Where can you get these?

Everything I write here is nice.

-- Ray

Whoops! Turns out he was fibbing, because he followed the above with...

And then after the above, he posted...

And yet once more...

As this sequence demonstrates, the poor guy can't even recall what he's said in his last few posts, which pretty much demonstrates that he honestly can't tell the difference between reality and whatever the little voice in his head is telling him to say at any given moment.

So at this point I'm going to recommend that everyone do what I'm going to do from now on: simply ignore him. We can't *make* him get better, and nobody who's this far into delusional thought-processes ever seeks out help unless it's thrust upon them -which is unlikely these days unless they've been molesting the neighbor's pets or children.

Too bad. There might have been something worthwhile hiding inside Ray Haddad at one time.

And you have just proven that you *can't* comprehend written English...

Twibil first refered to "it", that being the subject she was responding to, and then added a new subject at the end of her sentence. I understand English very well, but it would appear that you are (on this occassion at least) incapable of comprehending basic written English.

Regards, Greg.P.

Wow, you still can't make sense of a very simple sentence. Try these examples:

"I'm better at basketball than you are at football." "I'm a better doctor than you are a lawyer."

Both make perfect sense if English is your first language.

Exactly how can one make a comparison between sarcasm, which requires comprehension of basic written English, and comprehension of basic written English?

Jebus, you are slow. That isn't just poor reading, it's a developmental disability.

BU-AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! And *he* claims to be the one who understands everything!

Classic "whoosh".

If you intended irony, you failed. "Not everyone is as old as you" isn't an ironic phrase because I *am* old, and it's perfectly *true* that not everyone is as old as I am.

But "irony" means "The use of words to convey the opposite of their literal meaning; a statement or situation where the meaning is contradicted by the appearance or presentation of the idea.", and there was no implication that you actually meant the opposite of what you posted.

It's unwillingness.

[...]

(1) Apparently I'm better at it than you are at reading comprehension. (2) That's two separate subjects in one sentence; sarcasm and reading

[...]

OK, class, here beginneth the grammar lesson. ;-)

Sentence (1) is a well-formed English sentence. Whoever wrote (2) is confused - not surprising, since he was certainly subjected to the mess that passes for "grammar" in English-speaking schools.

Sentence (1) consists of two clauses linked by a conjunction. The parsing (in phrasal grammar) is:

Adverb, [Subject - Complement(Verb - Object)]

+(Comparator) - [Subject - Complement(Verb - Object)].

The Verb is of the form . Nominals are "nouns", "pronouns", "adjectives" and "gerunds" in traditional school grammars. In the second clause, the Nominal is omitted, to avoid repetition.

There are other grammars that describe English accurately, but I prefer this one, as it's easiest to learn.

Forget the "grammar" you learned in grade school - it does not describe English. It's the result of a 16th century schoolteacher's mistaken notion that English is a species of Latin.

Harrumph.

I promise not to subject you to a proper grammar if you promise to stop critiquing each other's use of English. If you can't make sense of what someone wrote, say so, and offer (politely) what you think was intended.

Our aim should clear (and with luck, entertaining) communication.

Got that?

Good.

cheers,

wolf k.

On 6/18/2009 12:03 AM Twibil spake thus:

Bingo. AKA obtuseness. Willful "misunderstanding".

Wolf, old idiot, the item under discussion was the exchange which took place _before_ the sentence you have defined as "[1]". Twibil claimed that her use of US slang could have it's meaning illuminated by simply Googling the slang terms. I attempted to point out that one would have to recognise that the terms were actually foreign slang and were not intended literally, both "buck" and "wing" having several non-foreign-slang meanings which she may well have intended.

You may well consider that English is not a species of Latin, but I would suggest to you that yank english is no longer a species of English.

Regards, Greg.P.

I do not claim to understand "everything". I certainly wouldn't claim to understand incomprehensible people such as you. Your claim is your very own "whoosh".

Regards, Greg.P.

It is the writer's responsibility to make his or her meaning clear, when putting his or her view into text. As the reader I may take whatever meaning I see from that text.

Regards, Greg.P.

And "buck and wing" is no longer a species of Contemporary Yank English. ;o)

On Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:19:51 +1200, LD wrote:=

te:

=

As I was largely unaware that they ever were (exception: buck =3D dollar= ) it's no great loss to me that they are no longer contemporary there.

Regards, Greg.P. (what's you current PC term for Negros?)

Let's see: it's been used here a number of times in just the last few days which means......yes.......that's right: it's perfectly contemporary.

(That *is* what "contemporary" means, you know...)

Good thing you aren't a professor of literature... I can see your dissertation... "Bare bodkins? Fardels? This Shakespeare dude was an idiot!"