grammar_nitpick flux which is better: "i still do want something" or "i do still want something"? 040825 ... shower singer 'i do still' but what would i know? 040826 ... flux google gives 45600 for "i do still" and 178000 for "i still do". (and 1100 for both). but what does that prove? 040826 ... DaVis Although purists can state rules to avoid certain constructions, the rules don't really apply if it would change the meaning of the sentence. In this case, it depends upon which emphasis you want. (And a Google search won't help, since both meanings are out there and we don't know which you want.) "I DO still want something." This word order is simply emphasizing the fact that you DO want something, still. It focuses the attention on the yes/no of desire. "I STILL do want something." This order is emphasizing that your wanting something hasn't ceased because of it being later--it focuses on the time aspect of the statement (perhaps in response to someone wondering if your desires have changed). Note also that you could just simply say, "I still want something." This would not provide a stress of the DO or STILL. It's interesting that many people don't realize that they are saying completely different things when they change the word order, often miscommunicating --at the same time they wonder why grammar can be important. Most teachers don't do a good job explaining why "Sabina likes ice cream more than I" is totally different from "Sabina likes ice cream more than me." The first deals with how BOTH you and Sabina feel about ice cream, whereas the second one is indicating that Sabina would rather be licking a cold cone than licking you. 040826 ... flux exactly the sort of answer i wanted. 040831 ... shower singer It is quite simple to emphasise contrary to order: "I do STILL want..." "I still DO want..." emphasis contained in tone of voice rather than word order 040831 ... user24 do you know, I've really no idea. it's a copout, but I think they're both acceptable. initially I agreed with DaVis, but having read shower singer's reply, I agree with that, too. Sorry to be of no help. 040901 ... picasso grammatically you shouldn't split the infinitive from the auxiliary verb, so it should be "i still do want something", do being the auxiliary, want being the infinitive. but that is very nit-picky. 050127 ... flux that is not an infinitive, i don't think.. 060604 ... picasso yeah you're right, i realised that after. so i looked it up on wikipedia, and it said this: On a historical level, it is possible that years of attacks against split infinitives by prescriptive grammarians have cowed some people into needless reluctance to split other compound verb forms. For example, people will contort sentences to avoid placing an adverb in its usual position between the auxiliary verb and the participle, leading to constructions such as, "The argument originally had been used..." instead of "The argument had originally been used", which is more natural for most speakers. so there's no reason not to split the participle from the auxiliary verb. in other words, either is fine... 060605 ... picasso having said that, if you are going to use periphrastic conjugation (ie putting the auxiliary "do" into a positive statement, when you don't need to), you're aiming at one of two effects: 1. making it sound archaic, which you're not aiming for here. 2. stressing the fact that what you're saying is a positive statement. if you wanted to stress the fact you still want to do it, it'd be simple enough to just say "i still want something." so to most comfortably stress the "do", i'd say "i do still want something". it is of course very possible to stress the word still in that sentence, but because we naturally unstress the word "i" at the beginning of a sentence, it's natural to stress the word that comes after it, because english has an alternating stress pattern (think iambic pentameter). 060605 ... flux i have long ago forgotten the original context. but these answers have served to amuse me. oh well. 060605 ... AfPRicochet MVP over my college years, i've become more and more of a grammer nazi and it's all thanks to my best friend. he's definately made college one of the best experiences of my life. thanks chad 060606 ... unhinged unnecessary apostrophes drive me crazy i.e. there's a sign i walk by sometimes outside an apartment building that says 'studio's for rent' 060607 ... forgive me Im bitter That's grammar and definitely to you. sigh. 060607 ... nr every day = daily. "she goes to work daily." everyday = ordinary, or the adjective for daily. "an everyday long-sleeved t-shirt" or "everyday chores." 220102 ... oops that should say "she goes to work every day." 220102 ... nr lay vs. lie: lay requires a direct object. present tense: i lay the book onto the table. i lay the blanket on the bed. past tense: i laid the book onto the table. i laid the blanket on the bed. lie does not. present tense: i lie on the beach. i lie in bed. past tense: i lay on the beach. i lay in bed. 220102 ... nr on possessives: singular possessive: i'm going to my friend sarah's house. i'm going to my friend jess's (or jess', depending on what style you're using) house. plural possessive: i'm going to my friends jess and sarah's house. (i guess they're roommates?) i'm going to my friends' house. 220102 ... nr none of this is directed at anyone here; i just have a brain that likes thinking about this stuff. and i'm not being paid to do it at the moment, so... volunteer work it is. 220102 ... nr on plurals: if someones last name ends in s (Adams, Jones) an "es" is added to pluralize it. "i'm going to visit the Adamses and Joneses (as in 'keeping up with')." and to make them plural possessive: the Adamses' house, the Joneses' house. 220102 ... raze as someone who used to mistakenly write "everyday" in place of "every day" (it's happened here) and has always had a difficult time with the lie/lay situation, i'm genuinely thankful for this. a helpful resource for those times when my brain isn't sure what to do! yes! 220102 ... nr glad it helps! everyone has their grammar achilles heels (that phrased pluralized reads funny, like greek mythology-decorated high heels). mine is the who/whom distinction. sometimes it's obvious, and sometimes i just go with what sounds right. 220102 ... typo_nitpick phrase, not phrased. 220102 ... nr the past tense of "lead" is "led." i am about to lead a team meeting. i just led a team meeting. 220223 ... nr the correct phrase is "all of a sudden" 220223 what's it to you? who go blather from