• Victor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    The amount of grammatical mistakes in your own comment is pretty ironic as well.

    Muphry’s Law strikes again.

    • hperrin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 day ago

      Excuse me, it’s Muphry’s Theory. It hasn’t been proven enough to be a scientific law.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Care to elaborate? I may have missed a comma here or there, but what else was wrong?

        I mean your own spelling is rather atrocious - especially when devices tend to have a spell check; “Muphry”? Is he a distant cousin of Murphy perchance?

        Oh and I use the Kings English here in my country, not “US English” ……

        Oh my word, this was embarrassing for you. 😂 My spelling was absolutely perfect, you shmuck. No wonder you deleted it before I even saw the reply in my inbox.

        • peanutyam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Hardly embarrassing - you don’t seem to understand light hearted banter clearly….yes I was playing on Murphy/Muphry.

          Geez straight to name calling though - classy 🙄

          Have a nice life.

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            You’re right. The schmuck name calling was perhaps a bit harsh on you.

            You were “playing” on Murphy/Muphry? What does that mean? It seems like you just didn’t know Muphry’s Law was a thing, and you tried to hang me for “misspelling” it, then you realized what it is and deleted the comment. But maybe I’m just assuming. 🤷‍♂️

            I don’t know if you’re bantering, perhaps you are. I just have a hobby of shitting on people’s grammar that complain about other people’s grammar. It’s this Robin Hood type of feeling I get. I’m probably sick or something.

            Take care!

    • peanutyam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Well then use this as a teaching moment and elaborate then?

      I live in a country that uses the King’s English, not the American version so please enlighten me - I do enjoy learning.

      But don’t say there are an amount of errors without even trying to quantify them….given the burden of proof rests with you.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Fair enough, let’s have at it, Mr. “King’s English”. (God, do you even hear how insufferably pretentious that sounds?)

        Let’s start with the original comment. My edits in [brackets].

        “God safe us” - [the] irony right there[… something? “is funny”? What about the irony? You have to finish the thought.][missing comma] especially when critical of someone else’s use of an acronym[comma] perhaps one’s own grasp of the English language should be a little better!!! [Overuse of exclamation points, although one could argue the level of severity in the contents of your message…]

        God save us …. [space between “us” and the ellipsis"; and an extra period after the ellipsis]

        Next comment!

        Well then[missing comma] use this as a teaching moment and elaborate[missing comma; also another “then”? Then then then then.] then?

        I live in a country that uses the King’s English[pretentious af but nothing wrong here], not the American version[missing comma] so please enlighten me - [hyphen instead of en dash] I do enjoy learning. [Good, you’re learning right now.]

        But don’t say there are [“is an amount”, probably? I don’t know what the King says, but that’s what I would say] an amount of errors without even trying to quantify them….given [again, ellipsis with an extra period; also the weird use of an ellipsis here – it should be a comma] the burden of proof rests with you.

        Did you learn something?

        • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Isn’t the first mistake simply him using the sentence to declare there is irony? How is that an incomplete sentence?

              • Victor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                Now, I’m not as much of a grammar nerd as I’d like to be, but from what I understand, “irony right there” isn’t a complete sentence, or barely even a complete clause. It’s just a few words that should be part of a clause.

                Maybe someone could fill in the grammatical details here, or prove me wrong.

                • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  I guess if he wrote “That’s irony right there”, it would be easier to consider it a complete sentence, so maybe you’re right.

                  • Victor@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 hours ago

                    Yes – exactly! I think that’s actually the missing part here: “That’s”. It makes the following thing they say sound much more complete. 👍 Thank you!