TY Kightshow.
At least SOMEONE got it!
I was afraid it might slip by without it being recognized.
| Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums https://mail.karaokescenemagazine.net/forums/ |
|
| Grammar https://mail.karaokescenemagazine.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15260 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | diafel [ Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Grammar |
This is to respond to the person who posted this in the Karaoke forum. It's totally off topic there and a thread was high-jacked, so I'll respond here. Quote: (its keep)....should be it's keep. Let's not forget the apostrophe now, Diafel. "its" and NOT "it's" is completely appropriate and correct in the way I used it, in reference to my karaoke equipment and explaining to someone how I got started hosting: diafel @ Mon Dec 08, 2008 5:01 pm wrote: That I started it as a hobby and have been doing it for years at home and finally decided to make my hobby earn its keep. in this case, "its" is the possessive form of the pronoun "it" and is correctly written without an apostrophe. It should not be confused with the contraction "it's" (for it is or it has), which should always have an apostrophe. This is also to the same person: You said: Quote: ME THINKS that ME THINKS is TWO words and not one.
Wrong, yet again. Sigh. Methinks is old english. Apparently you've never read Hamlet by Shakespeare. The actual quote is: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks", said by Queen Gertrude in Act 3, Scene 2. often misquoted as "methinks the lady doth protest too much". In any case I borrowed it from Shakespeare, even if it wasn't a direct quote. Methinks is ONE word, NOT two A short explanation of the quote from enotes.com: Almost always misquoted as "Methinks the lady doth protest too much," Queen Gertrude's line is both drier than the misquotation (thanks to the delayed "methinks") and much more ironic. By "protest," Gertrude doesn't mean "object" or "deny"—these meanings postdate Hamlet. The principal meaning of "protest" in Shakespeare's day was "vow" or "declare solemnly," a meaning preserved in our use of "protestation." When we smugly declare that "the lady doth protest too much," we almost always mean that the lady objects so much as to lose credibility. Gertrude says that Player Queen affirms so much as to lose credibility. Her vows are too elaborate, too artful, too insistent. More cynically, the queen may also imply that such vows are silly in the first place, and thus may indirectly defend her own remarriage. Now, perhaps we can move on and let it go.... |
|
| Author: | knightshow [ Tue Dec 09, 2008 3:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
as an old Shakespeare nut, I laughed myself silly with the "doth protest too much" quote. You just do what ya do, cause yer good at it, Lady D! |
|
| Author: | diafel [ Tue Dec 09, 2008 4:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
|
TY Kightshow. At least SOMEONE got it! I was afraid it might slip by without it being recognized.
|
|
| Author: | timberlea [ Tue Dec 09, 2008 5:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
Grammar, isn't that my father's and mother's mother? 
|
|
| Author: | jamkaraoke [ Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
whatever happened to the spill check feature ? |
|
| Author: | karyoker [ Tue Dec 09, 2008 7:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
Quote: whatever happened to the spill check feature ?
If the word is underlined highlight it and right click. It will give the correct spelling. |
|
| Author: | diafel [ Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
To the VERY SAME PERSON: Quote: Here is another link to a page that is all about GRAMMAR MISTAKES.
ummmm that should be GRAMMATICAL mistakes.
|
|
| Author: | diafel [ Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
timberlea @ Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:05 pm wrote: Grammar, isn't that my father's and mother's mother?
No, it's MY mother's and father's mother! 
|
|
| Author: | BruceFan4Life [ Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
diafel @ December 10th 2008, 3:20 am wrote: To the VERY SAME PERSON:
Quote: Here is another link to a page that is all about GRAMMAR MISTAKES. ummmm that should be GRAMMATICAL mistakes. Not according to the web site. |
|
| Author: | Murray C [ Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
diafel @ Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:00 pm wrote: This is to respond to the person who posted this in the Karaoke forum. It's totally off topic there and a thread was high-jacked, so I'll respond here. Quote: (its keep)....should be it's keep. Let's not forget the apostrophe now, Diafel. This is also to the same person: You said: Quote: ME THINKS that ME THINKS is TWO words and not one.
Methinks the one being referred to fell face-first into the quiche, got up, slipped on the mess and promptly face-planted the omelette! It's side-splitting in its hilarity! 
You know what'd be even more funny? If said person  started believing everything on the 'net. 
|
|
| Author: | diafel [ Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
Murrlyn @ Wed Dec 10, 2008 8:09 am wrote: Methinks the one being referred to fell face-first into the quiche, got up, slipped on the mess and promptly face-planted the omelette! It's side-splitting in its hilarity! You know what'd be even more funny? If said person started believing everything on the 'net. !I LOVE your egg in face analogy! I'm darn-near peeing myself  BruceFan4Life @ Wed Dec 10, 2008 3:35 am wrote: Not according to the web site. And I can point you to several sites explaining the existence of leprechauns, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy. Would you like them? |
|
| Author: | BamaRob [ Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
Diafel, I've seen exactly what you're worryin' about in several of these forums. Just keep doing what you do and dont let it get to you. If someone seriously wants to go through forum posts and point out grammatical mistakes, that seems like their prob in being anal retentive, not yours. Their issues can B a big deal on an English paper, but who cares in here. 2 points of advice here: 1) If you know it gets under their skin......just do it more! "Its" a text message age.
2) Look at it like this, they're probably really old, and will die soon. 
|
|
| Author: | Lone Wolf [ Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
diafel @ Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:22 am wrote: timberlea @ Tue Dec 09, 2008 6:05 pm wrote: Grammar, isn't that my father's and mother's mother? No, it's MY mother's and father's mother! Wait a minute! I'm confused if it's your mother's and father's mother does that mean you are a product of incest? Oh well maybe that's why I'm not a English Major. 
Lone Wolf |
|
| Author: | diafel [ Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
Thanks, Robby. Yer wurds arr apreeshiated! Chears! Lone Wolf @ Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:24 am wrote: Wait a minute! I'm confused if it's your mother's and father's mother does that mean you are a product of incest? Oh well maybe that's why I'm not a English Major. Lone Wolf No, but maybe you should be a genie-ologost!
|
|
| Author: | Catseyeview [ Tue Dec 16, 2008 6:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
zat anyfink lak a gy-know-kolojissssst? |
|
| Author: | srnitynow [ Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
Some very "cunning linguistics" going on here.
|
|
| Author: | 6 String [ Tue Dec 16, 2008 10:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Grammar |
If you want, I can learn you all how to talk more gooder england like wot me & my mates do! |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|