On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 08:19:40AM -0500, Randy Kramer wrote: > On Sunday 04 March 2012 06:53:37 am Chris Bannister wrote: > > > Thank you > > > (I read "The Grammar of English Grammars" by Goold Brown. finished 35 > > > of 11294 in one month. Hope can finish one day). > > > > Just be aware, the Americans have their own version of English. > > I would have said just the opposite--the English have their own version of > English. ;-) Oh, but I guess they did get there first. ;-)
Why try and confuse Lina? > And then I see the .nz on your address, I know the Australians have their own > version of English, I'll bet the New Zealanders do, also. We still use the basic English words, (i.e. boot instead of trunk, Mum instead of Mom, etc. etc. etc) although that seems to be changing as more Americanisms creep into usage. For example, I now notice that first year University students are now referred to as "freshers" in some literature. > > "The Grammar of English Grammars" is the wrong book to be reading, > > i.e., there is no such word as "Grammars" > > Then what is the plural of grammar? There certainly seems to be a need / use There isn't one. What is the plural of syntax? What is the plural of sheep? Have a look at: http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101017091521AAqPonZ Basically[1], the answer is: No, grammar is an uncountable noun and, therefore, cannot become a plural. [1] http://thescreamonline.com/essays/essays08-01/basically.html -- "Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet." -- Napoleon Bonaparte -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120304153012.GA8429@tal
