| WritersBeware |
|
Edited by: WritersBeware May 3, 09, 03:03AM
| #81 |
Joined: Apr 19, 07
Threads: 152
Posts: 8,669
|
humble: If we consider this explanation true for a moment. Why wrongly?
Why are you asking the same question for which I have already provided the answer? Again, for you to have typed "offended AT," in that context, wrongly left the door open to the possibility that you could be feeling that negative emotion at someone/something who/that has done absolutely nothing, neither actual nor perceived. The fact is that you obviously took personal offense to my assertions, meaning that you felt that I did something negative TO you. Therefore, you were offended BY me, not AT me.
humble: My usage was absolutely correct. 'Offended at' has a meaning of displeasure. It also sounds a bit more polite.
Your obscure source (published in 1911) does not at all take into consideration the personal context in which you used the phrase; the fact is that you absolutely did NOT use the phrase to indicate "general displeasure." You used the phrase to indicate your focused, personal grudge specifically brought about BY my specific stance.
|
|
| humble |
|
May 3, 09, 04:13AM
| #82 |
Joined: Feb 11, 09
Threads: 2
Posts: 285
|
WritersBeware: "general displeasure."
If only you had a chance to look at the book before commenting :D
Even if you think it is obscure.
It is not the only source. There are more classics, and Susan Gass is amongst modern linguists. She is Currently at MSU, she is the Director of the English Language Center, Co-Director of the Center for Language Education And Research, and Director of the Second Language Studies Ph.D. Program. She is also President of the International Association of Applied Linguistics.
I was specifically offended at the comments you made.
This phrase 100% grammatically correct and does not wrongly leaves any door open.
It was 100% correct. It conveyed my focused displeasure. And in my opinion it was politer than "offended by."
|
|
| WritersBeware |
|
May 3, 09, 04:37AM
| #83 |
Joined: Apr 19, 07
Threads: 152
Posts: 8,669
|
Well, you are free to believe whatever it is that you believe. As far as Susan Gass is concerned, I would be more than happy to discuss the issue with her.
|
|
| EW_writer |
|
Edited by: EW_writer May 3, 09, 05:09AM
| #84 |
Joined: Jul 2, 07
Threads: 27
Posts: 2,239
|
humble: I am offended at this baseless accusation.
I think it's pretty clear from this statement that humble was saying that he was offended AT the statement and not BY you. Sigh.. why can't you just ADMIT that you just made a mistake, meathead? >.< Everybody make mistakes, but it takes a real psycho like yourself to refuse to admit it till the bitter end. You're really funny that way though... >.< ROFLMAO!
Oh, and I think that nobody, not Lavinia, FreelanceWriter, or exwriter will back you up on this one. Well.. maybe MAK would, but then that wouldn't really be a good thing for you now, would it? :p
|
|
| WritersBeware |
|
May 3, 09, 01:56PM
| #85 |
Joined: Apr 19, 07
Threads: 152
Posts: 8,669
|
Where are the Rule 5 supporters? Funny—they just disappeared.
EW_writer: Sigh.. why can't you just ADMIT that you just made a mistake, meathead?
Sorry, but I will not admit a mistake when a mistake did not occur. I'm sorry that you can't understand my sound reasoning.
Keep up the completely one-way insults and name-calling. You continue to prove precisely who the real trouble-maker of the forum is.
|
|
| EW_writer |
|
May 3, 09, 07:51PM
| #86 |
Joined: Jul 2, 07
Threads: 27
Posts: 2,239
|
WritersBeware: Sorry, but I will not admit a mistake when a mistake did not occur.
Still no actual proof disproving humble's claim. Say, for someone who's supposed to be a fan of factual evidence, you seem to come real short of it when it matters. :)
|
|
| WritersBeware |
|
Edited by: WritersBeware May 3, 09, 08:14PM
| #87 |
Joined: Apr 19, 07
Threads: 152
Posts: 8,669
|
WritersBeware: Again, for you to have typed "offended AT," in that context, wrongly left the door open to the possibility that you could be feeling that negative emotion at someone/something who/that has done absolutely nothing, neither actual nor perceived. The fact is that you obviously took personal offense to my assertions, meaning that you felt that I did something negative TO you. Therefore, you were offended BY me, not AT me.
Let me play devil's advocate for a second. Let's say that I am incorrect—what's your enormous victory? That I was wrong (according to a 1911 source), ONCE, on a linguistic issue involving the use of "at" versus "by" in a particular context? Congratulations—y ou would have proven that I am not a superhuman who is incapable of even the slightest mistake. Well, duh!
Wow, you surely would have taught me a thing or two!
LOL.
|
|
| EW_writer |
|
May 3, 09, 08:56PM
| #88 |
Joined: Jul 2, 07
Threads: 27
Posts: 2,239
|
Hahaha.. what do you call it? Red herring? ^_^ The issue is about nothing other than you not being able to admit a mistake. Do you or don't you have any formal evidence to counter humble's claim regarding his use of the phrase is question? Yes or no?
|
|
| EW_writer |
|
May 3, 09, 09:00PM
| #89 |
Joined: Jul 2, 07
Threads: 27
Posts: 2,239
|
WritersBeware: y ou would have proven that I am not a superhuman who is incapable of even the slightest mistake. Well, duh!
Is this you FINALLY admitting your mistake or do you really have the delusion of being a superhuman? :D
|
|
| OxbridgeResearchers |
|
May 5, 09, 10:10AM
| #90 |
Joined: May 2, 09
Threads: 6
Posts: 934
|
EW - you really have a way with words :)
|
|
| EW_writer |
|
May 6, 09, 07:14AM
| #91 |
Joined: Jul 2, 07
Threads: 27
Posts: 2,239
|
OxbridgeResearchers: EW - you really have a way with words :)
Thanks. ^_^
My question remains unanswered though.. :) We'll probably read something along the lines of "I'm not engaging your childish blah blahs anymore blah blah.." which is translated as "I'm wrong but I just CAN'T admit it without having a nervous breakdown so now I'm gonna try to forget this EVER happened" :D
|
|
| OxbridgeResearchers |
|
May 6, 09, 11:50AM
| #92 |
Joined: May 2, 09
Threads: 6
Posts: 934
|
EW_writer: My question remains unanswered though.. :)
and you know why :)
|
|
