TO BE WRONG.
Lorne: Snakes? Uh-huh. And they came out of your what? Okay. Okay, well, did they get up there themselves or is this part of a, you know, a thing? No, I'm not judging...Do we fight snakes? Angel: Only if they're giant. Or demons. Or giant demons. Are they giant demon snakes? Lorne: Well, unless this guy's 30 feet tall, I'm thinking they're of the garden variety.
'Lineage'
Spike's Bitches 46: Don't I get a cookie?
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risqué (and frisqué), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
§ ita § - May 16, 2011 7:19:23 am PDT #21418 of 30000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Steph L. - May 16, 2011 7:21:38 am PDT #21419 of 30000
That which does not kill you should RUN
If loving punctuation within quotation marks is wrong, I don't want to be right.
§ ita § - May 16, 2011 7:25:55 am PDT #21420 of 30000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
You can have some punctuation within quotation marks. You just can't have it all. Otherwise, what does a quote even mean? That's not what they said, why is it in quote marks? It's a mockery of verbatimness.
Ginger - May 16, 2011 7:26:42 am PDT #21421 of 30000
"It didn't taste good. It tasted soooo horrible. It tasted like....a vodka martini." - Matilda
I am particularly appalled by the notion that usage on the Web could be used as the foundation of any grammar argument. That's a slippery slope to having "r" be an acceptable spelling for the third-person plural of to be.
DavidS - May 16, 2011 7:28:17 am PDT #21422 of 30000
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."
If loving punctuation within quotation marks is wrong, I don't want to be right.
Yes, well it's clear that you don't want to be right.
I don't see why it's a travesty. It's just what people are used to. The British way always made more sense to me.
DavidS - May 16, 2011 7:28:45 am PDT #21423 of 30000
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."
That's a slippery slope to having "r" be an acceptable spelling for the third-person plural of to be.
It's Prince's fault.
§ ita § - May 16, 2011 7:28:55 am PDT #21424 of 30000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Seriously, though--spoken usage can count in the evolution of language, or written in another media, just not on the internet?
Ginger - May 16, 2011 7:45:34 am PDT #21425 of 30000
"It didn't taste good. It tasted soooo horrible. It tasted like....a vodka martini." - Matilda
Usage affects the evolving meaning of words, but has much less effect on grammar and punctuation.
§ ita § - May 16, 2011 7:57:17 am PDT #21426 of 30000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Well, that was before there was so much usage involving punctuation. It seems natural that usage is relevant, even if prescriptivists hate it.
Steph L. - May 16, 2011 8:06:15 am PDT #21427 of 30000
That which does not kill you should RUN
It seems natural that usage is relevant, even if prescriptivists hate it.
Here's where I need to point out the irony of "literally" no longer being used to mean "literally."
I mean, really? Why is usage born out of sheer ignorance acceptable in the evolution of words' meaning?
If loving punctuation within quotation marks is wrong, I don't want to be right.
Yes, well it's clear that you don't want to be right.
Have I ever given a damn about this? Do you think it's likely I'm going to start now?