As above.

"Off of" is a colloquialism, and so is "off" in the context noted. Either would probably be considered non-Standard English.

The "grammatically correct" preposition in this case would be "from"- "You didn't take it from a dead man, did you?"

But then, always using Standard English lacks flavor. In a piece of fiction, I vote for flavor over correctness. Besides, the phrase in question is dialogue, and reflects the way people talk.

/Removes former English teacher hat and goes back to normal manner of speaking./

Fair enough. The link was provided to show you examples. I'll leave you to it.

Actually, initially I wrote "from a dead man" but I thought taken from might indicate the dead man was active in this action. I guess I thought wrong.
Dani, I am looking into the link as we speak. Examples are useful for learning, thanks for the link!
I was surpised to find this to be incorrect: "where did he go to?"

*Nevermind. I'll leave grammar to the buffs.

Lord Dren, I read your reply before you edited it and it appears we felt the same about "from".

No problem - I assumed you were looking for "the correct answer" and missed the "friendly discussion of grammar" bit. (I haven't read through the whole thread.) I personally do not like to engage in grammar "discussions" because some people take their grammar rules very personally. And while I love grammar, and observing how writers use it, I don't love it so much that I want to debate it for hours.

As Treydog appropriate pointed out, dialogue or fiction is different. So: "I dint do nuttin," said the man with the bloody axe in his hand," would be horrible grammar but might actually be correct under the circumstances. My only comment about this is: If, as a writer, you have chosen to break a grammar rule in order to convey flavor, then I, as a reader, should be able to tell by context. If I cannot and if in reading your writing it just jumps out as an error, then maybe you've failed.

Yes: "Where did he go to?" would be wrong. Never end a sentence with a proposition (it's a peeve of mine, sorry). Well, except for the dialogue/fiction/flavor exception identified by Treydog.

At the risk of putting another link on this thread, one of the very best grammar teaching tools is http://www.dailygrammar.com/archive.shtml. The lessons are simple, easy and you can learn a lot in the time it takes you drink a cup of coffee. In fact, if you spent fifteen minutes a day, you would work through the lessons in about two months.

Of course, that might put an end to friendly grammar discussions.

I've always applied creative license to most grammar rules. If something works better, or sounds better, then I ignore the rules to put it in. It's probably because the grammar rules in English annoy me, but I encourage others to do it. There are times when things just won't work if you don't apply your own common sense, and sometimes that hasn't been covered in your English lessons.

Hmm, that sounds interesting, Gallow. May you give us an example?

And is a good example. You should not start a sentence with And, but sometimes it just sounds better. It also allows you to limit your commas.

True that, actually. Also, isn't it true that even though you shouldn't start a sentence with 'because', sometimes it does sound better to do so? I may be wrong, however.

Because can be difficult. I guess it depends on how you're using it. "You shouldn't jump off that cliff, because that would be stupid." Or, "You shouldn't jump off that cliff. Because that's stupid."

I dunno.

I see what you mean. However, would it be plausible to use a dash (--) before the 'because'? I personally do not like the use of a comma in that sentence.

I've always used dashes for asides.

"You shouldn't jump off that cliff --Because that would be stupid-- and you shouldn't do it."

Yeah, me, too. Sometimes I do use brackets or a comma, though, depending on the sentence. Also, I often use a dash instead of saying 'because', simply because it sounds better and flows nicer.

Example: "I'm definitely going to kill that guy - he killed my family, after all." I think that sounds better than: "I'm definitely going to kill that guy 'because' he killed my family, after all.''

Okay, bad example... but I hope you get what I mean.

True, because looks weird in that. But you wouldn't even need to have it there. "I'm definitely going to kill that guy, he did kill my family, after all."

Granted, that uses TWO (ZOMG!) commas, but it would be still look better than adding a because. A dash would still look better in that case, though.

Agreed. I've always been a little obsessed about punctuation and getting it right. However, I still feel as if I struggle. Sometimes I don't know whether to put a semi-colon or a comma, for example.

Or you could just write:

"Jumping off a cliff is stupid."

And be done with it.

Here, we run into an issue I don't point out in my comments, because it is such a technical one... However, I always did mark it on student papers, because it is one of the "7 Deadly Grammar Sins." The example is a comma splice:



That is two independent clauses joined by a comma. There are 2 fixes- (1.) Use a coordinating conjunction with the comma, (2.) Use a semicolon.

I see a great many comma splices in the fan-fiction section, even among some of the best writers. How to tell if it is a splice:

Is each element (on either side of the comma) a complete sentence? If yes, you need a coordinating conjunction and comma OR a semicolon.

Example:

"My goal was clear, the broccoli must die!" WRONG

"My goal was clear; the broccoli must die!" CORRECT

There is not a really good way to use a coordinating conjunction in that example, so here is another:

"I went to the store, the dog stayed home." WRONG

"I went to the store, and the dog stayed home." CORRECT

As to dashes, I overuse them, without any real reference to the rules for correct usage. (Even though I have 3 or 4 style manuals and grammar handbooks near to hand.)

Very, very interesting and helpful, T-dog. Thank you.

Out of interest, is it okay to put dashes where there could a semi-colon, like in the example you just used?

Yay for semi-colons!

Also in some stories I see sentences with seven commas sometimes. That could be a little out of hand. They'll start breeding faster than we can contain them, and there will be commas everywhere!

That is actually another fix - however, it is recommended that the writer use a conjunctive adverb with the dash comma construction.

Are you sure about that? What is the purpose of the comma in that sentence? The same as "and", right? In Dutch "and" can never EVER follow a comma, I'm pretty sure it's the same English because "and" has the same function as its Dutch equivalent.
If I'd follow the rules I was taught it would be:
I went to the store. The dog stayed home.

I went to the store and the dog stayed home.
I am not so sure about the last one. "And" should add information about you going to the store so the dog is irrelevant.
Wouldn't the correct way be: I went to the store but the dog stayed home.??

For English grammar (or punctuation), the "comma + coordinating conjunction" construction is considered necessary for separating independent clauses. This is different from the "optional" comma for elements in a series.

Coordinating conjunctions- for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so

In the example given, you could certainly switch conjunctions.

However, the correct construction would still be:

"I went to the store, but the dog stayed home."

Elements in a series:

"The hamster ate two eggs, five biscuits, and a watermelon."

OR

"The hamster ate two eggs, five biscuits and a watermelon."

Either of those is considered correct- sometime around 1970(?) the MLA decided that the final comma could be dropped.

English grammar and punctuation is weird

It is the weirdest, just like the math.