[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 53 KB, 576x960, 1488149184528.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9176575 No.9176575 [Reply] [Original]

>wherewithal is one word
>altogether is one word
>extraordinary is one word
>beefsteak is one word
>eachother is incorrect
fucc

>> No.9176611

Inflammable means flammable? What a country!

>> No.9176641

>>9176575
And despite what many people think, 'alright' is also incorrect.

>> No.9176683

>brazilians are humans just like you and me
Sure bb

>> No.9177218

>>9176575
>eachother is incorrect
Whats funny, to me at least, is that both terms in that word apply 'difference/separation'.

Each, implying more than one separate things.
Other, implying more than one separate things.
You want to put: difference difference together?
You want to make each other (singulardifferent singulardifferent) = singularsame

>> No.9177222

>>9176641
alright is all right

>> No.9177396

>>9177218
?

"they all liked each other"

The use of these words is perfectly necessary and informative.

>> No.9177492

>>9177396
Yeah. Why is it compelling, as op desires, to make each other one word?

I myself have that inkling at times I suppose, because in certain circumstances, especially maybe when you are talking about lovers; "They loved eachother",

Its not like each (and every) other, of the world, as your example implies a multitude, they all,

but two people, eachother, become one, as the word, is that where the notion to make the 2 words 1 comes from?

They were very similar to each other. They were very similar to eachother.

The first might imply 'they' were very similar to each (and every) other, (in the world?);

The second is kind of a natural inclination maybe to imply, I am not talking about each other in the world, but as, these two people, are each, an other, to... each... other (not each... other... in the world.... but just.... each other... present in the room.... sheesh, if only there was a word to imply this);

In love, in similarity, the 2 become the one, each other, becomes 1, eachother, the lovers are eachother. The lovers love eachother. The lovers love each other (...each and every other in the world?... no... eachother... )

And now after writing each a bunch of times you get that weird 'existential' woah, is that really how that word is spelled, say it so often and such, but it is a weird word, imagine it was pronounced similar to Bach.

>> No.9177497

>>9176575
>whosoever is one word
>everyman is one word
>boypussy is incorrect

>> No.9177590

>>9177492
I appreciate that you typed all that out, but "each other" refers to each other subject, meaning each other person encompassed by "They". It does not imply each other person in the world.

I think the temptation to combine the two words has more to do with the way they're spoken. It sounds more natural to pronounce them like "ea-chother" than "each other".

>> No.9177601

>>9176611
>American English is good they said

>> No.9177619

>>9177497
according to the OED, "boipucci" is the correct usage