• @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          413 hours ago

          It probably annotates abbreviation of the full year 1985 1986 1987, etc, so people don’t get confused and think Tom Cruise was 87 when he married Mimi Rogers.

          I can’t say if it’s a good or bad annotation, but theres a possible explanation.

              • TheRealKuni
                link
                fedilink
                English
                312 hours ago

                Just to be pedantic, you should use “whoever” there, not “whomever.”

                To tell whether to use “who” or “whom,” replace it with “he” or “him” and follow the ‘m.’

                “he made this” vs “him made this”

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  212 hours ago

                  Can I get an example for whomever please? My brain is slow today but like learning new grammar tips.

                  • TheRealKuni
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    5
                    edit-2
                    10 hours ago

                    Sure!

                    “If I’m asked, I’ll give grammar tips to whomever.”

                    Whomever is tough, because often this would be constructed as “I’ll give grammar tips to whoever asks.” And you would use “who” there, because “whoever” is the subject of the clause “whoever asks.”

                    Generally speaking, it’s usually safe to pick “whoever” over “whomever.”

                    But if you drop the “-ever” it’s a lot easier. Anywhere you’d use “him” (that is, the objective pronoun), you use “whom.” To whom, for whom, by whom, etc.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              13 hours ago

              Idk why or who makes the conventions. It might be a required format, kind of like how you’re supposed to start numbering pages in APA after the title page.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1015 hours ago

        I went down a rabbit hole on this one. I think the age may be irrelevant, or only correlated with children. At least Kidman and Holmes left him over Scientology. They were trying to avoid having their kids indoctrinated. That worked for Holmes, backfired on Kidman. It might have worked for Holmes because it backfired on Kidman. https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/06/28/after-tom-cruise-once-denied-abandoning-suri-she-seems-to-get-the-last-word/

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1016 hours ago

          Leonardo DiCaprio? I don’t know much about him. If you mean the young girlfriend/partners, those are transactional relationships. He gets arm candy and they get access to high level producers and directors at parties. I feel like it’s much more honest and safe that they aren’t married to him.