Where is that troll JC at?

The Queen of Cans and Jars generously shared with us this little ditty:
revek wrote:

"The Queen of Cans and Jars" wrote in message
. ..
revek wrote:

Because enspelled wannabe back in the day wanted 'respect' for the
english language.

uh, what?

I dropped an "an".

except that "enspelled" doesn't seem to be a word. that's where i got
confuzzled.

It's a "fantasy" word. I think it was cobbled together from bespelled
and ensorceled or something like that. I've seen it all of twice but I
can't remember where.

--
revek
Usenet is like Tetris for people who still remember how to read.

"Diane Ball" wrote in message
...
Maybe it was supposed to be "acceptable".

Good guess. A little less single malt may be in order.

Yours aye,
Curt

"Diane Ball" wrote in message
...
Maybe it was supposed to be "acceptable".

Good guess. A little less single malt may be in order.

Yours aye,
Curt

"Neil Durant" wrote in message
...
On 2004-08-18, curt wrote:
It's a latin rule designed to make english seem more acceptable to the
elite. Get over it. Rules are there to describe actual usage, not
force the language into an unnatural mold. The actual usage of a
living
language is the primary and to my mind only iron clad guide. If it is
clear and understandable, it is good English.

I can't agree. The word "at" is a preposition. It needs to refer to
something. For example...at the ballpark....at school....at swimming
camp

When you end a sentence with the word "at", it makes no sense.

"Where is that troll JC at?" What is "at" referring to? You can't use
the
word "at" in the way, plan and simple.

"Where is that troll JC?" This makes perfect sense and is true to boot.

I completely agree.

Of course you agree, because I am right and there really is no way to argue
against me.

I wouldn't even have brought this up, but this whole thread is a total
troll. I really don't give a crap how anyone talks on here. My whole idea
was to be silly as the thread was from the beginning.

I am done here. Time for another wee dram.

curt

"Neil Durant" wrote in message
...
On 2004-08-18, curt wrote:
It's a latin rule designed to make english seem more acceptable to the
elite. Get over it. Rules are there to describe actual usage, not
force the language into an unnatural mold. The actual usage of a
living
language is the primary and to my mind only iron clad guide. If it is
clear and understandable, it is good English.

I can't agree. The word "at" is a preposition. It needs to refer to
something. For example...at the ballpark....at school....at swimming
camp

When you end a sentence with the word "at", it makes no sense.

"Where is that troll JC at?" What is "at" referring to? You can't use
the
word "at" in the way, plan and simple.

"Where is that troll JC?" This makes perfect sense and is true to boot.

I completely agree.

Of course you agree, because I am right and there really is no way to argue
against me.

I wouldn't even have brought this up, but this whole thread is a total
troll. I really don't give a crap how anyone talks on here. My whole idea
was to be silly as the thread was from the beginning.

I am done here. Time for another wee dram.

curt

"Neil Durant" wrote in message
...
On 2004-08-18, curt wrote:
It's a latin rule designed to make english seem more acceptable to the
elite. Get over it. Rules are there to describe actual usage, not
force the language into an unnatural mold. The actual usage of a
living
language is the primary and to my mind only iron clad guide. If it is
clear and understandable, it is good English.

I can't agree. The word "at" is a preposition. It needs to refer to
something. For example...at the ballpark....at school....at swimming
camp

When you end a sentence with the word "at", it makes no sense.

"Where is that troll JC at?" What is "at" referring to? You can't use
the
word "at" in the way, plan and simple.

"Where is that troll JC?" This makes perfect sense and is true to boot.

I completely agree.

Of course you agree, because I am right and there really is no way to argue
against me.

I wouldn't even have brought this up, but this whole thread is a total
troll. I really don't give a crap how anyone talks on here. My whole idea
was to be silly as the thread was from the beginning.

I am done here. Time for another wee dram.

curt

On 18 Aug 2004 18:07:58 -0700, (TdN) wrote:

Curt, you have fallen prey to one of the Immutable Laws of the
Internet--every post that attempts to take others' grammar or spelling
to task will itself contain at least one grammatical or
lexicographical solecism.

T.

"Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things."
-Quayle

On 18 Aug 2004 18:07:58 -0700, (TdN) wrote:

Curt, you have fallen prey to one of the Immutable Laws of the
Internet--every post that attempts to take others' grammar or spelling
to task will itself contain at least one grammatical or
lexicographical solecism.

T.

"Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things."
-Quayle

Diane Ball wrote:

Maybe it was supposed to be "acceptable".

Perhaps. Which is another reason he shouldn't be running around
correcting the grammar of other people's posts.

..:. Craig

Diane Ball wrote:

Maybe it was supposed to be "acceptable".

Perhaps. Which is another reason he shouldn't be running around
correcting the grammar of other people's posts.

..:. Craig