Meanwhile... Pt. 1

[dan bailey]

Given that the topic was kids being force-fed knowledge without understanding, perhaps the original spelling was appropriate?

Intriguingly meta- comment there.

[The Confessor]

You can tow a trotline. Or a dropline for that matter.

dan is, of course, technically correct about "toe the line" but since most ships are equipped with towlines (remember the towline getting cut in The Caine Mutiny?), I think hal should be given a pass.

They have towlines for pulling barges up canals here in the UK too. Just sayin'.

Oh, and while we're on the subject of well worn sayings that people often get wrong, I really get annoyed when people say something is a mute point, rather than a moot point.

[dan bailey]

Oh, and while we're on the subject of well worn sayings that people often get wrong, I really get annoyed when people say something is a mute point, rather than a moot point.

Yep -- good one.

[Phil Maurice]

Yep -- good one.

And should we blame Judas Priest or Alicia Masters for "you've got another thing coming"?

[Aaron King]

I see so many of these all the time, but generally ignore them since a whole bunch of people online become hostile when corrected, even gently as you did. Some examples: "step foot in" "have your cake and eat it too", "one in the same" and my daughter's favorite, "nip it in the butt."

What's wrong with "You can't have your cake and eat it too"? That's the saying.

[The Confessor]

What's wrong with "You can't have your cake and eat it too"? That's the saying.

Yeah, I was gonna bring that up too. Saying "have your cake and eat it too" is correct.

[GavinR]

Yeah, I was gonna bring that up too. Saying "have your cake and eat it too" is correct.

No it isn't. Leaving out the word can't totally changes the meaning of the phrase.

[Aaron King]

No it isn't. Leaving out the word can't totally changes the meaning of the phrase.

Leaving out what word? Issuing it like a command? I don't know if we're all talking about the same thing.

[The Confessor]

Totally changing the subject, I wanted to share the fact that I've just bought a pre-owned Takamine EGS330SC electro-acoustic guitar online. It cost me £280 (about $388), although they're £400+ new, and the price includes a hard case that comes with it.

I already have a lovely Martin DM as my main gigging guitar, but I've just landed a position at a local music venue running their Thursday open mic evenings, so I needed to source a communal electro-acoustic for Joe Public to play (I'll be damned if anyone's laying hands on my Martin! ). I've played this particular model of Takamine before and although it's no Martin, it is a really nice guitar for the price range. It will certainly be good enough for the public to use at my open mic. Plus, Takamines always sound good once they're plugged in and coming through a PA.

Here's the actual guitar I've just bought...





I know we have some musicians in the forum, so hopefully some of you will appreciate this.

[The Confessor]

No it isn't. Leaving out the word can't totally changes the meaning of the phrase.

Oh, I see what you mean. Well, yeah...obviously you'd say "you can't have your cake and eat it too". Do people really just say "cake and eat it too", without adding the "you can't" bit? How would that work within the context of a sentance?

Hmmm...I'm not sure I believe anyone just comes out with "cake and eat it too" without the prefix. It'd be like someone saying, "hand is worth two in the bush."

[GavinR]

Leaving out what word? Issuing it like a command? I don't know if we're all talking about the same thing.

Leaving out the word "can't". If I say "have your cake and eat it too", it means something completely different from "can't have your cake and eat it too".

[GavinR]

Oh, I see what you mean. Well, yeah...obviously you'd say "you can't have your cake and eat it too". Do people really just say "cake and eat it too", without adding the "you can't" bit? How would that work within the context of a sentance?

Hmmm...I'm not sure I believe anyone just comes out with "cake and eat it too" without the prefix. It'd be like someone saying, "hand is worth two in the bush."

Lol....we must posted at the same exact time.

[The Confessor]

Lol....we must posted at the same exact time.

Yeah, we did! But you see what I'm saying. I don't think that anyone would ever just come out and say "have your cake and eat it too". As Arron King points out, that'd be like issuing it as a command.

[Aaron King]

If I say "have your cake and eat it too", it means something completely different

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I guess I've just never heard someone say that. When it's said, what does it even mean? Is the speaker ordering someone to simply eat the metaphorical cake? To not eat it? People are weird.

[GavinR]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I guess I've just never heard someone say that. When it's said, what does it even mean? Is the speaker ordering someone to simply eat the metaphorical cake? To not eat it? People are weird.

No harm and no foul...people just say stupid things all the time. Mostly, when I hear people use phrases incorrectly, I just ignore it but it happens quite often.