From what I understand it’s fairly common in engineering, but less of a forget everything you learned and more of a that’s all gonna be pretty much useless in the context of the specific job you’re doing so just pay attention to the training

“Since the definition of a sentence in Standard English is a construction consisting of a subject noun phrase and a predicate verb phrase, by definition, the answer is that you can’t have a verbless sentence, even short ones: Ice melts, Ducks quack, Winter sucks, etc.— a main verb has to be there.”

https://www.evansville.edu/writingcenter/downloads/sentence-parts.pdf

Fragments can still convey a complete thought without being a sentence: eg “Go!”, “Scalpel!”, “So far, so good.”, etc.

https://www.niu.edu/writingtutorial/punctuation/sentence-fragments.shtml

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/mechanics/sentence_fragments.html

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/mistake-of-the-month-sentence-fragments/

The title in question was especially bad as it didn’t make sense due to the omitted verb, but still had the structure of a standard sentence, making it even harder to interpret. I am a native English speaker which is why I remember every grammar lesson from pre-k through college saying that a sentence needs to have both a subject and a verb. Sometimes, the subject is implied, like in an imperative sentence, but that’s the exception, not the rule.

And I’m not trying to be a total stickler abt grammar just for the sake of it, but because it is actively poisoning readability and we shouldn’t be rewarding it whether malicious as another commenter had suggested or just out of laziness. There’s no effect that the writer here is achieving by cutting the words the were cut.

I’ll also add that that wikipedia article uses that ‘Jones Winner’ thing, but it would be much less ambiguous to just say ‘Jones Wins’ and so you shoud pretty much always use the second. If this headline wanted to eliminate unnecessary words to minimize wordcount or something, they could easily have taken out their superfluous adjectives rather than the verb which severely hindered readability.

They don’t often drop the only verb of the sentence, rendering it nonsensical.

And also is this actually a common practice? Like, would it be a normal headline to write:

“The forge workers standing up human rights”

Rather than

“The forge workers standing up for human rights” ??

No, Clearly not, as the former makes no goddamn sense. Similar to the title in question. I don’t get why you’re defending this poor practice tho. It doesn’t even make sense for it to be a non English speaker that wrote it making a translation issue because one of the earliest things you learn in English, French, Spanish, etc is that a sentence needs a verb to function.

No. It’s a sentence fragment. It makes no sense and leaves out the end of the thought

You have a poor understanding of sales tax bud

Ok, yeah, sure, but the title doesn’t even make sense as a sentence.

Wtf is this title?

Those are the hadiths which is kinda like a state law vs a national law where the national law overpowers the state law (except in specific circumstances) or how the us constitution overrides national law. The quran is the only book that’s the word of God, and if you take all the hadiths as truth you open Islam up to all kinds of other critiques. Besides that, the shia/sunni split has a ton of hadith issues where they only treat some as truth and not others. For the record it’s not just Muslims or something. All of the Abrahamic religions are immensely fucked and I’m pretty sure I could make a similar case for most others. Even fucking Buddhism is being used to justify an ethnic cleansing rn.

You have definitely made me reflect on what I said and I shouldn’t have made such a claim when I don’t really know what I’m talking about entirely.

Jsyk in this specific context it’s hanged. Weird right?

Like:

Hanged from the neck until death

I can prove objectively that religion is bad for humanity. Can you do the same about atheism? There’s a huge difference between the two. We respect people, not their beliefs. If someone’s a racist, that’s a belief with just as much evidence (aka none/blind faith) as a religion. Do I have to respect their religions? I do think it’s really sad that these people died, though I view it as an easily preventable occurrence, and mostly the fault of those that partook. (The same way that I viewed the submarine)

That’s not what the term martyr means when we’re referring to Islam tho. They’re usually referring to Jihad which is much more specific. (And problematic)

Also, imagine thinking an American dictionary and en English word mean anything when the only ‘true’ reading of this religion is Arabic

Not in that country they ain’t. At least not about most things.

You really don’t need a degree in literature to become a published author. That’s like getting a degree in media studies so you can become a youtuber. Yeah, you could do it, and it may give you some advantages, but like… You’re already literate, right? Besides that, taking a class or two on literature or creative writing would give you a lot of the skills you need to get you on your way, which you can easily do while pursuing another degree that ensures greater monetary security or (less easily) at a community college while also working.

I’m not saying that the system that begets this thinking is good, but it is the one we live under.

The corvette is the best track car for the price by far, same with certain camaros. And I’m not talking about Nascar tracks, I mean nordschleife times.

Ok then, so people who vote in US elections are inherently evil? - a more analogous example

People who consume bananas are inherently evil?

People that have smartphones are inherently evil?

Those things are all choices. How about another one? Lithium mining is a bad system that negatively impacts the environment. Therefore, people that buy electric cars are evil and bad for the environment, right?!?

I disagree with the second part. That means everybody living in a first world country is inherently a bad person just by accident of their birth location. We’re well past the point of choosing whether or not we participate in most systems, and at the end of the day, somebody needs to do the job of law enforcement.

Some do. Some, like Shaq or Ryan Reynolds (or Kanye) use their money to invest in other companies. Ryan Reynolds coming out and saying Nazi shit would probably be bad for Mint, just like Ye’s controversy was bad for Yeezy, just like Elon’s controversy is bad for Tesla.

There’s a reason we have realism in political science though. Theory isnt the truth of how things play out in real life, especially when it comes to the social sciences. We need descriptions just as much, if not moreso, than prescriptions.

I agree that theory is important tho, so I’ll do my part by linking a free resource: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5GYwuvmAD_VyV6w5aFnnUw

Cause the middle school one is the quadratic formula. You use it to factor 2nd degree polynomials. You don’t solve for a, b, and c, you just plug them in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlK51P0vuc4