RE: Linguistic fuckupery (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


LaTigresse -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 12:12:56 PM)

Stop and pick me up on the way!




DarkSteven -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 12:33:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus

I like Tameeks![:)]


Can I keep her?  Er, I mean, can we keep her?




outlier -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 12:44:51 PM)

FR,

Well as I recall Greedy voted to keep her in another thread.
I welcomed her here.  And LadyH likes her.  And she did
get other welcomes in her own "What The Hell" thread.  So
I would say she is in. 

And if she doesn't choose to set sail on that sea of sophistry
known as P&R, I think that is OK too.




Ninebelowzero -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 12:52:52 PM)

She does scrub up well:-)

have her sent round to my apartment stat!




MariaB -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 1:07:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tameeks

And here I thought this thread was going to be dedicated to all the asstwats who can't spell to save their lives and insist on sending women messages on this site. 

I did learn some new phrases though, thanks for that.  :)



Believe it or not some of those so called asstwats (No such word) are a lot cleverer than you. Spelling doesn't equal intelligence [8|]




tazzygirl -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 1:23:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tameeks

Now you've gone and done it.    Being called sweetheart makes my little subby heart go all aflutter. 


lithium, I has blunts... :)

edited to remove at sign which showed up as a series of stars for some reason. 



for someone who was "done" you cant seem to stop.





tameeks -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 1:29:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MariaB


quote:

ORIGINAL: tameeks

And here I thought this thread was going to be dedicated to all the asstwats who can't spell to save their lives and insist on sending women messages on this site. 

I did learn some new phrases though, thanks for that.  :)



Believe it or not some of those so called asstwats (No such word) are a lot cleverer than you. Spelling doesn't equal intelligence [8|]



Oh shit, I'm just getting all the love today.   I swear I'm all aflutter over here. 

Oh, when did I say I was clever? 

Asstwats not a word?  Say it ain't so.  Whatever shall I do?  






tameeks -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 1:32:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: tameeks

Now you've gone and done it.    Being called sweetheart makes my little subby heart go all aflutter. 


lithium, I has blunts... :)

edited to remove at sign which showed up as a series of stars for some reason. 



for someone who was "done" you cant seem to stop.




I am done, with the first conversation we were engaged in.  I have moved on to bigger and better things now. Like how you think I'm wonderful and how I felt when you called me sweetheart.  I swear my knees got weak.   

I really have no problem with you, I don't hold grudges.  I said I was sorry you took offense as none was meant.  If you want to be enemies then fine, I'm over it and was moving on. 




tameeks -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 1:37:31 PM)

Yay!  Company!  What would you ladies like me to grab for munchie time? 




tazzygirl -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 1:38:51 PM)

Yeah, you missed the whole point. Which is cool. I have learned to expect less around here. Have fun with munchie time.




tameeks -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 1:42:24 PM)

Well that's always good, that way you're never let down!  :)   Smile, I am.  

Can we be friends? I'll buy you munchies too.  Can you just call me sweetheart again? 




Anaxagoras -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 2:05:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lazarus1983
For the first few years on this board, I stayed in PR, until I finally got burnt out last year. It's nothing more than a bunch of collectivists arguing about each others' character, not the issues. Since everyone's doing it, no one seems to notice that debates are about the poster, not the issue. The argument from intimidation is alive and well in PR.

Now once in a while I'll get curious and look at the topics, and I can see exactly how each thread will go based on who is the OP. I know exactly who will respond, who will support, who will defend...

Arise Lazarus and get thee back to the P&R...




CalifChick -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 2:22:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: lazarus1983

For the first few years on this board, I stayed in PR, until I finally got burnt out last year.



First "few years"... P&R wasn't created until April of 2009. If you got burnt out last year, it wasn't after a few years in P&R. Although I hear that a month of P&R feels like a year in the real world.

Whaaaaaaaaa??????

Cali




JstAnotherSub -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 2:39:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Christ on a stick.

Some days I think this place needs mass quantities of weed and midol.

I have one of those, but I aint sayin which. 

(bring the papers)




lazarus1983 -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 3:48:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CalifChick


quote:

ORIGINAL: lazarus1983

For the first few years on this board, I stayed in PR, until I finally got burnt out last year.



First "few years"... P&R wasn't created until April of 2009. If you got burnt out last year, it wasn't after a few years in P&R. Although I hear that a month of P&R feels like a year in the real world.

Whaaaaaaaaa??????

Cali


Very true. I forget that PR was divorced from Off Topic. I should say that the PR threads I participated in.





DaddySatyr -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 4:40:24 PM)

I'd do 'er (I'm from Brooklyn. Trust me, that's a compliment)!!!



Peace and comfort,



Michael




Edwynn -> RE: Linguistic fuckupery (1/24/2012 8:03:38 PM)



quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk

Y'all, or 'yall or yawl?

I once worked with a guy from Texas who would say 'y'all' to me, even though there was only him and me standing in the room.



It's "y'all," as was explained somewhere soon after your post, a contraction of "you all," that itself being a condensed expression of "all of you," hence the expedient of y'all. While on such matters, it's "even though there were only he and I standing in the room."

When addressing two people standing astride and using the word "you' there is always the question by the addressees; "do you mean just me, or both of us?" When common usage of "y'all" is familiar to all parties, the distinction between "you" (with eye contact) and "y'all" makes it clear, with out need for the ungainly and inelegant "talkin' to you!"or "you guys." 

In any event non-natives are the only ones that I have heard relate usage of y'all for the second person singular (however few of them). I'm sure I could have missed one or two occasions of that incidence myself, but being in the south (USA) most of my life, I don't recall it. If in the conversation it is understood that the second person and, say, your friend(s) or family are involved in whatever question or proposition, then it is indeed likely that "y'all" (second person plural) could be invoked with only she/he and you in the room.

I think the guy from Texas watched too many movies and TV shows (where incorrect usage is common) to help figure out what he was supposed to be like. Not an unusual occurrence.

PS

The German language has the direct equivalent of the word y'all when in the familiar address, that being "ihr," while in formal address the non-specified sing./pl. "Sie" (you) is used.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875