1 edit
> If a statue in the park of a person on a horse has
> both front legs in
> the air, the person died in battle.
> If the horse has one front leg in the air, the
> person died as a result of wounds
> received in battle.
> If the horse has all four legs on the ground, the
> person died of natural causes.
This is NOT true. http://www.snopes.com/military/statue.htm
> Coca-cola was originally green
This is NOT true. http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/green.asp
> The first couple to be shown in bed together on prime time TV were > Fred and Wilma Flintstone.
This is NOT true. http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/marykay.htm
I'm at work, so I can't provide URLs for any more of these (just looked up the ones I knew were fake), but I'd imagine most of these "facts" are quite the opposite.
-Rahul, resident myth debunker
Originally posted by richjohnsonIs that correct in Canada?
The correct way of writing out the nuber 101 is "one hundred one".
I have freinds in Canada and they don't give two hoots when the mail me and I can understand them( in both senses,and you too)
I am a Royalist.
The Queen's English is that we understand the message and can convey a message.The rest is just
1 edit
Originally posted by missleadIt is grammatically correct in all English-speaking countries to spell numbers without the superfluous conjunction. Most people (even so-called "writers" ) don't give "two hoots" about grammar, so you'll see errors perpetuated ad infinitum in all forms of written media, be it personal correspondence or, surprisingly, The New York Review of Books.
Is that correct in Canada?
I have freinds in Canada and they don't give two hoots when the mail me and I can understand them( in both senses,and you too
Originally posted by Poison GodmachineIf you go for a telephone number for Spain It is broken down into two digits:
It is grammatically correct in all English-speaking countries to spell numbers without the superfluous conjunction. Most people (even so-called "writers" ) don't give "two hoots" about grammar, so you'll see errors perpetuated ad infinitum in all forms of written media, be it personal correspondence or, surprisingly, The New York Review of Books.
Example: 01247456983 is:
01,24,45,69,83.
Also they don't say for 125 Like we say:one hundred and twentyfive.
They say one hundredtwenty and five.
Linda
Originally posted by missleadJapan is even more confusing when it comes to numbers. Large numbers are counted in groups of 10,000 (mun).
If you go for a telephone number for Spain It is broken down into two digits:
Example: 01247456983 is:
01,24,45,69,83.
Also they don't say for 125 Like we say:one hundred and twentyfive.
They say one hundredtwenty and five.
Linda
10,000 = ichi mun (one lot of 10,000).
100,000 = ju mun (10 lots of 10,000)
1,000,000 = hyaku mun (100 lots of 10,000)
Originally posted by shougiThanks Shougi
Japan is even more confusing when it comes to numbers. Large numbers are counted in groups of 10,000 (mun).
10,000 = ichi mun (one lot of 10,000).
100,000 = ju mun (10 lots of 10,000)
1,000,000 = hyaku mun (100 lots of 10,000)
You really know how to get a party off the ground.
Linda.
Originally posted by SirLoseALotActually, the grammatically correct "Go," or "Be" are commands with the understood "you", easily vying for shortest sentence.
Indeed!It is impossible.And it hurts when you try to hard.🙄
But,isn't 'I do' just as short as 'I am'.Or is that not a complete sentence?
I go, I is, I be... Depending on your dialect, these could be viable as well...
1 edit
Originally posted by Poison GodmachineIndeed it is not.It was Santa Claus who was originally green and coca-cola gave him the red and white colors as we all know him today.
> Coca-cola was originally green
This is NOT true. http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/green.asp
Fred and Wilma,however,is correct,I think.But they aren't acknowledged 'cause they are cartoon characters.
Originally posted by Poison GodmachineI think so-called grammatical rules are properly thought of as descriptive, not prescriptive. So, if the majority, or even a significant subset of people write and say 'one hundred and one', then it IS correct, and any grammar book that says it is not is dated.
It is grammatically correct in all English-speaking countries to spell numbers without the superfluous conjunction. Most people (even so-called "writers" ) don't give "two hoots" about grammar, so you'll see errors perpetuated ad infinitum in all forms of written media, be it personal correspondence or, surprisingly, The New York Review of Books.
1 edit
Originally posted by dfm65How Wittgensteinian...😀
I think so-called grammatical rules are properly thought of as descriptive, not prescriptive. So, if the majority, or even a significant subset of people write and say 'one hundred and one', then it IS correct, and any grammar book that says it is not is dated.
There's a great article on just this subject in the April 2002 issue of Harpers Magazine. The article is titled "Tense Present: Democracy, English, and the Wars Over Usage". The author is the one and only David Foster Wallace. You can get this article online at the Harpers' site.
1 edit
Originally posted by Poison GodmachineWell, ok, so you can provide sources that contradict the claims made by Bill's sources. So what? Why should anyone believe your sources more than they believe his? I think a double standard is operating here: on the one hand, Bill's original claim is subject to scepticism; on the other, the counterclaim is expected to be accepted uncritically. After all, snopes and the rest of PG's sources are only internet postings, which can be posted by anyone, knowledgable and honest or not. The snopes 'green Coca Cola' aricle is written by Barbara Mikkelson. Excuse me, but WHO? Why should we believe her account? The debunking art is lies in great part in sounding authoritative; however, even debunkers are not immune from counter debunking.
> If a statue in the park of a person on a horse has
> both front legs in
> the air, the person died in battle.
> If the horse has one front leg in the air, the
> person died as a result of wounds
> received in bat ...[text shortened]... acts" are quite the opposite.
-Rahul, resident myth debunker
I should point out that I take no particlar position on whether Coke was once green or not - I simply do not know. But a random internet page won't convince me either for or against.