Page 1 of 1

Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2014 7:57 pm
by TPFKA@W
A young relative-in-law posted this on older sis's facebook. I knew you would like it.
margie.gif

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:13 am
by TPFKA@W
Image

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:38 am
by Joe Guy
I seen for I am a seener.

-Ricardo de Turdo

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2015 3:34 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
I see therefore I saw
- Marjorie Daw


Six errors in three FB 'sentences' (should be four of course) must be a record!

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:08 pm
by oldr_n_wsr
Looks fine to me. :shrug

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:49 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
Just for you oldr... :nana
It's been a while. Hope you're doing well and staying warm. I heard you were in town not long ago, close to my and Mark's new house in Nobleville. Next time you're here, let us know. We'd love to see you.
I don't like using "my and Mark's" - it's logical but ugly. However, it is nowhere near the ugliness of "Mark and I's" (good grief!). Move over, Hyacinth Bucket!

Something similar to "close to the new house that Mark and I purchased" would be an improvement.

A better solution would be to write "our new house" and then close by saying "Mark and I would love to see you".

You're welcome

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 9:50 pm
by Gob
MajGenl.Meade wrote:J

Something similar to "close to the new house that Mark and I purchased" would be an improvement.

"Close to the new house which Mark and I purchased", surely? :fu

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 11:41 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
As stated - "something similar to. . .would be an improvement."

:fu x 2

But more to the point, 'that' is properly used with a restrictive clause. There is one and only one house purchased jointly by the one and only couple mentioned.

'Which' would precede a non-restrictive clause leaving open the possibility of the purchase of other houses, even some purchased in conjunction with another person or persons unknown. This would be to assume facts not in evidence.

:fu x 4

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:09 am
by TPFKA@W
Gob wrote:
MajGenl.Meade wrote:J

Something similar to "close to the new house that Mark and I purchased" would be an improvement.

"Close to the new house which Mark and I purchased", surely? :fu
Gob: Fuck with the bull and you get the horns. :mrgreen:

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:24 am
by Gob
MajGenl.Meade wrote:A

'Which' would precede a non-restrictive clause leaving open the possibility of the purchase of other houses, even some purchased in conjunction with another person or persons unknown. This would be to assume facts not in evidence.

:fu x 4
The words "new house" in the original statement qualify my assertion.

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:51 am
by MajGenl.Meade
Ah, you prove my point. The word 'new' is further evidence of a restrictive clause. We must not allow putative new houses to clutter up the environment.

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 4:11 am
by BoSoxGal
:lol:

Re: Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2015 2:27 pm
by oldr_n_wsr
Whatever!?!?!?
I understood even with the poor grammar/sentence structure or whatever else is wrong with it.
I was never good at dangling participals(sp?) or preposition ended sentences.