Topic: I once dated an English major, but it didn’t work out.
Anonymous A started this discussion 8 years ago #75,547
When she broke up with me, she said, “It’s not you. It’s I.”
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 5 hours later[^] [v] #890,841
ironic, considering "me" would be correct there
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 3 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,842
@previous (Sheila LaBoof)
Nope. Becaust “to be” is a predicate nominative verb, it therefore requires the subject pronoun “I”. Thanks.
Nope. Becaust “to be” is a predicate nominative verb, it therefore requires the subject pronoun “I”. Thanks.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 8 years ago, 31 seconds later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,843
Actually, nevermind. I forgot that Autists cannot detect humor.
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 8 years ago, 18 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,848
haha you found out that it is "me"
YeastPaste™ !iAYoMftFR2 (OP) replied with this 8 years ago, 25 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,861
@previous (Sheila LaBoof)
No. Actually, there are two schools of thought on this issue. Those who want to mold English to Latin rules of grammar will insist that it is “I”. Those who prefer English’s ancient Germanic roots, will accept “me”. They are both right and wrong. Also, Autism.
No. Actually, there are two schools of thought on this issue. Those who want to mold English to Latin rules of grammar will insist that it is “I”. Those who prefer English’s ancient Germanic roots, will accept “me”. They are both right and wrong. Also, Autism.
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 8 years ago, 2 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,914
english is as english does
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,916
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 4 hours later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,942
You dumped her for an English minor.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 1 hour later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,950
lol gramma nazis
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 29 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,954
@previous (E)"...ours is a mongrel language which started with a child's vocabulary of three hundred words, and now consists of two hundred and twenty-five thousand; the whole lot, with the exception of the original and legitimate three hundred, borrowed, stolen, smouched from every unwatched language under the sun, the spelling of each individual word of the lot locating the source of the theft and preserving the memory of the revered crime."
"I am almost sure by witness of my ear, but cannot be positive, for I know grammar by ear only, not by note, not by the rules. A generation ago I knew the rules---knew them by heart, word for word, though not their meanings---and I still know one of them: the one which says---but never mind, it will come back to me presently."
"I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing. I have a correspondent whose letters are always a refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered originality about his orthography. He always spells Kow with a large K. Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one. It is better. It gives the imagination a broader field, a wider scope. It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new kind of a cow."
"I never had any large respect for good spelling. That is my feeling yet. Before the spelling-book came with its arbitrary forms, men unconsciously revealed shades of their characters and also added enlightening shades of expression to what they wrote by their spelling, and so it is possible that the spelling-book has been a doubtful benevolence to us."
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 8 years ago, 2 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #890,961
"...ours is a mongrel language which started with a child's vocabulary of three hundred words, and now consists of two hundred and twenty-five thousand; the whole lot, with the exception of the original and legitimate three hundred, borrowed, stolen, smouched from every unwatched language under the sun, the spelling of each individual word of the lot locating the source of the theft and preserving the memory of the revered crime.""I am almost sure by witness of my ear, but cannot be positive, for I know grammar by ear only, not by note, not by the rules. A generation ago I knew the rules---knew them by heart, word for word, though not their meanings---and I still know one of them: the one which says---but never mind, it will come back to me presently."
"I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing. I have a correspondent whose letters are always a refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered originality about his orthography. He always spells Kow with a large K. Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one. It is better. It gives the imagination a broader field, a wider scope. It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new kind of a cow."
"I never had any large respect for good spelling. That is my feeling yet. Before the spelling-book came with its arbitrary forms, men unconsciously revealed shades of their characters and also added enlightening shades of expression to what they wrote by their spelling, and so it is possible that the spelling-book has been a doubtful benevolence to us."