Using “wallow” verb with objectAnswering a question with “Me” instead of “I” + <auxiliary verb>Transitive verbs VS intransitive verbsIn “Approval was given, and Ju's art displayed.” how can the transitive verb 'display' be used without an object?Confusion about “transitive and intransitive verbs”Usage of uppercase word instead of lower after dialogueTransitive or intransitive, that is questionA verb 'biodegrade' as transitive and intransitiveworry and worry aboutAre all transitive verbs intransitive too?How to differentiate between a transitive and intransitive verb?

Simulating rnorm() using runif()

Good allowance savings plan?

My story is written in English, but is set in my home country. What language should I use for the dialogue?

Brexit - No Deal Rejection

Schematic conventions for different supply rails

Ban on all campaign finance?

How could a scammer know the apps on my phone / iTunes account?

Theorems like the Lovász Local Lemma?

Bash replace string at multiple places in a file from command line

Is having access to past exams cheating and, if yes, could it be proven just by a good grade?

Why is a Java array index expression evaluated before checking if the array reference expression is null?

Is it true that real estate prices mainly go up?

Possible Leak In Concrete

Be in awe of my brilliance!

Where is the 1/8 CR apprentice in Volo's Guide to Monsters?

What is Thermal Runaway Protection?

Can anyone tell me why this program fails?

Bastion server: use TCP forwarding VS placing private key on server

Identifying the interval from A♭ to D♯

Instead of Universal Basic Income, why not Universal Basic NEEDS?

Why did it take so long to abandon sail after steamships were demonstrated?

Citation at the bottom for subfigures in beamer frame

Counting certain elements in lists

Function to parse .NET composite string format



Using “wallow” verb with object


Answering a question with “Me” instead of “I” + <auxiliary verb>Transitive verbs VS intransitive verbsIn “Approval was given, and Ju's art displayed.” how can the transitive verb 'display' be used without an object?Confusion about “transitive and intransitive verbs”Usage of uppercase word instead of lower after dialogueTransitive or intransitive, that is questionA verb 'biodegrade' as transitive and intransitiveworry and worry aboutAre all transitive verbs intransitive too?How to differentiate between a transitive and intransitive verb?













1















I see that wallow is an intransitive verb so it means that it should not be followed by an object.



But if I use wallow as:




Since that kid didn't get the ice-cream so she started wallowing on the road.




Is this sentence grammatically incorrect because now I am using it like a transitive verb?










share|improve this question
























  • You usually wallow around in something soft (water, mud), meaning flail your arms and legs, often trying (but failing) to move / make progress. I can't say your usage is "wrong", but it's a little unlikely (especially without around). I suspect thrashing about might be better for your context, especially given that wallowing around is something we say about pigs in their muddy / pig-shitty sties - with the strong implication that pigs really like doing this (mud-wallowing).

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago












  • ...but your example is no more "transitive" that He was crying [in the road, in his bedroom, wherever]. Of course, to cry can be transitive in Cry me a river or maybe even I cried buckets, but I can't easily see how to do that with to wallow.

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @pjj Wallow does not take an object there. The road is the object of the preposition on, not of the verb.

    – StoneyB
    2 hours ago











  • @StoneyB Thank you. Your comment is really really helpful. 3 questions/point - (1.) so does it make my sentence grammatically correct (2.) lets say it it is incorrect, but suppose I had "accidentally" used in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would it be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice? (3.) Could you please recommend some online resources to me where I can learn these concepts, how do I understand that "the road" was object of preposition "on", to me it looked like "on the road" was object.. please recommend...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago












  • @StoneyB I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago















1















I see that wallow is an intransitive verb so it means that it should not be followed by an object.



But if I use wallow as:




Since that kid didn't get the ice-cream so she started wallowing on the road.




Is this sentence grammatically incorrect because now I am using it like a transitive verb?










share|improve this question
























  • You usually wallow around in something soft (water, mud), meaning flail your arms and legs, often trying (but failing) to move / make progress. I can't say your usage is "wrong", but it's a little unlikely (especially without around). I suspect thrashing about might be better for your context, especially given that wallowing around is something we say about pigs in their muddy / pig-shitty sties - with the strong implication that pigs really like doing this (mud-wallowing).

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago












  • ...but your example is no more "transitive" that He was crying [in the road, in his bedroom, wherever]. Of course, to cry can be transitive in Cry me a river or maybe even I cried buckets, but I can't easily see how to do that with to wallow.

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @pjj Wallow does not take an object there. The road is the object of the preposition on, not of the verb.

    – StoneyB
    2 hours ago











  • @StoneyB Thank you. Your comment is really really helpful. 3 questions/point - (1.) so does it make my sentence grammatically correct (2.) lets say it it is incorrect, but suppose I had "accidentally" used in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would it be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice? (3.) Could you please recommend some online resources to me where I can learn these concepts, how do I understand that "the road" was object of preposition "on", to me it looked like "on the road" was object.. please recommend...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago












  • @StoneyB I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago













1












1








1


1






I see that wallow is an intransitive verb so it means that it should not be followed by an object.



But if I use wallow as:




Since that kid didn't get the ice-cream so she started wallowing on the road.




Is this sentence grammatically incorrect because now I am using it like a transitive verb?










share|improve this question
















I see that wallow is an intransitive verb so it means that it should not be followed by an object.



But if I use wallow as:




Since that kid didn't get the ice-cream so she started wallowing on the road.




Is this sentence grammatically incorrect because now I am using it like a transitive verb?







grammar transitivity






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 hours ago









Lucian Sava

9,125113175




9,125113175










asked 3 hours ago









pjjpjj

1253




1253












  • You usually wallow around in something soft (water, mud), meaning flail your arms and legs, often trying (but failing) to move / make progress. I can't say your usage is "wrong", but it's a little unlikely (especially without around). I suspect thrashing about might be better for your context, especially given that wallowing around is something we say about pigs in their muddy / pig-shitty sties - with the strong implication that pigs really like doing this (mud-wallowing).

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago












  • ...but your example is no more "transitive" that He was crying [in the road, in his bedroom, wherever]. Of course, to cry can be transitive in Cry me a river or maybe even I cried buckets, but I can't easily see how to do that with to wallow.

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @pjj Wallow does not take an object there. The road is the object of the preposition on, not of the verb.

    – StoneyB
    2 hours ago











  • @StoneyB Thank you. Your comment is really really helpful. 3 questions/point - (1.) so does it make my sentence grammatically correct (2.) lets say it it is incorrect, but suppose I had "accidentally" used in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would it be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice? (3.) Could you please recommend some online resources to me where I can learn these concepts, how do I understand that "the road" was object of preposition "on", to me it looked like "on the road" was object.. please recommend...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago












  • @StoneyB I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago

















  • You usually wallow around in something soft (water, mud), meaning flail your arms and legs, often trying (but failing) to move / make progress. I can't say your usage is "wrong", but it's a little unlikely (especially without around). I suspect thrashing about might be better for your context, especially given that wallowing around is something we say about pigs in their muddy / pig-shitty sties - with the strong implication that pigs really like doing this (mud-wallowing).

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago












  • ...but your example is no more "transitive" that He was crying [in the road, in his bedroom, wherever]. Of course, to cry can be transitive in Cry me a river or maybe even I cried buckets, but I can't easily see how to do that with to wallow.

    – FumbleFingers
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @pjj Wallow does not take an object there. The road is the object of the preposition on, not of the verb.

    – StoneyB
    2 hours ago











  • @StoneyB Thank you. Your comment is really really helpful. 3 questions/point - (1.) so does it make my sentence grammatically correct (2.) lets say it it is incorrect, but suppose I had "accidentally" used in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would it be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice? (3.) Could you please recommend some online resources to me where I can learn these concepts, how do I understand that "the road" was object of preposition "on", to me it looked like "on the road" was object.. please recommend...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago












  • @StoneyB I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago
















You usually wallow around in something soft (water, mud), meaning flail your arms and legs, often trying (but failing) to move / make progress. I can't say your usage is "wrong", but it's a little unlikely (especially without around). I suspect thrashing about might be better for your context, especially given that wallowing around is something we say about pigs in their muddy / pig-shitty sties - with the strong implication that pigs really like doing this (mud-wallowing).

– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago






You usually wallow around in something soft (water, mud), meaning flail your arms and legs, often trying (but failing) to move / make progress. I can't say your usage is "wrong", but it's a little unlikely (especially without around). I suspect thrashing about might be better for your context, especially given that wallowing around is something we say about pigs in their muddy / pig-shitty sties - with the strong implication that pigs really like doing this (mud-wallowing).

– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago














...but your example is no more "transitive" that He was crying [in the road, in his bedroom, wherever]. Of course, to cry can be transitive in Cry me a river or maybe even I cried buckets, but I can't easily see how to do that with to wallow.

– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago






...but your example is no more "transitive" that He was crying [in the road, in his bedroom, wherever]. Of course, to cry can be transitive in Cry me a river or maybe even I cried buckets, but I can't easily see how to do that with to wallow.

– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago





1




1





@pjj Wallow does not take an object there. The road is the object of the preposition on, not of the verb.

– StoneyB
2 hours ago





@pjj Wallow does not take an object there. The road is the object of the preposition on, not of the verb.

– StoneyB
2 hours ago













@StoneyB Thank you. Your comment is really really helpful. 3 questions/point - (1.) so does it make my sentence grammatically correct (2.) lets say it it is incorrect, but suppose I had "accidentally" used in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would it be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice? (3.) Could you please recommend some online resources to me where I can learn these concepts, how do I understand that "the road" was object of preposition "on", to me it looked like "on the road" was object.. please recommend...

– pjj
2 hours ago






@StoneyB Thank you. Your comment is really really helpful. 3 questions/point - (1.) so does it make my sentence grammatically correct (2.) lets say it it is incorrect, but suppose I had "accidentally" used in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would it be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice? (3.) Could you please recommend some online resources to me where I can learn these concepts, how do I understand that "the road" was object of preposition "on", to me it looked like "on the road" was object.. please recommend...

– pjj
2 hours ago














@StoneyB I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar...

– pjj
2 hours ago





@StoneyB I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar...

– pjj
2 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3














To physically wallow in something is to partly sink the body into something: water, mud, sand, dirt, etc. Figuratively one can wallow in an emotion such as self-pity, or in luxury, comfort, etc. There is a strong implication, for humans, of laziness (good or bad). Wallowing on a road does not make sense, because we do not use 'on' after 'wallow'.



Wallow






share|improve this answer

























  • Ok. Suppose I use in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice?

    – pjj
    2 hours ago











  • And one more question - the way I have used wallow in the example in my question, that particular usage is showing after "wallow" an object is there, right?

    – pjj
    2 hours ago











  • Yes, I want to understand how to check whether verb is used transitively or intransitively.. basically understanding whether verb has object or not... I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar... If you could recommend some good online learning resources then it would be helpful...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago











  • @pjj - wallow 'on' is never right. When you wallow you sink into something.

    – Michael Harvey
    1 hour ago


















2














You are not making it transitive. There is simply a prepositional phrase acting as an adverbial of location. There is no object for wallow, you're just saying where they are wallowing.



However, one does not wallow on anything. You wallow in things, either literally (mud, water, or even champagne) or metaphorically (emotions like self-doubt, guilt, or angst, for instance, or champagne - that one is more usually metaphorical than literal). It actually comes from how some animals live, keeping themselves partly submerged for much of the time, like pigs or hippos.



You could wallow on something as long as you were also wallowing in something, where the on might give an idea of broader location - so if we ever have pigs on the moon, we might say "the pigs wallowed in mud on the moon".




In case you are wandering about the "wallowing in champagne" thing, that could happen literally - if someone had enough money and wanted to do it, they could fill a large, shallow container with champagne and frolic in it. However, it is used metaphorically just to indicate flagrant and wasteful luxury. Not to suggest that people have a paddling pool full of champagne.






share|improve this answer






















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "481"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f200565%2fusing-wallow-verb-with-object%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3














    To physically wallow in something is to partly sink the body into something: water, mud, sand, dirt, etc. Figuratively one can wallow in an emotion such as self-pity, or in luxury, comfort, etc. There is a strong implication, for humans, of laziness (good or bad). Wallowing on a road does not make sense, because we do not use 'on' after 'wallow'.



    Wallow






    share|improve this answer

























    • Ok. Suppose I use in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • And one more question - the way I have used wallow in the example in my question, that particular usage is showing after "wallow" an object is there, right?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • Yes, I want to understand how to check whether verb is used transitively or intransitively.. basically understanding whether verb has object or not... I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar... If you could recommend some good online learning resources then it would be helpful...

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • @pjj - wallow 'on' is never right. When you wallow you sink into something.

      – Michael Harvey
      1 hour ago















    3














    To physically wallow in something is to partly sink the body into something: water, mud, sand, dirt, etc. Figuratively one can wallow in an emotion such as self-pity, or in luxury, comfort, etc. There is a strong implication, for humans, of laziness (good or bad). Wallowing on a road does not make sense, because we do not use 'on' after 'wallow'.



    Wallow






    share|improve this answer

























    • Ok. Suppose I use in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • And one more question - the way I have used wallow in the example in my question, that particular usage is showing after "wallow" an object is there, right?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • Yes, I want to understand how to check whether verb is used transitively or intransitively.. basically understanding whether verb has object or not... I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar... If you could recommend some good online learning resources then it would be helpful...

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • @pjj - wallow 'on' is never right. When you wallow you sink into something.

      – Michael Harvey
      1 hour ago













    3












    3








    3







    To physically wallow in something is to partly sink the body into something: water, mud, sand, dirt, etc. Figuratively one can wallow in an emotion such as self-pity, or in luxury, comfort, etc. There is a strong implication, for humans, of laziness (good or bad). Wallowing on a road does not make sense, because we do not use 'on' after 'wallow'.



    Wallow






    share|improve this answer















    To physically wallow in something is to partly sink the body into something: water, mud, sand, dirt, etc. Figuratively one can wallow in an emotion such as self-pity, or in luxury, comfort, etc. There is a strong implication, for humans, of laziness (good or bad). Wallowing on a road does not make sense, because we do not use 'on' after 'wallow'.



    Wallow







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 49 mins ago

























    answered 2 hours ago









    Michael HarveyMichael Harvey

    16.5k11836




    16.5k11836












    • Ok. Suppose I use in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • And one more question - the way I have used wallow in the example in my question, that particular usage is showing after "wallow" an object is there, right?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • Yes, I want to understand how to check whether verb is used transitively or intransitively.. basically understanding whether verb has object or not... I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar... If you could recommend some good online learning resources then it would be helpful...

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • @pjj - wallow 'on' is never right. When you wallow you sink into something.

      – Michael Harvey
      1 hour ago

















    • Ok. Suppose I use in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • And one more question - the way I have used wallow in the example in my question, that particular usage is showing after "wallow" an object is there, right?

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • Yes, I want to understand how to check whether verb is used transitively or intransitively.. basically understanding whether verb has object or not... I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar... If you could recommend some good online learning resources then it would be helpful...

      – pjj
      2 hours ago











    • @pjj - wallow 'on' is never right. When you wallow you sink into something.

      – Michael Harvey
      1 hour ago
















    Ok. Suppose I use in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice?

    – pjj
    2 hours ago





    Ok. Suppose I use in an English essay writing exam (lets say ILETS or toefl) then would be considered as grammatically incorrect or it is too trivial to be notice?

    – pjj
    2 hours ago













    And one more question - the way I have used wallow in the example in my question, that particular usage is showing after "wallow" an object is there, right?

    – pjj
    2 hours ago





    And one more question - the way I have used wallow in the example in my question, that particular usage is showing after "wallow" an object is there, right?

    – pjj
    2 hours ago













    Yes, I want to understand how to check whether verb is used transitively or intransitively.. basically understanding whether verb has object or not... I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar... If you could recommend some good online learning resources then it would be helpful...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago





    Yes, I want to understand how to check whether verb is used transitively or intransitively.. basically understanding whether verb has object or not... I am not a native English user so please don't mind my ignorance towards English grammar... If you could recommend some good online learning resources then it would be helpful...

    – pjj
    2 hours ago













    @pjj - wallow 'on' is never right. When you wallow you sink into something.

    – Michael Harvey
    1 hour ago





    @pjj - wallow 'on' is never right. When you wallow you sink into something.

    – Michael Harvey
    1 hour ago













    2














    You are not making it transitive. There is simply a prepositional phrase acting as an adverbial of location. There is no object for wallow, you're just saying where they are wallowing.



    However, one does not wallow on anything. You wallow in things, either literally (mud, water, or even champagne) or metaphorically (emotions like self-doubt, guilt, or angst, for instance, or champagne - that one is more usually metaphorical than literal). It actually comes from how some animals live, keeping themselves partly submerged for much of the time, like pigs or hippos.



    You could wallow on something as long as you were also wallowing in something, where the on might give an idea of broader location - so if we ever have pigs on the moon, we might say "the pigs wallowed in mud on the moon".




    In case you are wandering about the "wallowing in champagne" thing, that could happen literally - if someone had enough money and wanted to do it, they could fill a large, shallow container with champagne and frolic in it. However, it is used metaphorically just to indicate flagrant and wasteful luxury. Not to suggest that people have a paddling pool full of champagne.






    share|improve this answer



























      2














      You are not making it transitive. There is simply a prepositional phrase acting as an adverbial of location. There is no object for wallow, you're just saying where they are wallowing.



      However, one does not wallow on anything. You wallow in things, either literally (mud, water, or even champagne) or metaphorically (emotions like self-doubt, guilt, or angst, for instance, or champagne - that one is more usually metaphorical than literal). It actually comes from how some animals live, keeping themselves partly submerged for much of the time, like pigs or hippos.



      You could wallow on something as long as you were also wallowing in something, where the on might give an idea of broader location - so if we ever have pigs on the moon, we might say "the pigs wallowed in mud on the moon".




      In case you are wandering about the "wallowing in champagne" thing, that could happen literally - if someone had enough money and wanted to do it, they could fill a large, shallow container with champagne and frolic in it. However, it is used metaphorically just to indicate flagrant and wasteful luxury. Not to suggest that people have a paddling pool full of champagne.






      share|improve this answer

























        2












        2








        2







        You are not making it transitive. There is simply a prepositional phrase acting as an adverbial of location. There is no object for wallow, you're just saying where they are wallowing.



        However, one does not wallow on anything. You wallow in things, either literally (mud, water, or even champagne) or metaphorically (emotions like self-doubt, guilt, or angst, for instance, or champagne - that one is more usually metaphorical than literal). It actually comes from how some animals live, keeping themselves partly submerged for much of the time, like pigs or hippos.



        You could wallow on something as long as you were also wallowing in something, where the on might give an idea of broader location - so if we ever have pigs on the moon, we might say "the pigs wallowed in mud on the moon".




        In case you are wandering about the "wallowing in champagne" thing, that could happen literally - if someone had enough money and wanted to do it, they could fill a large, shallow container with champagne and frolic in it. However, it is used metaphorically just to indicate flagrant and wasteful luxury. Not to suggest that people have a paddling pool full of champagne.






        share|improve this answer













        You are not making it transitive. There is simply a prepositional phrase acting as an adverbial of location. There is no object for wallow, you're just saying where they are wallowing.



        However, one does not wallow on anything. You wallow in things, either literally (mud, water, or even champagne) or metaphorically (emotions like self-doubt, guilt, or angst, for instance, or champagne - that one is more usually metaphorical than literal). It actually comes from how some animals live, keeping themselves partly submerged for much of the time, like pigs or hippos.



        You could wallow on something as long as you were also wallowing in something, where the on might give an idea of broader location - so if we ever have pigs on the moon, we might say "the pigs wallowed in mud on the moon".




        In case you are wandering about the "wallowing in champagne" thing, that could happen literally - if someone had enough money and wanted to do it, they could fill a large, shallow container with champagne and frolic in it. However, it is used metaphorically just to indicate flagrant and wasteful luxury. Not to suggest that people have a paddling pool full of champagne.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 25 mins ago









        SamBCSamBC

        11.3k1541




        11.3k1541



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f200565%2fusing-wallow-verb-with-object%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Are there any AGPL-style licences that require source code modifications to be public? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Force derivative works to be publicAre there any GPL like licenses for Apple App Store?Do you violate the GPL if you provide source code that cannot be compiled?GPL - is it distribution to use libraries in an appliance loaned to customers?Distributing App for free which uses GPL'ed codeModifications of server software under GPL, with web/CLI interfaceDoes using an AGPLv3-licensed library prevent me from dual-licensing my own source code?Can I publish only select code under GPLv3 from a private project?Is there published precedent regarding the scope of covered work that uses AGPL software?If MIT licensed code links to GPL licensed code what should be the license of the resulting binary program?If I use a public API endpoint that has its source code licensed under AGPL in my app, do I need to disclose my source?

            2013 GY136 Descoberta | Órbita | Referências Menu de navegação«List Of Centaurs and Scattered-Disk Objects»«List of Known Trans-Neptunian Objects»

            Button changing it's text & action. Good or terrible? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are Inchanging text on user mouseoverShould certain functions be “hard to find” for powerusers to discover?Custom liking function - do I need user login?Using different checkbox style for different checkbox behaviorBest Practices: Save and Exit in Software UIInteraction with remote validated formMore efficient UI to progress the user through a complicated process?Designing a popup notice for a gameShould bulk-editing functions be hidden until a table row is selected, or is there a better solution?Is it bad practice to disable (replace) the context menu?