0
Kevin X Posted 17 years ago
Vocabulary
"You had me at get lost." ???
Hi guys,
I saw this sentence the other day, confused not just about what it means, but if it's grammatical.
"You had me at get lost."
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/moredetails.aspx?showBleed=false&ProductNo=61167723&colorNo=0&pr=F
Another example:
http://www.impawards.com/2009/i_hate_valentines_day_xlg.html
Thanks for your comments.
I saw this sentence the other day, confused not just about what it means, but if it's grammatical.
"You had me at get lost."
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/moredetails.aspx?showBleed=false&ProductNo=61167723&colorNo=0&pr=F
Another example:
http://www.impawards.com/2009/i_hate_valentines_day_xlg.html
Thanks for your comments.
Top answer
". " is the common idiom used by a girl to tell a guy she is not interested, in him or anything he's offering, in an abrupt and rather rude way. ".
- ".
- " is the common idiom used by a girl to tell a guy she is not interested, in him or anything he's offering, in an abrupt and rather rude way.
- ".
- ", that statement cemented my love for you.
- Perverse are the ways of love, sometimes.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
It's not totally grammatical, it ought to be (but never is)
You had me at "Get Lost!".
"Get Lost!" is the common idiom used by a girl to tell a guy she is not interested, in him or anything he's offering, in an abrupt and rather rude way.
"You had me at ..." is becoming a common way for someone to tell their just-become or hopefully-soon-to-be significant other that fur
You had me at "Get Lost!".
"Get Lost!" is the common idiom used by a girl to tell a guy she is not interested, in him or anything he's offering, in an abrupt and rather rude way.
"You had me at ..." is becoming a common way for someone to tell their just-become or hopefully-soon-to-be significant other that fur
00
"You had me at ...."
Can anyone confirm that this expression entered the language as a result of the 1996 movie Jerry Maguire, staring Tom Cruise and Renee Zellweger?
Here is a link to the relevant scene:
Can anyone confirm that this expression entered the language as a result of the 1996 movie Jerry Maguire, staring Tom Cruise and Renee Zellweger?
Here is a link to the relevant scene:
00
I'd think so.
I don't recall hearing to before then.
But I'm wrong about all sorts of things, so if someone can find "You had me at 'hello'" showing up in the American corpus prior to Jerry Maguire, that's cool too.
(And I still think that Renee Zellweger squints too much.)
I don't recall hearing to before then.
But I'm wrong about all sorts of things, so if someone can find "You had me at 'hello'" showing up in the American corpus prior to Jerry Maguire, that's cool too.
(And I still think that Renee Zellweger squints too much.)
00
Just wondering. So many versions are floating around. Could you be thinking of the old expression, "I'm at a loss"?
A common corollary of that is, "You had me at a loss."
We often hear, "She was at a loss for words."
A common corollary of that is, "You had me at a loss."
We often hear, "She was at a loss for words."
00
RayHCan anyone confirm that this expression entered the language as a result of the 1996 movie Jerry Maguire, staring Tom Cruise and Renee Zellweger?I doubt it. "You had me at 'Hello'" may be considered a quotable moment in film history, I suppose, but there's nothing new in the construction"You had me at ...", which almost certainly predates the movi
0
Related Questions