Talk:Suzumiya Haruhi:Volume1 Chapter5 - Revision history

Da~Mike at 18:00, 4 September 2006

2006-09-04T18:00:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:00, 4 September 2006
Line 137:		Line 137:

	The previous discussions have been moved to the forum. Please click on the following links to view them.		The previous discussions have been moved to the forum. Please click on the following links to view them.


			*'''[http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=251 "Consortium" -> ?]'''


Line 146:		Line 149:

	*'''[http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=252 The ecchi moment with Nagato Yuk]'''		*'''[http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=252 The ecchi moment with Nagato Yuk]'''


	*'''[http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=251 "Consortium" -> ?]'''

Da~Mike at 21:02, 8 August 2006

2006-08-08T21:02:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:02, 8 August 2006
Line 152:		Line 152:

	== English Grammar Corrections ==		== English Grammar Corrections ==


			This contribution has been moved to forum. Please click on the following link to view it: '''[http://www.baka-tsuki.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=249 Grammar Corrections]'''

Da~Mike: ch 5 discusssion overhaul

2006-08-08T20:58:24Z

ch 5 discusssion overhaul

Show changes

Nandeyanen: /* English Grammar Corrections */

2006-07-20T13:42:03Z

English Grammar Corrections

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:42, 20 July 2006
Line 578:		Line 578:

	-This should be "and even I" because the pronoun is used before an action verb ("joining") with "having" as a linking verb indicating that the pronoun used should be in the nominative case.		-This should be "and even I" because the pronoun is used before an action verb ("joining") with "having" as a linking verb indicating that the pronoun used should be in the nominative case.

			-I disagree. To make the mistake easily distinguishable, simplify the sentence to "...this resulted in Suzumiya-san having I [join] her club." This is most obviously incorrect. Compare that to: "...this resulted in Suzumiya having me [join] her club." and it is very simple to see which is the correct sentence. I can't explain the grammar very well, but I suppose I'll give it a try (and possibly fail miserably). First off, linking verbs identify or describe the subject, so "having" is not acting as a linking verb. The subject of the sentence is not the speaker (I), which is what you seem to believe it to be, but Suzumiya-san. Thus it is necessary to use objective case, changing "I" to "me". Mikuru, Yuki, and Koizumi are all direct objects of the transative verb "have", and "joining" is a transative verb with the direct object being "her club". --[[User:Nandeyanen\|Nandeyanen]] 06:42, 20 July 2006 (PDT)

	'''"Man! For someone who's just turned 15, having to face a turning point in his life is just a bit too early!"'''		'''"Man! For someone who's just turned 15, having to face a turning point in his life is just a bit too early!"'''

138.217.43.34: /* English Grammar Corrections */

2006-07-20T11:23:43Z

English Grammar Corrections

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:23, 20 July 2006
Line 581:		Line 581:
	'''"Man! For someone who's just turned 15, having to face a turning point in his life is just a bit too early!"'''		'''"Man! For someone who's just turned 15, having to face a turning point in his life is just a bit too early!"'''
	-who's should be who		-who's should be who

			-who's stands for "who has" so it sounds fine: "For someone who has just turned 15"

59.146.189.185: /* Haruhi, whom I'd parted with */ corrected original Japanese word : "matsu" => "mashi"

2006-06-13T18:46:45Z

Haruhi, whom I'd parted with: corrected original Japanese word : "matsu" => "mashi"

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:46, 13 June 2006
Line 181:		Line 181:

	===Haruhi, whom I'd parted with ===		===Haruhi, whom I'd parted with ===
	ハルヒは二日前に駅前で別れたときまったく変化のない仏頂面で唇を突き出していた。最近マツな顏になったと思っていたのに、また元に戻っちまった。		ハルヒは二日前に駅前で別れたときまったく変化のない仏頂面で唇を突き出していた。最近マシな顏になったと思っていたのに、また元に戻っちまった。

	×Haruhi, whom I'd parted with in front of the station, two days previously, twisted her face into a sour look, pouting. Lately, she'd been making this face a lot, and I was still waiting for it to turn back.		×Haruhi, whom I'd parted with in front of the station, two days previously, twisted her face into a sour look, pouting. Lately, she'd been making this face a lot, and I was still waiting for it to turn back.

74.237.113.192: English Grammar Corrections

2006-06-12T18:01:07Z

English Grammar Corrections

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:01, 12 June 2006
Line 572:		Line 572:

	-Seigfreid		-Seigfreid

			== English Grammar Corrections ==

			'''"As you well know, this resulted in Suzumiya-san having Asahina Mikuru, Nagato Yuki and even me joining her club."'''

			-This should be "and even I" because the pronoun is used before an action verb ("joining") with "having" as a linking verb indicating that the pronoun used should be in the nominative case.

			'''"Man! For someone who's just turned 15, having to face a turning point in his life is just a bit too early!"'''
			-who's should be who

24.62.196.83: /* Syntax Error in Sql Statement XD */

2006-06-08T06:55:17Z

Syntax Error in Sql Statement XD

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:55, 8 June 2006
Line 570:		Line 570:

	That's an appropriate use of HAVING because it's running a compairison on the aggregate function sum(y). Only in situations such as this one is HAVING a valid statement. In any other situations, the comparision would be contained in the WHERE portion of the statement.		That's an appropriate use of HAVING because it's running a compairison on the aggregate function sum(y). Only in situations such as this one is HAVING a valid statement. In any other situations, the comparision would be contained in the WHERE portion of the statement.
	--Seigfreid
			-Seigfreid

24.62.196.83: /* Syntax Error in Sql Statement XD */

2006-06-08T06:51:34Z

Syntax Error in Sql Statement XD

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:51, 8 June 2006
Line 570:		Line 570:

	That's an appropriate use of HAVING because it's running a compairison on the aggregate function sum(y). Only in situations such as this one is HAVING a valid statement. In any other situations, the comparision would be contained in the WHERE portion of the statement.		That's an appropriate use of HAVING because it's running a compairison on the aggregate function sum(y). Only in situations such as this one is HAVING a valid statement. In any other situations, the comparision would be contained in the WHERE portion of the statement.
			--Seigfreid

24.62.196.83: /* Syntax Error in Sql Statement XD */

2006-06-08T06:49:51Z

Syntax Error in Sql Statement XD

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:49, 8 June 2006
Line 558:		Line 558:


	I'd just ~~liek~~ to comment that HAVING is used incorrectly, however not as was previously stated. HAVING does not need to be used in conjunction with a GROUP BY statement. ~~However,~~ HAVING is only used when doing boolean compairisons on an aggregate function returned by the select. In most cases this means that the GROUP BY statement is there, because if you select anything aside from the aggregate function, the GROUP BY is required to make it work. If you were only selecting the aggregate function however, then there would be no GROUP BY, and the HAVING caluse would be valid. Albeit stupid ~~because~~ you're only getting 1 number returned by the ~~aggregate function~~, and running a ~~single~~ check on 1 number would be useless.		I'd just like to comment that HAVING is used incorrectly, however not as was previously stated. HAVING does not need to be used in conjunction with a GROUP BY statement. HAVING is only used when doing boolean compairisons on an aggregate function returned by the select. In most cases this means that the GROUP BY statement is there because if you select anything aside from the aggregate function, the GROUP BY is required to make it work. If you were only selecting the aggregate function however, then there would be no GROUP BY, and the HAVING caluse would be valid (Albeit stupid since you're only getting 1 number returned by the select, and running a HAVING boolean check on 1 number would be useless).

	Anyways, the HAVING clause is incorrect because the only time you use HAVING is when running a boolean compairison on an aggregate function. It's a WHERE statement for aggregate functions.		Anyways, the HAVING clause is incorrect because the only time you use HAVING is when running a boolean compairison on an aggregate function. It's a WHERE statement for aggregate functions.
Line 569:		Line 569:
	HAVING total > 5		HAVING total > 5

	That's an appropriate use of HAVING because it's running a compairison on the aggregate function sum(y). Only in situations such as this one is HAVING a valid statement.		That's an appropriate use of HAVING because it's running a compairison on the aggregate function sum(y). Only in situations such as this one is HAVING a valid statement. In any other situations, the comparision would be contained in the WHERE portion of the statement.