According to the National Marfan Foundation, as well as wikipedia, both are correct. If it is named for a person, it may be written as their surname (possessive) or simply by their surname. In American English, it is more often rendered by the surname possessive. Degree in American English Cheesecake.
I apologise good Sir for correcting a mistake which didn't exist, make joyous the use of good grammar (I blame me being stupid on the lack of drinks at the minute lol)
I also said you're instead of your, twice. Sadface about yonder motherboard. If I had a functioning spare, you'd totally have it. Pepsi win!
How in Satans butthole have you gone from netspeak to archaic medievil to californication in two sentences?! Awesome face P.S. Archaic stuff is great to use every now and then to confuse people, especially Americans (nothing prejudiced intended there). When you start with all the thee's, thou's, hitherto's and foreasmuche's the blank stares make it all worth while. Also, if you're good enough, you can make one sentence last about a week
"Fool. The point, you doth miss. What we are saying is that the people with the worst English / Grammar / punctuation as in actual fact the people who speak it as a first language- it's quite obvious when a person isn't actually a native English speaker and is struggling slightly, those folks are easily forgiven. No, it is actually the horrid little oiks whom are so used to 'txt speak' and more concerned with typing quickly in order to counter another persons post who are the worst offenders; I had a lovely state education in a pretty average school but I passed my GCSEs with an A & B in English language & literature, because I paid attention during lessons." I fear it is thee the point doth miss. The OP was not bemoaning the horrid little oiks who textspeak, but those who actually have no idea of the different meanings of the example he gave. These are people who have learnt English, but have not been taught it - there is a difference. You can learn to speak perfect English from a CD language course, but be totally incapapble of writing "The cat sat on the mat". If you have only ever heard people say "I could've ......." it's not unreasonable to assume that they are saying "I could of......", and so to think that is the correct construction. While the teaching of formal rules of grammar can help, it is only by reading that you can pick up all the nuances of different sentence construction, and spelling. I can remember when very young being castigated for writing the first line of the Paternoster as "Our Father, which are tin heaven" The word "art" as a form of the verb "to be" was totally unknown to me. When national news bulletins use expressions like "The HMS Ark Royal" there is little hope of those who may be unsure of the correct way getting it right. Yes there is an awful lot of people who simply can't be bothered to use good English, but there is also an awful lot who simply don't know how to, through no fault of their own.
rofl Yeah I'm surprised I didn't see it myself but this is obviously a typo. It's not like I didn't know how to spell "particular" and wrote "particle" instead
Just to be a grammar nazi. Have you people noted that the name of Relix is not begun with a capital R in the little text box that pops up when you give someone rep? This should be fixed immediately!
This means nothing. I know people with English degrees who can't spell for toffee (and probably can't spell "toffee" without reaching for a dictionary )
On the whole "Where does the full stop go" (Or to Americanize it for the colonials: "Where does the period go"), there are (of course), two schools of thought. The first (older) style says that the full stop, comma, etc., go outside the quotation. It also says that you are supposed to put two spaces before starting a new sentence, but HTML has pretty much killed that off. The second (newer) style says the full stop, comma, etc., go inside the quotation, to match any other punctuation that may be taking place within the quote. Of course, neither one covers such wonderful things as , which crams a lot of punctuation into a small space. And, on a completely unrelated note, what is the most number of times you can legitimately, consecutively, repeat a word in a sentence? Spoiler 5: While looking at the sign above the store, James wondered if there should be more space between the "Marks" and "And", and "And" and "Spencer".
Language evolves, we have to live with it, no point getting too worried about it. English used to have grammatical gender until 6/700 years ago, people don't bemoan that anymore.
OH SNAP! Only two or three posts into reading the thread and I spotted a grammar hypocrite! This thread is pure gold for me, I could spend hours here!
