What there is, - this dog "not for themselves", times there is always and we walk and travel on exhibitions? Ah then tell for whom?
Not know, for whom dog Beam, as well as and not understand, for what during debate zone has in reorientation demagoguery
"For themselves" (already told, that sarcastic skloenniya "along and across" this expression me not likes) = class "pet", camping on E. Not "show" and not "located" -
Such terms more apply to cats, but essence this not changes. Although. If have cats biggest class ". The way" hardly can become class "show" (I not special, me shared), then have dogs can, perhaps. There is still the other homegrown the term - "on sofa", so I feel safer? Such the term not will provoke, instead constructive discuss, psevdoostroumnogo "parirovaniya": "Aah," for themselves ", and have us for neighbor, ha-ha-ha" ah not one wit has and like a cliche, honest word
Not quite realized, to what this family of history pro Aladdin because - yes, Nellie breeder "with a human face", she eggs harvested elderly, deduced from a view Dog a good people, not threw away, as, perhaps, some circumventing suspicious breeders, only as this applies to this article? Responding on question: I think, that have professional noted not can be dogs "for themselves", in is understanding of term ’, in which I his understand.
Last edited by NN (Mar 25 2014 16:53:09)