I still find it spooky that a 19-year-old is considered a man, legally (and in many other cases, too). Also, he has butthole mouth.

"The point of the story isn't the little girl, the point of the story is, they robbed a bank with a telephone."

Asa Phelps: Why is the restaurant pregnant, let alone in a car?



Restaurants can't get pregnant. They clone themselves asexually. Duh.

Take a sentence over literally and then pretend to not understand? That's original, subby!

San Antonio. Home of the River Walk, $25, tastes-like-ass quesadilla.

Yeah and what the hell was that restaurant doing in the car...amidoinitrite?

Babby needs to learn how steal stuff.
But Babby not learn how to avoid immovable object like wooden pole with wires at top.

/Babby now has sad, but Babby has new guardians, named 'the state' and 'fosters lager step parents of anal retribution'.
//'Anal' is for those nutter foster parents who keep smacking the kid with a bible, instead of love.

Did some really rough guy on a motorcycle show up or something to collect the child? I am assuming that is how the wreck occurred.

macsavageg4: Did some really rough guy on a motorcycle show up or something to collect the child? I am assuming that is how the wreck occurred.

showed up, showed up. Not so good with the grammar or spelling most of the time.

pat-246

"The point of the story isn't the little girl, the point of the story is, they robbed a bank with a telephone."


"Did they hurt the little girl?"


Out of order quote is out of order.

macsavageg4: macsavageg4: Did some really rough guy on a motorcycle show up or something to collect the child? I am assuming that is how the wreck occurred.

showed up, showed up. Not so good with the grammar or spelling most of the time.

what is this I don't even

Why would a restaurant have a child in a car?

mrlewish: Why would a restaurant have a child in a car?

If it was a clown restaurant, there could have been dozens of clown children in the car.

Allen. The end.: I still find it spooky that a 19-year-old is considered a man, legally (and in many other cases, too). Also, he has butthole mouth.

Filthy chuwero.

Lipspinach: macsavageg4: macsavageg4: Did some really rough guy on a motorcycle show up or something to collect the child? I am assuming that is how the wreck occurred.

showed up, showed up. Not so good with the grammar or spelling most of the time.

what is this I don't even

Did some really rough guy on a motorcycle showed up or something to collect the child?

Is He dead or not. CNN Says yes.

Ed Finnerty: If you let one of those things scream at someone long enough, they'll give up the money.

Perhaps he threatened to bring the little bastard in.

Clawhammer: kleppe: Take a sentence over literally and then pretend to not understand? That's original, subby!

Ahh, cool a headline expert gives a critique.

There was nothing syntactically ambiguous or grammatically incorrect with TFA's headline. It was perfectly clear. DURR HURR PREPOSITIONS

Lipspinach: macsavageg4: macsavageg4: Did some really rough guy on a motorcycle show up or something to collect the child? I am assuming that is how the wreck occurred.

showed up, showed up. Not so good with the grammar or spelling most of the time.

what is this I don't even

Once I figure it out. I will let you know.

kleppe: Clawhammer: kleppe: Take a sentence over literally and then pretend to not understand? That's original, subby!

Ahh, cool a headline expert gives a critique.

There was nothing syntactically ambiguous or grammatically incorrect with TFA's headline. It was perfectly clear. DURR HURR PREPOSITIONS

Really? You can't figure this out?

Man accused of robbing restaurant (with child in car)
Man accused of robbing (restaurant with child) in car
(Man accused of robbing restaurant with child) in car

It's completely ambiguous. If you don't believe me, use Babelfish to translate it into another language and back.

It's grammatically incorrect too. That's not what "with" means, it's just newspaper jargon. You really think "with child in car" is correct English? It's also missing a verb. No, wait, two verbs.

The correct statement is:

A man is accused of robbing a restaurant while a child was in his car.

Do you see what happens to the ambiguity?

The Jami Turman Fan Club: kleppe: Clawhammer: kleppe: Take a sentence over literally and then pretend to not understand? That's original, subby!

Ahh, cool a headline expert gives a critique.

There was nothing syntactically ambiguous or grammatically incorrect with TFA's headline. It was perfectly clear. DURR HURR PREPOSITIONS

Really? You can't figure this out?

Man accused of robbing restaurant (with child in car)
Man accused of robbing (restaurant with child) in car
(Man accused of robbing restaurant with child) in car

It's completely ambiguous. If you don't believe me, use Babelfish to translate it into another language and back.

It's grammatically incorrect too. That's not what "with" means, it's just newspaper jargon. You really think "with child in car" is correct English? It's also missing a verb. No, wait, two verbs.

The correct statement is:

A man is accused of robbing a restaurant while a child was in his car.

Do you see what happens to the ambiguity?

It's only ambiguous if you think restaurants can be impregnated or vehicles transporting children are commonly used as weapons. English is really not a contextual language at all. And no, I obviously didn't miss subby's attempt at humor. If I hadn't "seen what he had done there" I wouldn't have commented in the first place.

kleppe: It's only ambiguous if you think restaurants can be impregnated or vehicles transporting children are commonly used as weapons. English is really not a contextual language at all. And no, I obviously didn't miss subby's attempt at humor. If I hadn't "seen what he had done there" I wouldn't have commented in the first place.

What was originally written was not English.
It had a bunch of English words jumbled together, but it violated almost every rule of English sentence structure. It also had at least one word ("with") which was not used correctly.

The fact that you are conversant enough with Headlineese to figure it out does not make it unambiguous. It certainly does not make it grammatically correct, as you claimed.

Hvae you eevr seen tihs tcirk? If you tkae the mlddie lrettes in ecah wrod and mkae tehm bdrawkcas, you slitl can raed it jsut fnie. Deos taht mkae it sellepd cltcerroy?