If he was killed, shouldn’t it say “who WAS also a lion”? Instead of “who IS also a lion”
Just to clarify
Submitted 2 weeks ago by ickplant@lemmy.world to [deleted]
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/d984abf0-1c0a-49ab-a329-a1c7238e0126.jpeg
Comments
workerONE@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Johandea@feddit.nu 2 weeks ago
They didn’t want to spoil the second half of the sentence
RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 2 weeks ago
He’s still a lion, just with a [DEAD] modifyer tag.
monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Could have been an adopted meerkat-bro. Families are complicated these days.
KSPAtlas@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
That’s a relative clause though?
rasmus@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
… which is a type of subordinate clause
Tedesche@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
It’s 2025. Anything can identify however it wants.
bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
Well, if you don’t apply the term “brother” to full siblings, he could be a liger or a tigon.
ummthatguy@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Is the liger bred for its skills in magic?
lemmyknow@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
Nah, it’s mainly to research ligerme
MacNCheezus@lemmy.today 2 weeks ago
Tigers are not endemic to Africa. This being a national park, not a zoo, I’d say the chances of that possibility are extremely slim.
tacosanonymous@mander.xyz 2 weeks ago
What if his parents adopted a hyena or a large house cat?