<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Matresseses</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/</link>
	<description>Showcasing the best of the worst of the wide world of words</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:47:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Tadlock</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1525</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Tadlock</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 03:05:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1525</guid>
		<description>Both phrases with &quot;suites&quot; and &quot;suits&quot; are incorrect.  It should read &quot;three-piece suites&quot; if it&#039;s about furniture and &quot;three-piece suits&quot; if it&#039;s about clothing.  The hyphenation of the first two words would be correct.

I can see no reason the ampersand should be used in &quot;tables &amp; chairs&quot; either.  Ampersands are being used much too loosely these days.

I&#039;m assuming that &quot;robes&quot; should be &quot;wardrobes.&quot;  However, if they are selling robes, they might also be selling three-piece suits.

I&#039;m also thinking of picking up some &lt;em&gt;chest drawers&lt;/em&gt; the next time I&#039;m in town.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both phrases with &#8220;suites&#8221; and &#8220;suits&#8221; are incorrect.  It should read &#8220;three-piece suites&#8221; if it&#8217;s about furniture and &#8220;three-piece suits&#8221; if it&#8217;s about clothing.  The hyphenation of the first two words would be correct.</p>
<p>I can see no reason the ampersand should be used in &#8220;tables &amp; chairs&#8221; either.  Ampersands are being used much too loosely these days.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m assuming that &#8220;robes&#8221; should be &#8220;wardrobes.&#8221;  However, if they are selling robes, they might also be selling three-piece suits.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m also thinking of picking up some <em>chest drawers</em> the next time I&#8217;m in town.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1514</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2009 16:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1514</guid>
		<description>&quot;Chest Drawers&quot;?  Is that underwear for above the waist?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Chest Drawers&#8221;?  Is that underwear for above the waist?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1507</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1507</guid>
		<description>Ah, good call, G and DexX. That does make more sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, good call, G and DexX. That does make more sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hugh</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1494</link>
		<dc:creator>Hugh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:57:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1494</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d say that they&#039;re probably selling &quot;wardrobes&quot; rather than the &quot;robes&quot; that would go in them...

And &quot;chest drawers&quot;? &quot;chests of drawers&quot;, surely...

And to DexX: A 3-piece suit is trousers (pants to you), jacket and waistcoat</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d say that they&#8217;re probably selling &#8220;wardrobes&#8221; rather than the &#8220;robes&#8221; that would go in them&#8230;</p>
<p>And &#8220;chest drawers&#8221;? &#8220;chests of drawers&#8221;, surely&#8230;</p>
<p>And to DexX: A 3-piece suit is trousers (pants to you), jacket and waistcoat</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DexX</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1493</link>
		<dc:creator>DexX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:33:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1493</guid>
		<description>I think that should be &quot;suites&quot;, as written, not your suggested correction of &quot;suits&quot;.  As they are obviously selling furniture, the former seems more likely.  A three piece suite is generally a sofa and two matching armchairs.  A three piece suit would be, what, pants, jacket, and vest?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that should be &#8220;suites&#8221;, as written, not your suggested correction of &#8220;suits&#8221;.  As they are obviously selling furniture, the former seems more likely.  A three piece suite is generally a sofa and two matching armchairs.  A three piece suit would be, what, pants, jacket, and vest?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1492</link>
		<dc:creator>G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:07:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1492</guid>
		<description>Are you sure that wasn&#039;t meant to be &quot;suite,&quot; as in &quot;suite of furniture&quot; (set)?  It makes more sense in this context, and would be correct.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you sure that wasn&#8217;t meant to be &#8220;suite,&#8221; as in &#8220;suite of furniture&#8221; (set)?  It makes more sense in this context, and would be correct.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pierre L. A. Jönsson</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1491</link>
		<dc:creator>Pierre L. A. Jönsson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:04:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1491</guid>
		<description>Actually, I think &quot;mattress&#039;s&quot; is OK.
They could have simply run out of &quot;E&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, I think &#8220;mattress&#8217;s&#8221; is OK.<br />
They could have simply run out of &#8220;E&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Naked Bunny with a Whip</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1490</link>
		<dc:creator>Naked Bunny with a Whip</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:12:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1490</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s the ADD of retail!  Items listed further down:

Garden Implements
Toys
Motorcycles
Puppys</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s the ADD of retail!  Items listed further down:</p>
<p>Garden Implements<br />
Toys<br />
Motorcycles<br />
Puppys</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cgarvey</title>
		<link>http://wordsplosion.com/matresseses/comment-page-1/#comment-1489</link>
		<dc:creator>cgarvey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 13:14:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordsplosion.com/?p=1212#comment-1489</guid>
		<description>&quot;Suites&quot; looks correct to me! As in, a 3-piece suite of furniture (e.g. 1x3-seater couch and 2x1-seater chairs). Certainly in the context of the sign anyway.

How pedantic is that?!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Suites&#8221; looks correct to me! As in, a 3-piece suite of furniture (e.g. 1&#215;3-seater couch and 2&#215;1-seater chairs). Certainly in the context of the sign anyway.</p>
<p>How pedantic is that?!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>