• TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The article this whole thread is about discusses the chances for a recession in AMERICA, so Im not the only one saying they=American.

    Right… But “they” doesn’t imply a specific entity, nor does it specify a time.

    The way we define a recession in America has changed over time, we only started utilizing the NBER for this in the 1960s.

    • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They does apply to a specific entity since the discussion is overtly about America.

      “They” changed the definition would mean the US government changed the definition and that is incorrect.

      And now that I have explained 3rd grade English grammar to you regarding how pronouns work, I think we can stop here. You were not paying any attention to the subject at and kept losing the thread and then resorting to bs when this was pointed out.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “They” changed the definition would mean the US government changed the definition and that is incorrect.

        Lol, if we are basing this on your assumption wouldn’t “they” mean the NBER?

        And if they meant either, wouldn’t that still be correct given that the way they define a recession has adapted over time…again they made an extremely vague claim that did not include any specified descriptors, including time.

        You were not paying any attention to the subject at and kept losing the thread and then resorting to bs when this was pointed out.

        My original claim was that you were having a semantic dispute… That’s still my claim. Your issue is that you are stuck in an intentionality fallacy, where you have assumed the meaning of his statement and then rejected it for not being as specific as you would like.

        now that I have explained 3rd grade English grammar

        Lol, and you are still failing to understand that the specificity of a pronoun cannot be assumed by a person outside of a discourse. A person making a vague claim after reading an article is not specific enough to assume their meaning unless asked for further clarification.

        • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          OP has no idea who NBER was so “they” would be the government.

          Do context clues exist in your first language?

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            OP has no idea who NBER was

            And what evidence has led you to believe that… Oh yeah, another assumption!

            Do context clues exist in your first language?

            Lol, do logical fallacies exist in your first language?

                • Peaty@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That isn’t a fallacy either. If they knew about the NBER or not “they” did not change the definition. The definition they thought was correct is an oversimplification and was not correct.