How can you tell me about something that is unconscious?jawakiller said:It lowers my opinion of you. Unconsciously. Its unfortunate but true.
Ah, but I don't have to interact with you (other than commenting). If you were someone I knew, it would matter. Its actually sub-consciously, so my fault on the choice of words.Harry Mason said:How can you tell me about something that is unconscious?jawakiller said:It lowers my opinion of you. Unconsciously. Its unfortunate but true.
Also, I could raise your opinion of me and lower it with equal ease.
Want to see?
I work multiple jobs while attending college full time to support my mentally challenged younger sister.
*Opinion raised*
I get drunk and hoot and holler at Metal concerts.
*Opinion lowered*
I counsel troubled inner-city teens as volunteer work.
*Opinion raised*
I own a banjo.
*Opinion lowered*
I am a published poet.
*Opinion raised*
I smear purple glitter make up on my eyes and dance to Daft Punk in my underwear.
*Opinion lowered*
I could subject you to this emotional roller-coaster all day...
Actually formal pronouns lost popularity hundreds of years ago. The peasants at the time spoke a more base form of the language that was simpler and easier to use and learn. It eventually overtook the entire system and formed what we knows as modern English as opposed to middle English. That is, unless my knowledge of things is wrong of course I learned most of this in my high school English class and its been a while.Harry Mason said:English has lost a lot of words due to disuse, but most of them are formal pronouns, like you said. Formal pronouns becoming extinct in English makes sense to me. The importance of status has waned due to civil rights, changes in the economy, etc. What I can't figure out is why something as USEFUL as a gender neutral second person plural pronoun would disappear.Twilight_guy said:OT: I think English used to have a second person plural int he same way it used to have a formal pronouns, like "thy." They were lost overtime from lack of use with lots of other parts of English as it evolved. If its underused enough to not warrant continued inclusion in the language its probably not something that is a major concern. Still, We could just have the official people in charge of official English create a second person plural pronoun.
It's interesting to think about.
I'm with this guy. I'm not a native English speaker though...but I still think context is all thats needed.loc978 said:I've never had cause to use it... I really don't see the need to differentiate. Context provides all the meaning a person could need, if they pay attention.
Also, those who do use it tend to use it interchangeably with "you". I've often heard a single person addressed as "y'all". Not fond of the term at all.
That's one funny fetish.Paksenarrion said:I wasn't born in the South, but my bf apparently gets a kick out of me saying "Y'all" whenever I'm wearing denim short shorts and a plaid button down shirt tied around my midriff.
The strangest part: I don't own denim short shorts or a plaid button down shirt.
He bought them for me. <_<
1. It's an everywhere-that-isn't-a-podunk-cultural-junkyard thing.ZephrC said:I've actually started using y'all myself for pretty much the same reasons you've laid out. Plus I'm originally from eastern Washington, but living in western Washington now, so I enjoy hamming up the hick on occasion. Nobody ever reacts badly around here though, so I guess the hatred of the term must be an east coast thing?
Also, ain't is a perfectly acceptable word to me. It's just a more pronounceable contraction of am not. You can't really say amn't comfortably, can you? Ain't fills that gap nicely.
Well yesiree, bob! I'll just go back to fucking sheep and leave y'all edjumacated folk to your fancy grammar and such!ten.to.ten said:1. It's an everywhere-that-isn't-a-podunk-cultural-junkyard thing.ZephrC said:I've actually started using y'all myself for pretty much the same reasons you've laid out. Plus I'm originally from eastern Washington, but living in western Washington now, so I enjoy hamming up the hick on occasion. Nobody ever reacts badly around here though, so I guess the hatred of the term must be an east coast thing?
Also, ain't is a perfectly acceptable word to me. It's just a more pronounceable contraction of am not. You can't really say amn't comfortably, can you? Ain't fills that gap nicely.
2. It's "I'm not", not "amn't".
Don't forget to fetch some water from the crick to warsh the winders with while you're out. Thanks buddy.ZephrC said:Well yesiree, bob! I'll just go back to fucking sheep and leave y'all edjumacated folk to your fancy grammar and such!
Okay, you got me. I have no idea what winders are.ten.to.ten said:Don't forget to fetch some water from the crick to warsh the winders with while you're out. Thanks buddy.ZephrC said:Well yesiree, bob! I'll just go back to fucking sheep and leave y'all edjumacated folk to your fancy grammar and such!
Windows. Sorry, I was only joking really, but last year I spent about three months living with my parents-in-law from rural Ohio and whenever topics like these come up I can hear their horrible voices playing like an orchestra in my brain.ZephrC said:Okay, you got me. I have no idea what winders are.