decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
No no no no no no no, yes. | 305 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Have your cake and eat it too.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 25 2012 @ 01:52 PM EDT
> Of COURSE you can have your cake and eat it too!

No, it's an archaic use of the word "have". It reads more along the
lines of "still have" - and you can't still have your cake if you've
eaten it.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Oversensitive much?
Authored by: rocky on Monday, June 25 2012 @ 02:11 PM EDT
If people were saying "have your cake and THEN eat it too", I would be
right there fuming with you, but without the time-related word "then",
they are just mentioning two simultaneous conditions joined with the word
"and". There is no logic or illogic to mentioning either one first or
second.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

No no no no no no no, yes.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 26 2012 @ 09:57 AM EDT
You must have lots of trouble talking to people.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Have your cake and eat it too.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, June 26 2012 @ 11:54 AM EDT
What about "Cheap at half the price" ?

Would be fine if it ran 'Would be cheap at half the price' but that's not how it's used.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )