grammar within game logos [split]

[Jools]

The style is very nice.

However it's a bit wrong to call it "the" spring project. There are also other spring projects. Maybe better with "a spring project". Just saying.

Split from http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=32502, which is about the style of possible BAR logos.

[Silentwings]

However it's a bit wrong to call it "the" spring project. There are also other spring projects.

No. There is one Spring project, inside of which BAR is one of many subprojects. "The Spring Project" is on the BA logo and it's going on whatever BAR logo we eventually settle on too. There is no practical chance of confusion with other projects named Spring.

[Jools]

However it's a bit wrong to call it "the" spring project. There are also other spring projects.

No. There is one Spring project, inside of which BAR is one of many subprojects. "The Spring Project" is on the BA logo and it's going on whatever BAR logo we eventually settle on too. There is no practical chance of confusion with other projects named Spring.

Yes there is, because of the dash (or what should be one). The dash is a weaker delimiter than the period, therefore the idea of the previous clause (balanced annihilation) is conveyed over to the clause after the dash. So in that case I suggest you to use the period instead -- or another paragraph.

[Silentwings]

Yes there is, because of the dash (or what should be one). The dash is a weaker delimiter than the period, therefore the idea of the previous clause (balanced annihilation) is conveyed over to the clause after the dash. So in that case I suggest you to use the period instead -- or another paragraph.

Normal grammar does not apply in headers and it is standard to use a dash to convey a relationship between two objects without specification of hierachy. However, since you wish to discuss proper grammar...

because of the dash (or what should be one)

Since the dash is already created, the perfect tense is appropriate: "or what should have been". Here the first object is carried over from a previous sentence and the second object is "the dash", so it is ambiguous to use "one" and I would prefer you to specify "a dash".

The dash is a weaker delimiter

A dash is generally not regarded as a delimiter, although here its usage is similar to that of a delimiter.

therefore the idea of the previous clause (balanced annihilation)

Balanced Annihilation requires capitalization and is a proper noun, not a clause. Since Balanced Annihilation has a tangible existence it is not an idea, either. So I would prefer "therefore, the object of the previous subtitle (Balanced Annihilation)".

(balanced annihilation)

It's not a grammatical error, but the subtitle in question actually reads "Balanced Annihilation Reloaded".

So in that case I suggest you to use

"So, in that case, I suggest you use"

to use the period

Strictly, to use "a" period, since it refers to only a hypothetical instance of "the" period.

use the period instead -- or another paragraph

Within full sentences, dashes are typically used for interjections that have only loose relevence to the current clause; a comma (or nothing at all) would be more appropriate here.

paragraph

Subtitles are not paragraphs.

[Anarchid]

Imo if you're referencing this as "made on top of Spring Project", you need to include the Spring branding.

Merely using "the spring project" is in fact ambigous as to how it specifies the main title's relationship with "the spring project".

To stay on topic: Heil Spellcheck!

[Jools]

Since the dash is already created, the perfect tense is appropriate: "or what should have been". Here the first object is carried over from a previous sentence and the second object is "the dash", so it is ambiguous to use "one" and I would prefer you to specify "a dash".

I was referring to the absense of the dash, and where a hyphen is used instead. Dashes are used to separate clauses, hyphens are used to separate syllables. Go back to elementary school class 101.

Balanced Annihilation requires capitalization and is a proper noun, not a clause. Since Balanced Annihilation has a tangible existence it is not an idea, either. So I would prefer "therefore, the object of the previous subtitle (Balanced Annihilation)".

A word can be both a noun and a clause. They are separate things. Clauses consist of elements such as subjects and predicates. Lexical categories are different things and consist of things such as nouns and verbs. Again go back to elementary school, you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Silentwings]

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/clauses, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/hyphen and http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/dash clearly contradict every assertion made in the above post by Jools, except
- the bit about lexical categories, which is not relevent since the definition given of a clause is incomplete (e.g. a noun, proper or otherwise, is not in itself ever a clause, although it may form a part of a clause), and
- the statement that noun and clause are separate concepts, which is correct.

I have finished procrastinating and cba to do corrections for a second post.

[Jools]

Well, that's more of less right, so agreed.

However, you do not use hyphens to separate parts of titles , and the original point about dashes in titles was that they bind together both parts, while it's also correct that book and movie titles etc employ a special form of grammar. But it's nevertheless never correct to use hyphens instead of dashes in those places.

I did not even enter into the difference between en- and em-dashes, but that's a topic that is subjective anyway and varies from language to another. I believe Americans more often prefer to use em-dashes whereas Europeans use more en-dashes, when separating clauses. Of course you always use en-dashes between ranges of numbers etc. But again, never hyphens.

I might add that a syllable is defined as part of word. If you reread those links you provided with this information, then there is no longer any conflict.

[Jools]

Split from http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=32502, which is about the style of possible BAR logos.

This part is also about the the style of the logos, namely the style of the language. It's a bit weird decision as it's hard to discuss a logo without discussing its language.

[dansan]

I love this forum for its nerdiness :)

[Silentwings]

I might add that a syllable is defined as part of word.

No it isn't. The correct definition is given here http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... h/syllable.

[Jools]

I might add that a syllable is defined as part of word.

No it isn't. The correct definition is given here http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/defin ... h/syllable.

Explain how that different definition applies to the context of this thread (the only cases where a syllable would be a whole word would be words like "a" of "the", hardly relevant when discussing the difference between hyphenation and dividing titles)

Edit: I'm just trying to help you by telling how to avoid making a quite embarrassing mistake, and your attitude is a very strange one in this respect.

[Silentwings]

Explain how that different definition applies to the context of this thread

As is made clear in the previous post, the definition you stated was incorrect and I have linked you to a correct one.

Edit: I'm just trying to help you by telling how to avoid making a quite embarrassing mistake, and your attitude is a very strange one in this respect.

Your attempt to help us is appreciated.

This is off-topic and can be continued in the off-topic forum. Locked.