is never going to make you appear anything but
foolish, Dave. Spit the hook.


Like any typical, obfuscating lawyer, Dave is trying to make something
complicated out of something simple.

We are discussing a simple, four-word sentence. It has a subject a verb an
object and an object modifier. That's it! Dredging up non-applicable grammar
rules is not necessary. He's trying to save face but doing badly. He
apparently thought that doubtlessly was a modifier of the verb and,
consequently, an adverb. But any fool knows it's "doubtlessly why" and not
"is doubtlessly). If doubtlessly were an adverb the sentence structure would
be: "Which doubtlessly is why."

I guess Dave never learned the KISS rule. Or the logical order rule.

Wilbur Hubbard

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:06:12 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

We are discussing a simple, four-word sentence.
[snip]

"Which doubtlessly is why."

Poor attempt at post-editing in a failed attempt to further obfuscate.


I take back what I said, Neal. While the third grader would probably not
have recognized that your four words are part of a dependent clause
introduced the relative pronoun "which," the third grader would at least
have gone you one better by recognizing that your four words do not
constitute a sentence.

Do a little googling of "clause" and "sentence" and maybe you can start to
get this grammar stuff sorted out.

Sorry, but you're just plain wrong, Dave. All it takes to make a complete
sentence is a subject and a verb.

"Which is doubtlessly why." This is a complete sentence.

"Which is why." This is a complete sentence.

"Why me?" This is also a complete sentence.

"That is." This, too, is a complete sentence.

"Which is?" Same applies here - complete sentence.

Go to the back of the class! Don't forget the dunce cap.

Wilbur Hubbard

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 16:16:59 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

Do a little googling of "clause" and "sentence" and maybe you can start
to
get this grammar stuff sorted out.

Sorry, but you're just plain wrong, Dave. All it takes to make a complete
sentence is a subject and a verb.

"Which is doubtlessly why." This is a complete sentence.

"Which is why." This is a complete sentence.

"Why me?" This is also a complete sentence.

"That is." This, too, is a complete sentence.

"Which is?" Same applies here - complete sentence.

Go to the back of the class! Don't forget the dunce cap.

Keep it up, Neal. The more you say the more you display your ignorance of
the language.

Take my earlier advice and google up "sentence," "clause" and "phrase"
before you dig yourself in even deeper.


I don't have to dig any deeper. I've managed to bury you as it is.

Wilbur Hubbard

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:06:12 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

We are discussing a simple, four-word sentence.
[snip]

"Which doubtlessly is why."

I take back what I said, Neal. While the third grader would probably not
have recognized that your four words are part of a dependent clause
introduced the relative pronoun "which," the third grader would at least
have gone you one better by recognizing that your four words do not
constitute a sentence.

Do a little googling of "clause" and "sentence" and maybe you can start to
get this grammar stuff sorted out.

This is becoming tedius. "Doubtless" is correct, Wilbur. "Doubtlessly" can
also be correct, but is considered "clumsy."
http://www.bartleby.com/68/15/2015.html

"KLC Lewis" wrote in message
et...

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:06:12 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

We are discussing a simple, four-word sentence.
[snip]

"Which doubtlessly is why."

I take back what I said, Neal. While the third grader would probably not
have recognized that your four words are part of a dependent clause
introduced the relative pronoun "which," the third grader would at least
have gone you one better by recognizing that your four words do not
constitute a sentence.

Do a little googling of "clause" and "sentence" and maybe you can start
to
get this grammar stuff sorted out.

This is becoming tedius. "Doubtless" is correct, Wilbur. "Doubtlessly" can
also be correct, but is considered "clumsy."
http://www.bartleby.com/68/15/2015.html


Irrelevant! That link talks about "doubtless" used as an adverb and I have
shown, without doubt, that in the sentence, "Which is doubtlessly why," that
doubtlessly is used as an adjective since it is a modifier of the word "why"
and not a modifier of the verb "is."

Wilbur Hubbard

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 14:11:47 -0500, "Wilbur Hubbard"
said:

You should have typed 'doubtlessly" (not doubless). Aside from the incorrect
spelling of the root word you compounded your folly by not using it as an
adjective. "Which is (doubtlessly) why."

I don't have the original from Wilbur, he's in my KF. How I managed to read the post of his below must be down to poor KF management on my part. That he has the audacity to post the above, when he wrote what is below is beyond me.

In article s.com, Wilbur Hubbard wrote:

I agree. I've got the spaces between the component (inner liner) and
the hull all poured with two-part, urethane closed-cell foam. It makes

The word 'all' in the above is completely redundant, and using it there makes you look a fool. You've named what is being referenced, so there is no need for 'all'.


the boat stronger, quieter, unsinkable and eliminates the condensation
in all but the most ideal conditions for it.

"The boat stronger" what does that mean?

Ending a sentence with a preposition?! Wilbur, surely, with
qualifications that entitle you to criticise how is it possible you
could make such a mistake?


The overhead will get
condensation on it when cooking and boiling water but that's about it
and that soon evaporates.

Water vapour will condense on it, it doesn't "get condensation on it".
The condensation hasn't arrived there from somewhere else, one is the
condenser and the other the condensate. For it to 'get condensation on
it' the vapour must condense elsewhere and then, somehow, transfer.
Perhaps you meant to say "water will condense on it".


Also keeping the hatches open when aboard, which is most of the time
for us real sailors,

OK, this one isn't a grammar/spelling error, but, dammit, it wasn't
spotted by anybody: Living on a boat doesn't make you a real sailor.
*Sailing* is what makes people sailors.


helps keep the boat surfaces and air temperature
in synch so you're correct there Karin.

Now you don't know to whom you are replying.


If a boat doesn't have an insulated hull it's going to sweat and their
is nothing that can be done

Their?! WTF?!

Wilbur, please don't criticise other's use of the language when you
butcher it so badly yourself.


Justin.

--
Justin C, by the sea.