Never Marry a REALLY Hot Men?

<heehee>

If he doesn't realize that he's hot, it can be very sweet.

I don't know. How much money does he have?

In fairness, shouldn't the title be: "Never marry a REALLY Hot Men?"

Done.

Gosh, some people are really language sticklers around here. Next they'll be demanding the Queen's English. :wink:

If you stuck to the Queen's English communication would be more efficient.That is what the Queen's English is designed and refined for.I trust you don't think it is an affectation because if you do I suspect that is your excuse for saving yourselves the effort of taking a degree of command over it without which you can soon end up communicating with no-one.

Communication does involve both transmission and reception.Extreme examples of transmission only types are often to be found in padded cells.Reception only types hear voices in their heads.

Setanta is only an apprentice language stickler but he's a fast learner and may well come to be the scourge of the forum.

The first priority of a totalitarian regime is to undermine and ultimately wreck the efficient communication system of the proles,and if,tcis,you are working on that project,as many are,you are doing above a passble job of it.If not-then you are being a trifle foolish to put it politely.

The purity of the language is our only hope of retaining our hard won freedoms which some of us would like to pass on to future generations.


So cheap jibes at the Queen's English are self-serving strategies cooked up by the lazy to try to encourage others into the same pit.

Tcis, the reference to the title is just a joke arising from the error in the title of the thread about "hot women"--which had a singular article, and the plural noun.

It was just a bit of silliness, and i wasn't suggesting you had made an error. In fact, your original title was correct, and the noun agreed with the article.

But please carry on . . . which is, of course, what Spendius has just done . . . and good morning/afternoon to you, Spendius, you cantankerous old Sassenach . . .

Hi Setanta:-

That was good last night I thought.I've looked up the word in the OED.

Also the words with the same stem.I'll try to get to it tonight.

But I stayed up a bit late and,as a result,am still a bit sluggish.

The Spooners from RP and Clary are much improved which I like to think is one result of my earlier strictures.A liitle effort goes a long way in this world.

I trust you agree with the post you see above.One sometimes has to risk being cantankerous or the other side get a free run.Not that I think tcis is of the other side.Possibly just never had thought about it.Hopefully I changed that.

Regards

Until he finally clues in to the fact he's hot.

In my 20's I was with a guy like that, it was good for the first 9 months, when he finally woke up to the fact he was hot.

He had a lot of wild oats to sow, and boy did he plough the fields.
Being young and stupid, I put up with it for 2 more years.
Sheesh.

Karma happens though - He married a woman he had gotten pregnant, and last I heard, everytime he brings up leaving her, guess what!

They're up to 4 "accidents" now.


It was definitley a learning experience. I have NEVER tolerated infidelity since then. I'm way too wonderful for that.

Spendius, my take on the Queen's English is, the stilteder the betterer . . .

Setanta:-

Stilted is going a touch too far,The formal is okay but the pompous I would dispute.Pompous is in the style.

Veblen is an expert with the QE but you could hardly say he was pompous.

Do I come over as pompous?I have looked in the thesaurus under magniloquence and ostentation,which are two of the subdivisions of pomposity,and,without seeming to be pushing my own boat out,I hardly think I am described.Perhaps we can ask Lola to adjudicate as she has had a fair exposure to my style and is amply qualified to judge it.

No Boss, i was indulging a bit of self-deprecation there, a fine old tradition of Hibernian humor. Note the use of "stilteder" and "betterer"--which also introduces some 'Merican self-deprecation.

There is a subtle buffoonery to the best of low humor, which is that to which i aspire.

And it can be expressed quite well, also, as in Winston Churchill's bon mot on the topic of ending sentences with prepositions:

That is something up with which i will not put.

I am told frequently that I resemble a well hung version of Mel Gibson, but I can't see it myself.

Neither can we.

Maybe, we're all sweet then....who knows?

I'm sweet when I want to be.

Yes you do spendius. Perhaps you keep in mind, that not
everone of us considers Engish as our mother tongue. The
Queen's English comes natural to you, not to some of us.
Impolite is the adjective that comes to my mind, when I read
some of your postings (not all).

Setanta:-

For sure I noticed it.I wouldn't call it self-deprecation though.Quite the contrary.

The point about language usage and totalitarianism is an important one.Mailer has tried to bang it into us for years.He banged it into me.I can hear what he railed against on every news broadcast.And many others have done the same.

You might like Finnegan's Wake.There is some advanced buffoonery and stylish low humour in that once you pick up da lingo.Which isn't easy but what is that's worthwhile?

Setanta:-

I'm a bit ginko on this and you are probably an expert.

Could you explain that "Message body" thing for me and possibly for others.Sometimes I would like to use italics and colour and BIG TYPE and anything else of interest.