Were portmanteau words ‘originally invented by Lewis Carroll’, so has it been modified?

In your example, word isn’t necessarily a misspelling the place of the word being created. Why does the author think that word means world (a mistake, but not a misspelling), or is in fact saying something other than what you expected, and intended to type word? Any man who intended world and typed Word, it’s a misspelling. nowhere in the definition is there a phrase ‘except where this creates a valid word in English’.

In your example, word isn’t necessarily a misspelling the place of the word being created. Why does the author think that word means world (a mistake, but not a misspelling), or is in fact saying something other than what you expected, and intended to type word? Any man who intended world and typed Word, it’s a misspelling. nowhere in the definition is there a phrase ‘except where this creates a valid word in English’.

In your example, word isn’t necessarily a misspelling the place of the word being created. Why does the author think that word means world (a mistake, but not a misspelling), or is in fact saying something other than what you expected, and intended to type word? Any man who intended world and typed Word, it’s a misspelling. nowhere in the definition is there a phrase ‘except where this creates a valid word in English’.

What is the tu quoque fallacy?

Can you create a movie that is able to change your life? I want to marry tomorrow is a way of saying I will be or I expect to be. It is always fun. Can more than one person be blamed for this fire? No matter who was at fault Or, I realize, it’s not true, but what the spokesman is supposed to say says, it may of course be a Freudian slip.

Edit: The passive is the usual construction in this situation, which is probably what confused the spokesman; unfortunately (whether to be married or to be blamed )it is more a prediction than anything else, which is what I object to. The phrase meaning “responsible” is specifically was to blame. Foller calls it an “illogicality long established as idiomatic”; I would say it is just as well-constructed as the synonym at fault.

Can you create a movie that is able to change your life? I want to marry tomorrow is a way of saying I will be or I expect to be. It is always fun. Can more than one person be blamed for this fire? No matter who was at fault Or, I realize, it’s not true, but what the spokesman is supposed to say says, it may of course be a Freudian slip.

Edit: The passive is the usual construction in this situation, which is probably what confused the spokesman; unfortunately (whether to be married or to be blamed )it is more a prediction than anything else, which is what I object to. The phrase meaning “responsible” is specifically was to blame. Foller calls it an “illogicality long established as idiomatic”; I would say it is just as well-constructed as the synonym at fault.

Can you create a movie that is able to change your life? I want to marry tomorrow is a way of saying I will be or I expect to be. It is always fun. Can more than one person be blamed for this fire? No matter who was at fault Or, I realize, it’s not true, but what the spokesman is supposed to say says, it may of course be a Freudian slip.

Edit: The passive is the usual construction in this situation, which is probably what confused the spokesman; unfortunately (whether to be married or to be blamed )it is more a prediction than anything else, which is what I object to. The phrase meaning “responsible” is specifically was to blame. Foller calls it an “illogicality long established as idiomatic”; I would say it is just as well-constructed as the synonym at fault.

Can you create a movie that is able to change your life? I want to marry tomorrow is a way of saying I will be or I expect to be. It is always fun. Can more than one person be blamed for this fire? No matter who was at fault Or, I realize, it’s not true, but what the spokesman is supposed to say says, it may of course be a Freudian slip.

Edit: The passive is the usual construction in this situation, which is probably what confused the spokesman; unfortunately (whether to be married or to be blamed )it is more a prediction than anything else, which is what I object to. The phrase meaning “responsible” is specifically was to blame. Foller calls it an “illogicality long established as idiomatic”; I would say it is just as well-constructed as the synonym at fault.

When can I use the tense when I start thinking about whether I am still working there or not? I have been writing for the last 12 months at XYZ for the whole last year mean the whole year up to the date of writing. I worked there for the whole of last year ( is needed to distinguish ‘2011’ from ‘twelve months to date’) is equally grammatical, but means (or at least implies) that you no longer do so.? I have been working here for the whole of last year would mean for the whole of 2011 but invites the question ‘So what have you been doing since January? “.

In Chinese, my son is a person who loves to talk.