Happy New Year grandpa Nazi Meade.

[TPFKA@W]

A young relative-in-law posted this on older sis's facebook. I knew you would like it.

[TPFKA@W]

[Joe Guy]

I seen for I am a seener.

-Ricardo de Turdo

[MajGenl.Meade]

I see therefore I saw
- Marjorie Daw


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

[oldr_n_wsr]

Looks fine to me.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Just for you oldr...

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

[Gob]

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?

[MajGenl.Meade]

As stated - "something similar to. . .would be an improvement."

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.

x 4

[TPFKA@W]

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?

Gob: Fuck with the bull and you get the horns.

[Gob]

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.

x 4

The words "new house" in the original statement qualify my assertion.

[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.

[BoSoxGal]

[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.