Quote:
|
Originally Posted by falco10291029
Yes, two definitions, one of which works. Context is how the reader looks at it
|
No it isn't.
Quote:
|
No, i took the whole definition
|
Are you sure? It seems to me that you fixated on
one of the words in
one of the descriptions - the word 'explain' - and ignored all else.
Quote:
|
I agree i worded that wrong
|
Wow, an admission of fallibility? Perhaps I am making progress.
Quote:
|
You are the one who stated that the flexibility didn't extend to what i had
|
I did not.
Quote:
|
YOU started talking about criticism
|
I cited my text as an example thereof. But we moved on from there, and you evidently didn't keep pace. The definition of criticism is not relevant to the discussion over how meaningful my comments are.
Quote:
|
YOU are the one who talked about how what you said was flexible
|
Incorrect. I asked you a simple question about flexible, subjective meaning. These two things are not equivalent.
Quote:
|
In that context, deem meant "to subject to", which is a valid definition
|
1)
No it isn't.
2) Your sentence wouldn't make sense even if you did choose to invoke your imaginary definition.
Quote:
Secondly, if being compared to saiud wordmith, I still am not so low as to be criticized [...]
my usage very rarely contains any errors
|
I think this entire discussion stands as testament to the inaccuracy of those claims.
Quote:
|
What I was saying by that, is what it means if you use the proper definitions for what is implied by it
|
Do you think you can realistically call this a well-constructed sentence?
Quote:
|
based on earlier definitions and argument it can be turned into "(In the category of just you) you don't own"
|
You are not listening. From whence comes this restriction of scope?
Quote:
|
I can, I said that i was arguing the definition of have, and you said i wasn't
|
No. Learn to read. I said that the disagreement did not stem from conflicting definitions, which is true. We apparently agree on the definition 'to own', but you insist on inserting some specification of scope somewhere between defining the term and using it.
This is the cause of the disagreement.