Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators
Thanks to Anonymous,bruncher,niord,gvonge,Shelford, for Donating to support the site
It's its
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8291
- Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
- Has thanked: 2940 times
- Been thanked: 4049 times
Re: It's its
"The defendant said the judge was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
"The defendant, said the judge, was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
Who says punctuation doesn't matter?
BJ
"The defendant, said the judge, was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
Who says punctuation doesn't matter?
BJ
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 10978
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
- Has thanked: 1505 times
- Been thanked: 3050 times
Re: It's its
swill453 wrote:I think predictive text, and the dumb trusting of it, is a lot to blame.
Scott.
I think your expectation fails. This kind of illiteracy was widespread online before we ever had predictive text. Indeed, before most of us ever had mobile phones.
What I find mildly amusing is that it's always native English speakers whose literacy is so poor. Foreigners, including those who visibly struggle with English and make lots of other mistakes, always seem to do much better.
bungeejumper wrote:Who says punctuation doesn't matter?
My sympathies are with the defendant on that one. Lock up the judge.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8034
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
- Has thanked: 1001 times
- Been thanked: 3687 times
Re: It's its
UncleEbenezer wrote:I think your expectation fails.
I made no expectation, so am comfortable in the lack of failure.
Scott.
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 523
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:15 pm
- Has thanked: 62 times
- Been thanked: 116 times
Re: It's its
bungeejumper wrote:"The defendant said the judge was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
"The defendant, said the judge, was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
Who says punctuation doesn't matter?
BJ
No
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2574
- Joined: November 5th, 2016, 2:22 am
- Has thanked: 552 times
- Been thanked: 1213 times
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2595
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
- Has thanked: 1120 times
- Been thanked: 1182 times
Re: It's its
vrdiver wrote:I wonder what they'll say?
Tut-tut, "I wonder what they'll say" is a statement, not a question. It shouldn't have a question mark after it.
Julian F. G. W.
-
- Lemon Slice
- Posts: 284
- Joined: November 7th, 2016, 8:31 am
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 89 times
Re: It's its
If you don`t write " The man broke hi`s leg " , you don`t write " The dog broke it`s leg".
You use " it`s " as you use " can`t ,don`t , shouldn`t, wouldn`t ,couldn`t " to indicate missing letters.
You use " it`s " as you use " can`t ,don`t , shouldn`t, wouldn`t ,couldn`t " to indicate missing letters.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2939
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:18 am
- Has thanked: 1365 times
- Been thanked: 794 times
Re: It's its
marronier wrote:If you don`t write " The man broke hi`s leg " , you don`t write " The dog broke it`s leg".
You use " it`s " as you use " can`t ,don`t , shouldn`t, wouldn`t ,couldn`t " to indicate missing letters.
Why are you telling us? Are you mansplaining?
Mel
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8034
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
- Has thanked: 1001 times
- Been thanked: 3687 times
Re: It's its
melonfool wrote:marronier wrote:If you don`t write " The man broke hi`s leg " , you don`t write " The dog broke it`s leg".
You use " it`s " as you use " can`t ,don`t , shouldn`t, wouldn`t ,couldn`t " to indicate missing letters.
Why are you telling us? Are you mansplaining?
Mel
And using the wrong punctuation too. (The back tick being just as wrong as the single quote in common use.)
Scott
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19361
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 657 times
- Been thanked: 6915 times
Re: It's its
melonfool wrote:I also once, when in a restaurant that also did take away, got fed up of waiting to be served, so I got my mobile phone and phoned the restaurant, asked if they did take away, they said yes, so I asked if it would be OK if they delivered it to the table by the window........a waiter appeared quite quickly.
All well and good, but it is one of my pet peeves when I make the effort to show up in person to buy or order something, and then the sales assistant who is serving me decides that he/she will first answer the phone to someone who made less effort than me.
Apparently some service staff are penalised if they don't answer the phone after, say, four rings. But what about the in-person customer who is thereby delayed?
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2939
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:18 am
- Has thanked: 1365 times
- Been thanked: 794 times
Re: It's its
Lootman wrote:melonfool wrote:I also once, when in a restaurant that also did take away, got fed up of waiting to be served, so I got my mobile phone and phoned the restaurant, asked if they did take away, they said yes, so I asked if it would be OK if they delivered it to the table by the window........a waiter appeared quite quickly.
All well and good, but it is one of my pet peeves when I make the effort to show up in person to buy or order something, and then the sales assistant who is serving me decides that he/she will first answer the phone to someone who made less effort than me.
Apparently some service staff are penalised if they don't answer the phone after, say, four rings. But what about the in-person customer who is thereby delayed?
It was about twenty years ago. There were eight of us, so we didn't want to go somewhere else. And I *was* the "in person customer". Maybe you need to read it again?
Mel
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19361
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 657 times
- Been thanked: 6915 times
Re: It's its
melonfool wrote:Lootman wrote:melonfool wrote:I also once, when in a restaurant that also did take away, got fed up of waiting to be served, so I got my mobile phone and phoned the restaurant, asked if they did take away, they said yes, so I asked if it would be OK if they delivered it to the table by the window........a waiter appeared quite quickly.
All well and good, but it is one of my pet peeves when I make the effort to show up in person to buy or order something, and then the sales assistant who is serving me decides that he/she will first answer the phone to someone who made less effort than me.
Apparently some service staff are penalised if they don't answer the phone after, say, four rings. But what about the in-person customer who is thereby delayed?
It was about twenty years ago. There were eight of us, so we didn't want to go somewhere else. And I *was* the "in person customer". Maybe you need to read it again?
No, I got it the first time. The point stands. I admire the way you finessed the system and I might do that myself as well.
But there were those who had been waiting longer than you who perhaps had a more legitimate claim on those extra resources.
For some reason service workers respond better to phone calls but I don't understand why. I'd never run a business that way.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2939
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:18 am
- Has thanked: 1365 times
- Been thanked: 794 times
Re: It's its
You can't possibly know there were people waiting longer or that the staff were incentivised to answer the phone
Not every anecdote needs to be over analysed.
Mel
Not every anecdote needs to be over analysed.
Mel
-
- The full Lemon
- Posts: 19361
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
- Has thanked: 657 times
- Been thanked: 6915 times
Re: It's its
melonfool wrote:You can't possibly know there were people waiting longer
You wrote: "I was about 4 people back from the front of the queue and it was starting to get silly it was taking so long."
Evidently there were people waiting longer than you.
In that same situation, having summoned extra resources, I would have directed them to first serve the "4 people" ahead of me in the queue who had been waiting longer than me.
melonfool wrote:You can't possibly know the staff were incentivised to answer the phone
Not in that case, but I once confronted a sales person who interrupted me to answer the phone, and she told me that she had a "4 ring" imperative.
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 6139
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:12 pm
- Has thanked: 1589 times
- Been thanked: 1801 times
Re: It's its
Lootman wrote:melonfool wrote:You can't possibly know there were people waiting longer
You wrote: "I was about 4 people back from the front of the queue and it was starting to get silly it was taking so long."
Evidently there were people waiting longer than you. ...
In the Tesco queue. I think the "About four [non uniformed] people arrived very quickly looking really flustered!" might have managed to have dealt with the 4 people at around the same time, given there was also "The woman serving on the desk". We also don't know if any of those 4 in the queue had queue barged ahead of the OP. A common occurrence nowadays.
In the restaurant. "You can't possibly know there were people waiting longer", unless you were there, knew the OP back then or you were the waiter who attended and you recall the incident.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3562
- Joined: November 5th, 2016, 8:43 am
- Has thanked: 3963 times
- Been thanked: 1448 times
Re: It's its
"The defendant, said the judge, was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
But why the speech-marks? Actually, I think this should be:
'The defendant, said the judge, was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life.'
or with speech-marks:
"The defendant", said the judge, "was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
Steve
PS In my defence I have to state that my English teacher, apart from introducing me to 'Fowler's Modern English Usage', was extremely pretty!
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8034
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
- Has thanked: 1001 times
- Been thanked: 3687 times
Re: It's its
stevensfo wrote:or with speech-marks:
"The defendant", said the judge, "was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
I disagree. The tenses are wrong.
Either:
"The defendant", said the judge, "is an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
or:
"The defendant", said the judge, "was an entrenched liar who should have been put away for the rest of his life."
Scott.
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 2939
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:18 am
- Has thanked: 1365 times
- Been thanked: 794 times
-
- Lemon Quarter
- Posts: 3562
- Joined: November 5th, 2016, 8:43 am
- Has thanked: 3963 times
- Been thanked: 1448 times
Re: It's its
swill453 wrote:stevensfo wrote:or with speech-marks:
"The defendant", said the judge, "was an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
I disagree. The tenses are wrong.
Either:
"The defendant", said the judge, "is an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
or:
"The defendant", said the judge, "was an entrenched liar who should have been put away for the rest of his life."
Scott.
No. The defendant was a liar many years ago. Now he is a reformed character and no longer lies, BUT has just been convicted of a serious crime years ago when he was still a liar. So my version is correct. He 'was' an entrenched liar and 'should be put away'.
Yes, I agree, he 'should have been' put away.
Steve
PS The use of 'entrenched' in this context is disrespectful to all those who died in WW1 and I feel offended. To which tabloid should I complain?
-
- Lemon Half
- Posts: 8034
- Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
- Has thanked: 1001 times
- Been thanked: 3687 times
Re: It's its
stevensfo wrote:swill453 wrote:Either:
"The defendant", said the judge, "is an entrenched liar who should be put away for the rest of his life."
or:
"The defendant", said the judge, "was an entrenched liar who should have been put away for the rest of his life."
No. The defendant was a liar many years ago. Now he is a reformed character and no longer lies, BUT has just been convicted of a serious crime years ago when he was still a liar. So my version is correct. He 'was' an entrenched liar and 'should be put away'.
Yes, I agree, he 'should have been' put away.
Lol. So your version isn't correct...
Scott.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests