Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kaijyuu]

I still think "it's" should be used for both.


And I always spell it "gryphon." The episode title spells it "griffon," though.

[Flying Dice]

Hmm. Not the one I would have picked.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

grif·fon (grfn)
n.
1. Any of a breed of dog originating in Belgium and having a short, bearded muzzle. Also called Brussels griffon.
2. Any of various wirehaired hunting dogs of a breed originating in the Netherlands in the late 19th century.
3. Variant of griffin.

Oh well, I've already used griffin, so I'll stick with that.

Its not that big of a deal.

It is if you're obsessive about proper usage and word choice, and little things like that distract you to the point where you can barely focus on the story. Not the fault of the writers, either, as I still do that to an extent with most published authors. 

[Bohandas]

I still think "it's" should be used for both.

Agreed it makes no sense that "it" should have an irregular posessive form, especially one that's spelled the same but punctuated differently. The only reason why the apostrophe is ever omitted is stubborn adherence to a bizarre and arbitrary tradition.

Speaking of which, has anybody else ever noticed that people who teach or study the English language all seem to speak the same bizarre dead dialect, in which "it" has an irregular posessive, the words "ain't" and "stupider" don't exist, you can't end a sentence with a preposition, and "they"/"their" can't be used in the singular, "you" can't be used in a generic sense, and a distinction is made between the hypen and the dash (despite the two characters being identical when written by hand and effectively indistinguishable elsewhere);  Yet awkward (and unnecessarily bombastic) phrases such as "it is I" are considered perfectly acceptable.

[LordBucket]

Its because of the difficulty of creating conflict to the story
and its also easy way to make reader experience emotion.

Possibly. But I prefer fluffy happy nice emotions to crying unhappy pouty ones.

On a related note, I prefer my shipping with a completely feminine bias. Reading Twilight say "Oh, yeah, baby! Take it! Take it!" just makes me shake my head. But a story like Don't Let the Sun Catch You Crying, which is about 40 pages of totally unresolved sexual tension and emotional bonding, that works for me. It's sweet and cute, and it doesn't require me to wonder what happened to the ponies to act that way.

Again, I want sugar bombs of fuzzy happy goodness in my ponies. Not grimdark, not hardcore erotica, not psychokillers or nighttime terrors.

I'm a nitpicky bastard

I think my biggest complaint at the moment is that too many authors are trying to use the same devices. It seems like one in two fics has somebody say "It. Is. On." About one in three has a poison joke event. Every monster is a manticore.

I understand that fanfic writers are trying to draw from a limited pool of only 28 episodes so far, but they really don't need to. It reminds me of a similar problem from Star Wars fanfics: you have an entire galaxy with millions of habitable world, yet 90% of fanfics take place on one of the dozen or so planets named in a movie.

It's not necessary. It doesn't make for good reading after seeing the same devices so many times. My favorite fics have been those that take existing characters and put them in new circumstances. It's the characters we love. Drop Pinkie Pie in the middle of the desert and have the locals decide to sacrifice her to their local deity and have her misunderstand and try to make it a fun and exciting event, while everyone else goes to rescue her and then throw in the twist at the end that she knew all along what the plan was but fun was more important than escape. Same characters, with different plot and antagonist. That's much more entertaining than reading yet another "Luna celebration, fight the manitcore, oh no parasprites/poison joke while Twilight freaks about what Celestia will think but she likes what happened and it was 20% cooler in ten seconds flat" story.

Don't need OC ponies. But do need OC stories.

[Armok]

Wait, so which side here's the grammar nazis, and is the other side the grammar commies?

NINJAD: wait, what pumpkin sexual tension? Don't let the sun catch you crying is a *shipfic*?!

Also, the C on OC means "character", what you meant to say was "Don't need OCs. But do need OPs.".

[Silfurdreki]

Spoiler: RANT (click to show/hide)

DAMNIT PEOPLE, TWO SIMPLE RULES! TWO! CONTRACTIONS REQUIRE AN APOSTROPHE! ALL OTHER USES DO NOT! LEARN THE DAMN RULES ALREADY!
it's - it is
its - EVERYTHING ELSE DAMNIT

These rules have always been highly confusing for me, as a non-native English speaker. You put an apostrophe when contracting "it is", fine. You put an apostrophe on a word to signify possession "the washing machine's buttons", fine.

The confusing part is that when you want to say that "it" is in possession of something, then it's suddenly supposed to be "its". Wut? Make up your mind, English.

[LordBucket]

has anybody else ever noticed that people who teach or study the
English language all seem to speak the same bizarre dead dialect

It's standard practice that when language is taught, the formal/polite forms are preferred. This is not unique to english. Take a Japanese class and you'll be taught desu instead of da. Take english and you'll learn "hello" and not "sup."

dead dialect

It's not dead. You apparently don't move in social circles where those forms are standard practice. Personally, if I were to say "ain't" to anyone I know, I'd expect them to at least give me a strange look.

Also, the C on OC means "character"

OC = Original Content

wait, what pumpkin sexual tension? Don't let the sun catch you crying is a *shipfic*?!

Given all the internal monologue swooning and the various scenes where they wake up entangled in each others horns/manes/etc., I would say so, yes.

[TheBronzePickle]

The C can be used for either "character" or "content" depending who you're taking to. It's one of those evil acronyms that can take on several meanings, and since the two are so close, this one's especially heinous.

[Crazy Cow]

Spoiler: RANT (click to show/hide)

DAMNIT PEOPLE, TWO SIMPLE RULES! TWO! CONTRACTIONS REQUIRE AN APOSTROPHE! ALL OTHER USES DO NOT! LEARN THE DAMN RULES ALREADY!
it's - it is
its - EVERYTHING ELSE DAMNIT

These rules have always been highly confusing for me, as a non-native English speaker. You put an apostrophe when contracting "it is", fine. You put an apostrophe on a word to signify possession "the washing machine's buttons", fine.

The confusing part is that when you want to say that "it" is in possession of something, then it's suddenly supposed to be "its". Wut? Make up your mind, English.

I understand perfectly that English is one of the most convoluted languages around. If you aren't born speaking it, it is hard as hell to master.
I may have given the wrong impression with that post, by the way. It was supposed to be exaggerated, what with the caps-lock typing and all :p I don't fly into murderous rage whenever grammatical errors pop up, but it does ruin my immersion.
I understand completely that plenty of people don't have perfect mastery of English, but it annoys me all the same.

@TheBronzePickle
I cry a single tear for the ocean of blood that has been spilled this day. :p

[Silfurdreki]

I understand perfectly that English is one of the most convoluted languages around. If you aren't born speaking it, it is hard as hell to master.
I may have given the wrong impression with that post, by the way. It was supposed to be exaggerated, what with the caps-lock typing and all :p I don't fly into murderous rage whenever grammatical errors pop up, but it does ruin my immersion.
I understand completely that plenty of people don't have perfect mastery of English, but it annoys me all the same.

Oh, I wasn't really upset by your rant or anything, if that's the way I came across. I just took the opportunity to vent a bit, because I always wondered what the hell was up with that rule.

[LordBucket]

I just had a thought.

The Hobbit, Ponified:
Bilbo --> Twilight
Thorin --> Applejack
Dwarves --> Rarity, Rainbow Dash
Gandalf --> Pinkie Pie
Elrond --> Celestia
Gollum --> Fluttershy
Smaug --> Prince Blueblood
Bard -->
Wood Elves --> Cutie Mark Crusaders
Goblins --> Diamond Dogs
Eagles --> Wonderbolts

Somebody must do this.

EDIT: After ore thought, I think the proper role for Derpy is to play the thrush. Still need a suitable candidate for Bard and the race of man.

[Crazy Cow]

PROGRESS UPDATED
*squee*

Crazy Cow cancels Study Anthropology: Interrupted by Progress

[Flying Dice]

Its because of the difficulty of creating conflict to the story
and its also easy way to make reader experience emotion.

Possibly. But I prefer fluffy happy nice emotions to crying unhappy pouty ones.

On a related note, I prefer my shipping with a completely feminine bias. Reading Twilight say "Oh, yeah, baby! Take it! Take it!" just makes me shake my head. But a story like Don't Let the Sun Catch You Crying, which is about 40 pages of totally unresolved sexual tension and emotional bonding, that works for me. It's sweet and cute, and it doesn't require me to wonder what happened to the ponies to act that way.

Again, I want sugar bombs of fuzzy happy goodness in my ponies. Not grimdark, not hardcore erotica, not psychokillers or nighttime terrors.

I'm a nitpicky bastard

I think my biggest complaint at the moment is that too many authors are trying to use the same devices. It seems like one in two fics has somebody say "It. Is. On." About one in three has a poison joke event. Every monster is a manticore.

I understand that fanfic writers are trying to draw from a limited pool of only 28 episodes so far, but they really don't need to. It reminds me of a similar problem from Star Wars fanfics: you have an entire galaxy with millions of habitable world, yet 90% of fanfics take place on one of the dozen or so planets named in a movie.

It's not necessary. It doesn't make for good reading after seeing the same devices so many times. My favorite fics have been those that take existing characters and put them in new circumstances. It's the characters we love. Drop Pinkie Pie in the middle of the desert and have the locals decide to sacrifice her to their local deity and have her misunderstand and try to make it a fun and exciting event, while everyone else goes to rescue her and then throw in the twist at the end that she knew all along what the plan was but fun was more important than escape. Same characters, with different plot and antagonist. That's much more entertaining than reading yet another "Luna celebration, fight the manitcore, oh no parasprites/poison joke while Twilight freaks about what Celestia will think but she likes what happened and it was 20% cooler in ten seconds flat" story.

Don't need OC ponies. But do need OC stories.

Regarding the first bit: I agree that the over-the-top clopfics and GRIMDARK gorefests aren't really my thing either, but I do enjoy reading things that take a realistic view of the 'verse. (In other words, not absurd "Ponies all murder/rape each other", but also not "Content restricted just as much as the show is". The latter can still be enjoyable, but it isn't the only type of fic I enjoy.)

On the latter bit, I tend to disagree. I've read more fics with OC ponies that I really got into than ones that used the Mane 6 or secondary characters. I think that a big part of this is just that people in general have trouble with proper characterization, but it is only really noticable when they're using canon characters, because we already know their personalities, whereas OC ponies are whatever the author wants them to be. I do agree with you on the overuse of a number of plots and jokes, which is actually a big reason why I decided to do an OC fic instead of one with strictly canon characters and settings: it allows me to write a story within the 'verse, including (later-stage) incorporation of canon ponies, while still avoiding the typical situations.

[Bohandas]

Spoiler: RANT (click to show/hide)

DAMNIT PEOPLE, TWO SIMPLE RULES! TWO! CONTRACTIONS REQUIRE AN APOSTROPHE! ALL OTHER USES DO NOT! LEARN THE DAMN RULES ALREADY!
it's - it is
its - EVERYTHING ELSE DAMNIT

These rules have always been highly confusing for me, as a non-native English speaker. You put an apostrophe when contracting "it is", fine. You put an apostrophe on a word to signify possession "the washing machine's buttons", fine.

The confusing part is that when you want to say that "it" is in possession of something, then it's suddenly supposed to be "its". Wut? Make up your mind, English.

English is my native language and I don't understand it either. I think it's just an arbitrary rule that is only still observed due to pigheaded adherence to useless tradition.

In short, there is NO real reason.

[Flying Dice]

Spoiler: RANT (click to show/hide)

DAMNIT PEOPLE, TWO SIMPLE RULES! TWO! CONTRACTIONS REQUIRE AN APOSTROPHE! ALL OTHER USES DO NOT! LEARN THE DAMN RULES ALREADY!
it's - it is
its - EVERYTHING ELSE DAMNIT

These rules have always been highly confusing for me, as a non-native English speaker. You put an apostrophe when contracting "it is", fine. You put an apostrophe on a word to signify possession "the washing machine's buttons", fine.

The confusing part is that when you want to say that "it" is in possession of something, then it's suddenly supposed to be "its". Wut? Make up your mind, English.

English is my native language and I don't understand it either. I think it's just an arbitrary rule that is only still observed due to pigheaded adherence to useless tradition.

In short, there is NO real reason.

Yeah, AFAIK the only reason it is still around is because that is how it has >>always<< been, and there hasn't been any real effort to change it. Incidentally, I'm also a native english speaker and I didn't figure out how that worked until midway through secondary school. I'd say that if an artifact in a language is both pointless and confuses even people who were raised with it, it probably shouldn't exist, if only for the sake of elegance.