[- - e r i k - -]

[mattyb]

My god, even when he's weeping its threesome-like.

/cowers in respect

[IceEnclosure]

suposably most people don't even know they're saying it wrong

[mattyb]

/puts flame proof coat on

He's in Australia, what do you expect?

/leaves rapidly

But when did supposably become a word?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by IceEnclosure 

suposably most people don't even know they're saying it wrong

Did they go to the zoo? Supposably.

[IceEnclosure]

What does the zoo have to do with supposables? I read it over and over and I feel dumb.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Did they go to the zoo? Supposably.

expeshally on Sunday when it's a little cooler.

[Sherman Homan]

For all intensive purposes and irregardless of a writers' grammer, it's the meaning of there content thats important.

[rickey939]

If I could, I would, and should.

[Dork.]

From the title, I thought this thread was going to be about the Mets....

[design219]

Originally Posted by Sherman Homan 

irregardless

I love the hated word.

But I'd never use it.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by IceEnclosure 

What does the zoo have to do with supposables? I read it over and over and I feel dumb.

Sorry, it's from an episode of Friends. I figured everybody would have seen that episode by now considering it's rerun like every two hours. One of the characters is convinced that he dumped the woman of his dreams because she said "supposably," and another character in the background is trying sentences with "supposably" trying to figure out how she used it wrong.

[turtle777]

This is effing ridiculous.

I never understood that people don't THINK about what they write. Don't they realize that they have never seen this written in any reputable books, newspapers or magazines.

-t

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by IceEnclosure 

suposably most people don't even know they're saying it wrong

You misspelt ‘their’.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

You misspelt ‘their’.

Huh ?

-t

[Mastrap]

Whooooosh

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Over half a second? What an outrage.

[Eug]

They should just change it to:

coulda
shoulda
woulda

Or maybe

couda
shouda
wouda

P.S. I like cheese.

[Oisín]

Kuda, shuda, wuda. They’re, English language fixed.

I absolutely adore that little red, round cheese on the left in the foreground of Eug’s picture, though I can’t remember what it’s called. Not sure how the cheese made its way into the thread, though. ‘Couda’ -> Gouda, perhaps?

[IceEnclosure]

Gouda rocks

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

I absolutely adore that little red, round cheese on the left in the foreground of Eug’s picture, though I can’t remember what it’s called.

Where is this picture ?

[Eug]

Hmmm... Not consistently loading. It is here, but like I said, it is not consistently loading. So, here's another one:



P.S. Oisin, the original pic said "Gouda" right in the pic.

[Randman]

Originally Posted by Sherman Homan 

For all intensive purposes and irregardless of a writers' grammer, it's the meaning of there content thats important.

I c what u did thar but it still makes me cringe lol

[Sherman Homan]

It actually hurt to write that.

[Chinasaur]

Originally Posted by IceEnclosure 

suposably most people don't even know they're saying it wrong

Excellent Loved the intentional misuse of 'supposedly"

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by Chinasaur 

Excellent Loved the intentional misuse of 'supposedly"

Its misusage.

[olePigeon]

People, unfortunately, just don't care anymore.

Try reading YouTube comments, your IQ will drop 20 points.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by IceEnclosure 

What does the zoo have to do with supposables?

Supposables?

Those are meds ur doc gives you to stick up ur bum!

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

iWeep

Fixinated.

-t

[turtle777]

Ha, I just read a new one: Luckerly



-t

[Oisín]

That’s downright Hepburnesque.

[Oisín]

P.S. Oisin, the original pic said "Gouda" right in the pic.

No, it’s not a Gouda. The small one.

[turtle777]

Today's Shirt on Woot.

-t

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

No, it’s not a Gouda. The small one.

...could be an Edam.

[Tiresias]

Why weep? Just Google the correct forms.

Could of = 5,040,000
------------------------
Could've = 11,900,000
Could have = 170,000,000

[Oisín]

Googling the correct forms still only prove that something as simple as ‘could have’ is misspelt in approximately 2.75 per cent of all cases on the Internet. If we assume that, on average, no demographic section or particular type of text is more inclined to use the words ‘could have’ than any other, that means that something like 2.75 per cent of the people in the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia, etc. are so inept at spelling that they’re incapable of spelling even something this simple correctly.

Still plenty of cause for weeping.

[Tiresias]

2.75 is not that bad, is it? And you might find that a lot of them are elementary school students or something, or lazy, or just slipped up, or learning English, etc.

I think a brief sniffle quite suffices.

[Dakar the Fourth]

I dunno, if you randomly polled people, do you think they'd pick a number higher or lower than 2.75% for the amount of idiots around.

Call me pessimistic, but I'd go higher.

[Tiresias]

Of course, being a bad speller doesn't make you an idiot any more than being bad at tennis makes you a paraplegic.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Tiresias 

2.75 is not that bad, is it? And you might find that a lot of them are elementary school students or something, or lazy, or just slipped up, or learning English, etc.

I think a brief sniffle quite suffices.

Elementary students, possibly. Lazy, probably. Learning English (i.e., non-native speakers), no. Confusing unstressed ‘have’ with unstressed ‘of’ is entirely a native error, not something someone who has learnt English as a foreign language is likely to do.

2.75 per cent would not be that bad if it were just ‘bad spellers’. A ‘bad speller’ in my book is someone who misspells slightly uncommon words, or words that present actual difficulties in the link between spelling and pronunciation. ‘Have’, though, is neither. It’s one of the ten most common and ubiquitous words in the English language.

Bear in mind, I say this coming from a background in a country where, at a guess, about 10 per cent of the population consistently misspell ‘you’ (plural accusative).

[Eug]

Well, I will just say I don't even know what a plural accusative is.

Note the last in that sentence is "is". Oops. I did again... sorta...

[Oisín]

Well, I will just say I don't even know what a plural accusative is.

I should call it the plural oblique, really. ‘You’ is actually the old plural oblique in English. Think of the singular nominative thou, oblique thee; plural nominative ye, oblique you. That’s what it is.

[Dakar the Fourth]

There should be a law against foreigners talking to native speakers like this.

[Eug]

I should call it the plural oblique, really. ‘You’ is actually the old plural oblique in English. Think of the singular nominative thou, oblique thee; plural nominative ye, oblique you. That’s what it is.

Uh... K Thx?

P.S. I think I wouda understood just as much of that had you written it upside down.

˙sı ʇı ʇɐɥʍ s’ʇɐɥʇ ˙noʎ ǝnbılqo 'ǝʎ ǝʌıʇɐuıɯou lɐɹnld ؛ǝǝɥʇ ǝnbılqo 'noɥʇ ǝʌıʇɐuıɯou ɹɐlnƃuıs ǝɥʇ ɟo ʞuıɥʇ ˙ɥsılƃuǝ uı ǝnbılqo lɐɹnld plo ǝɥʇ ʎllɐnʇɔɐ sı ’noʎ‘ ˙ʎllɐǝɹ 'ǝnbılqo lɐɹnld ǝɥʇ ʇı llɐɔ plnoɥs ı

[Oisín]

^ That smiley ain’t upside down.

Okay, in Danish:

Thou (one person, subject in the sentence) = du (example, du er, ‘thou art’)
Thee (one person, object in the sentence) = dig (example, jeg giver dig…, ‘I give thee …’)
You (more persons, subject) = I (example, I er, ‘you [all] are’) [as in English, I is always capitalised, though it means something else]
You (more persons, object) = jer (example, vi giver jer…, ‘we give you …’) [jer not capitalised]

About 10 per cent of Danes do a bit of hypercorrection here and write Jer, capitalised, due to the capitalisation of I.

Clearer?

There should be a law against foreigners talking to native speakers like this.

What are you talking about? I haven’t spoken a word. All I do is type.



[Sorry for the derail—carry on]

[Dakar the Fourth]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

^What are you talking about? I haven’t spoken a word. All I do is type.

That too.

[Dork.]

I thought the plural accusative was what a teacher does when she doesn't know who hurled the spitball at the back of her head, so she gives the whole class detention....

[Oisín]

[ @ Dakar ]

Oh, so now you want to take away my typing freedom, too?

Suppressionist.

I thought the plural accusative was what a teacher does when she doesn't know who hurled the spitball at the back of her head, so she gives the whole class detention....

That’s just the populist approach. Grammarians do it without spitballs.