So, I recently unlocked Yuurin and noticed a minor flaw in his description.
"His bond with all things natural is unmatched, able to draw on both plant and beast to execute powerful attacks and impenetrable defences."
Topic: Yuurin Character Description Typo
Users reading this topic:
There are no members reading this topic.
- 1
Posted on March 19, 2011 20:27
1 thumbs up
#1
jrawls9, The Manipulative Tactician of Santi
Contribution: 217 (203 + 13.8)
Joined: February 16, 2011
Contribution: 217 (203 + 13.8)
Joined: February 16, 2011
Hello to all.
So, I recently unlocked Yuurin and noticed a minor flaw in his description.
"His bond with all things natural is unmatched, able to draw on both plant and beast to execute powerful attacks and impenetrable defences."
So, I recently unlocked Yuurin and noticed a minor flaw in his description.
"His bond with all things natural is unmatched, able to draw on both plant and beast to execute powerful attacks and impenetrable defences."
Posted on March 19, 2011 21:21
#2
How is that a typo?
Signature made by Hab. <3
Forum Guide | Game Manual | Best of 101 | Swapping Rules | Squad Library | Staff ID
Forum Guide | Game Manual | Best of 101 | Swapping Rules | Squad Library | Staff ID
Posted on March 19, 2011 22:52
#3
Hikaru wrote:
How is that a typo?
Posted on March 19, 2011 23:00
#4
Posted on March 19, 2011 23:11
#5
That bold word is spelled right.
Posted on March 20, 2011 01:23
#6
Nothing is wrong...
Bon, I are epic
Bon, I are epic
Posted on March 20, 2011 01:31
#7
jrawls9, The Manipulative Tactician of Santi
Contribution: 217 (203 + 13.8)
Joined: February 16, 2011
Contribution: 217 (203 + 13.8)
Joined: February 16, 2011
Think about it:
" Impenetrable" is an adjective. The way the sentence is structured,it should be a verb there.
If you reread the sentence as worded, it states "able to.....to". Since this is the case, it makes no sense to follow the preposition with an adjective. Just as the words "draw" and "execute" were used here(both of which are verbs), impenetrable should be changed to a verb(which,I'm guessing, should have been "penetrate")
It's just grammer rules
.
" Impenetrable" is an adjective. The way the sentence is structured,it should be a verb there.
If you reread the sentence as worded, it states "able to.....to". Since this is the case, it makes no sense to follow the preposition with an adjective. Just as the words "draw" and "execute" were used here(both of which are verbs), impenetrable should be changed to a verb(which,I'm guessing, should have been "penetrate")
It's just grammer rules
.
Posted on March 20, 2011 02:26
1 thumbs up
#8
jrawls9 wrote:
Think about it:
" Impenetrable" is an adjective. The way the sentence is structured,it should be a verb there.
If you reread the sentence as worded, it states "able to.....to". Since this is the case, it makes no sense to follow the preposition with an adjective. Just as the words "draw" and "execute" were used here(both of which are verbs), impenetrable should be changed to a verb(which,I'm guessing, should have been "penetrate")
It's just grammer rules.
" Impenetrable" is an adjective. The way the sentence is structured,it should be a verb there.
If you reread the sentence as worded, it states "able to.....to". Since this is the case, it makes no sense to follow the preposition with an adjective. Just as the words "draw" and "execute" were used here(both of which are verbs), impenetrable should be changed to a verb(which,I'm guessing, should have been "penetrate")
It's just grammer rules
.Actually, the verb there is "execute." He is able to execute both powerful attacks and impenetrable defenses. Although, you don't really execute defenses the way you execute attacks, so they should probably come up with a better verb to put in their. This might be a better statement: "His bond with all things natural is unmatched; he is able to draw on both plant and beast to execute powerful attacks and erect impenetrable defences." I also changed another part because of subject/verb agreement. The way it was before, Yuurin's bond is being said to be able to draw on both plant and animal, but Yuurin is the one doing the drawing, not the bond.
Epicurus wrote:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Marcus Aurelius wrote:
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
Posted on March 20, 2011 04:16
#9
jrawls9, The Manipulative Tactician of Santi
Contribution: 217 (203 + 13.8)
Joined: February 16, 2011
Contribution: 217 (203 + 13.8)
Joined: February 16, 2011
rurudo66 wrote:
(...)
Actually, the verb there is "execute." He is able to execute both powerful attacks and impenetrable defenses. Although, you don't really execute defenses the way you execute attacks, so they should probably come up with a better verb to put in their. This might be a better statement: "His bond with all things natural is unmatched; he is able to draw on both plant and beast to execute powerful attacks and erect impenetrable defences." I also changed another part because of subject/verb agreement. The way it was before, Yuurin's bond is being said to be able to draw on both plant and animal, but Yuurin is the one doing the drawing, not the bond.
Actually, the verb there is "execute." He is able to execute both powerful attacks and impenetrable defenses. Although, you don't really execute defenses the way you execute attacks, so they should probably come up with a better verb to put in their. This might be a better statement: "His bond with all things natural is unmatched; he is able to draw on both plant and beast to execute powerful attacks and erect impenetrable defences." I also changed another part because of subject/verb agreement. The way it was before, Yuurin's bond is being said to be able to draw on both plant and animal, but Yuurin is the one doing the drawing, not the bond.
This is also good. Either way would make the sentence flow better.
Terms of use
Disclaimer
Privacy policy
Forum rules
ContactThis website and its contents are copyright © 2010-2011 War of Ninja.