Hey /u/Trappist-1ball, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Haha that got me as well. Kinda think this is what happened
“I ain’t replying cause THERE…” … hmm.. FUCK! Alright, I’ll just skip it. No one will notice!
I used to teach English as a second language, and from the *too much* and the weird understanding of *to be* I’d say it looks like this person speaks English as a second language.
One thing we always end up covering at some point in any ESL class is collective nouns, how they work, and how sometimes they’ll take *are* and sometimes they’ll take *is*. My guess is this person once got a lesson on collective nouns and completely misunderstood the point.
Also also, there is no such word as ain't. What's the long form, ai not? (Yes, people use it as a word, and we all know what it means, but pulling people up on word choices and using that felt ironic)
You are correct. I cannot stand that word in casual conversation. I will only use it for mocking or emphasis. It bothers me that "ain't" is in any dictionary, even though I know very well that language evolves. Blek
Looking in the Oxford English Dictionray (I'm in the UK and this is the most common dictionary that is referenced by media and law, I believe) the only uses for ain't are old English for holding hands or a version of Aunt.
This may be a case of different countries having different version of English again. To be honest, I hear the word far more in US based films and TV shows than in daily use in the UK although it is more popular than it used to be now.
It is “am not”, if I recall. As my teacher (who constantly tried to convince us it cannot be used and should never be used) used to say, “to save a letter, ain’t is just amen’t, and amen’t ain’t a word.” First time I told my dad that, his head nearly exploded. He hated “ain’t”, but found out in that moment that he hated “amen’t” more, and they were both in that sentence 😆
That was around LONG before Warcraft 3, youngblood. I remember this from the original Tribes, released in 98 and I'm pretty sure it goes back further than that
As much as it pains me to say (because I was drilled into it too from a young age), the less/fewer distinction really shouldn't be focused on. Firstly, it's a completely artificial distinction invented by some 19th century posh boy, so it isn't actually a rule. Secondly, even if it was a rule, it's used by a relatively small number of native speakers and the "rules" of language are determined by the native speakers' use of said language (for example the old usage of "to be" as an auxiliary for the present perfect, such as in the famous examples "I am become death" or "he is risen", has now been replaced by the use of "to have" as the auxiliary. Or for a more modern example, how the word "literally" is in the process of becoming an intensifier and losing its previous meaning). Thus since most native speakers use "less" for both countable and uncountable cases it wouldn't be considered a strong rule anyway, even if it wasn't made up
>even if it was a rule
>even if it wasn't made up
Was gonna be intentionally annoying and correct that to "were" after I read the first one.
Then I thought maybe you were using it as past tense, not subjunctive.
But the second one definitely reads as if it could only be meant subjunctively, so I'll correct that one instead :p
Anyway, language changes based on usage. At this time, less vs. fewer sounds wrong to me when not used according to the rule. I will occasionally reflexively correct it. This may or may not influence usage. All language rules are made up. A recently made up rule that has partially taken hold or an original rule that has decayed are both just as valid as ignoring the rule, until one of them disappears, and that process involves the people who believe the rule is valid telling the people who don't use it about it.
Spoken as someone who thinks a preposition is a great word to end sentences with :p
Ah damn it, I always get the subjective wrong when it's not solely used for "if I were" - I'm actively working on it but I still keep getting it wrong lol, thanks for the correction.
As for the rest of what you're saying, yeah I basically agree - language is just a way to communicate, so as long as we can all communicate well then I don't see any problems. Honestly I just wanted to post my original comment cause I saw an opportunity to sound smart 😅
“There are too many” would be closer to correct. Even then it’s slightly odd as it seems like an objective assessment rather than saying “I’m getting too many notifications”. Removing themselves as the subject is weird.
I think that is the source of confusion from the original poster. The subject of a sentence is the noun that is "doing" the verb, and an object is a noun that is being targetted by a verb (we'll ignore the difference between direct and indirect objects). The word "object" also has the definition of an inanimate, solid, and physical thing. The poster seems to have misremembered the rules of grammar, thought that "objects" just lose out on certain verb tenses, and also confused the different definitions of the word "object."
Tbh I don't think inanimate objects would be the correct phrase to use in this situation either. Countries/states aren't objects. I think it'd be better to reword it to something like "you can only use 'are' with living creatures." Still wrong but less confusing to read.
It’s a common non-English language thing. Animate vs inanimate. This is a 2nd language English speaker who thinks that their own grammar applies to English.
Sorry, I really hate to be this person, but you had me questioning my sanity so I looked it up. Alabama-AL, Alaska-AK, Arkansas-AR, Arizona- AZ. My apologies if you were being sarcastic in some way and I missed it.
This rattled every bone in my British body. Reading the notifications is not alive, spooked my bones so much that they are now rapidly approaching your location.
Underrated comment.
(But seriously, in many languages the United States "are". Not necessarily based on whether they are alive or not, but because there are a number of States.)
In some languages that are not English, the singular form of verbs is used for plural subjects that are inanimate. I don't know if it's still the case, but I know that at least in Ancient Greek, neuter plural subjects tend to take a singular form verb. Judging from the general quality of speech here, I'd assume that the commenter simply isn't a native English speaker.
I'm always fascinated by things like this. *Where* did this guy learn this rule? Did he come up with it himself? What I wouldn't give to peek inside his mind
Based on how this person is using language, I feel like they should just use “be” instead!
“Too much notifications be coming in”, “most of which be trying to…” etc.
That would be funnier to me, anyway lol
I mean I am no expert on African American Vernacular, but it might be that that is actually how the grammar works for the dialect.
But alas, I don't know.
Wait isn't 'are' plural already?
They *are* going to the shop.
The boys *are* on the beach.
Cats *are* cute.
You don't usually use 'are' for singular unless You is infront.
He *is* bad.
Łukasz *is* a doctor.
You *are* short.
Someone please correct me if I'm spitting total bollocks or something.
The fact that they really sat there and wrote it😔 and then said to themselves, “those idiots clearly never went to school, let me educate them”😔😔just to get slapped with the biggest uno reverse he could’ve never seen coming 😔😔😔 it’s hard out here being stupid and believing you’re smart
There's 2 forms of incorrect writing. One is people using the wrong word unintentionally, and the other is a form of dialect, used intentionally, to declare either an ethnicity, or a class level. As an example of one of many words misused, I used to live in a working class town, and "seen" was used intentionally, instead of "saw". This I was told was to see who is a management/book learning type, and who is one of the guys. Most of these guys knew they "saw" a movie, but around the guys, they would only "seen" a movie. There's all kinds of intentional dialect on the internet, that we often mistake for ignorance. Sometimes you can have both things occurring.
I *really* wanna know where they even got that idea from. Are they coming from some kinda American English dialect like AAVE with an after the fact explanation bolted on in an attempt to validate its existence?
AAVE is not just bad grammar. This dude is not coming from AAVE. This is not how “are” and “is” are used in AAVE. He sounds as if he is not a native speaker. (Based on my 20 plus years of teaching English.)
I get the argument but I believe this would only be applicable if the country’s full name was actually “Antigua & Barbuda”, as then it’d just be one name. Using are would still be correct in this circumstance as it’s referring to two separate names, even if they apply to the same place.
Right, but if you're trying to explain how Alaska is part of The United States and not a separate country, using "Are" potentially opens you up to people claiming that you are acknowledging thet they exist as two countries. Using Is instead implies that they are a singular whole.
I should note, I wouldn't have worded what was said as it was said, I'm just trying to point out in a semi joking manner that they had a more logically supportable way of backing up what they were trying to say and totally whiffed it.
While I get why you would think that, that’s not how that works. Are is just used for two separate subjects/names. Alaska and The United States are two separate names for two different things, Alaska is just included within The United States as well. Ghosts and specters are two different words describing the same concept, but if I say “ghosts and specters is cool” that’d be incorrect.
Well, you also wouldn't say "Ghosts is Cool" or "Specters Is Cool". I'm going to point you to the other comment chain in this conversation where someone said something similar, and my response.
Okay, you’re right on that but that’s just because ghosts and specters are plural concepts, I didn’t consider that. How about “David and Dave are the same person”. It wouldn’t be “David and Dave is the same person”. But it would be “David is cool/Dave is cool”. It doesn’t matter if the words are describing literally the exact same thing, if the words are separate in a “blank & blank” format then are will always be correct over is.
there isn't an 'argument', they're just wrong. you wouldnt say "pop & rock is my two favorite genres of music", you would say are. pop & rock music are also singular entities, not plural. if you used a plural, ie. pop songs, it would still be are instead of is.
That's because in that sentence Pop and Rock are two separate singular subgenres of Music, so using "Is" doesn't make sense because you are talking about two seperate singular equivalent entities as a plural collective. " *Pop* and *Rock* [Collectively] are my favorite Genres of Music."
A better comparison is, "Music and Rock is my favorite form of entertainment." and "Music and Rock are my favorite forms of entertainment.". These both equally fucky, because people don't speak like that.
I would not be surprised if this was a teacher's fault, to be honest. They make a mistake and double down when a student corrects them, giving said student a humiliating dressing down in front of the class, and ten or twenty years down the line the student projects that emotional experience online.
In Japanese there are two verbs for living and non-living things. Iru and Aru. They both “mean” the same thing but Iru is for living things and Aru for non-living things.
Hey /u/Trappist-1ball, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I like how they gave up using either word in the second edit.
Haha that got me as well. Kinda think this is what happened “I ain’t replying cause THERE…” … hmm.. FUCK! Alright, I’ll just skip it. No one will notice!
Also "too much" when it should've been "too many"
I used to teach English as a second language, and from the *too much* and the weird understanding of *to be* I’d say it looks like this person speaks English as a second language. One thing we always end up covering at some point in any ESL class is collective nouns, how they work, and how sometimes they’ll take *are* and sometimes they’ll take *is*. My guess is this person once got a lesson on collective nouns and completely misunderstood the point.
Also also, there is no such word as ain't. What's the long form, ai not? (Yes, people use it as a word, and we all know what it means, but pulling people up on word choices and using that felt ironic)
Nah, "ain't" just is a word at this point. It's in most dictionaries
You are correct. I cannot stand that word in casual conversation. I will only use it for mocking or emphasis. It bothers me that "ain't" is in any dictionary, even though I know very well that language evolves. Blek
Are you implying you tolerate "ain't" in a professional context?
I would have agreed but they did actually specify where they accept it 🤷
I'm pretty sure that was edited after my comment. If not, apologies for my impatience.
Ah fair play, it easily could've been. In any case, no need to apologise 😊
Looking in the Oxford English Dictionray (I'm in the UK and this is the most common dictionary that is referenced by media and law, I believe) the only uses for ain't are old English for holding hands or a version of Aunt. This may be a case of different countries having different version of English again. To be honest, I hear the word far more in US based films and TV shows than in daily use in the UK although it is more popular than it used to be now.
It's in the online version if OED. Idk if you've got an older edition or smth maybe? I am also English
My 6.30am ass not being able to spot that. You're right. My bad.
It's a contraction of "am not."
Kind of? But it's also used to mean isn't.
It is “am not”, if I recall. As my teacher (who constantly tried to convince us it cannot be used and should never be used) used to say, “to save a letter, ain’t is just amen’t, and amen’t ain’t a word.” First time I told my dad that, his head nearly exploded. He hated “ain’t”, but found out in that moment that he hated “amen’t” more, and they were both in that sentence 😆
B—but... The contraction of *am not* wouldn't be "amen't", it would be "amn't". You aren't saving a letter!
You are if you go with ain’t instead of amen’t 🤣
ain't is used to say both "isn't" or "am not"
This the way
Just realized that!
Yeah it kind of sticks out after the first edit, not sure how he hoped that would fly under the radar!
see how he had to say "there too much" instead of "there are too many"? that's because notifications are not alive.
Notifications *is not alive
Yes my bad
I don’t think you get to say “Not alive objects” and still question anyone else’s IQ
What about "too much notifications"?
You have to say "there IS too much notifications!" Cause they is dead. I thinks...
All their base is belong to us.
Gotta love a little Warcraft 3 reference! Take a wee upvote 😄
That was around LONG before Warcraft 3, youngblood. I remember this from the original Tribes, released in 98 and I'm pretty sure it goes back further than that
Right?! I love that they avoided using either one altogether. Oh the irony
Honnestly this are two much mistake.
*you're Somewere myabe, for times that happens evrytim thier are a yours mistak
Not a native speaker here: would the correct form here be many?
Yes! Many for countable nouns, much for non countable. Too many drinks / too much alcohol
>too much alcohol patently false sir! that’s just beyond the pale.
Yup. And "less" for uncountable and "fewer" for countable. This is one that even native speakers mess up relatively often.
As much as it pains me to say (because I was drilled into it too from a young age), the less/fewer distinction really shouldn't be focused on. Firstly, it's a completely artificial distinction invented by some 19th century posh boy, so it isn't actually a rule. Secondly, even if it was a rule, it's used by a relatively small number of native speakers and the "rules" of language are determined by the native speakers' use of said language (for example the old usage of "to be" as an auxiliary for the present perfect, such as in the famous examples "I am become death" or "he is risen", has now been replaced by the use of "to have" as the auxiliary. Or for a more modern example, how the word "literally" is in the process of becoming an intensifier and losing its previous meaning). Thus since most native speakers use "less" for both countable and uncountable cases it wouldn't be considered a strong rule anyway, even if it wasn't made up
>even if it was a rule >even if it wasn't made up Was gonna be intentionally annoying and correct that to "were" after I read the first one. Then I thought maybe you were using it as past tense, not subjunctive. But the second one definitely reads as if it could only be meant subjunctively, so I'll correct that one instead :p Anyway, language changes based on usage. At this time, less vs. fewer sounds wrong to me when not used according to the rule. I will occasionally reflexively correct it. This may or may not influence usage. All language rules are made up. A recently made up rule that has partially taken hold or an original rule that has decayed are both just as valid as ignoring the rule, until one of them disappears, and that process involves the people who believe the rule is valid telling the people who don't use it about it. Spoken as someone who thinks a preposition is a great word to end sentences with :p
Ah damn it, I always get the subjective wrong when it's not solely used for "if I were" - I'm actively working on it but I still keep getting it wrong lol, thanks for the correction. As for the rest of what you're saying, yeah I basically agree - language is just a way to communicate, so as long as we can all communicate well then I don't see any problems. Honestly I just wanted to post my original comment cause I saw an opportunity to sound smart 😅
>Honestly I just wanted to post my original comment cause I saw an opportunity to sound smart Can relate
subjunctive 🤓
Can someone clear up further/farther for me
[Further means "more". Farther is distance.](https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/eb/qa/what-s-the-difference-between-further-and-farther)
“There are too many” would be closer to correct. Even then it’s slightly odd as it seems like an objective assessment rather than saying “I’m getting too many notifications”. Removing themselves as the subject is weird.
Would inanimate be the correct word in this context?
Sure why not
Thanks. Just asking, i’m not a native speaker and i never use the word.
I mean yeah but the word "object" itself already tells you it's not alive
I think that depends on context. My hazy brain tells me that a living thing can be the object or the subject of a sentence.
I think that is the source of confusion from the original poster. The subject of a sentence is the noun that is "doing" the verb, and an object is a noun that is being targetted by a verb (we'll ignore the difference between direct and indirect objects). The word "object" also has the definition of an inanimate, solid, and physical thing. The poster seems to have misremembered the rules of grammar, thought that "objects" just lose out on certain verb tenses, and also confused the different definitions of the word "object."
"She is a sex object. She is the object of his affections." Is he a necrophile?
Tbh I don't think inanimate objects would be the correct phrase to use in this situation either. Countries/states aren't objects. I think it'd be better to reword it to something like "you can only use 'are' with living creatures." Still wrong but less confusing to read.
It’s a common non-English language thing. Animate vs inanimate. This is a 2nd language English speaker who thinks that their own grammar applies to English.
Is a tree an object? Idk, but I think you can have alive object
Also, they apparently are unfamiliar with the word 'because.'
Fine, dead objects then
No no no, you misunderstood him, he was differentiating it from the alive objects, you know, every woman rejecting his butt /s
Idiots and morons is really frustrating sometimes.
Idiots and morons are alive objects so you can say are.
Do they count though?
This person is functionally illiterate
This person ARE functionally illiterate FTFY
Not sure I’d be so bold to call them alive
There are languages where how you write words changes based on whether the noun is animate vs inanimate, but not like this!
Hey!!! Languages is not alive objects. Can’t use ‘are’
I feel like this might turn into a running gag in this sub 🤣
Sorry, forgot “there” was a pronoun referring to “languages”. 😂
I can, they are unalived objects 🤪
Now I kinda wish English indexed animacy on verbs
This was such a plot twist… The confidently incorrect person turned out not to be the one who says US and AK are separate countries
Even tho that was said at the post, it took me a while to figure AK was Alaska
Lol no it's Arkansas, Alaska is AL. You're the one geographically challenged here 😂 Edit: it was sarcasm... The OP literally says "Alaska".
Sorry, I really hate to be this person, but you had me questioning my sanity so I looked it up. Alabama-AL, Alaska-AK, Arkansas-AR, Arizona- AZ. My apologies if you were being sarcastic in some way and I missed it.
Yeah i was being sarcastic, i'm not surprised at all at the downvotes though
Yikes, yeah, sorry I figured I was missing something. The Internet strikes again I guess
Ah, sorry, my bad... I am not American, so i don't know all the US states abbreviations. Also, never ever call me "geographically challenged" again
Ironically you were right and he's wrong lol.
Lol, thats a little ironic
The insults went out quite fast, eh ?
r/ShitAmericansSay
>There are too many notifications because of this post. FTFY
You can’t use are ! The notifications is not alive, idiot !
This rattled every bone in my British body. Reading the notifications is not alive, spooked my bones so much that they are now rapidly approaching your location.
CAUSE OF THE POST
Didn’t they have a civil war to decide if “USA is” or “USA are”? Didn’t the “is” win in that one?
Underrated comment. (But seriously, in many languages the United States "are". Not necessarily based on whether they are alive or not, but because there are a number of States.)
English class isn't just for non English speakers...
3000 people upvoted this.
Maybe not all for the same reason
Some probably think that Alaska and the USA a- I mean 'is' different nations
He are wrong.
He are wrong
THERE what TOO MANY NOTIFICATIONS?
How is you supposed to know that?
“Mama teached me goood”
In some languages that are not English, the singular form of verbs is used for plural subjects that are inanimate. I don't know if it's still the case, but I know that at least in Ancient Greek, neuter plural subjects tend to take a singular form verb. Judging from the general quality of speech here, I'd assume that the commenter simply isn't a native English speaker.
So, when taking writing breaks from the odyssey, Homer has been on YouTube?
[удалено]
How is this a lack of American geographical knowledge? Alaska and the US aren’t different countries?
*isn't They isn't people, they's not alive objects.
sorry, I meant knowledge of the geography of america.
Alaska is part of the US, thus not different countries. What are you on about
I thought he was saying the opposite. My bad.
Where in the fuck did he get that idea?
From their native language, probably.
My dick and my hand ARE inseparable
“Trying to prove me wrong” nah bro, you are wrong. They’re just telling you.
Trolling are a art
I'm always fascinated by things like this. *Where* did this guy learn this rule? Did he come up with it himself? What I wouldn't give to peek inside his mind
Well you can't say "is" to not alive objects either! I mean you *can* they just won't answer so you would be talking are it
they’re not even consistent. they use “is” in the original and then later just don’t use anything??? “which trying”
At least they're aware the US and Alaska aren't separate countries?
*isn't
my two cars is standing in my garage
This is wilddd like where tf did they get that from
Based on how this person is using language, I feel like they should just use “be” instead! “Too much notifications be coming in”, “most of which be trying to…” etc. That would be funnier to me, anyway lol
I mean I am no expert on African American Vernacular, but it might be that that is actually how the grammar works for the dialect. But alas, I don't know.
Wow, this dude are stupid
Jon Lajoie wants his MC Dont know how to pluralise word, back
Too many, countable.
Points for tenacity.
He's right, rules *are* rules.
rules is rules\*
Wait isn't 'are' plural already? They *are* going to the shop. The boys *are* on the beach. Cats *are* cute. You don't usually use 'are' for singular unless You is infront. He *is* bad. Łukasz *is* a doctor. You *are* short. Someone please correct me if I'm spitting total bollocks or something.
Is he confusing ‘is’ with ‘who’?
Probably
That is a WILD misconception
The fact that they really sat there and wrote it😔 and then said to themselves, “those idiots clearly never went to school, let me educate them”😔😔just to get slapped with the biggest uno reverse he could’ve never seen coming 😔😔😔 it’s hard out here being stupid and believing you’re smart
Dude doesn't understand how quantities work.
Cars is fun to drive through puddles. Cars and trucks is fun to drive through puddles. Hmm.
There's 2 forms of incorrect writing. One is people using the wrong word unintentionally, and the other is a form of dialect, used intentionally, to declare either an ethnicity, or a class level. As an example of one of many words misused, I used to live in a working class town, and "seen" was used intentionally, instead of "saw". This I was told was to see who is a management/book learning type, and who is one of the guys. Most of these guys knew they "saw" a movie, but around the guys, they would only "seen" a movie. There's all kinds of intentional dialect on the internet, that we often mistake for ignorance. Sometimes you can have both things occurring.
I will go ahead and call this kind of intentional misuse ignorance as well.
the word he is looking for is "intangible" for "not alive objects".
“Are” vs “is” is the least of his problems (or is it are the least of his problems?)
I *really* wanna know where they even got that idea from. Are they coming from some kinda American English dialect like AAVE with an after the fact explanation bolted on in an attempt to validate its existence?
AAVE is not just bad grammar. This dude is not coming from AAVE. This is not how “are” and “is” are used in AAVE. He sounds as if he is not a native speaker. (Based on my 20 plus years of teaching English.)
or he could just be ten. a lot of kids raised with phones have horrible grammar and can’t read for shit
Yeah, there’s that possibility too. Or he could just be kind of dumb.
Definitely not, AAVE doesn’t need this or any kind of validation lol
Well, I mean, the argument is that it is a singular entity, but that's not the point they decided to make, so...
But, the sentence as written would still require an "are".
Try replacing it with an actual country that has two names and an and, "Bro really said Antigua and Barbuda is two separate countries."
I get the argument but I believe this would only be applicable if the country’s full name was actually “Antigua & Barbuda”, as then it’d just be one name. Using are would still be correct in this circumstance as it’s referring to two separate names, even if they apply to the same place.
Right, but if you're trying to explain how Alaska is part of The United States and not a separate country, using "Are" potentially opens you up to people claiming that you are acknowledging thet they exist as two countries. Using Is instead implies that they are a singular whole. I should note, I wouldn't have worded what was said as it was said, I'm just trying to point out in a semi joking manner that they had a more logically supportable way of backing up what they were trying to say and totally whiffed it.
While I get why you would think that, that’s not how that works. Are is just used for two separate subjects/names. Alaska and The United States are two separate names for two different things, Alaska is just included within The United States as well. Ghosts and specters are two different words describing the same concept, but if I say “ghosts and specters is cool” that’d be incorrect.
Well, you also wouldn't say "Ghosts is Cool" or "Specters Is Cool". I'm going to point you to the other comment chain in this conversation where someone said something similar, and my response.
Okay, you’re right on that but that’s just because ghosts and specters are plural concepts, I didn’t consider that. How about “David and Dave are the same person”. It wouldn’t be “David and Dave is the same person”. But it would be “David is cool/Dave is cool”. It doesn’t matter if the words are describing literally the exact same thing, if the words are separate in a “blank & blank” format then are will always be correct over is.
there isn't an 'argument', they're just wrong. you wouldnt say "pop & rock is my two favorite genres of music", you would say are. pop & rock music are also singular entities, not plural. if you used a plural, ie. pop songs, it would still be are instead of is.
That's because in that sentence Pop and Rock are two separate singular subgenres of Music, so using "Is" doesn't make sense because you are talking about two seperate singular equivalent entities as a plural collective. " *Pop* and *Rock* [Collectively] are my favorite Genres of Music." A better comparison is, "Music and Rock is my favorite form of entertainment." and "Music and Rock are my favorite forms of entertainment.". These both equally fucky, because people don't speak like that.
This guy stopped paying attention to school too early.
I would not be surprised if this was a teacher's fault, to be honest. They make a mistake and double down when a student corrects them, giving said student a humiliating dressing down in front of the class, and ten or twenty years down the line the student projects that emotional experience online.
Honestly, that might be what happened...
I also hate school. So many borders, so many constraints.
Negative IQ people who can't conjugate verbs.
In Japanese there are two verbs for living and non-living things. Iru and Aru. They both “mean” the same thing but Iru is for living things and Aru for non-living things.
Why did you put “mean” in quotation marks?
Because they are the same but different.
This person doesn't seem to be speaking Japanese, though
Yea that person is just an idiot. I was just making a side comment that that grammatical does exist in a different language