Wombsly Blockburger just isn't going to fly with Shannon. Neither (despite my many efforts) is Clark David Wilson Blockburger, Junior. So, there you go. I'm all out of ideas. That makes this your big chance to step up and offer any and all suggestions you might have. We've got another ultrasound slated for November 7th, so you've only got until then to offer names for both boys and girls. After that, we'll be focusing down our efforts. Also, for the moment we're trying to focus in on
good names, so you can just keep winners such as "Vandaleesha" and "Bamp" to yourself.
16 comments:
I have to vote for "Wendy." First, you are already used to a two-syllable name that starts with "W." Second, there is the obvious burger chain connection. Third... well, why not? Hope it's a girl. Wendy would be a terrible name for a boy.
I don't know, now that you've suggested Bamp, I think it's really great. I think I'll name my next thing Bamp.
I guess Bethletard is out, too, huh?
The word focus is used incorrectly in the above phrase "focusing down our efforts" a more appropriate usage would be to drop the "down" and just say "focusing our efforts," which is still awkward but sounds better.
By the way I think Sha'qwantae would be a good name.
Well, now we're really reaching, because "focus down" is a phrase commonly used throughout the American lexicon. Specifically, I know physicists that routinely "focus down" beams. Google supports my claim, as about 67,600 websites also use the phrase.
Secondly, can you say "run-on sentence"?
I think you're really reaching there, Sha'qwantae.
How about Mark David Wilson Blockburger? Or...get this--Doctor Blockburger, Ph.D. You guys will save sooo much money not having to put Wombsly through college!
"focuss down" "seperate out" while these phrases are communly used threwout the commun Amerrican lexicon, they are still incorect. As to google suporting your clame, I found 1,020,000 websites that used the "word" bootylicious. You may not know this but just becouse something is on the internet does not mean that it is corect.
Anonymous,
You have made the positive assertion, that "focus down" is "incorrect". However, you have done nothing to support that claim. I would be interested to see a demonstration of where the error lies in my phrasing.
From Merriam-Webster's online dictionary:
focus[verb]: to cause to be concentrated, or to concentrate.
concentrate[verb]: to bring or direct toward a common center or objective : focus (concentrate one's efforts)
So, "to focus" and "to concentrate" are interchangeable. Therefore the fact that the English dictionary uses "concentrate one's efforts" as an example supports my claim that "focusing our efforts" is correct.
Anon,
No one has suggested that the phrase "focusing our efforts" is incorrect. You, however, did claim that "the word focus is used incorrectly in the above phrase 'focusing down our efforts'". As of yet, no arguments have been made to support this.
Looks like Sha'qwantae is having logic problems. The old "I'm right, therefore you are wrong - even though all I've done is call you wrong and my correctness does not mutually exclude your correctness."
So, are you saying that "loosing weight" is equally correct with "losing weight?" I guess you would also be saying that it's and its are interchangeable, along with who's and whose. I wish you had been MY third grade teacher. It would have made all those silly grammar tests a breeze.
"So, 'to focus' and 'to concentrate' are interchangeable."
I'm sorry, are you recanting the fact that there can be more than 1 way to say something?
To the elusive anonymous:
Your comments were amusing at first, but now they're getting old and ridiculous. You must have really had problems with 'then' and 'than' to take such offense.
People can say whatever they want on their blogs. If we all blogged like we were writing an essay, nobody would want to read them.
Sha'qwantae - Of course "loosing" and "losing" aren't both right. I was refering to the "focusing down" argument you started in this post thread, which if you were reading for context rather than just for grammar, you would have understood.
I can't fathom why you think proofreading Clark's blog is a good use of your time. Do you proofread the whole internet? If so, I think there are people out there who need your help much more than Clark.
First of all, the good news. I am the one you called "Grammar Nazi" and as of this post, I am resigning. You are right. Reading these blogs is a big waste of time. The bads news is that I am NOT Sha'Quantae. She may still be interesting in this editing job.
Post a Comment