Ruu Hoshino - Big Tits

not block the distributive prefixes

In Castilian written prefixes attached to the base without space or hyphen to separate them, unlike the English, who usually writes the prefixes of two syllables with a space. Maybe it's the British influence that favors the error . You should write "vice president", "deputy minister", "vice-consul" as is "blues", "preliminary contract", "underground" and so on.

There is a case Castilian particular that deserves a larger review: The Academy recognized at the 22nd edition of his dictionary to "ex-" prefix in cases where it means 'outside' or 'beyond', "remove", and other Where adds no meaning, and that it was a prefix in Latin and from there mucnas words: "exaggeration", "cry", "exclude" ... But he considered an independent adjective "ex" when associated with the meaning 'something or someone that has ceased to be', thus accepting the writing separately, "former minister", "former deputy, although in two cases accepted that was done in a single word: "veteran", "excautivo."

As rightly said Fernando Diaz Lozada in his column The Nation, is an apparent inconsistency. For "ex" was in Latin preposition and prefix and the first case, wrote separately the name, but not in Latin or Castilian "ex" was never an adjective and not have to invent a reason for writing separately pilgrim. In Castilian "ex-" prefix is \u200b\u200balways, except in the case of noun, as in colloquial speech: "I know your ex."

This inconsistency, in the recent English Language Spelling (2010), has tried to resolve in a manner inconsistent still. Academies recommend that you type in a word when it comes to a name, "former minister", "president," former congressman, "but admits to continue writing as if it were a preposition (but not), when a segment above complex, "a former senior", "former prime minister" ... The spelling is not natural, but a convention filled with inconsistencies and this will be one more. The important thing is not to be confused at least the grammatical nature of the elements.

is always possible to create unusual combinations and derivatives and then the uncertainty can make us feel more comfortable putting them a script as an apology, and so the character of Pedro Camacho Aunt Julia and the Scriptwriter by Mario Vargas Llosa referred to Peru as "the former Inca Empire." But in any case, prefixes do not need space or a hyphen to form a derivative English vocabulary and spelling does not advise them, rather the regrets.

Overall previously consented to this use of "ex" scripted " ex-Congressman, ex-champion", it also allowed to keep the capital (which was not necessary.) Nowadays it is ridiculous.


So get used to write "former secretary", "exmilitar" like "vice president." This last headline pick up a newspaper takes the prize as a single sentence together "ex council" and "pre-candidates", and below mentions a "former counsel" and repeated three or four times that of "pre-candidates", it is clear I should write: "exregidora", "candidates" and "exconsejera."

In the latter case and in another that follows it is stupid to write "who is also former counsel", like "who is a former council member." He may well say, "who was also minister" and "who was stage manager." For something we have verb conjugations in Castilian.

Benifits Of Mahabhringraj Oil

False

In language as in so many things in life we \u200b\u200bget carried away by so much so that most unusual forms may be somewhat surprising but are perfectly grammatical, as metalinguistic awareness is not blind but a mechanism is strongly influenced by the environment. In ehcho, let's go with the majority even when it is a mistake, especially if that majority includes "persons of respect," and today, broadcasters and journalists, the bullfighters, the actors and in general people from the entertainment, although the teachers, as writers and general people are still grown, probably much less than before, some ascendancy in the dynamic force of imitation which characterizes language as any other phenomenon essentially human.

I say in this case grammatical hesitation. Castilian is possible to say "police alert" as seen in these holders Trade or this one much more recent Industry Trujillo. It seems that what we should say is "cops on alert," but it is not a grammatical error.

really the same thing that is, "police alert" as "cops on alert" as we see in the headline of The Trome or in the Terra that see below, but the first combination is much less common than the latter.

The term "alert" appears to be an Italian military area "to alert" and then gave birth to a verb derived from "alert", and also adopted the adjective category, employment which is very sparingly. This is also an adjective episodic (similar to awake, prepared, calm ), and has a resultative aspectual content (is a state that is action being alerted ), so it only supports verb to be, while never be predicated of the verb. So you can say: "The police are on alert," but not "the police are alert." The verb is implied be in the headline: "10 thousand police [are] warning." Just what we find in these news Nicaragua, Ecuador and Uruguay :

The perplexity can also come from the fact that can not be used in permanent predicates: "* appoint [a] ten police alerts" (because there will always well) but transient predicates "find [a] ten police alert" (it is understood that find them at a time which will be well ).

Manuel Seco, with accuracy over the top in English philology, had said that as an adjective gender variance and cites an example from Antonio Machado: "The alert sentinel." Acknowledging that this motion is uncommon masculine and the adjective is used and only with change of number. One of the testimonies offered is Mario Vargas Llosa's own "all your senses alert." [1]

The Italians seem to come in first as a noun and so often applied as a modifier to characterize any person, animal or institution by the preposition "in" indicating precisely 'situation', as is the old formula, widespread and common, so it seems it was also more accurate the other, although both are possibilities, depending on the grammatical system, as well.

[1] Manuel Seco, Dictionary of the English language questions , Madrid, Espasa-Calpe, 9th ed., 1986, p. 29.