28
   

"I COULD care less" or "I COULDN'T care less" Which is it?

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sat 5 May, 2012 07:14 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
You've again illustrated your ignorance with the underlined sentence. These are exceedingly common and they are not used by Rhodes scholars, linguists, all manner of people in fact for one pointed reason -
they follow the logic of the English language perfectly.
What is the JTT definition of: "the logic of the English language" ??
JTT
 
  1  
Sat 5 May, 2012 10:16 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
What is the JTT definition of: "the logic of the English language" ??


One that I can discuss and point out examples for. One that language science fully embraces. One that has shown the prescriptivists to be nothing more than woefully ignorant no-nothings.

One that leaves you speechless, Om, completely unable to counter any argument on language. One that has caused you to repeatedly embarrass yourself with repeated assertions, that turned out to be nothing but lies, that you would address a particular language issue.

In short, one that describes language as it really works, in all registers, in all dialects, without the stunning levels of stupidity that you regularly trot out here.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sat 5 May, 2012 11:16 pm
@JTT,
Q.E.D.: JTT can be super-vague, when he tries to be.
JTT
 
  1  
Sat 5 May, 2012 11:23 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Speaking of super vague, yet another one of Dave's postings where he fails to address anything concerning the language issues. Perhaps it's time for one of your limited number of tales from the past, or another lie about having to go to the dentist or something.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sat 5 May, 2012 11:46 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:
Speaking of super vague, yet another one of Dave's postings where he fails to address
anything concerning the language issues.
Some of my my posts address considerations of language; not all of them.





David
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 09:15 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Some of my my posts address considerations of language;


You've never had a post, not a one, Om, that addressed considerations of language. You've merely repeated old prescriptions that you've vaguely memorized over the years.

It's so apparent that you've never considered, thought about any issue on language because you never offer anything on language.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 01:16 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
JTT can be super-vague,


This,

Quote:
One that I can discuss and point out examples for. One that language science fully embraces. One that has shown the prescriptivists to be nothing more than woefully ignorant no-nothings.

One that leaves you speechless, Om, completely unable to counter any argument on language. One that has caused you to repeatedly embarrass yourself with repeated assertions, that turned out to be nothing but lies, that you would address a particular language issue.

In short, one that describes language as it really works, in all registers, in all dialects, without the stunning levels of stupidity that you regularly trot out here.


is not at all vague, Om. It's so decidedly pointed that it's inextricably stuck in your craw.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 01:57 pm
@JTT,
I was asking u to denote what u had in mind.
For the moment,
I forgot that u have forfeited all credibility long ago.

I don 't mean to be abrasive, nor disrespectful, just factual.
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 02:19 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I was asking u to denote what u had in mind.


And I did.

But admittedly, I was a bit naive to think that you would be able to grasp any of it even though I explained it in language a child could understand.

No, that can't be right. You were a lawyer. You're just being your usual dishonest self.

And your hypocrisy, stunning! You have the temerity to ask what I had in mind even though it has been expressed many times in discussions on language and you have never once addressed a language issue. You only repeat memes you've heard. Once they are exposed, you stand naked, unable to do much better than mumble even greater inanities.

Your stupidity on language is highly abrasive. The only person that you are disrespectful to is yourself; mouthing canards and silly old prescriptions with not a scintilla of reasoned argument. But that's pretty difficult when you are simply repeating someone else's drivel, isn't it, Om?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 02:36 pm
@JTT,

DAVID wrote:
I was asking u to denote what u had in mind.
JTT wrote:
And I did.
U did so vaguely enuf
as to be of no value.





David
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 03:11 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
as to be of no value.


To you, of course. That simply tells us that you are woefully ignorant of matters concerning the English language - not a new revelation. Tell us something that we don't know, Sig.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 03:17 pm
@JTT,
I suspect u of being an alien; English, most likely.




David
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 03:47 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
I see that you have no inclination to address the language issues, Om.

I don't see that you have any inclination to address the language issues, Om.

Gee, another example that illustrates that a negative doesn't have to be the opposite of a positive.

See, Om, language is indeed much more complex than what a tiny brain like yours can comprehend. Best that you stay far away from these things that are way beyond your ken.

Tell me again why Mensa accepted you.

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 03:53 pm
@JTT,
There is only 1 reason for anyone and everyone.

Our Annual Gathering is in Reno this year.
Last year, I got poisoned in Portland (off site; that was painful).
I 've ofen been to Las Vegas (which I love),
but I 've never been to Reno. We 'll see.





David
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 03:57 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
There is only 1 reason for anyone and everyone.


You are a fine example that Mensa is much overrated.
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 04:46 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
There is only 1 reason for anyone and everyone.


That one reason must be an unshakable propensity to avoid addressing the issues.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 05:50 pm
@JTT,

DAVID wrote:
There is only 1 reason for anyone and everyone.
JTT wrote:
That one reason must be an unshakable propensity to avoid addressing the issues.
Well, if u were a member,
then u cud begin a SIG to do that.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 05:54 pm
@JTT,
DAVID wrote:
There is only 1 reason for anyone and everyone.
JTT wrote:
You are a fine example that Mensa is much overrated.
No. I rate it as fun; over 33 years of fun so far,
for the SIGs and the Gatherings. I like the lecturers.





David
JTT
 
  1  
Sun 6 May, 2012 06:58 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I like the lecturers.


You're awfully thick, Om. Who do you have explain what they are saying to you?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Mon 7 May, 2012 12:07 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
I like the lecturers.


You're awfully thick, Om.
There is that alien thing again.
Americans r less likely to use that choice of words.
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
concentrated - Question by WBYeats
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 12:29:46