Account name:
Password
(OpenID?)
(Forgot it?)
Remember Me
You're viewing
maderr
's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account
Learn More
Interest
Region
Site and Account
FAQ
Email
Reload page in style:
site
light
Amaretto Sour
sour, sweet & tipsy
???
???
May
.
21st
,
2004
02:19 pm
maderr
I just wrote "more clever" and my spell check insists it should be "cleverer." Is that grammatically correct? Because it doesn't seem like it to me.
Current Mood:
confused
Current Music:
ichiban no refrain from getbackers
Threaded
|
Top-Level Comments Only
no subject
Date:
2004-05-21 11:24 am (UTC)
From:
thornsilver
Yes, because "clever" has only two syllables. I don't think anybody actually *follows* that rule, though.
no subject
Date:
2004-05-21 12:09 pm (UTC)
From:
maderr.livejournal.com
Huh, learn something new every day. 'cleverer' it is then. thankee.
no subject
Date:
2004-05-21 12:20 pm (UTC)
From:
thornsilver
Or you can use "smarter"? :)
no subject
Date:
2004-05-21 12:26 pm (UTC)
From:
maderr.livejournal.com
lol. I guess that would be the obvious solution.
no subject
Date:
2004-05-21 01:13 pm (UTC)
From:
indigoraven.livejournal.com
Honestly, rules aside... I say whatever sounds better in the context. I don't trust my spell-grammar checker worth a damn sometimes.
no subject
Date:
2004-05-21 05:18 pm (UTC)
From:
tsaiko.livejournal.com
I agree. Use whatever sounds better. I stopped listening to my grammer check when it told me that "Queen" in "Queen Elizabeth" was too gender specific and that I should use a more gender nuetral term like "Ruler."
no subject
Date:
2004-05-22 09:36 am (UTC)
From:
maderr.livejournal.com
*blink* too gender...that's one I haven't encountered before.
7 comments
Reply
Threaded
|
Top-Level Comments Only
Profile
maderr
Style Credit
Style:
Plain
for
Tabula Rasa
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 19th, 2026 06:14 am
Powered by
Dreamwidth Studios
no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 11:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 12:09 pm (UTC)Huh, learn something new every day. 'cleverer' it is then. thankee.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 12:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 12:26 pm (UTC)lol. I guess that would be the obvious solution.
no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 01:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-21 05:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-05-22 09:36 am (UTC)*blink* too gender...that's one I haven't encountered before.