It doesn't though. They has been used for singular without knowing the gender for a long time.
Alinor
joined 1 year ago
I feel this is a false equivalency. Toys are easy, and you often know if the other person would like it or not, in which case you get them the toy, and not a gift card. The statment being made here is money vs gift cards, not money vs actual items.
The comparison is off. A better comparison would be:
"Here, kid. Here's 50 buck to go to this restaurant I think you'd like" "Why not get me a gift card? / Thanks, but I dont like that restaurant. Thankfully I can spent it in others, whereas I wouldn't be able to with a gift card".
I'm sorry, I don't know enough about the English language to recognise the difference. What would the phrase be in future tense?
I believe its Loss :p
But arent the ones from the circle 90 degrees on the inside of the circle as well? The squares could've just as well been placed on the other side of the (circle) lines.
This is not direct at all though. Direct is "my shift is almost done, do you want to hang out later?". Being direct means you do actually have to include saying what you want.
I am not, so I guess that explains it. Thanks!
Am I the only one who's never used a plunger (and never needed to)?
Took me a few minutes to find, but you are correct! Not his daughter. In fact: his girlfriend. For the record: he's 49 apparently.
view more: next ›
Haven't there always been rules about only 1 piece of carry-on, and there were limits for its size? It was simply never checked. Resulting in overhead boxes being full because some people brought multiple bags, resulting in some people being unable to store their stuff overhead. They're just enforcing the rules now right? Or has something actually changed?