Skweeky, you know these guys....
Why use a word with 1 syllable when you can find one with 5 or 6, its mere ostentaion to impress each other ;)
Printable View
Skweeky, you know these guys....
Why use a word with 1 syllable when you can find one with 5 or 6, its mere ostentaion to impress each other ;)
hehe, I was only kidding sweetyQuote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@17 October 2003 - 00:46
Skweeky, you know these guys....
Why use a word with 1 syllable when you can find one with 5 or 6, its mere ostentaion to impress each other ;)
I know how much JPaul likes to show off his knowledge of the English language
(and if there is a mistake in that sentence, please correct it, otherwise I'll look REALLY stupid :lol: )
Meretriciousness you feel old bean.Quote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@17 October 2003 - 00:46
Skweeky, you know these guys....
Why use a word with 1 syllable when you can find one with 5 or 6, its mere ostentaion to impress each other ;)
That word isn't even in my dictionary! :oQuote:
Originally posted by JPaul@17 October 2003 - 00:49
Meretriciousness you feel old bean.
WE WANT MORE WE WANT MORE
JPaul,
This has NOTHING to do with belief in God. It has to do with the word "if" which begins the line. The "if" indicates a conditional statement, requiring the subjunctive mood. See prior post for details.
Had you been the poster, you would used the indicative mood, dropping the "if" and stating:
"God, give me this computer."
A common misuse not involving God: "If I was king" should be, "If I were King".
You should know better than to fancy my response a cheap shot at religion, although there is a precedent set around here that would make one wary of such tactics.
hehe, I was only kidding sweetyQuote:
Originally posted by Skweeky+17 October 2003 - 00:48--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Skweeky @ 17 October 2003 - 00:48)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@17 October 2003 - 00:46
Skweeky, you know these guys....
Why use a word with 1 syllable when you can find one with 5 or 6, its mere ostentaion to impress each other ;)
I know how much JPaul likes to show off his knowledge of the English language
(and if there is a mistake in that sentence, please correct it, otherwise I'll look REALLY stupid :lol: ) [/b][/quote]
My knowledge of the language is sadly lacking.
I am all too well aware of this and constantly strive to improve it. Hence my reference to the chaps here for advice and guidance, which is always very much appreciated.
We are always learning. Grow or die, its an immutable law of nature.
That word isn't even in my dictionary! :oQuote:
Originally posted by Skweeky+16 October 2003 - 23:50--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Skweeky @ 16 October 2003 - 23:50)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JPaul@17 October 2003 - 00:49
Meretriciousness you feel old bean.
WE WANT MORE WE WANT MORE [/b][/quote]
Get another dictionary then. It is in mine. Websters World Three Volume. I always have it handy JP. :rolleyes:
RF,Quote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@16 October 2003 - 16:46
Skweeky, you know these guys....
Why use a word with 1 syllable when you can find one with 5 or 6, its mere ostentaion to impress each other ;)
Being comfortable with the warp and woof of the English language is hardly ostentation.
Writing well is an art, an art whose value is being degraded daily on the internet.
Some of us merely wish to do our part to hold back the tide....
CU L8R M8.
LOLQuote:
Originally posted by hobbes@17 October 2003 - 00:52
JPaul,
This has NOTHING to do with belief in God. It has to do with the word "if" which begins the line. The "if" indicates a conditional statement, requiring the subjunctive mood. See prior post for details.
Had you been the poster, you would used the indicative mood, dropping the "if" and stating:
"God, give me this computer."
A common misuse not involving God: "If I was king" should be, "If I were King".
You should know better than to fancy my response a cheap shot at religion, although there is a precedent set around here that would make one wary of such tactics.
And you spotted the reference. "You never disappoint".
Top Man
However I am sure you will agree that the language is living and growing. If we accept new words we must also accept new grammar, syntax etc.
For example it would appear that to split an infinitive is no longer the mortal sin it once were.
Yes, I know what you mean.Quote:
Originally posted by JPaul@17 October 2003 - 00:53
My knowledge of the language is sadly lacking.
I am all too well aware of this and constantly strive to improve it. Hence my reference to the chaps here for advice and guidance, which is always very much appreciated.
We are always learning. Grow or die, its an immutable law of nature.
It was the main reason I decided to study English. When talking on the internet one often gets the false impression English is an easy language, just because of all the 'Engrish' that is being spoken/typed. Recently I discovered I still make a lot of mistakes in grammar and that my vocabulary is terribly limited. <_<
So....here I am now, every evening, trying to study that damn phonetic alphabet by heart and trying to see the differences between phenomes and allophones :lol: :lol:
RF,Quote:
Originally posted by clocker+17 October 2003 - 00:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 17 October 2003 - 00:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@16 October 2003 - 16:46
Skweeky, you know these guys....
Why use a word with 1 syllable when you can find one with 5 or 6, its mere ostentaion to impress each other ;)
Being comfortable with the warp and woof of the English language is hardly ostentation.
Writing well is an art, an art whose value is being degraded daily on the internet.
Some of us merely wish to do our part to hold back the tide....
CU L8R M8. [/b][/quote]
I agree Canute
I thought all phones were allo phones. :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
that joke is just soooooo lame
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I love it
Yes, I know what you mean.Quote:
Originally posted by Skweeky+17 October 2003 - 01:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Skweeky @ 17 October 2003 - 01:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JPaul@17 October 2003 - 00:53
My knowledge of the language is sadly lacking.
I am all too well aware of this and constantly strive to improve it. Hence my reference to the chaps here for advice and guidance, which is always very much appreciated.
We are always learning. Grow or die, its an immutable law of nature.
It was the main reason I decided to study English. When talking on the internet one often gets the false impression English is an easy language, just because of all the 'Engrish' that is being spoken/typed. Recently I discovered I still make a lot of mistakes in grammar and that my vocabulary is terribly limited. <_<
So....here I am now, every evening, trying to study that damn phonetic alphabet by heart and trying to see the differences between phenomes and allophones :lol: :lol: [/b][/quote]
Phenomes, is that the things that make you attractive to the opposite sex.
Though I have to be honest, I happily use the word meretricious in conversation. Whether it is in your dictionary or not.
Perhaps your phenomes are not working on me, tho' I find that hard to believe.
And just how long have you been sitting on that one, waiting to slip it, fartlike, into a conversation?Quote:
Originally posted by bigboab@16 October 2003 - 17:03
I thought all phones were allo phones. :lol: :lol: :lol:
:blink:
erm no...A phoneme is the smallest unit of a language which can bring about a difference in meaning by entering into opposition with at least one sound unit.
e.g.: cat bat c/b are phonemes
allophones are just the different ways to pronounce one sound unit
e.g.: stop top pot the 't' is pronounced differently three times, they are all allophones from /t/
Does that make any sense at all ?:blink:
PS: can someone please tell me what metricious means?
Sorry, I would love to, but I have no idea.
I am just a 76 year old Luddite after all.
<_< You know very well I can't go to bed before I know what it means. If I fall asleep during class tomorrow morning it'll be your faultQuote:
Originally posted by JPaul@17 October 2003 - 01:15
Sorry, I would love to, but I have no idea.
I am just a 76 year old Luddite after all.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
hehehe
*blush*
maybe you can tell me what 'meREtricious' means?
1 : of or relating to a prostitute : having the nature of prostitution <meretricious relationship>Quote:
Originally posted by Skweeky@16 October 2003 - 17:10
PS: can someone please tell me what metricious means?
2 a : tawdrily and falsely attractive <the paradise they found was a piece of meretricious trash -- Carolyn See> b : superficially significant : PRETENTIOUS <scholarly names to provide fig-leaves of respectability for meretricious but stylish books -- Times Literary Supplement>
1 : of or relating to a prostitute : having the nature of prostitution <meretricious relationship>Quote:
Originally posted by clocker+17 October 2003 - 01:17--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 17 October 2003 - 01:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Skweeky@16 October 2003 - 17:10
PS: can someone please tell me what metricious means?
2 a : tawdrily and falsely attractive <the paradise they found was a piece of meretricious trash -- Carolyn See> b : superficially significant : PRETENTIOUS <scholarly names to provide fig-leaves of respectability for meretricious but stylish books -- Times Literary Supplement>
[/b][/quote]
yes, I found that too, but I still don't understand fully....does it just mean something looks nice but isn't?
I believe that in the context of JPaul's post, the definition "pretentious" would be the most apt.
If I were to say "flash for the sake of it" would you sleep easy.
Or perhaps, gratuitous may describe it better.
Thats all you would be doing over here at this time of night JP. :DQuote:
Originally posted by JPaul@17 October 2003 - 00:32
If I were to say "flash for the sake of it" would you sleep easy.
Or perhaps, gratuitous may describe it better.
Thats all you would be doing over here at this time of night JP. :D [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by bigboab+17 October 2003 - 01:35--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bigboab @ 17 October 2003 - 01:35)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JPaul@17 October 2003 - 00:32
If I were to say "flash for the sake of it" would you sleep easy.
Or perhaps, gratuitous may describe it better.
LOL
Hands up to that. As ever you are on the ball sir.
My apple and I may have to leave you chaps to your own devices.
Live long in Possil.
I guess that is about as close as I will come to getting you to fully admit that I was "spot on". If only such a thing WERE possible. :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by JPaul@17 October 2003 - 01:00
LOL
And you spotted the reference. "You never disappoint".
Top Man
However I am sure you will agree that the language is living and growing. If we accept new words we must also accept new grammar, syntax etc.
For example it would appear that to split an infinitive is no longer the mortal sin it once were.
If general ignorance of grammar already set in place for such a conditional circumstance is considered growth, I would hate to see this living language hit puberty.
edit: added the letter "f" to meretriciousf to appease Clocker
Would you like to buy a "F" hobbes?Quote:
Originally posted by hobbes@16 October 2003 - 18:03
I general ignorance of grammar already set in place for such a conditional circumstance is considered growth, I would hate to see this living language hit puberty.
Yeah, he'll give it to you alright. But who'd you download from, a slow DSL user?Quote: