No, that was you trying to slip out of explaining why you would write to someone with no knowledge of grammar.
You still don’t understand that there are no “correct definitions” in colloquial language
You don’t understand that there being none doesn’t lend wight to you “not a hard N” argument.
I disagree with you but that doesn’t mean I care if my username became associated with getting something wrong on an Internet forum with like 20 people on it.
Talking to you was a mistake, as you’re clearly a deeply unpleasant person who can’t handle somone politely disagreeing with you. Now that I’ve admitted a mistake I’ve made, how do we reconcile that with what you say here?
This isn’t about antisemitism, this isn’t about Israel. This is about you, personally, not being big enough to be able to accept having made mistakes, having been stupid publicly. I know a lot of people like that. Most grew out of that by the time we left grade school, but a minority didn’t, and never will. So I really hope you’re still of the age to be in grade school.
I admitted the same mistake before already. So, despite admitting as mistake to you already, you still said all of that.
explaining why you would write to someone with no knowledge of grammar.
This is the third time I’ve said this. You acquire the rules of grammar through language acquisition, which is an inherent property in humans. Just like you don’t need to study medicine to be able to know how to breathe, you don’t need to study linguistics to be able to understand grammar. This is stated very clearly in the very simply written Wikipedia article, which you refuse to read, because you’re a willfully ignorant dolt. You’re afraid of looking dumb, so you double down and look even dumber.
You’ve admitted to no mistakes. You can’t say “I was wrong”. You can’t. You can’t say that. You’re unable to.
You wrote "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.”
What you meant is “If I don’t understand the language we’re using, how are you able to communicate to me”, thinking you have some sort of gotcha. Then I point out that linguistics and language are nowhere near synonyms. You get ashamed that you’ve been stupid and double down. And now there’s three replies from you again, because you’re being emotional, because you can’t admit to not understanding linguistics.
“Colloquially” doesn’t mean “it’s to be taken however I later decide it will”.
Why won’t you just google these terms you CLEARLY do not understand? It’s beyond incredible to me that someone who knows they’re completely unaware of a thing starts arguing over it as if they actually were an expert.
The fact that this is an informal conversation doesn’t change the meaning of your sentence in the slightest, nor the mistake you made.
You said: "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.”
Do you deny saying that, or do you just deny that it’s in any way wrong? Because it’s either or.
Oh really? About things meaning whatever we want, tell me again about how the ECHR definition of antisemitism not including colloquialisms. Id love yo heat all about that.
It’s like watching a six year old talk about car parts. They think they’re making valid, adult sentences with meaning, and are completely oblivious to the adults laughing at them.
You’re simply raging that you can’t admit to having publicly humiliated yourself with your own stupidity. You can’t walk back on it, and removing the comments at this point would be ridiculous by any standards. So you obsess over this “conversation”, you have to reply, but you simply can’t address the fact that for the entire thread, it’s been about linguistics, and you don’t even understand what the term means.
##You said: "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.”
##Do you deny saying that, or do you just deny that it’s in any way wrong? Because it’s either or. I guess you deny there’s anything wrong with it. When there is. Very clearly. Almost as if you had some sort of inability to admit when you’re wrong. ;)
You still can’t admit that calling Jewish people nazis is wrong huh? As if you spent all that time writing that bullshit out that no one will read, not even me, to attempt to justify being antisemitic is just tragic.
Its almost as if you have an inability to admit when you’re wrong.
Why are you so desperately trying to conflate Israel to the entirety of Jewish people?
You’re proudly spamming comments which say “I don’t read the comments I’m replying to”. That will look great when you’re trying to pretend to know how to talk like an adult in some other threads, they go and check your profile and see you spamming “I DON’T READ, BUT I OBSESS OVER REPLYING”. I imagine a lot of people will save a lot of time.
Doesn’t matter how long you have this tantrum for. You were utterly wrong and said stupid shit that you can’t recover from. Just stop replying. It’ll be so much better for you. You don’t understand how linguistics work, you don’t understand what “colloquial” means and you’re clearly unable to get that information from Google, which is weird as fuck.
Calling Israelis nazis is linguistically correct and to say it isn’t is a linguistic error.
Still haven’t asked me what religion I was brought up in. Afraid of the answer my little “linguistics is synonymous with language”…?
Remember when you said “I said it colloquially”, thinking “colloquial” means “whatever I want a word to mean”, because you don’t understand what common usage is? Remember when you — at the top of the thread — were so insistent that you “can’t just make up meanings for words”? Yeah, I agree. That’s why it’s okay to call Israeli fascist nazis. You on the other hand, are making shit up. Like “the hard N” :D What a pathetic and weak argument from a sore loser.
You said dumb shit. Own up to it.
##You said: "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.”
##Do you deny saying that, or do you just deny that it’s in any way wrong? Because it’s either or. I guess you deny there’s anything wrong with it. When there is. Very clearly. Almost as if you had some sort of inability to admit when you’re wrong. ;)
The Israelis you’re calling nazis are Jewish. So, you are calling Jewish people nazis which is an antisemitic thing to do.
What are you writing so much bullshit to defend antisemitism? Its almost as if you can’t admit to making a mistake or something. Most people just go like “oh yeah, I see now” and move on with their lives.
Not you though. No, you HAVE to be antisemitic and will write essays defending it because you can’t admit to making a mistake.
No, that was you trying to slip out of explaining why you would write to someone with no knowledge of grammar.
You don’t understand that there being none doesn’t lend wight to you “not a hard N” argument.
I disagree with you but that doesn’t mean I care if my username became associated with getting something wrong on an Internet forum with like 20 people on it.
Talking to you was a mistake, as you’re clearly a deeply unpleasant person who can’t handle somone politely disagreeing with you. Now that I’ve admitted a mistake I’ve made, how do we reconcile that with what you say here?
I admitted the same mistake before already. So, despite admitting as mistake to you already, you still said all of that.
And you just went on and on and on
This is the third time I’ve said this. You acquire the rules of grammar through language acquisition, which is an inherent property in humans. Just like you don’t need to study medicine to be able to know how to breathe, you don’t need to study linguistics to be able to understand grammar. This is stated very clearly in the very simply written Wikipedia article, which you refuse to read, because you’re a willfully ignorant dolt. You’re afraid of looking dumb, so you double down and look even dumber.
You’ve admitted to no mistakes. You can’t say “I was wrong”. You can’t. You can’t say that. You’re unable to.
You wrote "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.” What you meant is “If I don’t understand the language we’re using, how are you able to communicate to me”, thinking you have some sort of gotcha. Then I point out that linguistics and language are nowhere near synonyms. You get ashamed that you’ve been stupid and double down. And now there’s three replies from you again, because you’re being emotional, because you can’t admit to not understanding linguistics.
Come on now. Think before you write. Please.
I was wrong to talk to you, as you seem to be a deeply unpleasant person with severe social problems.
See, that was easy.
I’m good to be honest. I was using it colloquially. So, I used it correctly.
I wish I could see your face right now
“Colloquially” doesn’t mean “it’s to be taken however I later decide it will”.
Why won’t you just google these terms you CLEARLY do not understand? It’s beyond incredible to me that someone who knows they’re completely unaware of a thing starts arguing over it as if they actually were an expert.
The fact that this is an informal conversation doesn’t change the meaning of your sentence in the slightest, nor the mistake you made.
You said: "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.”
Do you deny saying that, or do you just deny that it’s in any way wrong? Because it’s either or.
Oh really? About things meaning whatever we want, tell me again about how the ECHR definition of antisemitism not including colloquialisms. Id love yo heat all about that.
“not including colloquialisms”
It’s like watching a six year old talk about car parts. They think they’re making valid, adult sentences with meaning, and are completely oblivious to the adults laughing at them.
You’re simply raging that you can’t admit to having publicly humiliated yourself with your own stupidity. You can’t walk back on it, and removing the comments at this point would be ridiculous by any standards. So you obsess over this “conversation”, you have to reply, but you simply can’t address the fact that for the entire thread, it’s been about linguistics, and you don’t even understand what the term means.
##You said: "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.”
##Do you deny saying that, or do you just deny that it’s in any way wrong? Because it’s either or. I guess you deny there’s anything wrong with it. When there is. Very clearly. Almost as if you had some sort of inability to admit when you’re wrong. ;)
You still can’t admit that calling Jewish people nazis is wrong huh? As if you spent all that time writing that bullshit out that no one will read, not even me, to attempt to justify being antisemitic is just tragic.
Its almost as if you have an inability to admit when you’re wrong.
Why are you so desperately trying to conflate Israel to the entirety of Jewish people?
You’re proudly spamming comments which say “I don’t read the comments I’m replying to”. That will look great when you’re trying to pretend to know how to talk like an adult in some other threads, they go and check your profile and see you spamming “I DON’T READ, BUT I OBSESS OVER REPLYING”. I imagine a lot of people will save a lot of time.
Doesn’t matter how long you have this tantrum for. You were utterly wrong and said stupid shit that you can’t recover from. Just stop replying. It’ll be so much better for you. You don’t understand how linguistics work, you don’t understand what “colloquial” means and you’re clearly unable to get that information from Google, which is weird as fuck.
Calling Israelis nazis is linguistically correct and to say it isn’t is a linguistic error.
Still haven’t asked me what religion I was brought up in. Afraid of the answer my little “linguistics is synonymous with language”…?
Remember when you said “I said it colloquially”, thinking “colloquial” means “whatever I want a word to mean”, because you don’t understand what common usage is? Remember when you — at the top of the thread — were so insistent that you “can’t just make up meanings for words”? Yeah, I agree. That’s why it’s okay to call Israeli fascist nazis. You on the other hand, are making shit up. Like “the hard N” :D What a pathetic and weak argument from a sore loser.
You said dumb shit. Own up to it.
##You said: "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.”
##Do you deny saying that, or do you just deny that it’s in any way wrong? Because it’s either or. I guess you deny there’s anything wrong with it. When there is. Very clearly. Almost as if you had some sort of inability to admit when you’re wrong. ;)
The Israelis you’re calling nazis are Jewish. So, you are calling Jewish people nazis which is an antisemitic thing to do.
What are you writing so much bullshit to defend antisemitism? Its almost as if you can’t admit to making a mistake or something. Most people just go like “oh yeah, I see now” and move on with their lives.
Not you though. No, you HAVE to be antisemitic and will write essays defending it because you can’t admit to making a mistake.