Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:49:42 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r201477 - head/games/fortune/datfiles Message-ID: <86fx6jgx6x.fsf@ds4.des.no> In-Reply-To: <20100105162447.7deac6d7.stas@FreeBSD.org> (Stanislav Sedov's message of "Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:24:47 -0800") References: <201001040916.o049GZ1Y013061@svn.freebsd.org> <4B4384E3.2080600@FreeBSD.org> <20100105152300.eb7a66d1.stas@FreeBSD.org> <4B43D346.4020900@FreeBSD.org> <20100105162447.7deac6d7.stas@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> writes: > Hmm, I'm not by any means the English language expert [just learning], > but isn't "invasion of" in this context is somewhat vague? I mean, > from what I see from dictionaries "invasion of smth" could mean both > the action by smth, and action against smth. Is "invasion to" > grammatically incorrect? Either "the invasion of Iraq by the US" or "the US invasion of Iraq". Never "to". DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86fx6jgx6x.fsf>