|
|
Post by silverfox on Jan 2, 2010 21:09:01 GMT
FFS, how many times do I have to tell you ignorant f**kers? It's might HAVE, could HAVE, should HAVE, not f**king might OF, could OF, should OF! If you wish to shorten it take out the 'HA' and replace it with ('). i.e. might've, could've, should've! Where the f*ck did you learn your English, Brixton? Sorry, no disrespect.
I don't want to have to tell you lot again!
|
|
|
|
Post by Burtie on Jan 2, 2010 21:14:57 GMT
I think it's just the beer typing.
|
|
|
|
Post by os on Jan 2, 2010 21:28:02 GMT
Where the f*ck did you learn your English, Brixton? Sorry, no disrespect. I don't want to have to tell you lot again! What sort of statement is that, I mean maybe it should be Could have but to slander all those folk that live in Brixton because it! Oh dear Oh Dear!  |
|
billy
1st team skipper
Posts: 2,645
|
Post by billy on Jan 2, 2010 21:38:19 GMT
Where the f*ck did you learn your English, Brixton?
Balham SW12
|
|
|
|
Post by Amber Aleman on Jan 2, 2010 22:27:30 GMT
As a one time teacher of English, I do have much sympathy with Silverfox on this point. Let's just say that there are certain contributors to this forum who have perfectly legitimate views to express but let themselves down by their sloppy use of language. As a result they may not earn the respect that they deserve. The "have/of" issue is really quite simple. If you're referring to a possible event that didn't actually happen, and so usng a word such as "might", "would", "could", should" or "may" (these are so-called auxiliary verbs) then you should never follow that with the word "of" (a preposition like 'to' and 'at'). Instead you should (and probably mean to) use the word "have". I notice that a few posters on the Bobbins forum make this mistake. Let's not sink to their level. |
|
|
|
Post by Kebab Belly Bob on Jan 2, 2010 22:51:22 GMT
What a load have [ha ha] cobblers !
KBB
|
|
|
|
Post by Burtie on Jan 2, 2010 23:01:13 GMT
You should go on the Croydon Today news site and try and translate some of the comments on there. The majority are barely legible. The Sutton United forum is a grammatical nirvana by comparison.
|
|
filbert
1st team Player
Posts: 1,177
|
Post by filbert on Jan 3, 2010 11:07:07 GMT
Could you berate me in private please SF?
Or would that be privately? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by fluffy rascal on Jan 4, 2010 10:44:28 GMT
You should go on the Croydon Today news site and try and translate some of the comments on there. The majority are barely legible. The Sutton United forum is a grammatical nirvana by comparison. I know, that type of youth talk gets one bare vexxed. |
|
|
|
Post by Burtie on Jan 4, 2010 11:02:26 GMT
Braaap braaap, innit.
|
|
|
|
Post by fluffy rascal on Jan 4, 2010 16:48:29 GMT
|
|
oohaah
Top Performer
Posts: 3,138
|
Post by oohaah on Jan 5, 2010 19:20:28 GMT
Where the f*ck did you learn your English, Brixton? Who is Brixton? Surely 'Where the f*ck did you learn your English? Brixton?' is more correcter. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by fox on Jan 5, 2010 20:27:02 GMT
seeeeeennnnnn
|
|
|
|
Post by sallycat on Jan 6, 2010 23:44:13 GMT
Where the f*ck did you learn your English, Brixton? Who is Brixton? Surely 'Where the f*ck did you learn your English? Brixton?' is more correcter. ;D 'Tis. Or, how about: "Where the f*ck did you learn your English: Brixton?" Does that work, do you think? EDIT: Actually, having re-read it, it doesn't work as there are two questions: "where the f*ck did you learn your English?" and "was it Brixton?" I think it's nearly time for bed. |
|
Rax
1st team Player
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by Rax on Jan 7, 2010 10:14:50 GMT
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. That's a grammatically correct sentence.  |
|
