Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 01:42:17 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:
Tomorrow morning most of us will go back to trying to figure
out how to get x.org to work everywhere, either with or
without hal.
Which we also seem to do about once a month. ;)
With
On Monday 12 October 2009 21:17:47 Alan McKinnon wrote:
In theory you could pollute English with decent German grammar and slowly
deprecate the idiocies over time.
Is that the sort of decent grammar that insists on putting all adverbs before
their verbs, or that inserts a comma between a verb
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 10:03:13 Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Monday 12 October 2009 21:17:47 Alan McKinnon wrote:
In theory you could pollute English with decent German grammar and slowly
deprecate the idiocies over time.
Is that the sort of decent grammar that insists on putting all
Alan McKinnon schrieb:
But German is consistent. English is not consistent.
I am not so sure about German being consistent. As a fact often a lot of
information is lost during translation. This is more likely the main
problem.
kh
KH gentoo-u...@konstantinhansen.de wrote:
Alan McKinnon schrieb:
But German is consistent. English is not consistent.
I am not so sure about German being consistent. As a fact often a lot of
information is lost during translation. This is more likely the main
problem.
Let me try to
On Montag 12 Oktober 2009, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2009-10-11, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
English is a mess. As a language it's worse than a pig's
breakfast and makes almost no sense whatsoever to non-native
speakers. Mind you, it makes about as much sense to native
On Monday 12 October 2009 20:37:07 Grant Edwards wrote:
At least we mostly got rid of the whole gender mess and only
have to worry about objective/subjective case for a few cases.
I don't understand either of these two statements.
--
Rgds
Peter
On Monday 12 October 2009 20:58:14 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
At least we mostly got rid of the whole gender mess and only
have to worry about objective/subjective case for a few cases.
which makes english a horrible, horrible language.
Which does? Getting rid of the mess, or having to
On Monday 12 October 2009 21:58:14 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Montag 12 Oktober 2009, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2009-10-11, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
English is a mess. As a language it's worse than a pig's
breakfast and makes almost no sense whatsoever to non-native
On Monday 12 October 2009 22:13:53 Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Monday 12 October 2009 20:37:07 Grant Edwards wrote:
At least we mostly got rid of the whole gender mess and only
have to worry about objective/subjective case for a few cases.
I don't understand either of these two statements.
On Monday 12 October 2009 21:31:35 Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2009-10-12, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
One day an idiot refused to pay. So he tried to drive off
anyway. In a brand new Mercedes. Caused about ZAR15,000 damage
to his wheel arches rather than admit he was wrong and
On Montag 12 Oktober 2009, Peter Humphrey wrote:
On Monday 12 October 2009 20:58:14 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
At least we mostly got rid of the whole gender mess and only
have to worry about objective/subjective case for a few cases.
which makes english a horrible, horrible language.
On 10/12/09, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday 12 October 2009 21:31:35 Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2009-10-12, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
One day an idiot refused to pay. So he tried to drive off
anyway. In a brand new Mercedes. Caused about ZAR15,000
Grant Edwards schrieb:
[snip]
It's the same in mathematics for many/most operators i - j and
j - i aren't the same thing. The position of the variable
relative to the operator tells you want's going on. While a +
b is equal to b + a, that's a property of the particular
operator.
OK, this
On Monday 12 October 2009 23:22:29 Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2009-10-12, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
The boy kicked the ball. The subject is boy and the only way
to tell is the it's before the verb. Which is a stupid idea
actually.
It's probably just a result of
If I tell you ball is the objective case and the boy is
the subjective case, can you see where I'm going? It's still
the boy that kicked the ball but the position denotes
emphasis, not case.
Ah, yes I see. So you can then use position to imply whether
the statement is attempting to answer
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 01:28:13 Neal Hogan wrote:
If I tell you ball is the objective case and the boy is
the subjective case, can you see where I'm going? It's still
the boy that kicked the ball but the position denotes
emphasis, not case.
Ah, yes I see. So you can then use
17 matches
Mail list logo
