A new way of advertising Almea

Questions or discussions about Almea or Verduria-- also the Incatena. Also good for postings in Almean languages.
User avatar
JT_the_Ninja
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 1:54 pm
Location: Nowhere
Contact:

Post by JT_the_Ninja »

Jaaaaaa wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:
Space Dracula wrote:
zompist wrote:
Guest wrote:Back to the topic of this thread, someone should make some zompist.com merchandise and sell it on http://www.cafepress.com

:ch
Someone shouldn't, unless they're me.
Whoa man, that sentence is "messing" with my brain
I see what you mean...I thought Zomp was better at grammar than that.
Nothing ungrammatical bout it tho.
Of course there is. Illegal use of "they."

User avatar
Jaaaaaa
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: Illinois, USA
Contact:

Post by Jaaaaaa »

JonathanaTegire wrote:
Jaaaaaa wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:
Space Dracula wrote:
zompist wrote: Someone shouldn't, unless they're me.
Whoa man, that sentence is "messing" with my brain
I see what you mean...I thought Zomp was better at grammar than that.
Nothing ungrammatical bout it tho.
Of course there is. Illegal use of "they."
Meh, I don't see anything wrong with that... I've used it in the same paper as "Yea verily" :mrgreen:

User avatar
JT_the_Ninja
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 1:54 pm
Location: Nowhere
Contact:

Post by JT_the_Ninja »

Jaaaaaa wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:
Jaaaaaa wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:
Space Dracula wrote: Whoa man, that sentence is "messing" with my brain
I see what you mean...I thought Zomp was better at grammar than that.
Nothing ungrammatical bout it tho.
Of course there is. Illegal use of "they."
Meh, I don't see anything wrong with that... I've used it in the same paper as "Yea verily" :mrgreen:
It should be, "Someone shouldn't, unless he's me."

User avatar
Xeon
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Post by Xeon »

JonathanaTegire wrote:
Jaaaaaa wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:
Jaaaaaa wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote: I see what you mean...I thought Zomp was better at grammar than that.
Nothing ungrammatical bout it tho.
Of course there is. Illegal use of "they."
Meh, I don't see anything wrong with that... I've used it in the same paper as "Yea verily" :mrgreen:
It should be, "Someone shouldn't, unless he's me."
That could be regarded as sexism.

User avatar
JT_the_Ninja
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 1:54 pm
Location: Nowhere
Contact:

Post by JT_the_Ninja »

Not really. Not only is Mark a he, but the general English pronoun is traditionally "he."

User avatar
Xeon
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Post by Xeon »

JonathanaTegire wrote:Not really. Not only is Mark a he, but the general English pronoun is traditionally "he."
True, at one point, it was proper to refer to a woman as 'he' or 'him' in the accusative. What English really needs is a gender-nuetral third person singular pronoun to refer to humans. There is 'xe', but no one uses it. I don't believe it's even recognised by the OED.

User avatar
Drydic
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1652
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 12:23 pm
Location: I am a prisoner in my own mind.
Contact:

Post by Drydic »

Xeon wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:Not really. Not only is Mark a he, but the general English pronoun is traditionally "he."
True, at one point, it was proper to refer to a woman as 'he' or 'him' in the accusative. What English really needs is a gender-nuetral third person singular pronoun to refer to humans. There is 'xe', but no one uses it. I don't believe it's even recognised by the OED.
We've got one: [DeI], only it happens to be homophonous with the plural. Context usually separates the two.
Image Image
Common Zein Scratchpad & other Stuffs! OMG AN ACTUAL CONPOST WTFBBQ

Formerly known as Drydic.

User avatar
Tayanrai
Niš
Niš
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 5:46 am
Location: Pacific Ring of Fire

Post by Tayanrai »

I hate to bring this up, but... :roll:

See also this. It may not seem related to the current discussion at first, but you should know the reason why I linked to that certain topic...

~Tayanrai
[url=http://www.spinnoff.com/zbb/viewtopic.php?p=127442#127442]If you want to know where I've been and what I've been doing lately, please click this.[/url]

User avatar
Jaaaaaa
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: Illinois, USA
Contact:

Post by Jaaaaaa »

Xeon wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:Not really. Not only is Mark a he, but the general English pronoun is traditionally "he."
True, at one point, it was proper to refer to a woman as 'he' or 'him' in the accusative. What English really needs is a gender-nuetral third person singular pronoun to refer to humans. There is 'xe', but no one uses it. I don't believe it's even recognised by the OED.
Not to mention it's etymologically blegh...

User avatar
Mecislau
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by Mecislau »

Jaaaaaa wrote:
Xeon wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:Not really. Not only is Mark a he, but the general English pronoun is traditionally "he."
True, at one point, it was proper to refer to a woman as 'he' or 'him' in the accusative. What English really needs is a gender-nuetral third person singular pronoun to refer to humans. There is 'xe', but no one uses it. I don't believe it's even recognised by the OED.
Not to mention it's etymologically blegh...
What's "xe"?

User avatar
Jaaaaaa
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2002 6:01 pm
Location: Illinois, USA
Contact:

Post by Jaaaaaa »

Maknas wrote:
Jaaaaaa wrote:
Xeon wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:Not really. Not only is Mark a he, but the general English pronoun is traditionally "he."
True, at one point, it was proper to refer to a woman as 'he' or 'him' in the accusative. What English really needs is a gender-nuetral third person singular pronoun to refer to humans. There is 'xe', but no one uses it. I don't believe it's even recognised by the OED.
Not to mention it's etymologically blegh...
What's "xe"?
Nobody knows about it either.

User avatar
Mecislau
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 491
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 2:40 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by Mecislau »

Jaaaaaa wrote:
Maknas wrote:
Jaaaaaa wrote:
Xeon wrote:
JonathanaTegire wrote:Not really. Not only is Mark a he, but the general English pronoun is traditionally "he."
True, at one point, it was proper to refer to a woman as 'he' or 'him' in the accusative. What English really needs is a gender-nuetral third person singular pronoun to refer to humans. There is 'xe', but no one uses it. I don't believe it's even recognised by the OED.
Not to mention it's etymologically blegh...
What's "xe"?
Nobody knows about it either.
I thought it was something like "nth", where you replace the "x" with another sound... (eg, xe > he, she, ... me?)

Post Reply