In a world first

Witam.
Co dokładnie znaczy wyrażenie "in a world first" (lub "in a world-first", z myślnikiem)?
Np. w zdaniach "In a world first, a living arm has been grown in a lab" czy "In a world-first, new docking system means drones can refuel in mid-air".
Ze zdań domyślam się, że chodzi o "po raz pierwszy", ale co to za konstrukcja? "World first" to jest rzeczownik?

po raz pierwszy na świecie

to jest rzeczownik, skoro przylacza przedimek (i przyimek)
ale world-first moze tez byc przymiotnikiem
"in a world-first attempt...."

In a world-first...albo in world's first...

nie

W tym wypadku może nie, ale generalnie jest ok.

nie

Haha! The world's first transplatation of inner body organs...ok dobra, chodziło Ci o "the"?

I think we say 'internal organs'

What do you mean by "we"? I see no overt difference between the afore-mentioned phrases. At least, both are correct and fully understandable!

tak chodzilo o the

'inner body organs' trąci ezoteryką: organs of the inner body

ok dzięki

Come to think of it ...if there are "inner body organs", what are the outer ones?

the ones that lie on the road after you're run over by a truck

Yeah, but I didn't mean accidental and forceful body organs displacement ...

External sex organs like ears, a nose etc.? We all know what you meant, perv.:)))

I have seen things on the internet no man should ever see, but nose sex is yet ahead of me

There's a lot more things that are ahead of you. That's why the say ' you leave and learn'.

Damn you Sav, now it's all out in the open. Had you not mentioned that, no one would....hehe

Don't worry, it's not taxable, IRS won't find out :)

They might do, if they find the pictures you posted on the net :-)

They might do, if they find the pictures you posted on the net :-)

Right, why not? that makes sense, even if it's a nose sex 'stunt' :)

Look, I got a story here about a very ssick Illinois CPA who stole a lot of money and spent it on hookers and wanted to blame it on some kind of sex addiction or something I gues but the IRS came in and hit him very hard for back taxes.

http://m.accountingweb.com/article/dont-try-home-sex-addiction-no-excuse-tax-fraud/224199

This is because you cannot rightfully claim 'expenses for addiction'. If that were the case, then the world and his wife would claim for: cigaretters, drink, shoes, handbags and all other more fanciful addictions.

So they were right, don't try it at home then with your blinds pulled up:))