Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:PS. There HAVE BEEN tons of threads....(although that's a dubious grammatical construct at best)
not "there's been". ugh.
I'm 18:04; we you correcting me? I said 'there's been a ton of threads,' and I think that's grammatically correct.
this kills me lol. "there's been" is the same as saying "there is been". okay?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:PS. There HAVE BEEN tons of threads....(although that's a dubious grammatical construct at best)
not "there's been". ugh.
I'm 18:04; we you correcting me? I said 'there's been a ton of threads,' and I think that's grammatically correct.
'There has been tons' is incorrect. 'There have been tons' is correct.
But i said, "there's been a ton" -- isn't that correct?
NO, it's not, because if you "uncontract" the contraction "there's" it is "there is." And "there is been a ton" is not correct, as you, me, and everyone else can recognize.
Anonymous wrote:Sick of the posters that are not even in the DC area.
Anonymous wrote:hahahahaha. really, 6 pages and you didn't realize this? grammar police poster (well, one of you) you have been pwnd.
Anonymous wrote:
Jesus Christ on a Broken Stick, you are WRONG lady.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:PS. There HAVE BEEN tons of threads....(although that's a dubious grammatical construct at best)
not "there's been". ugh.
I'm 18:04; we you correcting me? I said 'there's been a ton of threads,' and I think that's grammatically correct.
'There has been tons' is incorrect. 'There have been tons' is correct.
But i said, "there's been a ton" -- isn't that correct?
NO, it's not, because if you "uncontract" the contraction "there's" it is "there is." And "there is been a ton" is not correct, as you, me, and everyone else can recognize.
Jesus Christ on a Broken Stick, you are WRONG lady.
Anonymous wrote:Blogger Moms who post here... Oooo aaaaa I have a blog. I write. Blah blah blah.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:PS. There HAVE BEEN tons of threads....(although that's a dubious grammatical construct at best)
not "there's been". ugh.
I'm 18:04; we you correcting me? I said 'there's been a ton of threads,' and I think that's grammatically correct.
'There has been tons' is incorrect. 'There have been tons' is correct.
But i said, "there's been a ton" -- isn't that correct?
NO, it's not, because if you "uncontract" the contraction "there's" it is "there is." And "there is been a ton" is not correct, as you, me, and everyone else can recognize.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"I think the poster is trying to contract "there's" as "there has". LOL."
Yes, and he/she would be correct. Contracting 'there has' is completely acceptable, and quite common. Example: "there's been a break-in!"
But wasn't the original correction that the correct word to use was HAVE not HAS? I took it that way, not that she assumed use of the word IS versus HAS.
No. The first poster griped about people that post saying "there's been a ton of threads like this". Grammar police corrected that poster, incorrectly, by saying they should have said HAVE been tons.
Oh my god. Going to bed now, I'm so bored.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"I think the poster is trying to contract "there's" as "there has". LOL."
Yes, and he/she would be correct. Contracting 'there has' is completely acceptable, and quite common. Example: "there's been a break-in!"
But wasn't the original correction that the correct word to use was HAVE not HAS? I took it that way, not that she assumed use of the word IS versus HAS.
Anonymous wrote:"I think the poster is trying to contract "there's" as "there has". LOL."
Yes, and he/she would be correct. Contracting 'there has' is completely acceptable, and quite common. Example: "there's been a break-in!"