Categories
- Art (178)
- Other (1,680)
- Philosophy (1,363)
- Psychology (1,890)
- Society (497)
Recent Questions
- Who are Alice, Horus and the mayor in the songs of Oksimiron from the album "Gorgorod"?
- How do world religions relate to corruption and arbitrariness of officials?
- What should I do if I start worrying, being stupid, not noticing the obvious things, or forgetting formulas during an exam, and as a result, my effectiveness drops dramatically?
- How do atheists who need objective proof of something solve the problems of phenomenology?
- Why did Christianity have such a strong influence on Russian philosophy?
Indeed, in the direct meaning (full) should not be used. But in ironic (got drunk) you can. It sounds, by the way, even sympathetic and not so judgmental as “got drunk”.
On the one hand, “eat ” and” eat ” are synonymous terms for the same action. On the other hand, the word “eat” is a literary one, it can be used in any constructions, while the word” eat “according to etiquette is undesirable to use almost in all cases, except for well-established phrases like “eat served”, etc. Thus, it is better to use the verb “eat” than “eat” – your gut did not let you down:)