>>51812972
when's it appropriate to use 's
>australia's
>australias
why did teachers always tell me 'i before e except after c' when its spelt """""weird"""""?

Oxford comma: yea or nay?

Can I get a translation for, "WE EUZ KINGZ N SHIT," thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.

>>51812972
>Also, who would like to see a /lang/ board re-emerge on 4chan?

nobody.fuck off

>>51812972
>Koreans
>Americans
>Australians
Why don't people use 'japaneses' or 'Britishes'?
It's even a correct English?

>>51813028
's would be used to refer to something belonging to Australia, or something in Australia. "Australias" would only be used if there were more than one Australia, which there isn't.

>i before e except after c
Shit rule, since one exception is too many.

>>51813038
Yea.

>>51813110
>Can I get a translation for, "WE EUZ KINGZ N SHIT,"

'Once upon a time we were rules of men, as well as excrement?'

Are you sure you heard the phrase correct? Seems like a strange thing to say..

>>51813230
>rules

*rulers

Pardon me.

>>51813038
I say yea, but unfortunately during my time at the UN I was conditioned to omit it. I don't know why it's not universal.

>>51813158
-n naturally adds s for plural. -ese naturally doesn't. Also, singular/plural for British person is Briton(s)

>>51813148
rude boy!

Many authors do something strange with quotes and punctuation. For example
>The judge said that, "the law does not prohibit fucking squirrels," while balls-deep in a bushy female who had nuts in her mouth.
Putting the comma before the closing quotation mark suggests that the judge said something more after 'squirrels' even if he didn't. Why is this allowed?

>>51813622
>the closing quotation mark suggests that the judge said something more after 'squirrels'
Not really. It's just easier on the eyes, avoids potentially forming a run-on sentence, and provides a pause when reading the sentence out loud. Besides, the closing quotation mark is right there. I don't know whether the ending comma is strictly correct, as it might be a splice, but I tend to write that way.

Why Paris's and not Paris' ?

>>51814362
I don't think there's even a strict rule on whether one should always use "s's" or just "s' ". I tend to use the latter. As for how to pronounce it....I have no idea, as I've heard it both ways.

girl's top or girls' top?

>>51815711
Most probably "girl's top" because you're referring to one girl. I can't think of a context in which "girls' top" would make sense. If you're referring to multiple girls then it would be "girls' tops".

I'll just use /brit/ or /cum/ whenever I have some questions tbqh, seems to be redundant with an entire board.

>>51812972
I took the CPE last november, and I managed to score the maximum score in Use of English. However, one can obtain a perfect score without doing everything right(93% of the right answers are enough to get 230/230), and one thing still bothers me.

Is "Turn out" always followed by "for", or can it be also followed by other prepositions such as "at"?
I had to transform the sentence "Not many people were present at the meeting" with the key word "out", and I transformed it in "Very few people turned out at the meeting".

I'm pretty sure that I made another mistake in the paper, so... Dunno. It does sound "wrong", but considering my score I'm led to believe that it still may be gramatically correct (There were 27 marks for the Use of English part, one could therefore make 2 mistakes at worst to obtain the maximum score).

>>51818005
Your sentence didn't seem strange to me, but the more natural form would be "very few people turned out FOR the meeting" "For" signifies the reason/purpose people turned out.

"Turn out" doesn't always require "for," though. You can follow it with "at" if you want to describe the action of "turn out". Example: "During the party, people turned out at an irregular rate." "people turned out in unprecedented numbers"