| Greetings to those who are guests and possibly prospective members of this site. I won't lie, the site is not excessively active but it has a daily presence of members. There is a level of activity that is more laid back and that may suit some people more than others. If you prefer no pressure posting and social discussions and interactions then this is the place for you. Have a look at our available forums to see what we offer as a site. If anything strikes your mood, why not talk to someone in the Chatango chat box at the bottom of every page. If you like what you see then why not join the community. |
| Alex! I Have A Bone to Pick With You!; And I'm making it public! | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: May 9 2012, 11:30 PM (1,055 Views) | |
| 『 』 | May 10 2012, 01:17 AM Post #16 |
![]()
Get Rekt M8
|
Irregardless of what you all say; Han shoots first = now canon. So I shot first.
|
![]() |
|
| DFlame | May 10 2012, 01:20 AM Post #17 |
![]()
guy who is never around
|
|
![]() |
|
| 『 』 | May 10 2012, 01:23 AM Post #18 |
![]()
Get Rekt M8
|
|
![]() |
|
| Mistriousfrog | May 10 2012, 01:34 AM Post #19 |
![]()
The God of Conquest
|
It is a real word jerk head! |
![]() |
|
| DFlame | May 10 2012, 01:38 AM Post #20 |
![]()
guy who is never around
|
It's redundant and improper. *hijacks thread about bitching about Star Wars to bitch about Grammar* |
![]() |
|
| Dragoknighte | May 10 2012, 01:38 AM Post #21 |
![]()
|
Silly Jeff, I have the original VHS too. And it doesn't matter who shot first anyways. Greedo was shot dead either way. |
![]() |
|
| Mistriousfrog | May 10 2012, 01:39 AM Post #22 |
![]()
The God of Conquest
|
It is not at all redundant and even to call it improper or colloquial would be pushing it. |
![]() |
|
| DFlame | May 10 2012, 01:42 AM Post #23 |
![]()
guy who is never around
|
It is. "Irregardless" means the same thing as "Regardless." [L] Edited by Lithas, May 10 2012, 01:46 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Mistriousfrog | May 10 2012, 01:49 AM Post #24 |
![]()
The God of Conquest
|
incorrect. It is semantics, but there is a difference. he has actually used the word wrong there due to the fact that the prefix (ir) is a negative which combined wiht the negative regardless creates a double negative thus making it mean it actually should be considered, however despite the literal interpretation of the word the fact that it is nonstandard while still in common use with its technically incorrect definition means that it is an acceptable word. |
![]() |
|
| Lithas | May 10 2012, 01:51 AM Post #25 |
![]()
The One
|
Frog, there is never a reason to use irregardless |
![]() |
|
| DFlame | May 10 2012, 01:52 AM Post #26 |
![]()
guy who is never around
|
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=irregardless+definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless http://www.thefreedictionary.com/irregardless http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irregardless |
![]() |
|
| Mistriousfrog | May 10 2012, 01:53 AM Post #27 |
![]()
The God of Conquest
|
The same can be said for any nonstandard word when there is a academically acceptable "official" word that could be used in its place. |
![]() |
|
| Lithas | May 10 2012, 02:00 AM Post #28 |
![]()
The One
|
Correct. That is why "nonstandard" words are incorrect. |
![]() |
|
| Mistriousfrog | May 10 2012, 02:02 AM Post #29 |
![]()
The God of Conquest
|
it is not that they are incorrect, it is merely that they are considered by certain parties to be inferior to the often sesquipedalian "correct" alternatives. |
![]() |
|
| Issa | May 10 2012, 02:09 AM Post #30 |
![]()
|
Dammit, you beat me to it! |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Chatterbox · Next Topic » |












7:24 PM Jul 11