Joe wrote:
On Feb 7, 5:21 pm, Charlie Morgan wrote:

On 7 Feb 2007 17:08:03 -0600, Dave wrote:






On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:14:59 -0500, Charlie Morgan said:

Hey, I thought you knew something about writing, Charlie. Nothing wrong with
Katy's usage of "like." The problem is the word "and," which should read
"with"

It was the wrong usage, given the context. She should have used "such as". Using
"like" would mean she was actually suggesting Reagan himself.

Sorry, but you're just plain wrong. Your usage is #5 below. Hers in #1 and
entirely correct.

like 2 (lk)
prep.
1. Possessing the characteristics of; resembling closely; similar to.
2.
a. In the typical manner of: It's not like you to take offense.
b. In the same way as: lived like royalty.
3. Inclined or disposed to: felt like running away.
4. As if the probability exists for: looks like a bad year for farmers.
5. Such as; for example: saved things like old newspapers and pieces of
string.

Sorry, but it is you who is just plain wrong on this. I don't know where you
pasted that from, but it's not very well done.

"such as" is used when you want to refer to things that are similar to the
object, without BEING the object.

Refer to the AP stylebook, or maybe Strunk & White, if you still don't
understand this important distinction.

You are not quite at the level of those who do not know the difference between
effect and affect, but you are getting close. :')

CWM- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Ohhh...I see said the blind man as he picked up the hammer and saw.

BB you could use the most proper grammer on earth, and you would still
be a dip****.
You should ask Harvard for a full refund.

Joe

They don't refund need scholarships....