Comment by cm11 4 days ago —–—, I believe. 3 comments cm11 Reply Timwi 3 days ago That depends. Your interpretation is “em+en+em”. But another, potentially wittier interpretation is “em in em”, i.e., you split an em-dash into two en-dashes and put an em-dash inside. jerf 3 days ago Heh, thanks for the attempted recovery but I definitely meant the other way around. jerf 4 days ago Oof, yes.
Timwi 3 days ago That depends. Your interpretation is “em+en+em”. But another, potentially wittier interpretation is “em in em”, i.e., you split an em-dash into two en-dashes and put an em-dash inside. jerf 3 days ago Heh, thanks for the attempted recovery but I definitely meant the other way around.
That depends. Your interpretation is “em+en+em”. But another, potentially wittier interpretation is “em in em”, i.e., you split an em-dash into two en-dashes and put an em-dash inside.
Heh, thanks for the attempted recovery but I definitely meant the other way around.
Oof, yes.