|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 22 new of 346 responses total. |
nephi
|
|
response 325 of 346:
| 
Jun 7 08:45 UTC 1995 |
I'm sorry. I must be politically-correct impaired. You'll have to bear with
me. 8*)
|
md
|
|
response 326 of 346:
|
Jun 7 12:08 UTC 1995 |
[This item should go into a "Classics" conference for permanent
preservation. Does Grex have such a thing?]
|
popcorn
|
|
response 327 of 346:
|
Jun 7 13:22 UTC 1995 |
This response has been erased.
|
srw
|
|
response 328 of 346:
|
Jun 8 06:19 UTC 1995 |
I heard an anchorperson on the news say "Each to his own."
This does not have the same flow (or meaning) as what he meant to say,
namely "To each his own."
We have already discussed the gender neutrality of the word "his" so
there's no need to rehash that.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 329 of 346:
|
Jun 8 12:42 UTC 1995 |
This response has been erased.
|
zook
|
|
response 330 of 346:
|
Jun 9 01:47 UTC 1995 |
Would you prefer "to each its own"? :-)
|
popcorn
|
|
response 331 of 346:
|
Jun 13 15:44 UTC 1995 |
This response has been erased.
|
birdlady
|
|
response 332 of 346:
|
Jun 13 17:12 UTC 1995 |
Hmmm...since it's a proper noun, I'd have to go with Elvises. But when
speaking of other names, like Jones, it isn't Joneses...it's Jones. =( I
think this may be one of those problems that depends on the sound of the word.
For example, deer, moose, and geese are plural, but so is cats, dogs, and
birds.
|
zook
|
|
response 333 of 346:
|
Jun 13 19:32 UTC 1995 |
I'd go with Elvises. To imply that Elvis is Latin is, well, offensive. ( :-) )
|
davel
|
|
response 334 of 346:
|
Jun 13 21:08 UTC 1995 |
Um, "Joneses" is to me one of the absolutely clearest examples. "Keeping up
with the Joneses", after all.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 335 of 346:
|
Jun 14 12:33 UTC 1995 |
This response has been erased.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 336 of 346:
|
Jun 14 12:33 UTC 1995 |
This response has been erased.
|
md
|
|
response 337 of 346:
|
Jun 14 12:56 UTC 1995 |
If the singular form were "Elvius" then the plural would be "Elvii."
The singular form "Elvis" would be "Elves" in the plural. Strange
but true.
|
davel
|
|
response 338 of 346:
|
Jun 14 18:51 UTC 1995 |
(Pronounced not too differently from "Elvis", not like the English "elves".)
|
jep
|
|
response 339 of 346:
|
Jun 16 03:46 UTC 1995 |
I can think of a lot of ways to pluralize "Elvis". Maybe it's
already a plural, and one of them is an Elva. Maybe it's like "deer", and
you can have an Elvis, four Elvis, or a whole herd of Elvis. Perhaps it's
like "person" and "people", one is an Elvis, two are Elvon. Or perhaps
there can only be one Elvis at a time, and others are counterfeits, like
Santa Claus. Or Valerie Mates.
Which brings up a more interesting question, anyway; if there were
(hypothetically, of course) more than one of Valerie, what could you call
them collectively? I vote for Jiffy Pop.
|
tsty
|
|
response 340 of 346:
|
Jun 19 04:10 UTC 1995 |
good shots jep ...rotfl... you musta had a great day at work ....<g>.
However, for plural popcorns ...... Jiffy Mom ....<G!>
|
popcorn
|
|
response 341 of 346:
|
Jun 19 12:49 UTC 1995 |
This response has been erased.
|
gracel
|
|
response 342 of 346:
|
Jun 19 17:15 UTC 1995 |
"Sing a song of popcorn /While the snowstorms rage ..." [etc.]
Isn't it usually a *bowl* of popcorn?
|
cyberpnk
|
|
response 343 of 346:
|
Jun 20 15:12 UTC 1995 |
I hate elvis, myself....
<Be vewy, vewy qwiet..I'm hunting Elvi...>
|
omni
|
|
response 344 of 346:
|
Jun 20 16:31 UTC 1995 |
Would that be a flying Elvis?
|
davel
|
|
response 345 of 346:
|
Jun 21 11:44 UTC 1995 |
No, a creeping elvis.
|
tsty
|
|
response 346 of 346:
|
Jun 21 16:53 UTC 1995 |
re #341 ...............................................................oh.
|
