Law School Discussion

question for grammarians...

absy

  • ****
  • 3823
    • View Profile
Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #10 on: September 14, 2004, 08:12:29 PM »
I just love how lexy was the first to rush to the "question for grammarians"   :)

TDPookie1

  • *****
  • 7929
  • the sugar cane is back!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - PookieEsq2B
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #11 on: September 14, 2004, 08:17:08 PM »
If we were all gathered in an actual room, Lexy would totally push people out of the way to rush to the person saying "Can I ask a grammar question?"

lexylit

Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #12 on: September 14, 2004, 08:25:46 PM »
hahahahaha that is SO NOT TRUE  >:( :D

you know i defer to pookie! and EnglishToLaw too.

Vic

Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #13 on: September 14, 2004, 08:26:40 PM »
Franz,

If you're referring to characteristics, say:  those or the.  And not, "you."

And Lexy, I commend you on commemorating someone who doesn't even know basic pronoun or determiner usage.

I am only being honest and feel remorseful to those whom perceive my preceeding post as arrogance.

foxnewssucks

Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #14 on: September 14, 2004, 08:28:07 PM »
Franz,

If you're referring to characteristics, say:  those or the.  And not, "you."

And Lexy, I commend you on commemorating someone who doesn't even know basic pronoun or determiner usage.

I am only being honest and feel remorseful to those whom perceive my preceeding post as arrogance.


You was in reference to you!

lexylit

Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #15 on: September 14, 2004, 08:29:47 PM »
vic, are you baiting us on purpose or do you honestly write at a 3rd grade level?

so far words vic doesnt know how to use include rhetoric, commemorate, pronoun, and whom

Vic

Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #16 on: September 14, 2004, 08:34:07 PM »
I write one grade level above you.

vic, are you baiting us on purpose or do you honestly write at a 3rd grade level?

so far words vic doesnt know how to use include rhetoric, commemorate, pronoun, and whom


TDPookie1

  • *****
  • 7929
  • the sugar cane is back!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - PookieEsq2B
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #17 on: September 14, 2004, 08:47:22 PM »
hahahahaha that is SO NOT TRUE  >:( :D

you know i defer to pookie! and EnglishToLaw too.

Thank you!   ;D  Your grammar is probably superior to mine.  I didn't learn details of English grammar.  I learned anal stuff like subjunctives by taking foreign language classes at advanced levels, particularly Latin.

Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2004, 10:57:30 AM »
"And Lexy, I commend you on commemorating someone who doesn't even know basic pronoun or determiner usage."

I am only being honest and feel remorseful to those whom perceive my preceeding post as arrogance.

Hey, @#!*. I asked because, as Lexy confirmed, it IS NOT a black and white issue. In some instances, it's acceptable. In others it's not. It's not like I was asking if "ain't" is appropriate for formal writing. By the way, I got an 800 Verbal, female dog. I don't need to be lectured by some anal prick. Because you seem to be such an expert, you should know that your use of "commemorating" was awkward, at best. (That initial "because" was for emphasis).
Cheers!

TDPookie1

  • *****
  • 7929
  • the sugar cane is back!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - PookieEsq2B
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: question for grammarians...
« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2004, 11:00:25 AM »
I like the use of "because" to start that sentence; very nice touch.  :)