What our pets alooklike

Everything else.

Moderator: GreenCrayon

Post Reply
User avatar
LordRetard
The Most Retardedest
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:44 pm
Location: My Parents' Basement

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by LordRetard »

Uh... Both of you? Why not, it's a party.

User avatar
Cirtur
Licensed Troll Pornographer
Posts: 9964
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:13 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by Cirtur »

Dude, you.

User avatar
wolf
She-Barbarian of the North
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:36 pm
Location: Canadia

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by wolf »

Pets? Yay! This is my rat Omagus. Wally died last year.
Image

And this is Jaydee the boxer puppy.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Can you hold my hand? It's a big poop

User avatar
mountainmage
Mage of the Mountains
Posts: 9601
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Right here. Right now.

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by mountainmage »

I want to mush Jaydee's adorable jowls. Did I mention Boxers are my favorite dogs behind pugs?

Also,
AHMETxRock wrote:All I'm saying is that when a woman offers me their ass as a hump-toy, I respectfully decline.
This has never happened.
No more white horses ♬ ♫ ♪ ılıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llılı ♪ ♫ ♬ for you to ride away

User avatar
Edminster
Tested positive for Space-AIDS
Posts: 8835
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:53 pm
Location: Internet
Contact:

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by Edminster »

wolf wrote:And this is Jaydee the boxer puppy.
Did you name it after Jaydee?
ol qwerty bastard wrote:bitcoin is backed by math, and math is intrinsically perfect and logically consistent always

gödel stop spreading fud

User avatar
Rainbow
*~t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m~*
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: Transexual, Transylvania
Contact:

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by Rainbow »

AHMETxRock wrote:All I'm saying is that when a woman offers me their ass as a hump-toy, I respectfully decline.
Who are these people that have an ass offered by a third party woman as a hump-toy? I'm sorry, I tried to hold it in. Now, fix your grammar, you whore.
AHMETxROCK wrote:This is not quoteworthy.

User avatar
LordRetard
The Most Retardedest
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:44 pm
Location: My Parents' Basement

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by LordRetard »

Rainbow wrote:Who are these people that have an ass offered by a third party woman as a hump-toy? I'm sorry, I tried to hold it in. Now, fix your grammar, you whore.
I'm not entirely sure what you think that you're trying to say. Anyway, don't fix anything, Ahmet. Linguistics is all about describing language and I need your texts as sample data.

User avatar
wolf
She-Barbarian of the North
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 4:36 pm
Location: Canadia

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by wolf »

Edminster wrote:
wolf wrote:And this is Jaydee the boxer puppy.
Did you name it after Jaydee?
I didn't name her. The rescue place we got her from did. But if it helps you sleep at night, yes I named her after that Jaydee.
Can you hold my hand? It's a big poop

User avatar
Rainbow
*~t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m~*
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: Transexual, Transylvania
Contact:

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by Rainbow »

Yar, he ought to 'ave said "...a woman offers me her ass as a hump-toy..."
AHMETxROCK wrote:This is not quoteworthy.

User avatar
mountainmage
Mage of the Mountains
Posts: 9601
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Right here. Right now.

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by mountainmage »

They/their can be singular or plural, although if it's singular, it usually means the person is of an unspecified or unknown gender. So, you're both right?
No more white horses ♬ ♫ ♪ ılıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llılı ♪ ♫ ♬ for you to ride away

User avatar
Rainbow
*~t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m~*
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: Transexual, Transylvania
Contact:

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by Rainbow »

No, no, no, stop being wrong. Not only is their/they totally not correct as a singular (I do admit it is up for debate, however), but he already had identified a woman in the sentence before he switched his pronouns to be all whackadoo.
AHMETxROCK wrote:This is not quoteworthy.

User avatar
Oldrac the Chitinous
Chicken O' the Sea
Posts: 3477
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:41 pm
Location: The Perfect Stillness of the Deep
Contact:

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by Oldrac the Chitinous »

Some Merriam-Webster editor wrote:The plural pronouns have also been put to use as pronouns of indefinite number to refer to singular nouns that stand for many persons <'tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech — Shakespeare> <a person can't help their birth — W. M. Thackeray> <no man goes to battle to be killed. — But they do get killed — G. B. Shaw>. The use of they, their, them, and themselves as pronouns of indefinite gender and indefinite number is well established in speech and writing, even in literary and formal contexts. This gives you the option of using the plural pronouns where you think they sound best, and of using the singular pronouns (as he, she, he or she, and their inflected forms) where you think they sound best.
(Emphasis mine.)

If you're going to use "ironic" in its colloquial sense, no fair turning into a prescriptivist here.
Police said they spent some time working out if they could charge the man with being armed with a weapon, as technically he was armed with part of a fish.

User avatar
LordRetard
The Most Retardedest
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:44 pm
Location: My Parents' Basement

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by LordRetard »

Ja, ja, das ist recht. Honestly I'd never recommend a prescriptivist grammar in any case, because often times a human being is a better judge of what sounds "good" or "right".

User avatar
mountainmage
Mage of the Mountains
Posts: 9601
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Right here. Right now.

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by mountainmage »

Rainbow wrote:No, no, no, stop being wrong. Not only is their/they totally not correct as a singular (I do admit it is up for debate, however), but he already had identified a woman in the sentence before he switched his pronouns to be all whackadoo.

Like I said...they/their is usually an unknown gender when it's singular, but the fact that Ahmet didn't use "she" doesn't make it wrong.
No more white horses ♬ ♫ ♪ ılıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llılı ♪ ♫ ♬ for you to ride away

User avatar
Rainbow
*~t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m~*
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: Transexual, Transylvania
Contact:

Re: What our pets alooklike

Post by Rainbow »

No, though. That whole argument is and always will be an argument, different in every book. I always have firmly believed that 'their' and 'they' are plural pronouns. The counter that authors have contradicted my view is laughable, because authors writing creative literature have atrocious grammar when you look at the book. Grammar does not apply to creative, stylistic writing. When you are doing your everyday speaking, it is grammatically incorrect to use 'they' or 'their' as a plural.
AHMETxROCK wrote:This is not quoteworthy.

Post Reply