Feb 2, 2011 -- 4:43PM, solfeggio wrote:

allthegood -

Well, at some point, of course, somebody is going to tell you that you can't do 'X' whether you like it or not.  We get this when we're in school, from our teachers, and in the military from our superior officers, and even in business from our bosses. 

And, of course, sooner or later, we are going to be getting advice from our doctors about something.  For instance, if our yearly blood test shows that our blood sugar levels are too high, a conscientious GP will tell his patient that, if the person does not want to develop diabetes, s/he should get more exercise and think seriously about a low glycemic diet.

Sooner or later, I would bet that all of us are going to be told by our GPs to do something if we wish to stay healthy.

But, yeah, I get your point here. 

This is where I usually have the can't/shouldn't discussion with people.  The underlying current of which is probably one of the biggest differences in our cultures.  Our teachers, bosses, and doctors aren't really telling us we "can't" do X.  Even if they use the exact word "can't".  What they are really saying is that we "shouldn't" do X.  Now, they may explain the repurcussions of our actions in such a way that we agree with them, or we may put enough weight on their words to do what they think we should do, but none of them really tell us a thing we "can't" do.  That's pretty much a legal thing, and far, far away from silly little internet discussions. 

It just seems that there is always a discussion running, whether it is about abortion, gay marriage, or gun ownership, that I have to say the same thing, "you can't tell someone else what to do or what not to do". 

Feb 2, 2011 -- 4:43PM, solfeggio wrote:

I can't just up and tell somebody with whom I'm having a casual conversation that they shouldn't be eating cow carcasses anymore, because that would seem very odd indeed to that person with whom I'm conversing.  But, in the format of an Internet chat room, like this one, in a discussion specifically tailored to talking about a different lifestyle like veganism, I don't think it inappropriate to offer information that might help a person decide to at least cut down on meat consumption.

 

Does that mean that I can offer my venison recipes, and tell you about the deer that I got this year?

all

allthegood -

I would imagine that there would be at least a few people who would appreciate your sharing your venison recipes.  There is no reason why you shouldn't post recipes if that is your inclination.

I don't post recipes for the simple reason that I'm not much of a cook, and what I do cook is pretty simple stuff.  The only time I use recipes is when I'm baking cookies or cake or muffins or something for our regular morning teas.  And there would be no point in posting them, because everybody already has his/her own favourites in that category. 

As for talking about how you shot a deer - Well, I'd just have to skip that, because it would make me feel too bad. 

And it's not really on topic here.

You bring up the 'must' and 'should' and 'could' model verbs, which is interesting.  If you stop to think about it, there are many instances when you simply 'must' do something.  For example, if you come to a red light, you 'must' stop.  That is, there is nothing actually physically compelling you to stop the car, of course, but knowing that you could be cited and fined by a policeman if you don't seems to be a compelling enough psychological reason. 

If you want to write legible prose, and you want to show possession, for example, you 'must' use an apostrophe in the proper place.  If you don't, then people might not understand what you're trying to say.  Again, nobody is twisting your arm to do it, but if you take pride in your writing and want to communicate clearly, it behooves you to follow the rules of grammar.

And, if you're a soldier in a wartime situation, and your lieutenant tells you to crawl over that ridge and throw a grenade into the Nazi pillbox, then you better do it or be accused of insubordination and possibly be up for a court martial.  In this case, the motivation to follow orders is strong enough that you probably wouldn't even think twice about doing what you're told.

As for 'should' - Well, we all know that we 'should' brush our teeth every night, and lock the doors before we go to bed.  Religious people would feel that they 'should' say their prayers as well.  'Should' is rather ambiguous, though.  The Nazis aren't going to capture you if you don't brush your teeth, and if there is a benevolent god or gods s/he undoutedly will forgive a lapse in prayer-saying now and then.

(Of course, if the god/gods is not benevolent, then you'd better get on your knees right now or suffer the consequences.)

I 'could' go on and on, but you get the point.

Learn more here:

www.englishpage.com/modals/modalintro.ht...

Solf,

That's one link that is getting bookmarked.

Don't worry, I'm not going to tell you about my yearly quota for deer.  I was saying that mostly for effect. 

As far as recipies go, I don't have em with me, but one can pretty much substitute venision for beef, just remember that it is a much leaner meat, so the dish, unless one makes other adjustments, it might be a little dry. 

We really like it for stews, chili, and meatloaf, or really anything that one would use hamburger for. 

It's good for steaks on the grill to, of course, I like em ultra rare.  If a person is a well done person, they'd probably want to stay away from them. 

all