Question on English Language to British Members

English has too many rules that exist simply because they exist.For instance, it's technically incorrect to start a sentence with the word "because," even though any clause that you could legitimately begin with the word "because" is grammatically and syntactically acceptable at the beginning of a sentence. I get grief about this all the time from my British advisor, and I keep doing it anyway (on purpose), because the rule frankly pisses me off.There's no reason for that rule to exist, other than that it was, at some point in the past, acknowledged to exist.Another one is the usage of the words "but" and "however." Their meanings are identical, but "but" is used to transition between two clauses (i.e. placed in the middle of the sentence), and "however" is used to transition between two sentences or paragraphs.Is that distinction really necessary?Languages should include as few underived rules as possible. Obviously, it would be unfeasible to go back and change the spelling of all words to be more intuitive, but it would not be hard to simply omit the one paragraph about using the word "because" at the beginning of sentences from the English rule book. Anything that easy to reverse is not worth maintaining, in my opinion.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi, Modulous. Maybe to a fourth-grader; but, to a college student? (<---2 clauses)----- Is that the real reason?A former MS student who had done her BS in English explained it to me as a holdover from Latin grammar (which, by the way, I figured for crap, since I actually have some training in Latin). It bothers me that she could have gotten a college degree without knowing that (it simultaneously makes me feel better for not knowing that myself: thanks, Modulous).Edited by Bluejay, : No reason given.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi, Caffeine. That's true, isn't it?It's not like we elected or appointed a government official in charge of grammar! English professors are just vigilantes.Still, as long as my science papers and grant proposals require me to use conventional grammar, I think the correct approach is still to demand an explanation for the rules I have to follow.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi, Chimp. Go spend a day in southern Missouri sometime. I was born in them hills.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi, Chimp. That's from a specific quote: "There's gold in them thar hills!" It was talking about the California Gold Rush of 1849. I think it comes from Mark Twain.Honestly, in all my visits to southern Missouri, I don't remember having heard "them there" used together like that, but it has been awhile since I've been back, and Catholic Scientist is currently there, so maybe he knows something I don't.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Since this thread has died down a little, I'm usurping it to discuss common language misuses. Today, I'm featuring Latin abbreviations, which are flagrantly abused by many people. i.e.This is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase "id est," which means, "that is." It is used to clarify a previous statement, just as the English phrase, "that is," is used. e.g.This is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase, "exemplus gratus" (singular) or "exempli grati" (plural). It means, literally, "a good example" or "good examples." It's used in place of the English phrase, "for example."Some people cannot keep "i.e." and "e.g." straight. My advice to such people is for them to just use English, even though it takes more keystrokes. cf.Not many people know or use this one, but I find it handy sometimes. It's an abbreviation for the Latin word "confer," which means, "compare." It means the writer is comparing something just written to something else, often something that may be more familiar to the reader, or to an external source that makes a statement or argument comparable to the present writer's. Q.E.D.Latin for "quod erat demonstrandum," meaning "which was to be demonstrated." This is written at the end of a logical argument, to emphasize that the argument has demonstrated the point that the writer intended to get across. Basically, it's a pedantic way of saying, "the end."

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.