Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 8:09:54 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

quote:

Which war that the u.s. has been in in the past 100 years, did we win?


We were on the winning sides of WWI, WWII.

Being the third string jv quarterback in a "championship" winning school does not make him the "wining" quarterback now does it?



I'm thinking we won the Gulf War.
What I have seen in the news is that our puppet is on the way out. Does that really count as a win?



< Message edited by thompsonx -- 7/2/2014 8:11:08 AM >

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 8:21:25 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: crazyml

I wasn't saying that at all. I was making the point that you'd rather bungled your comments with regard to the meaning of "decimated".

I have not bungled anything. I pointed out the difference between decimated and vanquashed. I did not state nor imply that decimate was not serious. In the military if one sustanes 10% losses one runs out of resources pretty quickly. Consider that when germany's invasion of poland was complete the germans had lost about half of their armor and a third of their airforce. Consequently they called off ww2 until they could recoup their losses.
When you assume my meaning you are simply exposing you own ignorance.





You don't actually understand the meaning of decimate. I was trying to hint at it, but I've just got to come out with it. You're ignorant as to the definition of decimate.

You're applying an archaic/historical meaning to a word which actually means to "kill, to destroy a large proportion of".

I'm sorry to have had to break this to you, and I've no doubt you'll be man enough to say "Oh yeah, my bad!" or something like that.

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 12:40:01 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: crazyml

I wasn't saying that at all. I was making the point that you'd rather bungled your comments with regard to the meaning of "decimated".

I have not bungled anything. I pointed out the difference between decimated and vanquashed. I did not state nor imply that decimate was not serious. In the military if one sustanes 10% losses one runs out of resources pretty quickly. Consider that when germany's invasion of poland was complete the germans had lost about half of their armor and a third of their airforce. Consequently they called off ww2 until they could recoup their losses.
When you assume my meaning you are simply exposing you own ignorance.





You don't actually understand the meaning of decimate.

Get a grip dude decimate means to reduce by 10% if this definition does not work in your zip code try a fucking dictionary.

I was trying to hint at it,

No you were trying to be a condescending punkassmotherfucker...now you are succeeding.


I'm sorry to have had to break this to you, and I've no doubt you'll be man enough to say "Oh yeah, my bad!" or something like that.


You are going to have to settle for "kiss my ass"

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 1:12:19 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: crazyml

I wasn't saying that at all. I was making the point that you'd rather bungled your comments with regard to the meaning of "decimated".

I have not bungled anything. I pointed out the difference between decimated and vanquashed. I did not state nor imply that decimate was not serious. In the military if one sustanes 10% losses one runs out of resources pretty quickly. Consider that when germany's invasion of poland was complete the germans had lost about half of their armor and a third of their airforce. Consequently they called off ww2 until they could recoup their losses.
When you assume my meaning you are simply exposing you own ignorance.





You don't actually understand the meaning of decimate. I was trying to hint at it, but I've just got to come out with it. You're ignorant as to the definition of decimate.

You're applying an archaic/historical meaning to a word which actually means to "kill, to destroy a large proportion of".

I'm sorry to have had to break this to you, and I've no doubt you'll be man enough to say "Oh yeah, my bad!" or something like that.

dec·i·mate
ˈdesəˌmāt/
verb
verb: decimate; 3rd person present: decimates; past tense: decimated; past participle: decimated; gerund or present participle: decimating

1.
kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage or part of.
"the project would decimate the fragile wetland wilderness"
drastically reduce the strength or effectiveness of (something).
"plant viruses that can decimate yields"
2.
kill one in every ten of (a group of soldiers or others) as a punishment for the whole group.

Origin
late Middle English: from Latin decimat- ‘taken as a tenth,’ from the verb decimare, from decimus ‘tenth.’ In Middle English the term decimation denoted the levying of a tithe, and later the tax imposed in England by Cromwell on the Royalists (1655). The verb decimate originally alluded to the Roman punishment of executing one man in ten of a mutinous legion.

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 1:42:26 PM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline
Ah, and it seems that someone has actually had recourse to a dictionary, are you ready to apologise now?

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 3:06:31 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
FR

I remember when this came up in relation to the UK's fox population in the 90s. There were wide reports that it had been 'decimated', and even official sources contradicted each other. Either 10% of the foxes had been wiped out, or 90% had been. I think the conclusion was that it was 90%.

Whatever. It would be a pretty foolhardy statesman who'd claim that he'd overseen the 'vanquishing' of Al Qaeda. That would be up there with King Cnut and his ordering back the tide. If Cheney wants to go around hearing people muttering 'Silly Cnut' behind his back, that's his lookout.

< Message edited by PeonForHer -- 7/2/2014 3:14:46 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 3:28:09 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Ah, and it seems that someone has actually had recourse to a dictionary, are you ready to apologise now?

Actually, it shows you are at fault, rejecting a perfectly legitimate meaning of the word in modern usage.

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 4:06:29 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
FR

Oh god save me.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 4:24:22 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

First, Afghanistan has never had very long periods of stability.

Second, every western nation except Switzerland has interfered in the middle east, and most of the problems goes back to the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire after WW1. Boundaries were drawn without regard to the fact that they put ancestral enemies in the same country insuring that there would be internal fighting, then the countries that were chosen to administer the new areas only knew how to run colonies, using force, uh, deadly force, which created more problems.

In other words, the Western Nations can collectively fuck up a wet dream, and could not pour piss out of a boot with the instruction on the bottom of the heel.

QFT! You all can have your silly political arguments but historically the root of the problem goes back to the creation of fictitious nations without regard to tribal or ethnic differences. Good post Jlf.


Ah....... Like you mean America. The fact is most nations were originally created through strife and/or battle. This isnt just a western thing either, if you look at the history of the world. Iraq was ruled by at least six empires, probably more, even before the arrival of Islam, this isnt something that just started after WW2, even Europe was shaped by both invasions and migration over countless centuries.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 4:29:23 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

FR -

Despite Obama's preaching that he has vanquished them, observant Muslims constantly make more gains

Latest example:

quote:

Al-Qaida splinter declares new Islamic caliphate

http://news.yahoo.com/al-qaida-splinter-declares-islamic-caliphate-195625121.html



Fucking laughable stuff....... You are too lazy to post a link so you just posted a Google search page. The laughable thing is that, if you had read it, the Second link on your list shreads your claim to bits.

My suggestion is read the shit you use for facts, because I can assure you others will.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/2/2014 11:31:24 PM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline
[ED for typos]

Ah, I think you've missed the point.

In order to be clear, are you agreeing with thomsonx's statement?

quote:

"It would not be beyond the capability of a fifth grader to recognize that dcimate means to reduce by a tenth while vanquish implies total reduction.
We all recognize that your post contain only puerile ignorance whose only purpose is to increase your post count. "


And disagreeing with mine..

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Quite. Unfortunately, I think that decimated is often - and I appreciate that this will appal you - used in a way that is not strictly correct.

I am almost certain that when Cheney described the opposition as being "Decimated" he wasn't claiming that their numbers had been reduced by 10%, but rather that they'd been well and truly beaten, Or "vanquished" if you will.




It seemed clear to me that thomsonx was ignorant of the modern definition, I was helping him to understand, alas like many posters when faced with a challenge of this kind he got into a little bit of a pickle.

I am sure, though, that you will agree that his definition of decimate is wrong; it very clearly sought to deny the fact that, as evidenced by your very public spirited resort to the dictionary amply demonstrates, the primary definition is rather closer to mine. You will also have noted that I acknowledge that the secondary definition, which is often marked as "historical" in dictionaries, exists.

As for whether the second definition is "perfectly legitimate", I am quite sure that I haven't said that it isn't. Although these days, its use smacks something of pompous pedantry. But context is very important. When taken alone the assertion "isn't decimate pretty much the same as vanquish" could be read literally, if you were a bit of a pedant, as "Isn't to reduce by 10% pretty much the same as vanquish", but of course given the context of the statement, and the application of the primary (and most commonly used) definition of the word it could be very clearly understood to mean "isn't to kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of pretty much the same as vanquish". On the other hand, in the sentence "the Legate ordered the decimation of the century" within the context of a Roman history would certainly not mean that the legate ordered that a large proportion of the century be destroyed.

You see, the context of a sentence is ever so important, as it can completely change the meaning of a sentence.

This would be a fun idea for a seminar with your post-grad professional writers.... you could call it "How to avoid using words in a way that makes you look like a pedantic little dick....", although it's probably a seminar you should ask one of your peers to lead.

< Message edited by crazyml -- 7/3/2014 12:27:44 AM >


_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 8:28:55 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

[ED for typos]

Ah, I think you've missed the point.

In order to be clear, are you agreeing with thomsonx's statement?

quote:

"It would not be beyond the capability of a fifth grader to recognize that dcimate means to reduce by a tenth while vanquish implies total reduction.
We all recognize that your post contain only puerile ignorance whose only purpose is to increase your post count. "


And disagreeing with mine..

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Quite. Unfortunately, I think that decimated is often - and I appreciate that this will appal you - used in a way that is not strictly correct.

I am almost certain that when Cheney described the opposition as being "Decimated" he wasn't claiming that their numbers had been reduced by 10%, but rather that they'd been well and truly beaten, Or "vanquished" if you will.




It seemed clear to me that thomsonx was ignorant of the modern definition, I was helping him to understand, alas like many posters when faced with a challenge of this kind he got into a little bit of a pickle.

I am sure, though, that you will agree that his definition of decimate is wrong; it very clearly sought to deny the fact that, as evidenced by your very public spirited resort to the dictionary amply demonstrates, the primary definition is rather closer to mine. You will also have noted that I acknowledge that the secondary definition, which is often marked as "historical" in dictionaries, exists.

As for whether the second definition is "perfectly legitimate", I am quite sure that I haven't said that it isn't. Although these days, its use smacks something of pompous pedantry. But context is very important. When taken alone the assertion "isn't decimate pretty much the same as vanquish" could be read literally, if you were a bit of a pedant, as "Isn't to reduce by 10% pretty much the same as vanquish", but of course given the context of the statement, and the application of the primary (and most commonly used) definition of the word it could be very clearly understood to mean "isn't to kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of pretty much the same as vanquish". On the other hand, in the sentence "the Legate ordered the decimation of the century" within the context of a Roman history would certainly not mean that the legate ordered that a large proportion of the century be destroyed.

You see, the context of a sentence is ever so important, as it can completely change the meaning of a sentence.

This would be a fun idea for a seminar with your post-grad professional writers.... you could call it "How to avoid using words in a way that makes you look like a pedantic little dick....", although it's probably a seminar you should ask one of your peers to lead.


I will use your own words to describe your post


pompous pedantry

Now move along your dirty ass is stinking the place up.

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:03:15 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
<== snipped my post for brevity - see above ==>
I will use your own words to describe your post


pompous pedantry

Now move along your dirty ass is stinking the place up.


Hey, if it helps you to call me names, you're welcome to, really!

You were demonstrated to be wrong about your definition of a word. If you had any self-respect you'd say "Yeah, I was a bit of a dick biting his head off and calling him ignorant when in fact all I was doing was displaying my own poor understanding of the word".

But I guess not everyone is strong enough to accept when they're wrong.

So, you blaze away, and call me any names you like if it makes you feel more manly.

Remember of course, that once your hour of editing is up, your posts stay here for all to see. Other people can draw their own conclusions about which of us is the pedant.

Do remember though, that you're the one who said..
quote:


It would not be beyond the capability of a fifth grader to recognize that dcimate means to reduce by a tenth while vanquish implies total reduction.

We all recognize that your post contain only puerile ignorance whose only purpose is to increase your post count.


Which as MM has made clear, is neither the only, or the principal definition of the word. So you've been caught being pedantic and wrong.

When I pointed out your ignorance to you you then said...

quote:


Get a grip dude decimate means to reduce by 10% if this definition does not work in your zip code try a fucking dictionary.


Which is plainly wrong, as MM's definition shows you. I know it must burn to challenge someone to use a dictionary and then find out that the dictionary actually supports their argument. As a hint, then next time you say "use a fucking dictionary", I'd suggest you hop on over to one of the many online dictionary to check that you know what they'll find. It must be really embarrassing to be shown up like this.

While I made it clear that "to reduce by 10%" is one meaning of the word decimate, the predominant meaning is as I described. Indeed many dictionaries now completely omit your archaic use of the word altogether.

For example :

See... http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/decimate?q=decimate

decimate
verb [T usually passive] /ˈdes.ɪ.meɪt/
› to kill a large number of something, or to reduce something severely :
Populations of endangered animals have been decimated.
(Definition of decimate verb from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press)

Also...
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/american-english/decimate

decimate
verb [T] /ˈdes·əˌmeɪt/
› to destroy large numbers of people , animals , or other creatures , or to harm something severely :
Overfishing has decimated the cod population .
We decimated public transportation in the 1950s and ’60s.
(Definition of decimate verb from the Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary © Cambridge University Press)
Focus on the pronunciation of decimate

Many others take the same line.

Now it's ok. If in the face of such evidence you're still convinced that your definition is correct, we (and pretty much the rest of the literate population of the fucking planet!) will have to agree to differ.

Good luck.

And yeah... seriously, call me any kind of name you like if it helps you with your self esteem.

I don't mind a bit.

On account, of course, of not really caring very much

_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:10:10 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
Tom's technically correct, that's the strict/original meaning.
Cm is also technically correct, that its meaning is broader in modern usage.

We done here now?

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:18:29 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

FR

That would be up there with King Cnut and his ordering back the tide. If Cheney wants to go around hearing people muttering 'Silly Cnut' behind his back, that's his lookout.

You owe me a new keyboard, and a pair of nostrils

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:28:49 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline
No, you haven't understood at all.

Tom said...
quote:

It would not be beyond the capability of a fifth grader to recognize that dcimate means to reduce by a tenth while vanquish implies total reduction.
We all recognize that your post contain only puerile ignorance whose only purpose is to increase your post count.


Which you have demonstrated to be bullshit.

Tom is incorrect.

The primary, most correct sense of the word is one thing, the secondary - often cited as archaic, and increasingly omitted altogether, meaning is as he described.

It's not fucking complicated, I'm at a loss as to how you can confuse the issue to be honest.

[ETA]

And I would add that had I gone to the dictionary and found the definition to mean only "reduce by one tenth" I can assure you, that I would have come straight back here and admitted that I'd been a dick.

God knows I've been caught out being a dick enough times to know that the best way is to come clean.

< Message edited by crazyml -- 7/3/2014 9:33:35 AM >


_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:34:13 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
You're at a loss because you believe only the first definition is correct in modern usage. You're mistaken (or in the language of this forum, a moron, lying, or "I'm befuddled at your post," if that's better for you).

It's not fucking complicated, as you noted. Didn't they teach how to read the dictionary at your school? I ask that honestly, since standards have continually fallen since the 70s.

The second definition is sometimes less common, but still an accurate use of the word in modern times.

Consider the definition of "light." Are you going to rule definitions 2- 42 as archaic and therefore inaccurate today?


light
1 [lahyt] Show IPA
noun
1.
something that makes things visible or affords illumination: All colors depend on light.
2.
Physics.
a.
Also called luminous energy, radiant energy. electromagnetic radiation to which the organs of sight react, ranging in wavelength from about 400 to 700 nm and propagated at a speed of 186,282 mi./sec (299,972 km/sec), considered variously as a wave, corpuscular, or quantum phenomenon.
b.
a similar form of radiant energy that does not affect the retina, as ultraviolet or infrared rays.
3.
the sensation produced by stimulation of the organs of sight.
4.
an illuminating agent or source, as the sun, a lamp, or a beacon.
5.
the radiance or illumination from a particular source: the light of a candle.
6.
the illumination from the sun; daylight: We awoke at the first light.
7.
daybreak or dawn: when light appeared in the east.
8.
daytime: Summer has more hours of light.
9.
a particular light or illumination in which an object seen takes on a certain appearance: viewing the portrait in dim light.
10.
a device for or means of igniting, as a spark, flame, or match: Could you give me a light?
11.
a traffic light: Don't cross till the light changes.
12.
the aspect in which a thing appears or is regarded: Try to look at the situation in a more cheerful light.
13.
the state of being visible, exposed to view, or revealed to public notice or knowledge; limelight: Stardom has placed her in the light.
14.
a person who is an outstanding leader, celebrity, or example; luminary: He became one of the leading lights of Restoration drama.
15.
Art.
a.
the effect of light falling on an object or scene as represented in a picture.
b.
one of the brightest parts of a picture.
16.
a gleam or sparkle, as in the eyes.
17.
a measure or supply of light; illumination: The wall cuts off our light.
18.
spiritual illumination or awareness; enlightenment.
19.
Architecture .
a.
Also called day. one compartment of a window or window sash.
b.
a window, especially a small one.
20.
mental insight; understanding.
21.
lights, the information, ideas, or mental capacities possessed: to act according to one's lights.
22.
a lighthouse.
23.
Archaic. the eyesight.
adjective, light·er, light·est.
24.
having light or illumination; bright; well-lighted: the lightest room in the entire house.
25.
pale, whitish, or not deep or dark in color: a light blue.
26.
(of coffee or tea) containing enough milk or cream to produce a light color.
verb (used with object), light·ed or lit, light·ing.
27.
to set burning, as a candle, lamp, fire, match, or cigarette; kindle; ignite.
28.
to turn or switch on (an electric light): One flick of the master switch lights all the lamps in the room.
29.
to give light to; furnish with light or illumination: The room is lighted by two large chandeliers.
30.
to make (an area or object) bright with or as if with light (often followed by up ): Hundreds of candles lighted up the ballroom.
31.
to cause (the face, surroundings, etc.) to brighten, especially with joy, animation, or the like (often followed by up ): A smile lit up her face. Her presence lighted up the room.
verb (used without object), light·ed or lit, light·ing.
33.
to take fire or become kindled: The damp wood refused to light.
34.
to ignite a cigar, cigarette, or pipe for purposes of smoking (usually followed by up ): He took out a pipe and lighted up before speaking.
35.
to become illuminated when switched on: This table lamp won't light.
36.
to become bright, as with light or color (often followed by up ): The sky lights up at sunset.
37.
to brighten with animation or joy, as the face or eyes (often followed by up ).
Idioms
38.
bring to light, to discover or reveal: The excavations brought to light the remnants of an ancient civilization.
39.
come to light, to be discovered or revealed: Some previously undiscovered letters have lately come to light.
40.
hide one's light under a bushel, to conceal or suppress one's talents or successes.
41.
in a good / bad light, under favorable (or unfavorable) circumstances: She worshiped him, but then she'd only seen him in a good light.
42.
in (the) light of, taking into account; because of; considering: It was necessary to review the decision in the light of recent developments.

Origin:
before 900; (noun and adj.) Middle English; Old English lēoht; cognate with Old Saxon lioht, Old Frisian liacht, Dutch, German licht, Gothic liuhath (noun); akin to Old Norse ljōs (noun), ljōss (adj.), Latin lūx (noun), Greek leukós bright, white; (v.) Middle English lighten, Old English līhtan, cognate with Old Saxon liuhtian, Old High German liuhten ( German leuchten ), Gothic liuhtjan


.... because if you are, then in that light....er....in light of that . . . um . . .

Well, you're going to have a lot of trouble using words.



< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 7/3/2014 9:37:13 AM >

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:40:14 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline
[ED to add two crucial missing words]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

You're at a loss because you believe only the first definition is correct in modern usage.


Oh bless your heart, where did I say that I believe only the first definition is correct in modern usage?

You have two options.

One person slagged another poster for equating decimated with vanquished. They did so because they narrowly, and, as you agree, incorrectly defined "decimate" to exclusively mean reduce by one tenth.

I pointed out that it does not exclusively mean "reduce by one tenth", I acknowledged the other definition - albeit while expressing my view that it's a pedantic way to define the word in normal usage. But if you can find me saying that it does not mean that, please do cite the post in question.

My claim that he doesn't understand the definition is based on the fact that - he doesn't understand the definition, he chose to argue that decimate only means to reduce by one tenth which as you know very well is wrong.

Can you see now?


< Message edited by crazyml -- 7/3/2014 9:41:30 AM >


_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:44:16 AM   
crazyml


Posts: 5568
Joined: 7/3/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Consider the definition of "light." Are you going to rule definitions 2- 42 as archaic and therefore inaccurate today?



Lord no! I wouldn't dream of doing that. I rely on sources like Collins, Cambridge and the OED.

Most of which either mark the archaic definition as "historical" or, increasingly, omit it altogether.

[ETA]

Since you asked whether I can use a dictionary I ought to add in the interests of disclosure...

I have a collection of dictionaries, including an older Chambers... which did define decimate solely as "to reduce by one tenth", so I did shit myself for a bit. So you can only imagine my sigh of relief when I encountered the more up to date definition from Chambers online...


decimate verb (decimated, decimating) to reduce greatly in number; to destroy a large part or number of something. decimation noun. decimator noun.
ETYMOLOGY: 17c in this sense; 16c in historical sense 'to select by lot and execute one in every ten': from Latin decimare to take a tenth person or thing, from decem ten.

You'll notice that in this definition they omit the secondary meaning altogether, relegating it to the ETYMOLOGY.

I hope that his has helped in some ways to alleviate the concerns you have about education in the 1970's.

It really is the case that when I wasn't taking my Latin or Ancient Greek classes, I was encouraged to familiarise myself with all kinds of reference book.

< Message edited by crazyml -- 7/3/2014 9:50:45 AM >


_____________________________

Remember.... There's always somewhere on the planet where it's jackass o'clock.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq - 7/3/2014 9:45:36 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
Here's why I think you're being ridiculous and for whatever reason, deliberately a dick:


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

The primary, most correct sense of the word is one thing, the secondary - often cited as archaic, and increasingly omitted altogether, meaning is as he described.



quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Oh bless your heart, where did I say that I believe only the first definition is correct in modern usage?



Why, bless your heart . . . right here:

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

The primary, most correct sense of the word is one thing, the secondary - often cited as archaic, and increasingly omitted altogether, meaning is as he described.



Of course, I know in your world that words don't mean what they mean, sentences don't mean what they mean, and everyone is being disingenuous but you. It must be a terrible burden.

Whatever has come over you lately, go out, get laid, get drunk, go to the movies, rent a boat, take a nap, whatever does it for you.

But yes, absolutely, it's one of *those* times:

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
God knows I've been caught out being a dick enough times



< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 7/3/2014 9:46:33 AM >

(in reply to crazyml)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Afghanistan - Syria - Iraq Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125