As a general rule, the editors and publishers of Speculative Grammarian are happy enough to print opposing viewpoints. Thus we have included in this issue the ellipsis-
That said, we cannot abide the slanderous libel and libelous slander promulgated by the despicable journal that allowed these idiots to have their say, apparently without vetting or fact checking of any kind. To wit, SpecGram never has been nor ever shall be “available exclusively online”. What sense would that make? A journal isn’t really a journal unless it involves the murder and mutilation of defenseless trees and the production and spillage of several metric tons of toxic ink, n’est-ce pas?
The hubris of D.D.D., O.O.O., and T.T.T. is clear: they have mistakenly assumed that whatever relative expertise they have in Gnostical Rectitude and Carwashing might extend to every (or even any) other area of intellectual inquiry. Perhaps they have something meaningful to say about ellipses
Thus we are reluctantly compelled to take legal action against these so-called “scholars” and the scandalous rag that printed their absurd claims, to prevent the unnecessary sullying of our collective good name. We are also forced by our whole-
Interestingly but unrelatedly, several of SpecGram’s senior sociolinguists specializing in legal jargon have begun a study of the sociopragmatics of various kinds of cackling among attorneys retained by academic journals, with a focus on slander suits and libel litigation. So far, “greedy”, “avaricious”, “wolfish”, “mercenary”, “money-
With that, I offer hearty congratulations to the Chiasmus of the Month Award winner for November 2010!