Alas, as the architect of the grammatical and stylistic misstep (?)
that became the subject of such captious assertions, I feel I am entitled to share my opinion on the subject at hand.
fragment in question may not have won many style points according to FFB’s stringent guidelines (for the record, I was seeking neither a Pulitzer nor Booker award for my reply), it did serve its intended purpose, which was to educate
. As a former ESL instructor, it was my simple intent to construct a possible “real-life” scenario in which this phrase might be heard, and thus understood by the original poster.
This phrase is part of what most would surely consider as “idiomatic” English. It is not part of formal written discourse, nor rhetoric, but simple, spoken word. One can argue whether forums such as these, in and of themselves, are intended to be “colloquial” in nature, and as such, be free from the absolutes of advanced textbook grammar. (*The sound of gasping grammarians echoes throughout the forums!*)
Arguably, the principal reason for this forum in particular is to offer non-native posters an opportunity to better experience the ubiquitous complexities that make up English grammar, both spoken and written.
In fact, when reviewed (again, and again, and again), it can be easily argued that the original offending phrase, as written, was actually a thought process, or inner discourse if you will, in which fragments are most certainly welcome and acceptable.
As to my aptitude in the area of domestic management, which was also called into question, suffice it to say my skills far exceed those of the subject of the offending phrase. However, from a stylistic standpoint, they seemingly fall short of the abilities of other posters whose personal décor consultants have taken to sort their books by color!