Advance warning to all responsible New Zealand road users

Linger wrote

All you need to do was look out for the helicopter hovering unlawfully
low over top of it.

 

Yes, but the people who use it don't know that.

I had a v. old fashioned English teacher from 11-16. Unconventional,
and brilliant, but a sticker for certain things. "Dave and me" vs
"Dave and I" was another one he drummed into us.

 

Oh, I see what you mean. "You can lead a whore to culture, but you
can't make her think".

nice to see that you're sticking to the tradition that in any spelling
or grammar flame/point of order, you manage to make a mistake, however
subtle in this case.

 

The way I was taught that one was to construct the sentence as if it only
applied to the first person.

You'd say "I went to the pub at lunchtime", but "The boss gave me a
bollocking for coming back pissed"

So, when you involve Dave, it becomes "Dave and I went to the pub at
lunchtime" and "The boss gave me and Dave a bollocking for coming back
pissed".

--
AndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas)
Kawasaki ZX-6R J1, Fiat Coupe 20v Turbo
BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL)
BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, DS#5, COSOC# Suspended, KotTFSTR#
The speccy Geordie twat.

 

If he's got any sense he'd keep quiet about the second part. Didn't
your teacher teach you *anything* useful? ;-)

 

And it's amazing how many people get it wrong.

 

He didn't teach "usenet proof-reading", and if he had, I'd have found
something better to do.

 

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "AndrewR"

I don't remember that; I must've been pissed.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

 

Pederastic threesomes? That's certainly considered an unconventional
way to teach English.

 

How many others are there, then?

Will it trip my binary filter?

 

Good luck. Enjoy.

 

I'd say "Me and Dave are going up the pub"

 

Dave is going to have a hell of a hangover after everyone's taken him
to the pub tonight.

 

That's not the point he was making, YTC.

Plus, "I'm going to the pub with Dave." would be a better way of
phrasing it. IMHO.

Next you'll be asking why Dave's spending all this time down the pub if
he's supposed to be getting married... Actually that's more of a worthy
question. What's the answer then Sherlock?

 

He's getting married?

 

WOOHOO!

--
Veggie Dave
UKRMHRC#2 BOTAFOF#08
IQ 18 FILMS http://www.iq18films.com
Extreme Racing http://www.veggie-dave.co.uk
Toxic Shock Syndrome Gets More Girls Than Me

 

It's a pain, but I live with it

Funny you should say that...

--
Veggie Dave
UKRMHRC#2 BOTAFOF#08
IQ 18 FILMS http://www.iq18films.com
Extreme Racing http://www.veggie-dave.co.uk
Toxic Shock Syndrome Gets More Girls Than Me

 

Cool, you own a ghost. Well I suppose it runs in the family.

 

Oh, I know. And my brother toes the party line that once something
enters into common usage, then it's acceptable [0]

My own preference is simply for more elegant use of language, which is
my justification for sticking to the old ways (sometimes).


[0] In contrast to Des and Ace (amusing to see them on the same
"side") who think that rules are rules are rules.

 

Not really that many, funnily enough: Dave and I vs Dave and me;
filled in vs filled out [form]. Some others which don't immediately
spring to mind.

Here's something I can never remember: my sister was born in 1968, my
brother John was born in 1971, I was born in 1975 and my brother
Daniel was born in 1978. So: is John my "older" brother, my "elder"
brother", or my "eldest" brother? etc