Aussie Group Re-Runs 4 - Page 12

DrSpike · February 23, 2003, 19:29

Perhaps Warne got his ban revoked.

finbar · February 23, 2003, 21:22

Quote:

Originally posted by DrSpike
Perhaps Warne got his ban revoked.

He's celebrating because Warnie's Mum gave him a diuretic too. And he was tested at the same time as Warnie. But the nicotine in his system masked the presence of the diuretic.

deity · February 23, 2003, 21:38

he he

Well, Horsie has declared war on me again

One of my horse-traps went off!

For eons I refused a peace treaty so I could send diplos all over his countryside withpout expulsion. Finally he cracks and declares war on me to kill diplos. Then he builds Sun Tzu and Great Wall immediately; then goes into Monarchy and has tons of units....

Anyone brave enough to predict the outcome??

finbar · February 24, 2003, 00:45

The usual boredom on other players' parts.

Alexander's Horse · February 24, 2003, 00:55

Can you explain your use of the apostrophe there please? I always get that one confused.

finbar · February 24, 2003, 03:40

How many players are there apart from you and Deity? More than one. Hence players. Plural. In a plural case involving an "s", the possessive apostrophe goes after the "s". It can't go before the "s" - player's - because that's how you indicate a singular possessive and we want to indicate a plural possessive.

OTOH, the plural of child is children. For the singular - one child - you would write, for example, "the child's bike". But because there is no "s" involved in the plural, to designate the plural you would write "the chidren's bike" (if there is only one bike) or "the children's bikes" (if there's more than one bike).

Language is a glorious thing. But in this case it just boils down to logic.

DrSpike · February 24, 2003, 05:23

Quote:

Originally posted by finbar
The usual boredom on other players' parts.

Maybe during the game, but it spices things up later on.

deity · February 24, 2003, 07:13

Well finbar, time you attacked someone....

Alexander's Horse · February 24, 2003, 07:47

Quote:

Originally posted by finbar
How many players are there apart from you and Deity? More than one. Hence players. Plural. In a plural case involving an "s", the possessive apostrophe goes after the "s". It can't go before the "s" - player's - because that's how you indicate a singular possessive and we want to indicate a plural possessive.

OTOH, the plural of child is children. For the singular - one child - you would write, for example, "the child's bike". But because there is no "s" involved in the plural, to designate the plural you would write "the chidren's bike" (if there is only one bike) or "the children's bikes" (if there's more than one bike).

Language is a glorious thing. But in this case it just boils down to logic.

Thanks for the explanation

This all accords with what I was taught but I still normally run a mile from using the plural possessive because so few people these days understand it.

finbar · February 24, 2003, 22:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse

Thanks for the explanation

This all accords with what I was taught but I still normally run a mile from using the plural possessive because so few people these days understand it.

Possessives - and, for that matter, apostrophes - are firmly rooted in logic. They're really a lot less scary than they seem.

Hydey · February 25, 2003, 17:47

Alexander's Horse · February 26, 2003, 19:53

Anyone showing up Thursday night?

finbar · February 27, 2003, 00:25

I might. Subject to the usual.

Alexander's Horse · February 27, 2003, 06:41

*finbar and horse watch the blinking icq of deity and hydey*

Hydey · February 27, 2003, 08:12

Bah I said I was busy and could not play

stupid horse

I can play on friday

deity · February 27, 2003, 08:28

same...

Hydey · February 27, 2003, 17:33

Yes he is a stupid horse

deity · February 27, 2003, 21:38

stupid horse...

Alexander's Horse · February 27, 2003, 23:38

Glad to hear you both can play

finbar · February 28, 2003, 00:28

Even if they're starting to sound like Abbott and Costello.

Alexander's Horse · February 28, 2003, 00:34

(nothing...)

deity · February 28, 2003, 01:31

wonder if Trev will be here for the 5 way.. otherwise our warring 4 way

SuperSneak · February 28, 2003, 03:31

Quote:

Originally posted by finbar

Possessives - and, for that matter, apostrophes - are firmly rooted in logic. They're really a lot less scary than they seem.

Care to be the elucidator on the topic of conjunctions?

Hydey · February 28, 2003, 05:48

Quote:

Originally posted by finbar
Even if they're starting to sound like Abbott and Costello.

Better than Howard and Costello

deity · February 28, 2003, 06:13

Go Bush...

Alexander's Horse · February 28, 2003, 06:17

Quote:

Originally posted by SuperSneak

Care to be the elucidator on the topic of conjunctions?

guest appearances by Sneak

finbar · February 28, 2003, 06:17

Quote:

Originally posted by SuperSneak

Care to be the elucidator on the topic of conjunctions?

What about them?

DrSpike · February 28, 2003, 10:33

Yeah it's a pretty vague question. I think he just wanted to use the word 'conjunction' in a sentence.

SuperSneak · February 28, 2003, 11:38

I think I meant contraction, actually. I seem to have an aversion to placing my apostrophe properly when using them.
It's shameful, really.
Hey...do you guys have Bisquick in Oz? The wife made a lovely casserole using it last night--quite versatile stuff--great for leftovers.

DrSpike · February 28, 2003, 11:45

Just put the apostrophe where the letter has been removed.

For example is not becomes isn't.