Talk:me three

me three
Um, I like pizza? --Connel MacKenzie 08:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * delete --Williamsayers79 10:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep — idiomatic — unless you want to add an adverb sense to three, which I'd be O.K. with, though I've never actually heard someone use this sense of three in any other phrase. (I'm not 100% sure that "it's likely that someone would run across it and want to know what it means", as the CFI put it — it's hard to imagine a context where it could be used without its meaning being clear — but it's certainly likely that a non-native speaker would run across it and want to know if it's standard usage, or even that a native speaker would run across it and want to know if it's dialectic. So, I guess I'm arguing that we keep this for the sense label as much as for the definition.) If the example bothers you, we can always replace it. (Also, possibly move to me, three.) —RuakhTALK 16:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep --Ptcamn 11:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * As long as it doesn't lead to the addition of me 4, me 5, etc. It's really not that idiomatic, but it is very common (even though the context tends to make it obvious enough without explanation).  It also seems to be more of a youth thing, playing on the secondary nature of too which is pronounced nearly identically to 2, whereas there is no tertiary equivalent to too, only 3, etc., and I wouldn't be surprised if you could fill in citations for me four and me five, but they really are sum of parts, just of the non-standard/informal/messed up kiddie grammar variety.--Halliburton Shill 16:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I can only find Google book hits for up to me five, so I guess we'd have to stop there. Using quotations only from Usenet to justify me six is kinda pushing it. DAVilla 22:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)