Would Sundae have been happy or horrified?

[post=999897]déjà vu[/post] & [post=999900]déjà déjà vu[/post]

from Noboxes' link

xoxoxoBruce;999902 wrote:

Bullshit, English is rain, it does[COLOR="Red"] it’s[/COLOR] work all over the land in words. The river is draining the excess rain, the river is a sewer. The river doesn’t change the rain, the rain changes the river.

Its.

assuming this was irrepurposeful... ;)

---------

Hey, Noboxes, did you ever consider -given the title of the thread- that this was more about remembering Sundae than language?

Fortunately, Wanker has been in the Dicktionary for a long, long time.

Hey, mony, did you ever consider - given the title of the thread and that I linked to a discussion Sundae never got a chance to see - that this was more about how it would have affected the answer to your question had Sundae seen it, than language?

BTW, that word was already in the dictionary and as the article you linked says - It's not new.

In horrified on her behalf.

monster;1055120 wrote:

from Noboxes' link

Its.

assuming this was irrepurposeful... ;)

Use an apostrophe when "it is" can be substituted, or to indicate possession.
It's the work of the rain, it belongs to the rain, therefore possessive.

I can buy that you were possessed when you did that.

xoxoxoBruce;1055130 wrote:

Use an apostrophe when "it is" can be substituted, or to indicate possession.
It's the work of the rain, it belongs to the rain, therefore possessive.

it does it is work all over the land

The possessive and the other one are not interchangeable here, I think you misunderstand But its OK ...I just balanced it up for you ;) yw :)

You're right, I don't understand. The apostrophe is used for contraction or for possession, and sometimes not at all.
That's clear as mud, but it covers the ground.:rolleyes:

Ask this chap...

[YOUTUBE]cCim90WO1-4[/YOUTUBE]

I don't know what Sundae would say because she is not here.

xoxoxoBruce;1055136 wrote:

You're right, I don't understand. The apostrophe is used for contraction or for possession, and sometimes not at all.
That's clear as mud, but it covers the ground.:rolleyes:

"Sometimes???" Nouns put the apostrophe. Pronouns do not -- owing to the otherwise inevitable confusion and ambiguity representing the contractions would bring.

Sounds are identical; on the page at least you can tell them apart.

Recommended Reading: Lynn Truss' Eats, Shoots, and Leaves: the Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation. (The title is indeed the panda joke.) Break out your highlighter if you need to. It contains some memorable remarks on mishandled apostrophes. It posits a growing suspicion that greengrocers are deploying them as a sales tool. To English majors and the Amateur Association Against Apostrophe Abuse, at least.

I vote horrified.

I think so too -she really enjoyed using it because it wan't a word. kind of extracts the fun.... but then, mebbe her use was part of the general use that got it added.....

She'll be turning in her grave if that's the case!

Yikes! Don't blame Sundae even if it is kinda true.