About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
I'd be more cautious before attributing this to a dialectal difference. There always seem to be far more strange, non-cohesive and non-covarying "dialects" in the syntactic literature than there are in the dialectological literature!
For a sentence like this, there might be a lot of other processing issues, or other non-linguistic forces at work. To say that it's dialectal variation is to make a specific claim that there is some parameter over which grammars can vary to either generate or not generate the sentence. I don't know if that's the sort of thing that would be expected for the phenomenon this sentence was used for, but I somehow doubt it is.