Moot point, moot point, moot point, not mute point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There's no such word as "wive". "Wives" is the plural, and the possessive form gets the apostrophe after the 's'.
Honors English, huh?
Actually, wive is a word. It means to take a wife. Otherwise, you are quite correct.
BTW, I started another post in this thread, and half way through it, it vanished. Is there a limbo where these posts go or did it just go pouf? I am nonplussed. When is someone 'plussed"?
Moot point, moot point, moot point, not mute point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Joey: "It's a moo point. It's like a cow's opinion. It doesn't matter."
Oh, and does the question mark go inside the quotes or outside?
It goes inside if it's a quote, but I don't know if it's just a word in a sentence. It's not a quote; it's just emphasizing the word. Ask the grammar police.
It goes inside if it's a quote, but I don't know if it's just a word in a sentence. It's not a quote; it's just emphasizing the word. Ask the grammar police.
It depends what you are asking. In this case it would go outside the quotation marks. You could put a question mark inside the quotes, but then you'd be asking when someone was "ebriated?", i.e. "ebriated with a (possibly ironic) rising intonation", and would need another question mark outside the quotes as well:
When is someone "ebriated?"?
Of course, that would be a stupid question, but at least it'd be punctuated properly.
It goes inside if it's a quote, but I don't know if it's just a word in a sentence. It's not a quote; it's just emphasizing the word. Ask the grammar police.
If a question mark or exclamation point is contained within quotation marks, it is assumed that the punctuation is a part of the material being quoted. Otherwise, they should be placed outside the quotation marks.
Periods are different. They are always contained within the quotation marks. Unless you are English, and then all rules of grammar are thrown out the window and everything taught in America about punctuation is completely wrong. Including the names of some of the marks.
It depends what you are asking. In this case it would go outside the quotation marks. You could put a question mark inside the quotes, but then you'd be asking when someone was "ebriated?", i.e. "ebriated with a (possibly ironic) rising intonation", and would need another question mark outside the quotes as well:
When is someone "ebriated?"?
Of course, that would be a stupid question, but at least it'd be punctuated properly.
Actually, there are examples like that. In the MLA citation method, this oddity happens:
Periods are different. They are always contained within the quotation marks. Unless you are English, and then all rules of grammar are thrown out the window and everything taught in America about punctuation is completely wrong. Including the names of some of the marks.
Yeah, it's actually called a "full-stop", don't you know?
I'm not sure that there are that many differences between British and American punctuation. I'm pretty sure the full-stop should go inside the quotes even if you're British.
Having said that, it depends what you mean. I think if you are quoting a complete sentence, and the quote forms the end of your sentence, the full-stop goes inside the quotes (i.e., you don't have another full-stop outside the quotes). If you are not quoting a sentence and the quote comes at the end of your sentence, there's no full-stop inside the quotes, but there is one outside them.
Comments
Is it "in regard" or "in regards"?
i.e. This letter is "in regard(s)" to blah...blah...blah...
Quick question...
Is it "in regard" or "in regards"?
i.e. This letter is "in regard(s)" to blah...blah...blah...
If you're using OS X check it in the dictionary -- pretty handy for a stock app.
PHRASES
as regards concerning; with respect to : as regards content, the program will cover important current issues.
in this (or that) regard in connection with the point previously mentioned : there was little incentive for them to be active in this regard.
with (or in) regard to as concerns; with respect to : he made inquiries with regard to Beth.
ORIGIN Middle English : from Old French regarder ?to watch,? from re- ?back? (also expressing intensive force) + garder ?to guard.?
Well I could have googled as well it but I knew you or midwinter would answer it within 15 minutes...
Actually I had to look it up yesterday and found it by accident!
Quick question...
Is it "in regard" or "in regards"?
i.e. This letter is "in regard(s)" to blah...blah...blah...
"in regard to"
Well I could have googled as well it but I knew you or midwinter would answer it within 15 minutes...
If you could try to ask questions between 11-12 on MW or 10-12:30 on T/Th, that's when I have office hours.
"Wives'" tale.
There's no such word as "wive". "Wives" is the plural, and the possessive form gets the apostrophe after the 's'.
Honors English, huh?
Actually, wive is a word. It means to take a wife. Otherwise, you are quite correct.
BTW, I started another post in this thread, and half way through it, it vanished. Is there a limbo where these posts go or did it just go pouf? I am nonplussed. When is someone 'plussed"?
Moot point, moot point, moot point, not mute point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Joey: "It's a moo point. It's like a cow's opinion. It doesn't matter."
... I am nonplussed. When is someone 'plussed"?
Inebriated... when is someone "ebriated"?
Oh, and does the question mark go inside the quotes or outside?
English doesn't have a gender neutral pronoun for the third person singular besides the uber-pretentious "one."
Rant part: ENGLISH, YOU BASTARDIZED TONGUE!
Actually, in 1989, the American Language Association approved the use of the word "they" to refer to a singular pronoun in the third person.
Inebriated... when is someone "ebriated"?
Oh, and does the question mark go inside the quotes or outside?
It goes inside if it's a quote, but I don't know if it's just a word in a sentence. It's not a quote; it's just emphasizing the word. Ask the grammar police.
It goes inside if it's a quote, but I don't know if it's just a word in a sentence. It's not a quote; it's just emphasizing the word. Ask the grammar police.
It depends what you are asking. In this case it would go outside the quotation marks. You could put a question mark inside the quotes, but then you'd be asking when someone was "ebriated?", i.e. "ebriated with a (possibly ironic) rising intonation", and would need another question mark outside the quotes as well:
When is someone "ebriated?"?
Of course, that would be a stupid question, but at least it'd be punctuated properly.
It goes inside if it's a quote, but I don't know if it's just a word in a sentence. It's not a quote; it's just emphasizing the word. Ask the grammar police.
If a question mark or exclamation point is contained within quotation marks, it is assumed that the punctuation is a part of the material being quoted. Otherwise, they should be placed outside the quotation marks.
Periods are different. They are always contained within the quotation marks. Unless you are English, and then all rules of grammar are thrown out the window and everything taught in America about punctuation is completely wrong. Including the names of some of the marks.
It depends what you are asking. In this case it would go outside the quotation marks. You could put a question mark inside the quotes, but then you'd be asking when someone was "ebriated?", i.e. "ebriated with a (possibly ironic) rising intonation", and would need another question mark outside the quotes as well:
When is someone "ebriated?"?
Of course, that would be a stupid question, but at least it'd be punctuated properly.
Actually, there are examples like that. In the MLA citation method, this oddity happens:
So and so asked "blah blah blah?" (Smith 71).
Bizarre.
Periods are different. They are always contained within the quotation marks. Unless you are English, and then all rules of grammar are thrown out the window and everything taught in America about punctuation is completely wrong. Including the names of some of the marks.
Yeah, it's actually called a "full-stop", don't you know?
I'm not sure that there are that many differences between British and American punctuation. I'm pretty sure the full-stop should go inside the quotes even if you're British.
Having said that, it depends what you mean. I think if you are quoting a complete sentence, and the quote forms the end of your sentence, the full-stop goes inside the quotes (i.e., you don't have another full-stop outside the quotes). If you are not quoting a sentence and the quote comes at the end of your sentence, there's no full-stop inside the quotes, but there is one outside them.
"The products were extremely popular with men after their launch."
"Police subdue man with a machette."
"Police help dog bite victim."
There was also a answering machine manual: "after taking a message the machine will rewind and resent itself."
I'll have to remember some more...
"Police help dog bite victim."
There was also a answering machine manual: "after taking a message the machine will rewind and resent itself."
These two are
When completely plastered, officers who volunteer will paint the locker room.
Miami police kill a man with a machete.
Three cars were reported stolen by the Los Angeles police yesterday.
Police begin campaign to run down jaywalkers.
Squad helps dog bite victim.
Actually, there are examples like that. In the MLA citation method, this oddity happens:
So and so asked "blah blah blah?" (Smith 71).
Bizarre.
Shouldn't there be a comma after asked. I was taught there was a comma after the speaker and punctuation to the left of the end quote.