Originally Posted by -Flossie-:
“Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, this is even more hilarious than the last effort, for reasons I will explain, but it is made doubly hilarious by kidnapping my use of ‘hilarious”. Presumably you find my usage very effective, and, as imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, perhaps I shouldn’t be aggrieved.
”
“Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, this is even more hilarious than the last effort, for reasons I will explain, but it is made doubly hilarious by kidnapping my use of ‘hilarious”. Presumably you find my usage very effective, and, as imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, perhaps I shouldn’t be aggrieved.
”
No comma required before and.
Hilarious is not an uncommon word; certainly not sufficiently obscure to require imitation. I'm sure no court in the land would find me guilty of plagiarism because I too used the word hilarious.
Of course there are other words I could have used; priceless, risible or laughable for example.
Quote:
“Almost all of the inaccuracies, as you call them, were typos, and you now seem to understand that they are of minor importance, perhaps only because you made them as well while hypocritically demanding “perfection” of me. However, I do wonder that your spelling of sensitivity was so bad, I may be being overly-generous in believing it to be a typo.”
“Almost all of the inaccuracies, as you call them, were typos, and you now seem to understand that they are of minor importance, perhaps only because you made them as well while hypocritically demanding “perfection” of me. However, I do wonder that your spelling of sensitivity was so bad, I may be being overly-generous in believing it to be a typo.”
I made two typos; hardly in the same league as your own.
The emboldened sentence simply doesn't make sense. Do you wonder that or do you wonder why?
Rather than "I may be being" do you think that 'Perhaps I am being,' or 'Am I being?' is less clumsy than following 'be' with 'being?'
Incidentally there is no hyphen in overly generous.
The poor hyphen will surely feel abandoned when you finally learn the correct usage.
Quote:
“I certainly can justify the hyphen in child-like, because of course it is the contraction of that phrase that provided the word childlike, and here is the etymology and usage http://www.memidex.com/childlike”
“I certainly can justify the hyphen in child-like, because of course it is the contraction of that phrase that provided the word childlike, and here is the etymology and usage http://www.memidex.com/childlike”
You can try to justify your errors from here to eternity; there is no hyphen in childlike.
That is so desperate.
Sure the etymology indicates the derivation of the word, but nowhere in the link you provided is childlike hyphenated.Nice try but no cigar.
Quote:
“As for cringeworthy, well I can’t prove I know the word, but it is so well known that I think a court would give me the benefit of the doubt.”
“As for cringeworthy, well I can’t prove I know the word, but it is so well known that I think a court would give me the benefit of the doubt.”
As is hilarious - see my point above.
I'm sure you've heard of cringworthy, but I'm equally sure that you were not aware that it is one word. Still it's good to know that you're open to correction.
Quote:
“As to my sentence which you claim was overly long; let’s have a look at it again.
“Just because she has wads of dosh doesn't make her an entrepreneur, the Apprentice is supposedly about business acumen, not just jumping on to the readily-available conveyor belt to prosperity for women who want to take their kit off.”
The second and third clause of the sentence make points relevant to the point in the first clause, and so all the clauses are bound together into a tightly bound semantic entity, and, as they flow naturally grammatically, the sentence works well and is well balanced. You are obviously not qualified to use or read long sentences, perhaps you just work in bullet points.”
“As to my sentence which you claim was overly long; let’s have a look at it again.
“Just because she has wads of dosh doesn't make her an entrepreneur, the Apprentice is supposedly about business acumen, not just jumping on to the readily-available conveyor belt to prosperity for women who want to take their kit off.”
The second and third clause of the sentence make points relevant to the point in the first clause, and so all the clauses are bound together into a tightly bound semantic entity, and, as they flow naturally grammatically, the sentence works well and is well balanced. You are obviously not qualified to use or read long sentences, perhaps you just work in bullet points.”
That is nonsense. Your point lost it's clarity due to your obvious inability to be succinct. Were you ever required to write a précis whilst at school? It's a great exercise for making one's point clearly and concisely.
Quote:
“Ok, now the best bit.
You generously didn’t highlight my ‘incorrect’ usage of ‘humorous” which should have been 'humourous"……… wait for the punchline people, wait for it…. quiet at the back there…. it’s coming…… there is no word “humourous” in an English dictionary. Yep, there are several examples in the English language where the ‘u’” disappears when an ‘”ous” is appended to a word and one example is ‘humour’. Oh dear, what a cock up. I mean, you really, really ought to have checked the centrepiece of the criticism in your post, given that in the last post your centrepiece criticism was also invalid. These antics are absolutely hilarious, and presumably this behaviour is habitual and will be repeated. Do you check things when you should in a work environment? One has to wonder.”
“Ok, now the best bit.
You generously didn’t highlight my ‘incorrect’ usage of ‘humorous” which should have been 'humourous"……… wait for the punchline people, wait for it…. quiet at the back there…. it’s coming…… there is no word “humourous” in an English dictionary. Yep, there are several examples in the English language where the ‘u’” disappears when an ‘”ous” is appended to a word and one example is ‘humour’. Oh dear, what a cock up. I mean, you really, really ought to have checked the centrepiece of the criticism in your post, given that in the last post your centrepiece criticism was also invalid. These antics are absolutely hilarious, and presumably this behaviour is habitual and will be repeated. Do you check things when you should in a work environment? One has to wonder.”
Humorous is an alternative spelling of humourous. It is not a replacement and does not invalidate the latter spelling.
You clearly don't check your own missives, otherwise your original post would not have been littered with so many typos. I assume your work does not require accurate spelling and grammar from you
Quote:
“And your plea for the politically correct position that posts can be “littered with spelling and grammatical mistakes” is ridiculous. How would people learn to improve if they were not made aware of their gross errors which make communication difficult? As I have said before, it is only gross errors I have highlighted, not the silly typos which you have used in your invalid attempts to make counter arguments.
Let the hilarity roll on. You have my permission to use the word hilarious, but don’t wear it out or use it inappropriately as I will want it back in full working condition and correctly spelt.”
“And your plea for the politically correct position that posts can be “littered with spelling and grammatical mistakes” is ridiculous. How would people learn to improve if they were not made aware of their gross errors which make communication difficult? As I have said before, it is only gross errors I have highlighted, not the silly typos which you have used in your invalid attempts to make counter arguments.
Let the hilarity roll on. You have my permission to use the word hilarious, but don’t wear it out or use it inappropriately as I will want it back in full working condition and correctly spelt.”
Is it really your job to make everyone else aware of errors which, though considered gross in your opinion, are often nothing of the sort? Indeed you seem to use such criticisms to validate some of your more spurious arguments.
On the assumption that you were educated to a reasonable level, there is less excuse for your mistakes than for those who have not enjoyed such privilege. Your poor punctuation and constant misuse of the hyphen suggest that, despite your supercilious attitude, you weren't quite as attentive in your English classes as you should have been.
I find your attempts to abash those who question you more amusing than insulting. Insult is usually the last resort of the desperate. For amusing feel free to to subsitute risible, laughable or even ludicrous; indeed anything but hilarious. You're welcome to possession of the word but be very careful and guard it well; there are those who would dispute your ownership and might defile it's usage.
