What happened to English grammar?

#nowtransparentaswellasthick

#talented

The Annecy thread was not deleted, J08, but your post was, at your request. You posted a little further on, when people had protested :-

"Yes. It was inappropriate. I should not have got sidetracked like that.

I will ask Gransnet to delete those posts." That is still there. you also commented later that you had been joking.

I can't remember now what you originally said, but I remember that it was not thought to be at all suitable to the subject.

bags why would you sink a shop?

Well, as I can't remember it it is hard to comment. It sounds like I got distracted. I must admit the people concerned in that case were not personally k nown to me and so, though I remember it was horrific, it would not have had me completely on the floor personally. Well, you'd go mad would n't you'

And I am called insensitive!

Bags, sunken is an adjective, describing a ship - only verbs are considered to be transitive (taking an object) or intransitive (not taking an object). Shall I go back into pedants' corner!
Is it worth my while repeating that I did not say anything disrespectful about this man, nor about my views on the rightness or otherwise of the War.?
Nor was I making a joke - I consider bad grammar in newspapers to be a serious matter.

Do you not know what the words "I remember it was horrific" mean Greatnan?

I never said it was deleted (the thread) Elegran.

" it was not thought to be at all suitable to the subject. "

I can imagine.

"and don't throw stones at the pot."

Totally now!

Well, as said, we were always taught that the past simple is 'sank' and that the perfect tense is used with the auxiliary 'to have' + past participle 'sunk'.
But I agree that foreign languages teachers are often more nit picking than native ones

The important fact being that we do not know, on an open forum, if the subject matter, even if it was not the point of the post, could be hugely upsetting for some posters. How do we know that no-one here, or their close relatives or friends, was/were involved as army personnel in the Falklands war, and met their demise or severe injury there??? Totally irrespective of what we thought about said war. And yes, totally irrespective of the poster, insensitive.

Ooh Bags! Envious!

Well, J08 people who live in glass houses calling kettles black are already so throwing stones at pots could be a shattering experience for them!

I do like these threads that have several conversations all going on at once!

Envious of Bags being transparentaswellasthick Jane, or talented?

Thick wasn't the right word. Not in the sense of brain thickness.

Apparently, any kind of subject matter could be upsetting for some member, so perhaps we should all stop posting!
Why on earth should an innocent thread about bad grammar from a newspaper give rise to this kind of comment?

......shakes head and gives up.....

No, I was just quoting Bags herself, jngl. I know you didn't mean thick as in unintelligent...

No! I didn't mean to refer to your post Ana.

#roundincircles

Oh I see, you were referring back to your #

Oh well, what I said still applies!

galen, . Just got as far as your post. I noticed that I shopped the first ship but not the second. You might sink a shop you were angry with, mightn't you? Figuratively speaking.

But then, would you have sunk it or sank it....?

I am sure you are sincere in what you say GN- but I could make up a sentence with exactly the same lack of syntax and grammatical error- which I am sure you would find totally insensitive, irrespective of the fact it was meant to be about grammar. I am surprised you can't see this, really and truly. The death of a close one is rarely a good joke... even if you are talking about the grammar, surely?

I'd have made the same comment totally irrespective of the poster-and has nothing to do with a personal attack.