Update 2: Grammar Error on Close Helmet vs. Close-Helmet (image and answer)

Seriously?

"...I do not care what the dictionary says."

Listen, you seem like an intelligent guy. Maybe you should direct your focus towards something more meaningful then whether a hyphen should be placed in a word in one item in an obscure game or not.

don't think i was trolling or flaming. just sharing my views on the english language the way you have been

i used gallagher because i thought the clip was a very funny way to prove a point:

as much as we want to believe that language is governed by a fixed set of rules, language is subjective and evolves over time in ways that sometimes don't really make sense. it's just the way it is.

eg: why is there a USA style of spelling english? was there any logic behind it? if so, why hasn't the rest of the world adopted that same style of spelling since logic is supposed to be universal?

language IS about wide acceptance. that's how we communicate. if almost everyone says "cloud now also means easily accessible servers on the internet", that's exactly what it means and how it's used in today's context despite it, logically speaking, making no sense.

we're referring to a historical object here that was historically referred to without the hyphen. given the historical acceptance of that spelling (as seen in dictionaries), i don't see any issues with referring to the same.

going back to this close helmet point, if it makes you feel better about it, think of it as GGG's artistic license to spell it in the way they want to (which thankfully remains supported)? :)

Op following your logic we should all be speaking old english. Language it's one of the things that changes more, as the guy above me said

But anyway what is this?

"

I do not care what the dictionary says.

I also do not care what law says, so I'll kill you and no one can prove me wrong

Right?

The word can be used with or without a hyphen. I don't see what's so hard to grasp about that.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

Color is the way we in the U.S. spell color, and colour is the way people in Britain spell color. This is a great example of two countries wanting to be different from each another for the sake of being different.

Another way of looking at that is that there is a correct way and a corrupted way of spelling the word 'colour'.

;)

"

_Nerevarine_ wrote:

Seriously?

"...I do not care what the dictionary says."

Listen, you seem like an intelligent guy. Maybe you should direct your focus towards something more meaningful then whether a hyphen should be placed in a word in one item in an obscure game or not.

When you quote someone, don't quote only what you want to hear or what you want to believe someone said. Quote whole statements, not half statements in your favor.

Here is what I did say:

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

On some things, I do not care what the dictionary says.

The things I've pointed out when it comes to spelling and grammar includes but is not limited to where a Hyphen should go. It has gone beyond what my OP says while still staying on topic.

"

_Nerevarine_ wrote:

Maybe you should direct your focus towards something more meaningful then whether a hyphen should be placed in a word in one item in an obscure game or not.

I am a transpiring published writer and literary critic. I am also a literary Admin on deviantArt.com., home to both novice and professional artists of today's time.

I do apply myself and my abilities whether I critique text in a game or someone's site, book, poetry or short-story prose. I correct everything out of place when it comes to anything related to text.

"

Qarak wrote:

Op following your logic we should all be speaking old english. Language it's one of the things that changes more, as the guy above me said

But anyway what is this?

"

I do not care what the dictionary says.

I also do not care what law says, so I'll kill you and no one can prove me wrong

Right?

No, not right. You took what I said out of context. Quote whole statements, not half statements in your favor like I told someone else in a reply.

Again, here is what I did say on the second page of this thread, the tenth thread down, under Qarak’s quoted message, the fourth body of text down, first sentence. (Must I be so specific?)

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

On some things, I do not care what the dictionary says.

Furthermore, some (not all rules) are what they are and that is the way it is regardless of changes. They are never going to go away. Some old rules in language are like brooms. Despite all the technological advances, guess what? They are still here!

======================================
======================================

It's me vs. a whole army, isn't it? It's quite evident you guys think only with the masses. You seem to never challenge what any source tells you be it by mouth or written word. It's foolish to believe they are always right. Think for yourselves, then, decide whether or not to agree with something or someone else, but don't be so foolish to think you have it all figured out when you may not, especially if someone else has a better, more valid argument.

You guys' arguments are weak and that's why I cannot consider agreeing with any of you.

To example, all you guys have to say is things like change is what justifies everything that was correct into something more wrong than previously thought. More than not, it's called fixing what is not broken, especially when it comes to language.

If society is to go off your logic that change in language justifies stupid, everyone would be speaking in abbreviations (not that this isn't already happening.) If it was up to you guys, the dictionary would consist of "WTF, OMG, STFU, IMHO, DBA, QAP, YGTI, SNH . . ." and countless other lazy-handed phrases that insult language. (I purposely used that Hyphen. Do you see what it's used for, why it's used and how it's used now?)

Imagine a whole book written only in complete short-handed abbreviations and how stupid it would sound.

This is exactly the argument Shakespeare or Oscar Wilde would have with today's people if they were brought back to life. Sure, they would have to adapt to a few things here and there in the language, but more than not, they would laugh at you, then they would wish they were dead again, and the people they'd argue with would wish these two brilliant men were dead because average people cannot stand a challenge.

"

dlrr wrote:

don't think i was trolling or flaming. just sharing my views on the english language the way you have been.

Quote me I said you were trolling or flaming. Why take offense to something that wasn't necessarily directed toward you? You tell on yourself. I didn't point a finger at any particular person when making that statement. It applies only to those who know they are the ones doing the flaming. They know who they are. On another note, trolling and flaming are two different things. I said nothing about anyone trolling.

"

dlrr wrote:

i used gallagher because i thought the clip was a very funny way to prove a point:

What point? The point he made you support was a poorly made point I easily debunked. He kept on asking a bunch of why this and why that. What's wrong with me coming back with valid answers? On some things, yes, I agree with what he said, but on other things I do not.

"

dlrr wrote:

as much as we want to believe that language is governed by a fixed set of rules, language is subjective and evolves over time in ways that sometimes don't really make sense. it's just the way it is.

I already understand rules can and will change. I never said they wouldn't. However, my argument still holds true certain old rules do apply and will stay the same.

"

dlrr wrote:

eg: why is there a USA style of spelling english? was there any logic behind it? if so, why hasn't the rest of the world adopted that same style of spelling since logic is supposed to be universal?

I already explained the reason why there's a U.S. vs. British way to English when saying:

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

Just because something can be written two ways, does not necessarily mean it is right. This is exception to the rule for certain words like color vs. colour. Color is the way we in the U.S. spell color, and colour is the way people in Britain spell color. This is a great example of two countries wanting to be different from each another for the sake of being different. There is really no other good reason why we need two spellings of this word, among others words.

"

dlrr wrote:

language IS about wide acceptance. that's how we communicate. if almost everyone says "cloud now also means easily accessible servers on the internet", that's exactly what it means and how it's used in today's context despite it, logically speaking, making no sense.

Using product names, etc. to support your standpoint is very weak. This is two or three times now I have had to point out weak logic used for unstable standpoints.

The argument in this thread thus far has not been about what certain words mean or what certain words should mean. It has been about how certain words are said, spelled or written in their more right way than wrong way.

"

dlrr wrote:

we're referring to a historical object here that was historically referred to without the hyphen. given the historical acceptance of that spelling (as seen in dictionaries), i don't see any issues with referring to the same.

Again, none of you can reason why or understand why the one usage of Close-Helmet has a Hyphen vs. the other usage that doesn't. This goes beyond just this word alone, folks.

"

dlrr wrote:

going back to this close helmet point, if it makes you feel better about it, think of it as GGG's artistic license to spell it in the way they want to (which thankfully remains supported)? :)

If GGG's team is so full of artistic transgressors of language, perhaps they should turn words like the into teh, no into noo, etc. while other games use less stupid ways of putting things.

My point here is GGG's intent is not to be different in how they spell things. They have asked for feedback from the players when something is not right in their texts and I gave more than enough feedback. I gave a lesson on language.

GGG's team doesn't sit around the meeting table or crowd around the drawing board (you seem to believe) saying, "Hmm, how can we spell this word differently? Come on guys, think! There has to be a way."

O GOD LOL

CHANGE THE NAME OF THE HELM AND MAKE THIS GUY IN THE CREDITS, TOTALLY DESERVES IT

---
On a serious note, I did a quick search on Google.
Guess what, someone asked the question, three days ago.

LINK

Check out the answers

EDIT - Pasted the link

"

Qarak wrote:

O GOD LOL

CHANGE THE NAME OF THE HELM AND MAKE THIS GUY IN THE CREDITS, TOTALLY DESERVES IT

---
On a serious note, I did a quick search on Google.
Guess what, someone asked the question, three days ago.

LINK

Check out the answers

EDIT - Pasted the link

EDIT: Given more thought to things in the above link, this reply has slightly changed.

The answers in that link you gave are laughable because they do not directly answer the question in the OP when asking, "I say "close helmet" is perfectly fine, and simple Google searches turn up more results for this form of it, but I can't find a convincing argument for why it is correct other than because it seems to be the most common usage."

Why is 'Close-Helmet' more correct than 'Close Helmet' with the hyphenation? Except me, not Google, not anyone in this thread or any other online sources can tell me or say why Close Helmet vs. Close-Helmet is more correct. All you will rarely come across on the web are rare uses of 'Close-Helmet' but nothing or no one tells you why the hyphenation is there.

The given answers in that link also do not say anything about the use of the Hyphen and why it is used in Close-Helmet (the second usage of Close Helmet.)

I also want to directly quote the OP in that thread when saying, "Yet, using "close" as a verb ("I shall close the door") doesn't really make grammatical sense either."

Looking further into it, if someone is saying they should or are going to close a door, this makes sense if close is going to be used as a verb this way. Therefore, Close Helmet (as it is) seems to be telling us something by commanding us to close the helm. It doesn't really read as a name.

In the commentaries, I would also like to quote the guy who said, "Close is sometimes used as a modifier instead of closed; a well-known example is close-minded."

Yes it is, but close as a modifier would need to make sense, close-minded, technically, is not a logical modifier. Closed-minded (with the d added at the end) is the more correct way of putting it.

I can somewhat relate the word close to the word almost. You cannot almost be close-minded. You are either closed-minded or not.

Do you see what I did there?

It's funny to see so many online sources and even reputable sources use the word close so wrongly, notably in the name of this helmet in ancient times.