Difference between revisions of "Talk:2390: Linguists"
(Created by dgbrtBOT) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--> | <!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--> | ||
| + | "Fell in a hole" sounds wrong, from a (possibly) Rightpondian perspective. If it was "...into...", then that'd be better. (Falling down a hole would probably imply total inholation, while into one might mean no more than a foot getting snagged. Though the former also separately implies starting from partial or imminent holedness, the latter indicates the hole was not previously a problem but then became a novel issue to deal with. Falling 'in' a hole could mean "I was already at the bottom of a hole, minding my own business, and then I tripped on something/lost my balance and fell over...") I also have problems with "Lit on fire", for something that is set fire to, but I know that's definitely a transatlantic issue. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.216|162.158.155.216]] 02:01, 26 November 2020 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 02:01, 26 November 2020
"Fell in a hole" sounds wrong, from a (possibly) Rightpondian perspective. If it was "...into...", then that'd be better. (Falling down a hole would probably imply total inholation, while into one might mean no more than a foot getting snagged. Though the former also separately implies starting from partial or imminent holedness, the latter indicates the hole was not previously a problem but then became a novel issue to deal with. Falling 'in' a hole could mean "I was already at the bottom of a hole, minding my own business, and then I tripped on something/lost my balance and fell over...") I also have problems with "Lit on fire", for something that is set fire to, but I know that's definitely a transatlantic issue. 162.158.155.216 02:01, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
