Is that really legit?
Just a vagrant itch in an episode of Monk that I saw recently. Sort of a grammatical issue. Which I know I should ignore, but...
In the story, a bar con artist bets Monk that he can tell him where he got his shoes. After some wheedling, Monk agrees to bet him $50. At which point the con artist looks at his legs, and says with a straight face," You got your shoes..." (pause for a breath) "on your feet." Monk grimaces and shoves the $50 over to him.
You got your shoes on your feet? Surely that should be you have your shoes on your feet? And Monk doesn't even object to the poor grammar? Grumble, grumble.
Perhaps correcting grammar isn't as visually entertaining as some of Monk's other fixations. Still, it seemed a bit odd that he let this slide.
In the story, a bar con artist bets Monk that he can tell him where he got his shoes. After some wheedling, Monk agrees to bet him $50. At which point the con artist looks at his legs, and says with a straight face," You got your shoes..." (pause for a breath) "on your feet." Monk grimaces and shoves the $50 over to him.
You got your shoes on your feet? Surely that should be you have your shoes on your feet? And Monk doesn't even object to the poor grammar? Grumble, grumble.
Perhaps correcting grammar isn't as visually entertaining as some of Monk's other fixations. Still, it seemed a bit odd that he let this slide.