Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 21st Jan 2009 11:30 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 344804
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: My work group are using XP 64
by mounty on Wed 21st Jan 2009 21:09
in reply to "RE[4]: My work group are using XP 64"
RE[6]: My work group are using XP 64
by Laurence on Wed 21st Jan 2009 21:23
in reply to "RE[5]: My work group are using XP 64"
politer ???
This one will run and run !
This one will run and run !
I doubt that:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/politer
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/politer
Being dyslexic - I made sure I spell-checked before posting
RE[5]: My work group are using XP 64
by perral1 on Wed 21st Jan 2009 21:38
in reply to "RE[4]: My work group are using XP 64"
And I think you both fail to realize that the original correction made was for the sake of pointing out something funny - that "remarkable little problems" is far, far different than "remarkably little problems". malfarot was not necessarily pointing out the mistake for the sake of pointing out the mistake, but rather for the sake of pointing out something humorous.
To summarize: *whoosh*
RE[6]: My work group are using XP 64
by Laurence on Thu 22nd Jan 2009 09:59
in reply to "RE[5]: My work group are using XP 64"
And I think you both fail to realize that the original correction made was for the sake of pointing out something funny - that "remarkable little problems" is far, far different than "remarkably little problems". malfarot was not necessarily pointing out the mistake for the sake of pointing out the mistake, but rather for the sake of pointing out something humorous. To summarize: *whoosh*
I got his 'joke' - I found it pedantic and not funny.
Anyway, I think this tangent has ran on long enough now.





Member since:
2007-03-26
Well, maybe you should take your own advice.
You're exaggerating somewhat. The spelling and usage are the same however I just hadn't included an apostrophe in the first instance.
However this is irrelevant as you've somewhat missed my point. I wasn't out to correct the previous post but rather make a point (by example) that nobody appreciates a language pendant - particularly when the error is such a minor one.
Maybe I should have been more direct in my original post but I thought what did was politer than simply mod'ing down
Edited 2009-01-21 20:57 UTC