>>If we've accepted "ubi" for a verb, grammar is lost already ;).
>
>Of course! BUT a lawyer in germany would press for "Analoge Anwendung" (dunno if "Similar application" is a semi-standard way of argument in american law) of the rule that ending of adjective and noun have to be equal. Ubi interpreted as verb makes it clearly a non-noun[keeping firmly in line of non-sense!], but IAC it has an ending<g>. Sort of duck typing salted with some Catch-22 from legalese...("this rule is meant ONLY for nouns. If there is no noun, any word having an ending can be made subject to this rule")

Aaah, but my dear colleague forgets the older rule, set forth by the legal genius of... (echoes down the stone corridors for about forever plus a coffee break, while absentmindedly scratching under the wig).

>No undergarments might translate into automatic sexual harassment risking suits. And to discriminate against such suits is still allowed or is that changing as well ? Or is the only discrimination allowed nowadays the one leading directly into leagal trouble and lawyer fees ?
>Does Casual Friday coupled with non-adherence to "Semper ubi puri sub ubi" automatically lead to such suits ?

So, unterwahrenlos == Automatisch Blei Tuxedo?

>>You should try learning Hungarian. It's like Forth.
>
>The only time there was a chance I remembered to enjoy in silence

Don't read this thread (it's in Serbian), but listen to language samples - it was a thread on "guess which language is this": http://www.parapsihopatologija.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=2168&st=0

Extra points if you got the forum's name right in your head :). More extra point if you recognize me by avatar.