b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 9826456 (Thread)

# Herr Claus what was your involvement in the war
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:28, archived)
# What was you are involvement in the war?
I am not.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:29, archived)
# thank you :)
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:30, archived)
#
Photobucket
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:31, archived)
# How about if we're talking about the shoes of the five Jesuses
The five Jesuses' shoes? The five Jesus' shoes? The five Jesuseses shoes?
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:32, archived)
# Shoe's, dipshit.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:34, archived)
# Damn, you're right
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:40, archived)
# Jesus 4 is totally the evillest of the Jesusses.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:36, archived)
# technically
any noun that ends in S would get the possessive as such: Jesus' shoes

Plurals of the form would be as so: "Look at all of those Jesuses in the sky fwapping madly into Claire Danes' hair!!!

So the CORRECT way to add posessive to the plural would indeed be: The five Jesuses' shoes...

huh... I gotta sit down.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:36, archived)
# Now, how about some sheep discussing data about greengrocers spelling?
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:38, archived)
# All the opinions of the sheepseses are that greengrocers can't s'pell
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:40, archived)
# DAMNIT!
no... :(
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:41, archived)
# greengrocers'

*ducks*
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:41, archived)
# THAT WAS A JOKE.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:44, archived)
# i did actually pick that
couldn't help myself though
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:45, archived)
# I am mollificated then.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:51, archived)
# Hmm
The five Jesuses' cum dripped from Claire Dane's hair like ectoplasm desperate to run home.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:41, archived)
# no the possessive of Jesus is Jesus's
it would only be Jesus' if Jesus were the plural of Jesu.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:41, archived)
# STOP
CONFUSING

ME
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:43, archived)
# It would be "the five Jesuses' shoes".
Jesus - singular
Jesuses - plural
Jesuses' - plural possessive
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:44, archived)
# THE FIVE JESUSESES' SHOE'S
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:47, archived)
# Je'su's Chri'st
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:48, archived)
# Now your'e getting the shape of it
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:54, archived)
# Chtongueeek
In my book about pictures of Jesus at different stages in his life, I refer to the Jesuses' pictures a lot, and I always use italics for the word. Yes, all of the 'Jesuses''es' letters are italic.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:59, archived)
# Tell me more of this "Jesu" person, and his brothers, the Jesus.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:45, archived)
# Jesu Joy of Man's Desiring.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:46, archived)
# That's Jesi
you ignorant (insert mean name here)

:D
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:48, archived)
# We of the sect of Jesu reject your heathen spelling of the identical Jesus triplets name (three blessings on their names)!
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:53, archived)
# These discussions give me a warm and wonderful feeling inside.
Maybe I should get a life...

...nah :)
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:47, archived)
# Technically
Both are correct. Depending on which style guide you use and where you are at in the world. :P

www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/58496-jesus-jesus-jesuss.html
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:49, archived)
# yeah, I would have said that next,
but personally I'll always go for semantic rules over morphological ones, on the grounds that morphological rules are "false simplicity" and can result in loss of meaning. The Jesus' scheme results in loss of meaning as the possessive of a singular word that happens to end in 's' and the possessive of a plural that ends in 's' are indistinguishable, and although it seems to reduce the amount of thinking required to know how to write something (because you only have to think about the letters rather than the meaning of the words), it isn't actually simpler at all, and thinking about what you're saying is in any case desirable.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:04, archived)
# This negates what you said earlier
about the evolution of language...

also, my brain hurts now and I need a fizzy beverage of some sort. I has been bested.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:10, archived)
# It really doesn't.
Language evolution always tends to favour simplicity, but I only support it when it's true simplicity (which is dropping redundant grammatical complexity, for example noun inflections where word order will suffice), never when it's false simplicity (which is dropping non-redundant grammatical complexity, such as decision making based on letters as opposed to meanings).
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:19, archived)
# I think I might love you.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:26, archived)
# I know, right?
I'd have her whisper Oxford's rules of diction in my ear as we made sweet sweet love on the back of a short shark bound for Tahiti...
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:28, archived)
# get in the queue
i've just spent about an hour and a half talking about acoustic black holes and the dirac equation, a sure way to my heart.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:29, archived)
# *scrolls down*
*gives up*
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:36, archived)
# haha
not many places where people *give up* after you've been talking about acoustic black holes, rather than pointing and laughing

edit: if it helps, i also posted a crudely drawn picture of a phase transition which i put in notes for some students here. then turned it into an animated crudely drawn phase transition cock spunking big gobs of spunk.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:38, archived)
# I'm suddenly popular.
I'm not quite sure what to make of this. I might have to go and have a lie down.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:32, archived)
# Happens to
the geekiest of us.

:D
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:36, archived)
# it often helps
have a cup of tea, too.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 22:40, archived)
# hahahaha
:D woo
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:34, archived)
# the soldiers were being naughty not nice
so I blasted over the battlefield on my sleigh and carpet bombed the fuckers
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:37, archived)
# TINSEL TORPEDOS
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:41, archived)
# Aerial Reconnaissance with a camera under his sled.
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:43, archived)
# Sorry
(, Tue 8 Dec 2009, 21:47, archived)