The number of quantity

@JTT,

Quote:

real language users

Oh, for Christ's sake.

And if you had a point to make, why didn't you make it instead of carrying on for pages with nothing but personal insults?

2 Replies

@fresco,

I think that was a great answer, fresco. I'm thinking you did that just for fun, and I thought it was.

0 Replies

@McTag,

Quote:

Well that's convincing. I concede.

But no apology. How come, McTag?

0 Replies

@McTag,

Quote:

And if you had a point to make, why didn't you make it instead of carrying on for pages with nothing but personal insults?

It was your point and your mistake. You raised it and I told you you were wrong.

"You are, to speak frankly, but with great generosity, simply full of ****, McTag."

It was then up to you to illustrate that you were not mistaken, but you, my dear friend, carried it on for pages without shouldering your responsibility.

Clearly that's one very good reason why you would want to discuss a language issue with me.

1 Reply

@Roberta,

Quote:

Generally, a number are, and the number is.

Ahhh, the logic of language. I hope OmSig doesn't see this. He'll have **** conniptions.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

simply full of ****, McTag."

That's an invitation to a discussion? Clearly another "use of language issue" where we differ.

1 Reply

@McTag,

McTag wrote:

Quote:
real language users

Oh, for Christ's sake.

And if you had a point to make, why didn't you make it
instead of carrying on for pages with nothing but personal insults?

Have u ever heard the popular song: "I Gotta Be Me" ?

David

0 Replies

@McTag,

Quote:

That's an invitation to a discussion?

No, that, in isolation clearly wasn't, McTag. It was a bit of brutal honesty to wake a guy up from his frequent errors on language.

But your selectiveness is also kinda dishonest, doncha think?

But let's not forget that it was you that started with the snide remarks on an issue where you were dead wrong. Then you compounded it with an avoidance that was childish. Then you sought refuge in another slur as regards US use of the English language, where, we must note, you were wrong again.

Still no apology?

1 Reply

@JTT,

Certainly not. It is one of my tasks to help prevent the language being too far degraded, too fast, by my American cousins.
Belatedly, after much prevarication on your part and much unnecessary unpleasantness, you pointed out that "criteria" had begun to be used in the singular by many people who should know better, and in many sources which should be better regulated.
Another regrettable development.
As far as your request is concerned, when your terms of address show a much-needed improvement, and not until then, can you expect to receive common courtesies.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

It is one of my tasks to help prevent the language being too far degraded, too fast, by my American cousins.

You have much less influence than any of the prescriptivists, and they have little, because you remain ignorant about how language works.

Quote:

Belatedly, after much prevarication on your part

No prevarication. I just played out the rope while you twisted it around your own neck.

Quote:

and much unnecessary unpleasantness,

Matched by you, my hypocritical friend.

Quote:

you pointed out that "criteria" had begun to be used in the singular by many people who should know better, and in many sources which should be better regulated.

More abysmal ignorance. You speak English, not some foreign tongue.

1 Reply

@JTT,

A quite inaccurate summing-up.
I conceded the point, but you continue with the unpleasantness.
I said that the beginning this was nit-picking, a minor point, but instead of a straightforward answer, you decided to make a federal case out of it. The unpleasantness was started by you, as is so often the case.
It seems to me that you, who apparently almost alone on this site professedly "understands how language works", often only use it for the basest of reasons. The reaction of other contributors on other threads stands testimony to that.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

I said that the beginning this was nit-picking, a minor point, but instead of a straightforward answer, you decided to make a federal case out of it.

All the more reason for you to apologize, McTag. You were wrong and you were nit picking, for obvious reasons.

Quote:

The unpleasantness was started by you

The unpleasantness was your nit picking. I told you in frank terms that you were wrong. You made the federal case out of it because you failed to address your nit picking. If you nit pick, you'd better understand why and be able to defend said nit picking.

Even after you were proven wrong, and you had conceded, you went on with some inane drivel about protecting the language.

McTag:

Quote:

you pointed out that "criteria" had begun to be used in the singular by many people who should know better, and in many sources which should be better regulated.

jtt:

Quote:

More abysmal ignorance. You speak English, not some foreign tongue.

As is typical, off you go on tangents instead of addressing the language issues.

2 Replies

@JTT,

I can think of few threads in which you involve yourself, which do not end in acrimony or worse.

Whether that is a cause for concern for you, only you would know, but I think it should be.

1 Reply

@McTag,

I can think of few replies of yours where you address the errant language issues you raise. But you are dandy with the tangents, McTag. If you hadn't started this one with your false nit picking there would be no problem at all.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

I told you in frank terms that you were wrong

You told me in abusive terms that I was wrong.

Quote:

Even after you were proven wrong

I was not proven wrong. You were able to show that others had decided that "criteria" had begun to be treated as a singular, in some circles. These are not circles where thoughtful people should be.

As I said, in reaching the select priesthood of those who "understand how language works" you have lost any common sense you started with.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

You told me in abusive terms that I was wrong.

I told you in frank terms, terms which you need to hear because you are so wrong so often.

Quote:

You were able to show that others had decided that "criteria" had begun to be treated as a singular, in some circles. These are not circles where thoughtful people should be.

McTag:

Quote:

you pointed out that "criteria" had begun to be used in the singular by many people who should know better, and in many sources which should be better regulated.

jtt:

Quote:

More abysmal ignorance. You speak English, not some foreign tongue.

1 Reply

@JTT,

You have resorted to repeating yourself, even after that which you have written before has been discredited and rejected.

I am not the first to make similar remarks, that your approach and attitude on these threads leaves much to be desired.

You profess to know "how language works", and I don't know whether this is true, or whether the phrase has any practical meaning, but the use to which you put your professed knowledge is base.

1 Reply

@McTag,

You'd be much better off if you just admitted that you don't understand, McTag. But honesty just ain't you.

McTag: You were able to show that others had decided that "criteria" had begun to be treated as a singular, in some circles. These are not circles where thoughtful people should be.

McTag: you pointed out that "criteria" had begun to be used in the singular by many people who should know better, and in many sources which should be better regulated.

jtt: More abysmal ignorance. You speak English, not some foreign tongue.

1 Reply

@JTT,

More repetitive and unhelpful claptrap.

If you want to do something useful, ponder "data", "agenda" and "criteria". Compare and contrast, and see if you can find the important difference in their usage.

1 Reply

@McTag,

Quote:

If you want to do something useful, ponder "data", "agenda" and "criteria". Compare and contrast, and see if you can find the important difference in their usage.

After you were proven wrong, you're still going on and on. If YOU have a point to make about YOUR contention YOU ponder it and advance YOUR position.

1 Reply

The number of quantity

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know