kanarie Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 there is a language in particular which escapes me at the moment in which an apostrophe is appropriate in the case of pluralisation. i thought it was dutch, but i may be wrong. true, for (most) words ending in vowels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 lol wut .. nevermind grammer? . if you know what its means than who cares yeah. their's more important things then grammer... language is like evolving yeah apart from the language is evolving bullshit this is exactly how i feel. if it irritates you, dont read what im saying, but i really cant be arsed putting anything more than minimal thought processes into chatting shit on a redundant internet forum. job application, essays, il make the effort. here, no. It shouldn't require effort. If you don't know the difference between "then" and "than" in infant school, then all your efforts are going to be wrongly directed. If not Chris Clark than who? im talking about apostrophes in its. i just use its with no apostrophe consistently. i know the difference between then, than, where, were, there, their so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCM Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 It shouldn't require effort. absolutely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redruth Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I'm going to say fuck its. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred McGriff Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 I am going to willingly choose ignorance because I'm a selfish, negative person and I care only about myself and I have a small penis (that queefs halitosis out of its hole). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braintree Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I'm going to say fuck its. +1 I smell a dupe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred McGriff Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 i smell penisholitosis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest abusivegeorge Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 It shouldn't require effort. Absolutely. Fuck it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Super lurker ultra V12 Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all. Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld. mark twain reminds me a bit of dlet. wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 dick heads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaini Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 you'll like this, fred http://apostrophe.me/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.