A powerful b/c 3 voice button accordion with hand made reeds. It has one treble stop to switch between 2 and 3 voice settings. It has 23 treble and 8 bass buttons.
I can e-mail pictures to anybody who is interested. The box is in immaculate condition and I am only selling as I have just purchased a Paolo.
Yes I would appreciate it, and it's not actually a typo. Look around a bunch of forums and you'll see much more use of "should of" than "should have". And no, it's not meaningless. If my English was poor, phrases like "should of", "could of" etc. would be unintelligible to me.
I admire both the diacritical umlaut on Björn's name, and his bold stance on maintaining language standards.
At the same thime, I endorse the quick, casual approach to online posting employed by Button Box.
Out of a saintly concern for the blood pressure levels of all who visit this site, I shall henceforth strive to drain acrimony from any and all discussions, assuring that everyone is a winner. That Gandhi f***er's got nothing on me.
"Quick casual approach". That's really very funny, NPDECO. The only reason i reacted in the first place is because I of not seen that misunderstanding of that phrase by a non-American before. It surprised me.
Of course, having used the word 'pallet' when I meant 'palette' in a completely different thread, I should probably slip back into silence on the subject of English(!)
Prigs.
Language changes. Just as wealthy old white men write history, so do wealthy old white men determine what is correct grammar. Language is ever-changing. What is considered bad grammar today will be perfectly acceptable tomorrow.
This should of been obvious. Speling is something else maybe.
1. (used to indicate distance or direction from, separation, deprivation, etc.): within a mile of the church; south of Omaha; to be robbed of one's money.
2. (used to indicate derivation, origin, or source): a man of good family; the plays of Shakespeare; a piece of cake.
3. (used to indicate cause, motive, occasion, or reason): to die of hunger.
4. (used to indicate material, component parts, substance, or contents): a dress of silk; an apartment of three rooms; a book of poems; a package of cheese.
5. (used to indicate apposition or identity): Is that idiot of a salesman calling again?
6. (used to indicate specific identity or a particular item within a category): the city of Chicago; thoughts of love.
7. (used to indicate possession, connection, or association): the king of France; the property of the church.
8. (used to indicate inclusion in a number, class, or whole): one of us.
9. (used to indicate the objective relation, the object of the action noted by the preceding noun or the application of a verb or adjective): the ringing of bells; He writes her of home; I'm tired of working.
10. (used to indicate reference or respect): There is talk of peace.
11. (used to indicate qualities or attributes): an ambassador of remarkable tact.
12. (used to indicate a specified time): They arrived of an evening.
13. Chiefly Northern U.S. before the hour of; until: twenty minutes of five.
14. on the part of: It was very mean of you to laugh at me.
15. in respect to: fleet of foot.
16. set aside for or devoted to: a minute of prayer.
Also;
—Usage note Of is sometimes added to phrases beginning with the adverb how or too followed by a descriptive adjective: How long of a drive will it be? It's too hot of a day for tennis. This construction is probably modeled on that in which how or too is followed by much, an unquestionably standard use in all varieties of speech and writing: How much of a problem will that cause the government? There was too much of an uproar for the speaker to be heard. The use of of with descriptive adjectives after how or too is largely restricted to informal speech. It occurs occasionally in informal writing and written representations of speech. See also couple, off.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
and;
—Pronunciation note Because the preposition of, when unstressed (a piece of cake), and the unstressed or contracted auxiliary verb have (could have gone, could've gone) are both pronounced /əv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uhv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation or /ə/[uh] in connected speech, inexperienced writers commonly confuse the two words, spelling have as of (I would of handed in my book report, but the dog ate it). Professional writers have been able to exploit this spelling deliberately, especially in fiction, to help represent the speech of the uneducated: If he could of went home, he would of.
A great addition, Medusa.
For those of us who are English language lovers as well as music lovers, Eats, Shoots and Leaves is a fun read.
From a review -
"The first punctuation mistake in “Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation” (Gotham; $17.50), by Lynne Truss, a British writer, appears in the dedication, where a nonrestrictive clause is not preceded by a comma. It is a wild ride downhill from there. “Eats, Shoots & Leaves” presents itself as a call to arms, in a world spinning rapidly into subliteracy, by a hip yet unapologetic curmudgeon, a stickler for the rules of writing. But it’s hard to fend off the suspicion that the whole thing might be a hoax.
The foreword, by Frank McCourt, contains another comma-free nonrestrictive clause (“I feel no such sympathy for the manager of my local supermarket who must have a cellarful of apostrophes he doesn’t know what to do with”)
Castagnari: Ilary
Castagnari: Ilary
A powerful b/c 3 voice button accordion with hand made reeds. It has one treble stop to switch between 2 and 3 voice settings. It has 23 treble and 8 bass buttons.
I can e-mail pictures to anybody who is interested. The box is in immaculate condition and I am only selling as I have just purchased a Paolo.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Button Box
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
This box is for sale by the way (should of made that clear)
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Button Box
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
'Should of' ?
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Björn
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
That was uncalled for Bjorn.
Perhaps you should put up a price too, Button Box?
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by rob_handel
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
sorry (but why uncalled for?)
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Björn
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
It was a little typo. I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate it if someone corrected a meaningless mistake that you made.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by rob_handel
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Yes I would appreciate it, and it's not actually a typo. Look around a bunch of forums and you'll see much more use of "should of" than "should have". And no, it's not meaningless. If my English was poor, phrases like "should of", "could of" etc. would be unintelligible to me.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Björn
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Intersting should 'have' becomes should 'av, should 'ov ' to should of....
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by jig
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Exactly, and it's a shame. In writing it becomes meaningless.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Björn
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
I can't help being irked by the incorrect use of 'practice'/'practise'. Likewise, by the incorrect use of " its " and " it's ". Rant over.
ES&L.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by domnull
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Button box, What type of Paolo did you purchase?
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by cliffhanger
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Bjorn..Why dont you start a thread on teahing us how to speak proper like, and on how to get those little dots over the O in your handle.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Free Reed
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
I admire both the diacritical umlaut on Björn's name, and his bold stance on maintaining language standards.
At the same thime, I endorse the quick, casual approach to online posting employed by Button Box.
Out of a saintly concern for the blood pressure levels of all who visit this site, I shall henceforth strive to drain acrimony from any and all discussions, assuring that everyone is a winner. That Gandhi f***er's got nothing on me.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by NEW Pure Drop® Ear Canal Oil
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
"Quick casual approach". That's really very funny, NPDECO. The only reason i reacted in the first place is because I of not seen that misunderstanding of that phrase by a non-American before. It surprised me.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Björn
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Hi Bjorn,
" If my English was poor". My mother used to correct me on that one all the time.." If my English were poor".
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by JNW
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
'because I of not seen that misunderstanding'
?
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Ottery
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Thank you for that JNW.
Ottery - apparently is does not matter if you use 'have' or 'of'. I took the casual approach and used the shorter word.
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Björn
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
I think it's rather charming ....
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Ottery
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
Of course, having used the word 'pallet' when I meant 'palette' in a completely different thread, I should probably slip back into silence on the subject of English(!)
# Posted on May 15th 2008 by Ottery
Grammar
Prigs.
Language changes. Just as wealthy old white men write history, so do wealthy old white men determine what is correct grammar. Language is ever-changing. What is considered bad grammar today will be perfectly acceptable tomorrow.
This should of been obvious. Speling is something else maybe.
# Posted on May 16th 2008 by cocus
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
What about 'Cliffs of Moher'?
Is 'of' in this case a corruption of 'Have ' ?
1. (used to indicate distance or direction from, separation, deprivation, etc.): within a mile of the church; south of Omaha; to be robbed of one's money.
2. (used to indicate derivation, origin, or source): a man of good family; the plays of Shakespeare; a piece of cake.
3. (used to indicate cause, motive, occasion, or reason): to die of hunger.
4. (used to indicate material, component parts, substance, or contents): a dress of silk; an apartment of three rooms; a book of poems; a package of cheese.
5. (used to indicate apposition or identity): Is that idiot of a salesman calling again?
6. (used to indicate specific identity or a particular item within a category): the city of Chicago; thoughts of love.
7. (used to indicate possession, connection, or association): the king of France; the property of the church.
8. (used to indicate inclusion in a number, class, or whole): one of us.
9. (used to indicate the objective relation, the object of the action noted by the preceding noun or the application of a verb or adjective): the ringing of bells; He writes her of home; I'm tired of working.
10. (used to indicate reference or respect): There is talk of peace.
11. (used to indicate qualities or attributes): an ambassador of remarkable tact.
12. (used to indicate a specified time): They arrived of an evening.
13. Chiefly Northern U.S. before the hour of; until: twenty minutes of five.
14. on the part of: It was very mean of you to laugh at me.
15. in respect to: fleet of foot.
16. set aside for or devoted to: a minute of prayer.
Also;
—Usage note Of is sometimes added to phrases beginning with the adverb how or too followed by a descriptive adjective: How long of a drive will it be? It's too hot of a day for tennis. This construction is probably modeled on that in which how or too is followed by much, an unquestionably standard use in all varieties of speech and writing: How much of a problem will that cause the government? There was too much of an uproar for the speaker to be heard. The use of of with descriptive adjectives after how or too is largely restricted to informal speech. It occurs occasionally in informal writing and written representations of speech. See also couple, off.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
and;
—Pronunciation note Because the preposition of, when unstressed (a piece of cake), and the unstressed or contracted auxiliary verb have (could have gone, could've gone) are both pronounced /əv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uhv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation or /ə/[uh] in connected speech, inexperienced writers commonly confuse the two words, spelling have as of (I would of handed in my book report, but the dog ate it). Professional writers have been able to exploit this spelling deliberately, especially in fiction, to help represent the speech of the uneducated: If he could of went home, he would of.
# Posted on May 16th 2008 by typo
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
A great addition, Medusa.
For those of us who are English language lovers as well as music lovers, Eats, Shoots and Leaves is a fun read.
From a review -
"The first punctuation mistake in “Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation” (Gotham; $17.50), by Lynne Truss, a British writer, appears in the dedication, where a nonrestrictive clause is not preceded by a comma. It is a wild ride downhill from there. “Eats, Shoots & Leaves” presents itself as a call to arms, in a world spinning rapidly into subliteracy, by a hip yet unapologetic curmudgeon, a stickler for the rules of writing. But it’s hard to fend off the suspicion that the whole thing might be a hoax.
The foreword, by Frank McCourt, contains another comma-free nonrestrictive clause (“I feel no such sympathy for the manager of my local supermarket who must have a cellarful of apostrophes he doesn’t know what to do with”)
# Posted on May 16th 2008 by JNW
Re: Castagnari: Ilary
........and this poor bastard started out just trying to sell his accordian !!!
# Posted on May 24th 2008 by hauke