home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16 / NN_1992_16.iso / spool / alt / usage / english / 5730 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-07-30  |  1.1 KB
  1. Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cleveland.Freenet.Edu!ai118
  2. From: ai118@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Zidonis)
  3. Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
  4. Subject: Re: What to use instead of "pun intended"?
  5. Message-ID: <1992Jul30.200112.17970@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
  6. Date: 30 Jul 92 20:01:12 GMT
  7. References: <1992Jul30.031927.18962@panix.com>
  8. Sender: news@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
  9. Reply-To: ai118@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Rich Zidonis)
  10. Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
  11. Lines: 19
  12. Nntp-Posting-Host: cwns1.ins.cwru.edu
  13.  
  14.  
  15. In a previous article, jhawk@panix.com (John Hawkinson) says:
  16.  
  17. >That was a totally cool trip to Antartica, dude! (pun intended)
  18. >[so the example stinks :-(]
  19. >
  20. >Anyway, I've noticed that occassionally I too will do this; subsequent
  21. >reflection, however, indicates that such usage is a tad
  22. >awkward/undesirable/something-to-avoid. Therefore, anybody have
  23. >anything better they'd care to suggest?
  24. >
  25. How about "fun intended."  Is not funning and punning what you had in
  26. mind?
  27.  
  28. -- 
  29. rich
  30.  
  31. Internet: ai118@cleveland.freenet.edu
  32.