Perhaps you can explain how people can manage to drive cars without understanding the basics of mechanical engineering? HOW? Perhaps because driving a car and building one is different?
Just like using language and studying it? Humans have something called language acquisition. It’s a term you’d definitely hear in any sort of a beginner linguistics class, probably on the first lesson. There’s also a very strong reason why it’s not called “linguistics acquisition”. Can you perhaps already piece it together from all the things I’ve explicitly tought you? (And you don’t understand how hard you’re projecting when you write things like “maybe you should’ve googled a few things before replying”?)
See the thing I said about you being literally unable to accept mistakes? This is one of them. And you won’t be able to accept the fact that you confused “linguistics” with “language”. When it’s right there, for all to see.
You would still need to has some basic understanding of grammar and to have studied the structure, grammar and syntax to be able to read. You walked yourself into a dead end there and now you’re trying to insult your way out of it. It might work on some but that won’t work on me.
I’ve made lots of mistakes in my life. One would be engaging with someone like you, with such poor social skills. There you go, one mistake admitted. So, no only are you wrong, there’s literally no way you could ever tell if I was
literally unable to accept mistakes
It seems that, instead, you were just shame dumbing from yourself, all the while claiming that I’m projecting, without a hint of irony. I haven’t seen it to your extent in the wild for a long time.
You would still need to has some basic understanding of grammar and to have studied the structure, grammar and syntax to be able to read.
No, you do not. Again, the very basics of linguistics. That is exactly like you saying that to drive a car you need to understand the basics of mechanical engineering. Then you’d make the argument that “to understand how brakes and the accelerator work you need to understand Newton’s laws of motions, the basics of mechanical engineering”.
No-one would claim that. And you know that. You know how ridiculous you are being, and you know I know it. But again, it’s not about me. It’s about you. You can’t admit to yourself that you’ve made a mistake. You can’t accept having been wrong. And that quality in you will fuck your life over, mark my words.
Humans naturally possess language acquisition. You do not need to even understand the concept of syntax or grammar to be able to correctly utilise both. I honestly keep overestimating you with each reply. Like I said some replies ago, it would’ve been far better for you to stop replying a long time ago. Now you’ll have made so many comments that removing or editing them will seem very silly indeed, and you have dug your heels in with this asinine denial of a simple mistake.
You’re trying to avoid looking dumb, but the only thing you’re doing to do that is making you look even dumber. Highly entertaining. But not as entertaining as this HDR version of Logan, so since you won’t stop replying (because you’re obsessing over this, since you can’t accept being wrong), I’ll be back later tonight or tomorrow. See you.
edit breaks -> brakes (see how easy it is to admit to mistakes?)
And on and on and on and on they went. They even planned to carry on the next day whether anyone was reading their replies or not and they would do so without a hint of irony.
Its cute that you think ill ever think of you or this again, after this.
I used it colloquially. Whats your problem here? Are you the only person who can use colloquial terms? What, do you not understand the very basics of linguistics or something?
Anything but talk about you “not a hard N” argument huh?
So now you think “colloquial” means whatever language?
I can’t believe you keep topping this every reply. Each better than the last. Ah, brilliant.
So again, common usage defines usage. Why do you keep arguing over things you know you don’t know shit about, when you keep humiliating yourself by doing it? I genuinely don’t understand why you wouldn’t spend a while learning what these terms actually mean so that you could improve your replies?
Right now it’s like… uh, how to describe it… Well, imagine overhearing some 9-year olds talking about how “you’re supposed to pee in the butt to make a baby”. You’d know how they’re mistaken, and you’d understand that with their level of knowledge, such a silly and childish assumption isn’t too unreasonable to make.
But now I’ve treated you like an adult for several comments, as have others, carefully and still respectfully detailing to you what you’ve got so wrong with your pretentious language use, but you won’t hear any of it. It’s incredible, truly. :D
NO-ONE uses “linguistics” synonymously with “language”, just like no-one uses “driving” as a a synonym for “car”, unless they’re so inexperienced with the language that they haven’t had time for language acquisition.
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. ;)
Imagine spending all that time and typing all that out in defence of calling Jewish people nazis. As if you thought I’d bother reading all your self masturbatory bullshit.
You can’t admit that its wrong to call Jewish people nazis and you bang on and on like that.
Grow up and admit you’re wrong to do that and that it not being a hard N is a joke of an attempt to justify it.
You’re so incapable of admitting to mistakes, that you’ll lie about not being unable to, while showing everyone you are. Who exactly do you think your deceiving? Yourself of course.
You’re making up shit and getting offended when people call you out on it. “The Hard N” is just so brilliant as well. It showcases that you don’t actually understand what the difference is between a hard and a soft consonant actually even is. This whole thread has been about linguistics which you don’t have the faintest idea of, and which you’re willfully ignoring, despite everyone trying to politely teach you. It’s amazing.
It’s not wrong to call Israelis nazis, no. It’s common usage and quite valid, as dozens of people in this thread have tried telling you, but you’re probably cognitively unable to go read short Wikipedia articles so you’d understand why everyone was laughing at your comments, just like you’re unable to admit to any mistakes. I’ll prove that. For several comments now, you’ve ignored the simple mistake you make, because you can’t defend it, but you’re not man enough to say “yeah, I made a mistake because I confused the words”. There’s nothing wrong with making mistakes, buddy. But there is a lot wrong in making mistakes and then doubling down into them.
We’ve been through what “common use” is and how in informal conversation, the word “nazi” is completely apt and linguistically correct of a term to use for the fascists Israelis. I know you would like to go back to being furious over things you don’t understand, but we’re still on the point about you not being able to admit to being wrong. :) I’ll prove it ONCE again, by leaving these as the clear last lines, which you will purposefully ignore:
##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. ;)
Perhaps you can explain how people can manage to drive cars without understanding the basics of mechanical engineering? HOW? Perhaps because driving a car and building one is different?
Just like using language and studying it? Humans have something called language acquisition. It’s a term you’d definitely hear in any sort of a beginner linguistics class, probably on the first lesson. There’s also a very strong reason why it’s not called “linguistics acquisition”. Can you perhaps already piece it together from all the things I’ve explicitly tought you? (And you don’t understand how hard you’re projecting when you write things like “maybe you should’ve googled a few things before replying”?)
See the thing I said about you being literally unable to accept mistakes? This is one of them. And you won’t be able to accept the fact that you confused “linguistics” with “language”. When it’s right there, for all to see.
#HI-LA-RI-OUS
You would still need to has some basic understanding of grammar and to have studied the structure, grammar and syntax to be able to read. You walked yourself into a dead end there and now you’re trying to insult your way out of it. It might work on some but that won’t work on me.
I’ve made lots of mistakes in my life. One would be engaging with someone like you, with such poor social skills. There you go, one mistake admitted. So, no only are you wrong, there’s literally no way you could ever tell if I was
It seems that, instead, you were just shame dumbing from yourself, all the while claiming that I’m projecting, without a hint of irony. I haven’t seen it to your extent in the wild for a long time.
No, you do not. Again, the very basics of linguistics. That is exactly like you saying that to drive a car you need to understand the basics of mechanical engineering. Then you’d make the argument that “to understand how brakes and the accelerator work you need to understand Newton’s laws of motions, the basics of mechanical engineering”.
No-one would claim that. And you know that. You know how ridiculous you are being, and you know I know it. But again, it’s not about me. It’s about you. You can’t admit to yourself that you’ve made a mistake. You can’t accept having been wrong. And that quality in you will fuck your life over, mark my words.
Humans naturally possess language acquisition. You do not need to even understand the concept of syntax or grammar to be able to correctly utilise both. I honestly keep overestimating you with each reply. Like I said some replies ago, it would’ve been far better for you to stop replying a long time ago. Now you’ll have made so many comments that removing or editing them will seem very silly indeed, and you have dug your heels in with this asinine denial of a simple mistake.
You’re trying to avoid looking dumb, but the only thing you’re doing to do that is making you look even dumber. Highly entertaining. But not as entertaining as this HDR version of Logan, so since you won’t stop replying (because you’re obsessing over this, since you can’t accept being wrong), I’ll be back later tonight or tomorrow. See you.
edit breaks -> brakes (see how easy it is to admit to mistakes?)
And on and on and on and on they went. They even planned to carry on the next day whether anyone was reading their replies or not and they would do so without a hint of irony.
Oh it’s not about people reading the replies.
It’s about you, writing replies that you’ll later feel ashamed of. :)
You said that. You keep pretending to understand things you don’t have the faintest grasp over. You have the internet. Why don’t you just… check?
Come on now. Check before you write.
Its cute that you think ill ever think of you or this again, after this.
I used it colloquially. Whats your problem here? Are you the only person who can use colloquial terms? What, do you not understand the very basics of linguistics or something?
Anything but talk about you “not a hard N” argument huh?
So now you think “colloquial” means whatever language?
I can’t believe you keep topping this every reply. Each better than the last. Ah, brilliant.
So again, common usage defines usage. Why do you keep arguing over things you know you don’t know shit about, when you keep humiliating yourself by doing it? I genuinely don’t understand why you wouldn’t spend a while learning what these terms actually mean so that you could improve your replies?
Right now it’s like… uh, how to describe it… Well, imagine overhearing some 9-year olds talking about how “you’re supposed to pee in the butt to make a baby”. You’d know how they’re mistaken, and you’d understand that with their level of knowledge, such a silly and childish assumption isn’t too unreasonable to make.
But now I’ve treated you like an adult for several comments, as have others, carefully and still respectfully detailing to you what you’ve got so wrong with your pretentious language use, but you won’t hear any of it. It’s incredible, truly. :D
NO-ONE uses “linguistics” synonymously with “language”, just like no-one uses “driving” as a a synonym for “car”, unless they’re so inexperienced with the language that they haven’t had time for language acquisition.
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. ;)
Imagine spending all that time and typing all that out in defence of calling Jewish people nazis. As if you thought I’d bother reading all your self masturbatory bullshit.
You can’t admit that its wrong to call Jewish people nazis and you bang on and on like that.
Grow up and admit you’re wrong to do that and that it not being a hard N is a joke of an attempt to justify it.
You’re so incapable of admitting to mistakes, that you’ll lie about not being unable to, while showing everyone you are. Who exactly do you think your deceiving? Yourself of course.
You’re making up shit and getting offended when people call you out on it. “The Hard N” is just so brilliant as well. It showcases that you don’t actually understand what the difference is between a hard and a soft consonant actually even is. This whole thread has been about linguistics which you don’t have the faintest idea of, and which you’re willfully ignoring, despite everyone trying to politely teach you. It’s amazing.
It’s not wrong to call Israelis nazis, no. It’s common usage and quite valid, as dozens of people in this thread have tried telling you, but you’re probably cognitively unable to go read short Wikipedia articles so you’d understand why everyone was laughing at your comments, just like you’re unable to admit to any mistakes. I’ll prove that. For several comments now, you’ve ignored the simple mistake you make, because you can’t defend it, but you’re not man enough to say “yeah, I made a mistake because I confused the words”. There’s nothing wrong with making mistakes, buddy. But there is a lot wrong in making mistakes and then doubling down into them.
We’ve been through what “common use” is and how in informal conversation, the word “nazi” is completely apt and linguistically correct of a term to use for the fascists Israelis. I know you would like to go back to being furious over things you don’t understand, but we’re still on the point about you not being able to admit to being wrong. :) I’ll prove it ONCE again, by leaving these as the clear last lines, which you will purposefully ignore:
##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. ;)