Page 1 of 1

Matt's off

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:17 pm
by Nick

Seems like he may have mislaid the login details for the Mailasail blog but 1st blog entry is posted at

Here's a video Stingo made of the departure:


I quite like it with the snow falling over it :nod:

Re: Matt's off

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:22 pm
by claymore
Thinks he's still on Diana - a breeze like that and there he is spinning round on full engine power - sails firmly bagged up and furled tight.

Seems strange - all that sun and then a flurry of snow....

Re: Matt's off

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:58 am
by claymore
I have noticed in recent posts a tendency towards the pedantic.

Perhaps this is contagious but if we look at the title of this thread it reads
Matt's off

Clearly this is grammatically weak and does not conform with known conventions
Written correctly it would read quite differently

Rather than risk causing offence to other contributors by writing the correct version below, perhaps debate may be stimulated which would result in the truly correct version being posted?

Re: Matt's off

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:44 am
by aquaplane
Yer but, as language is a form of communication, and it's not hard to understand the meaning of "Matt's off", it'll do.

Re: Matt's off

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:53 am
by claymore
I cannot believe what I read - especially from someone of your own fine standing and gifted and talented as you are with the Walking on Water skills.

Matt's off.

Matts WHAT is off?


Re: Matt's off

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:12 pm
by garredfox
His trolley?

Re: Matt's off

Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:48 pm
by claymore
My Dear old thing

Absolutely not - Matt may be off his trolley, something anyone who has ever met him would probably agree with, however - returning to the increasingly pedantic once cannot suggest that Matt's trolley is off without qualifying the statement by communication what it was that the aforementioned Trolley was on in the first place. Your would, I am sure, agree that the trolley would have needed to be on something, for example the pavement, in order for it to have been described eventually as "off" i.e "off the pavement" as opposed to its original situation or location which would have been "on the pavement"

Re: Matt's off

Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 6:13 pm
by sahona
Sorry your lairdship, you're* trolling again, trying to confuse the masses while exercising you spirtle.
"Matt's off" is correct as taught when Scottish education was second to none, as you well know. (a long time ago, granted)
The ' replaces the missing 'i' in "is". (similarly the 'a' in "are" at the *.) So now we understand "Matt is off"
Having said that, the statement is admittedly ambiguous. Should he have been kept in a fridge? Has he fallen from some perch? Has he behaved unsociably? What, in fact, was he "on" to start with?

However, it's (here we go again) people that splat 'possessive' apostrophes all over the place that are poisoning the language and causing confusion.

While I'm ranting, how many lyrics in a song ?
Maybe the word all these jumped-up showbiz pundits are looking for is, in fact, 'word'...

I refuse to leave my paradigm when progress is in the wrong direction.
Bring back the tawse...

Rant over - - but you don't need to go far in these yotti forums to find diabastrically poor English. (from Brits, not furriners.)