Word's fail me by raistlin


User avatar
raistlin
Paul

Cogito ergo sum... maybe?

Click the image to go to Nano-Meet Website
Image

Posted 15 Mar 2013, 20:02 #1 

User avatar
Duncan
I see what you did their.
Image

Posted 15 Mar 2013, 20:05 #2 

User avatar
Bermudan 75
Obviously going to use the surplus apostrophes to fill the potholes......

Typical petty mindedness twerps.
Image

Posted 15 Mar 2013, 20:28 #3 

User avatar
Borg Warner
The errant apostrophe. Makes me MAD.

It's happening here in Stowmarket. I live in St. Peter's Close, new signs have appeared and it's now St. Peters Close. When I enter my address details anywhere it has the apostrophe, however in replies it is almost always missing. I swear that one day I'll 'phone them up and tell them they've got my address wrong.

Rant rant rant.

Gary M

And it should be OWNERS' Club

Posted 15 Mar 2013, 20:30 #4 


Jumper
Perhap's theirs only one member.

Posted 15 Mar 2013, 23:47 #5 


Jumper
If a lowly pleb may beg to differ and take his life in his hands by contradicting such an august publication as the Grauniad:

Ben Bradshaw’s tweet was not ‘precisely’, or at least not correctly, punctuated as the article stated. Three full stops in a row? One is entirely sufficient, as the inclusion of speech marks around ‘avoid confusion’ (being the relevant and objective clause) gives the emphasis and attribution being sought. Smacks of affectation out of immaturity.

One therefore also wonders if they are aware of the value of capitals:
"Tom helped his uncle jack off his horse".
"Tom helped his Uncle Jack off his horse"'

And (anyone spot that howler?) so to bed.

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 00:13 #6 

User avatar
Zeb
Jumper wrote:If a lowly pleb may beg to differ and take his life in his hands by contradicting such an august publication as the Grauniad:

Ben Bradshaw’s tweet was not ‘precisely’, or at least not correctly, punctuated as the article stated. Three full stops in a row? One is entirely sufficient, as the inclusion of speech marks around ‘avoid confusion’ (being the relevant and objective clause) gives the emphasis and attribution being sought. Smacks of affectation out of immaturity.

One therefore also wonders if they are aware of the value of capitals:
"Tom helped his uncle jack off his horse".
"Tom helped his Uncle Jack off his horse"'

And (anyone spot that howler?) so to bed.



You can sleep with that image in your head?!!! :lol:

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 10:57 #7 


Jumper
To what image do you refer? The grammatical disaster, the equine reference, or the final 'howler'?

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 11:29 #8 

User avatar
Borg Warner
Jumper wrote:If a lowly pleb may beg to differ and take his life in his hands by contradicting such an august publication as the Grauniad:

Ben Bradshaw’s tweet was not ‘precisely’, or at least not correctly, punctuated as the article stated. Three full stops in a row? One is entirely sufficient, as the inclusion of speech marks around ‘avoid confusion’ (being the relevant and objective clause) gives the emphasis and attribution being sought. Smacks of affectation out of immaturity.

One therefore also wonders if they are aware of the value of capitals:
"Tom helped his uncle jack off his horse".
"Tom helped his Uncle Jack off his horse"'

And (anyone spot that howler?) so to bed.


Theirs???

What if Tom's uncle works at a Newmarket stud farm..........

I wish we could return back to the good old days of proper schooling.

Gary M

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 14:06 #9 


Jumper
My apologies - I was referring to your accurate example of an appropriate apostrophe in OWNERS’.

My return was intended light-heartedly, with ‘theirs’ deliberately misspelled - together with the inappropriate apostrophe in ‘Perhap’s’. All of these serving to highlight the scope for misinterpretation of poor grammar! Apparently, successful!

In my defence I thought the omissions and erroneous inclusions were glaring and obviously wrong. I take your point, I’ll try harder in future!

With regard to Uncle Jack: even though he may work on a stud farm, and possibly be bucolic in his language, I doubt he would use such vernacular to his young nephew Tom.

Zeb, when writing that I retained no mental image other than the words on the page!
Frankly, I’m surprised you even considered I might!

And still no objection to the grammatical 'howler'?

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 15:38 #10 

User avatar
Borg Warner
Jumper wrote:My apologies - I was referring to your accurate example of an appropriate apostrophe in OWNERS’.

My return was intended light-heartedly, with ‘theirs’ deliberately misspelled - together with the inappropriate apostrophe in ‘Perhap’s’. All of these serving to highlight the scope for misinterpretation of poor grammar! Apparently, successful!

In my defence I thought the omissions and erroneous inclusions were glaring and obviously wrong. I take your point, I’ll try harder in future!

With regard to Uncle Jack: even though he may work on a stud farm, and possibly be bucolic in his language, I doubt he would use such vernacular to his young nephew Tom.

Zeb, when writing that I retained no mental image other than the words on the page!
Frankly, I’m surprised you even considered I might!

And still no objection to the grammatical 'howler'?


Likewise light-hearted, hence return back.

Grammatical holwer? Please end my misery?

Gary M.

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 16:03 #11 


Jumper
Starting a sentence with the conjunction 'And'. It's a common misconception that it is ungrammatical but, in fact, it is not. I confess I was expecting hoots of derision from all quarters pointing out the lapse, but my trap was cunningly spotted by the erudite members on here! Most encouraging!

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 17:41 #12 

User avatar
Borg Warner
I love the English language.

And with that....

Posted 16 Mar 2013, 20:52 #13 


Top

cron