Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 22:17:23 +0200
From: Julien Pourtet <yulinux@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (X11/20040506)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.languages.english
Subject: Re: Grammar....
References: <aytpc.64$XY4.55@newsfe1-win>
In-Reply-To: <aytpc.64$XY4.55@newsfe1-win>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <40a67ad3$0$3760$626a14ce@news.free.fr>
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 May 2004 22:17:23 MEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.56.200.70
X-Trace: 1084652243 news9-e.free.fr 3760 81.56.200.70:10200
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.languages.english:277
squish wrote:
> Hi, I discovered the following phrases are amibious - which one 'sounds'
> more correct than the other?! Confuses me....
>
> "Is she and adam still an item?"
>
> "Are she and adam still an item?"
>
> by 'item' - it means 'still in a relationship' - in this sense.
>
> I thought "Are adam and nicola sitll an item?' would be perfectly
> reasonable, so why wouldn't "Are adam and she still an item?" or "Are she
> and Adam still an item?" be acceptable also?
>
> Och jesus it's confused you too now eh....
As for me, the second one sounds more correct.
--
Julien Pourtet
|
|