What I wrote is grammatically incorrect, there is no full stop. You understood what I meant with no ambiguity despite an incorrect use of grammar. I literally did write that without adhering to grammatical rules and it didn’t impede either of our abilities to communicate.
I think you guys are fighting about different things; you need to have a unified definition of grammar.
One is saying that without some rules on how the words relate to one another we couldn’t convey our meaning.
The other is saying that grammar, I think perhaps “proper grammar” is made up by humans, and so doesn’t have any intrinsic worth compared with something else made up by humans.
Both are correct, the important thing is that whichever grammar we collectively decide on. Intrinsically worthless or not, we need to have some unified definition, codified or not, so that we have the necessary degree of specificity for a given situation to transfer information between parties.
What I wrote is grammatically incorrect, there is no full stop. You understood what I meant with no ambiguity despite an incorrect use of grammar. I literally did write that without adhering to grammatical rules and it didn’t impede either of our abilities to communicate.
Of course it is correct! Let me break it down for you.
Subject: Grammar
Verb: Be -> Is
Adverb: Literally, Just
Pronoun: Some
Adjective: Made-up
Object: Notion
The lack of full stop is indeed an error. But the structure of your sentence is still valid.
Yeah almost like in different contexts different grammar is appropriate exactly like the original comment said you evolutionary col-de-sac
I think you guys are fighting about different things; you need to have a unified definition of grammar.
One is saying that without some rules on how the words relate to one another we couldn’t convey our meaning.
The other is saying that grammar, I think perhaps “proper grammar” is made up by humans, and so doesn’t have any intrinsic worth compared with something else made up by humans.
Both are correct, the important thing is that whichever grammar we collectively decide on. Intrinsically worthless or not, we need to have some unified definition, codified or not, so that we have the necessary degree of specificity for a given situation to transfer information between parties.