Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was driving with my mom one summer, and we were approaching a produce stand that had several sandwich boards set up on the side of the road advertising prices. One of them said:
CORNS 25 CENTS EACH
Mom nearly died laughing when I wondered aloud if they were selling blisters and boils too.
Can you give us a complete sentences, so we can see the context?
If [the thing that is] is the subject, then a verb [is] is required in addition.
Cf: "The things that kids do do not bother me." The subject of the sentence is [The things that kids do]. There is no verb yet.
Also:
"Whatever he takes takes precedence over what he buys."
"The toilet paper stuck to his shoe when he leaves leaves with him."
The teacher ask Bill to write the past participle of the verb 'to have' on the black board. He writes "had had". Joe raises his hand, and says that's wrong and goes to the board and erases one of the 'hads'. But the teacher shook her head. Joe where Bill had had had had had had had had had had her approval though.
Correctly punctuated, the sentence would read: Joe, where Bill had had "had had", had "had"; "had had" had had her approval, though.
If I were to say " The thing that is important is having experience " the two forms of the verb "to be" would not appear in succession. I can't think of a sentence in which they would and still be correct. I'm referring to the common practice of using them redundantly. "The thing is is that experience is important.
People who insist on adding letters where they don't belong. Like - damadge. Yes, we all know, the word "edge" has a D in it. But that doesn't mean every words that ends in a "j" sound requires a d. OKAY?
I was driving with my mom one summer, and we were approaching a produce stand that had several sandwich boards set up on the side of the road advertising prices. One of them said:
CORNS 25 CENTS EACH
Mom nearly died laughing when I wondered aloud if they were selling blisters and boils too.
My supermarket always prices corn, for example, at "4 for $1.00 each". I pointed out that that would come to $4.00, and the stock clerk said the word "each" is there as a convention, to indicate that they are not sold by weight, but by the piece. I asked him if they would cost more, or less, if the sign said "4 for 25c each" (or 1,000 for 25c each), and he looked at me like I had two heads.
Typed in an email the other day, from someone in top management:
"I seen it"
He must have been born in Pittsburgh.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
