Important notice from the GRAMMAR POLICE. Plz read. This means you.

[rufio]

Indeed.  "Funny you may think it" parses to me as "Funny, you might think so but..." more than the apparently intended "You might think it's funny, but..."  I'm not saying that was the source of Rohina's confusion, but it certainly caused some for me.

I actually interpreted it as "Funny as you may think it..." which makes perfect sense.

People who start sentences with "This being" tend to be lost causes anyway, because even if you can teach them to express themselves grammatically, the whole "this being" construction tends to be a marker for "causality, it is not for me".

If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.

[Midwing]

"Funny you may think it" parses to me as "Funny, you might think so but..." more than the apparently intended "You might think it's funny, but..."

I see how ambiguous that was now, I understand the confusion.  I will paraphrase more clearly.

If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.

Perhaps because it is a phrase I'm so used to hearing on a daily basis, I'm not entirely sure how it is wrong.  I'm sure it will be pointed out to be in meticulous detail, however.

[rufio]

If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.

Perhaps because it is a phrase I'm so used to hearing on a daily basis, I'm not entirely sure how it is wrong.  I'm sure it will be pointed out to be in meticulous detail, however.

It's simple:  It is not part of rohina's dialect, and is thus ABOMINATION.

[CheritaChen]

If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.

Now I feel obligated to point out that we are not communicating in some languages on this forum. We all, including Midwing, are using English.

Besides that, my objection to such a construction would not be so much in the order as the clunky tense of the sentence. There is a distinction between

This being the case, perhaps I should repent me of my wrongdoing, although I really think I use the construct correctly.

and

This being the reason for asking in the first place.  It's never too late to learn.

jolrei used a separate clause that, while not a great sentence unto itself, did not obfuscate any of the requisite elements of subject (I), verb (should repent) and object (wrongdoing) which were all clearly rendered by the sentence. Midwing used a construction that unnecessarily garbled the flow of information and made something passive (either this or reason, it's not easy to distinguish) which shouldn't have been (being vs. is).

[Midwing]

So, "That was my reason for asking" instead?  "This is why I asked"?  "It is because of this I asked"?  "I asked because of this?"

Am I any closer?

[rufio]

If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.

Now I feel obligated to point out that we are not communicating in some languages on this forum. We all, including Midwing, are using English.

Yes, which is why I started the sentence with "If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to..."  Logic is not language-specific; just because the fact-reason order sounds better in your dialect of English does not mean that it is necessarily more logical than the cause-result order, which sounds better in other dialects (and in other languages).

[rohina]

If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.

No, I was arguing that people who use "this being" or even better "this being that" think that "this being" is a phrase which explains something, as opposed to being completely useless, devoid of meaning, and often used purely to turn what follows it into a gobbledegook fragment.

Midwing's example is exactly why I have a problem: "This being the reason for asking in the first place" is a fragment. The verb is incorrect and it makes Midwing sound like a pretentious nard who wants to sound fancy but has no idea how to form a sentence.

I was also talking about English, which I know is a topic you can't stand. Because any comment anyone makes about any language must apply to all languages. Except French, apparently. rufio doesn't care about French.

But, do go on with your interminable argument about how everything I say is wrong.

[rufio]

Since you were raging against people beginning sentences with "this being", I thought you were including sentences beginning with "this being the case,..." as well, but clearly you weren't.  This is kind of like how people insist that starting a sentence with "Because" is wrong, despite the fact that there are plenty of prescriptively correct sentence structures that can begin with "because".

However, I wonder if you would still take issue with Midwing's sentence if it began with "hence" instead of "This being":

(quote)
"Hence my asking in the first place."

vs.

(quote)
"This being the reason for asking in the first place."

vs. the technically correct

(quote)
"is why I asked in the first place."

What say you?  Is it only OK to use fragments for effect if you use ancient vocabulary?  At what point does a fragment used for effect become "gobbledygook"?  Would you say that "this being" is more pretentious than "hence"?

[Midwing]

This needn't degenerate into a torrent of insults and personal arguments.  I really couldn't care less about the execution of correction but this is becoming more about who is right and their authority in correcting me, even their motives behind correcting me, rather than just getting on with it.  This was never a personal issue between rohina and me.  My sentence was incorrect.  Simple as.

This is wrong.  This is why.  This is correct.  It's a simple protocol to follow. 

[Roflganger]

"That was my reason for asking" instead? 

Am I any closer?

This one gets my vote.  It's clear, concise and to the point. 

[maxon]

This needn't degenerate into a torrent of insults and personal arguments.  I really couldn't care less about the execution of correction but this is becoming more about who is right and their authority in correcting me, even their motives behind correcting me, rather than just getting on with it.  This was never a personal issue between rohina and me.  My sentence was incorrect.  Simple as.

Oh don't worry about that.  They enjoy it.

[rohina]

However, I wonder if you would still take issue with Midwing's sentence if it began with "hence" instead of "The being":

(quote)
"Hence my asking in the first place."

vs.

(quote)
"This being the reason for asking in the first place."

vs. the technically correct

(quote)
"is why I asked in the first place."

What say you?  Is it only OK to use fragments for effect if you use ancient vocabulary?  At what point does a fragment used for effect become "gobbledygook"?  Would you say that "this being" is more pretentious than "hence"?

The first one is still wrong. Hence is not the issue, it's the verb. My point was, though, that using "this being" is not only incorrect, it also is an indicator of a non-grammatical problem. This comes from my experience, so I know you won't count it.

I am not averse to fragments for stylistic effect, but I don think any of your examples count in this category.

This needn't degenerate into a torrent of insults and personal arguments.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

[rufio]

The first one is still wrong. Hence is not the issue, it's the verb.

Which verb?  I thought you meant "being", since the only other verb in the sentence is "asking" which is part of a subordinate clause anyway, and correct as far as I can tell.  Unless by "verb" you mean "absence of main finite verb".  In any case, you have stated in the past that it is OK to use sentence fragments for effect, and since you are (so you say) an expert on stylistics, I was wondering if you'd be willing to share your qualifications for precisely when it is OK to use sentence fragments with the plebes.

[littleblackdog]

This being the reason for asking in the first place.  It's never too late to learn.
[/quote]

isn't this a mispaced modifier?

[rufio]

This being the reason for asking in the first place.  It's never too late to learn.

isn't this a mispaced modifier? [/quote]

What modifier do you think is "mispaced", exactly?

[littleblackdog]

" This being the reason for asking in the first place"

[Midwing]

The whole sentence can't be a misplaced modifier, surely?  The only thing in that sentence which I would have thought could be a misplaced modifier would be "in the first place" but as has been discussed ad infinitum, I'm no grammatical expert.  It strikes me that unless you know your stuff, you'd best leave this kind of thing to those who do.

[littleblackdog]

The whole sentence can't be a misplaced modifier, surely?  The only thing in that sentence which I would have thought could be a misplaced modifier would be "in the first place" but as has been discussed ad infinitum, I'm no grammatical expert.  It strikes me that unless you know your stuff, you'd best leave this kind of thing to those who do.

I do not know my stuff,  that is why I was asking.  I will go and see if I can find the answer on the internet.

[rufio]

littleblackdog, it is not good enough to just memorize catch phrases - you actually have to learn what they mean, too.

A misplaced modifier is a verbal adjective which is itself the head of a clause, which also modifies a noun in a higher clause; however, the clause it heads is placed in such a way that it is not clear which noun it modifies, causing (often hilarious) syntactic ambiguity.  Is what Midwing said ambiguous?  No.  This is a hint.  I suppose you could count "being" as a verbal adjective, but it's obvious that it's modifying "this".  If you want to say that it's not clear what "this" refers to (which is not the case) that would be an ambiguous anaphor.  "Asking" is a gerund and not a verbal adjective at all.

[Midwing]

I find that this website is a useful exercise that may help.  I just scanned through it.

Asking a question, no matter how much initiative you are attempting to show at improving the level of your grammar, apparently doesn't protect you from the wrath of those who know better than you do.  Bear that in mind.

[Roflganger]

Asking a question, no matter how much initiative you are attempting to show at improving the level of your grammar, apparently doesn't protect you from the wrath of those who know better than you do.

"Is that a misplaced modifier?" suggests littleblackdog doesn't know the answer and wants to learn.  "Isn't that a misplaced modifier?" suggests littleblackdog believes he knows the answer and is looking for affirmation.  The first type of question seems generally well-received in these parts.  The second type may result in wrath and ridicule if the asker is not correct after all.

[Midwing]

Was her question not, word-for-word, a perfect example of the second type of question you just mentioned?

Or were you saying that being ridiculed is less to do with asking a question than the manner in which you ask it?

[Roflganger]

Was her question not, word-for-word, a perfect example of the second type of question you just mentioned?

Or were you saying that being ridiculed is less to do with asking a question than the manner in which you ask it?

You said that asking a question invites wrath.  I said that asking a question with the intention of learning (rather than trying to prove that you know something) does NOT invite wrath. 

[Midwing]

I asked a question with the intention of learning.  I could do no right in some eyes!  Miscommunication is a bugger. 

[rohina]

The first one is still wrong. Hence is not the issue, it's the verb.

Which verb?  I thought you meant "being", since the only other verb in the sentence is "asking" which is part of a subordinate clause anyway, and correct as far as I can tell.  Unless by "verb" you mean "absence of main finite verb".  In any case, you have stated in the past that it is OK to use sentence fragments for effect, and since you are (so you say) an expert on stylistics, I was wondering if you'd be willing to share your qualifications for precisely when it is OK to use sentence fragments with the plebes.

It can't be a subordinate clause if it is the ONLY clause.

When exactly? Oh, say when you don't confuse nouns with their homonyms?