English thread. Why not?

[Reactor]

I only met "fishes" in GTA Vice City when the statistics are displayed. There is a line "fishes fed" which appears to be grammatically incorrect.

A little more musing on plural grammar - it's just me, or in English, it is possible to give plural forms to adjectives as well? AFAIK the word "graphic" is an adjective. Sometimes I heard/read colours in plural form as well...greens,reds, just like that. It's a bit confusing to decide about this rule. I'm pretty sure you cannot just put any adjective in plural form. For instance, uh, "sudden". The word "suddens" is meaningless.

[Gez]

Those aren't adjectives, they're nouns. If you talk about greens and reds, you're talking about colors, not about colored things. Graphic is a noun, too, but it's seldom used -- usually it's only employed in the plural.

[Reactor]

So they just appear to be adjectives, they are really nouns. So this confirms that adjectives don't have any plural forms. Thank you

[Ravick]

Hi there.

What is the word in English for a person who talks too much?

Thanks in advanced!

[lil'devil]

Well, there's the word 'chatterer', although I've rarely seen it being used.

---

Also, it's 'thanks in advance', not 'advanced'. :)

[Reactor]

I heard "chatter-box" and "blubbermouth" as well. In Doom 3, it is also written in Theresa Chasar's e-mails. I guess both of them are good to go.

[Trance]

"Blabbermouth", not "blubbermouth". But "blabbermouth" more describes someone who you wouldn't trust to keep a secret.

[Reactor]

Thank you So "blabbermouth" is more like a gossiper then. I learnt something new

[Ravick]

So did I!

"Chatterer", "chatter-box", "blabbermouth" and "gossiper". Didn't know any of these ones (despite I knew "gossip" already and would probably think in this variation by myself, hah). Thanks, pals!

---

Also, it's 'thanks in advance', not 'advanced'.

I vaguely remember reading a discussion about it where the people involved did not get to a conclusion about what was the right way. But I'll take your hint as the right way for now on! Thanks again!

[Gez]

It's easy to tell, grammatically it wouldn't make sense for things to be "in advanced". With "in", you need a noun to describe in what; not an adjective, you can't be in an adjective, you need a thing to be in. In other words, in advanced what?

[Rachael]

It's easy to tell, grammatically it wouldn't make sense for things to be "in advanced". With "in", you need a noun to describe in what; not an adjective, you can't be in an adjective, you need a thing to be in. In other words, in advanced what?

I disagree about it being easy to tell, here - "easy" is subjective on how fluent someone is with English. And I am talking a very deep level of fluency - to the point of being able to recognize nuance - while yes, if you are taught in the proper mechanics of the language you'd be able to recognize it, but in order to recognize it right away you have to be a person who uses it every day.

[lil'devil]

I agree that it may not be easy to tell, because the word 'advance' is somewhat rare in regular use, but 'advanced' is pretty common.

[Gez]

It's basic grammar, "advanced" is an adjective, you'll never get "an advanced" without a noun to describe what is advanced precisely (e.g. "GZDoom is an advanced source port"). So you could have "advanced thanks" if you really want, I guess.

[4thcharacter]

Is "casted" the right past tense for "cast"?

[lil'devil]

No, it's simply 'cast'. It doesn't change.