TomHChappell wrote:In speaking of salaries "grand" is also used to mean "thousands of dollars per year", at least in the US of America.
'Grand' means 'thousand', particularly in monetary terms, here as well.
I've never heard it for anything but money.
The point was, when speaking of certain repeated payments (especially such as salaries), instead of saying "so many grand per year" they just say "so many grand".
What's an example of a non-money use of "grand" meaning "thousand" in Wales's English?
TomHChappell wrote:The point was, when speaking of certain repeated payments (especially such as salaries), instead of saying "so many grand per year" they just say "so many grand".
Yeah, but people will also just say "I make X thousand" and mean "I make X thousand per year".
With "have" I prefer the "-n't" constructions everywhere. When "have" is used in its lexical meaning it's always in full form.
EDIT: Didn't read the whole thread... AGAIN. That discussion was back on page 6. I feel stupid .
At, casteda dus des ometh coisen at tusta o diédem thum čisbugan. Ai, thiosa če sane búem mos sil, ne?
Also, I broke all your metal ropes and used them to feed the cheeseburgers. Yes, today just keeps getting better, doesn't it?
That sequence of 'had...have' is totally ungrammatical for me. The meaning, anyway, can be conveyed simply by 'hadn't'.
I reckon it comes from confusion/analogy with the conditional.
That sequence of 'had...have' is totally ungrammatical for me. The meaning, anyway, can be conveyed simply by 'hadn't'.
I reckon it comes from confusion/analogy with the conditional.
The uncontracted version is ungrammatical for me. The contracted version isn't - I think it's an attempt at correctness with an extra bit by analogy with 'wouldn't've'.
كان يا ما كان / يا صمت العشية / قمري هاجر في الصبح بعيدا / في العيون العسلية
I don't know if this has been mentioned already, because I was too lazy to read through all 8 pages.
My friends have the terrible habit of using the word "ass" after an adjective" as a means of emphasizing. For example: "That was a long-ass party" or "It's a hot-ass day outside, isn't it?".
Then I always point out to them that what they're saying could easily be taken the wrong way. "There were people with long asses at the party?" and "Really? With so many hot asses I might get some action!"
"Happiness can be found even in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn on the light."
Economic Left/Right: -4.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.87
Now I'm thinking about the -ass intensifier. I realized that I use it in restricted ways: When I suffix -ass, the noun phrase can't use the normal indefinite article; instead it has to be preceded by one in the singular and some in the plural or for mass nouns*:
He is one crazy-ass motherfucker. Those are some cheap-ass shoes. That is some nasty-ass pizza.
An adjective suffix that requires special modifier usage. Conlangers take note! Also, I only use this suffix with a pejorative meaning. That's a sweet-ass car sounds totally wrong to me, and langover's example that was a long-ass party would have to mean I was annoyed about the length of the party.
Furthermore, the list of adjectives you can use with -ass seems really restricted.
*Obviously you don't do this if there's a possessive pronoun. An actual sentence that I once said: I miss my old clanky-ass radiator.
EDIT: Then again, it looks like I use the same modifiers in this type of pejorative construction even without the -ass. That is some nasty pizza. What's going on here??
I can't believe I've failed to mention this before, but use of "do you want to..." as an imperative marker is extremely common among a lot of people I around here. I got in trouble a few times as a kid (and still sometimes now, occasionally) because people would say "do you want to [insert chore here]" and I'd say no, I don't want to. It honestly confused me for a long time, since my Aspergeriffic self seems to have missed that.
Risla wrote:I can't believe I've failed to mention this before, but use of "do you want to..." as an imperative marker is extremely common among a lot of people I around here. I got in trouble a few times as a kid (and still sometimes now, occasionally) because people would say "do you want to [insert chore here]" and I'd say no, I don't want to. It honestly confused me for a long time, since my Aspergeriffic self seems to have missed that.
It's common here too, and while I don't remember being confused by it, I do remember not being sure whether someone was telling me to do something or genuinely asking if I wanted to do it.
Risla wrote:I can't believe I've failed to mention this before, but use of "do you want to..." as an imperative marker is extremely common among a lot of people I around here. I got in trouble a few times as a kid (and still sometimes now, occasionally) because people would say "do you want to [insert chore here]" and I'd say no, I don't want to. It honestly confused me for a long time, since my Aspergeriffic self seems to have missed that.
I figured out what that meant a long time ago, as my parents used it that way all the time (not in a passive-aggressive way, though), to the point where I tend to overgeneralize it now, and my sister will sometimes say "do you want to...? You don't have to, if you don't want to, it's ok" when she doesn't mean it as an imperative. Maybe I just Aspergered it the other way.
Astraios wrote:My mother put a relative clause where an adjective should go today, saying: "It was the light-haired from Spain man". I found it funny.
I think what's innovative (and funny! ) in that is the prepositional phrase "from Spain" that's been moved ahead of the noun "man" it modifies.
You can consider "light-haired" a RC, but you can also consider it a participle; and since a participle is a kind of adjective, and in English adjectives come before their head nouns, "light-haired man" is not innovative usage.
Risla wrote:I can't believe I've failed to mention this before, but use of "do you want to..." as an imperative marker is extremely common among a lot of people I around here. I got in trouble a few times as a kid (and still sometimes now, occasionally) because people would say "do you want to [insert chore here]" and I'd say no, I don't want to. It honestly confused me for a long time, since my Aspergeriffic self seems to have missed that.
I figured out what that meant a long time ago, as my parents used it that way all the time (not in a passive-aggressive way, though), to the point where I tend to overgeneralize it now, and my sister will sometimes say "do you want to...? You don't have to, if you don't want to, it's ok" when she doesn't mean it as an imperative. Maybe I just Aspergered it the other way.
I applaud both of your innovative derivations of the word "Asperger." Especially using it as a verb.
There is also the intransitive verb "sperg (out)". Sperg is a touch on the derogatory side I guess, but I'd still use the verb for myself - "whoops, I was sperging out there, sorry". (Even though I do not have the associated syndrome.)