• undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Its not a mistake to use an accurate definition of a term. Why would I admit a mistake for that?

    I see, so because it doesn’t specifically say

    Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis, even colloquial usage with a soft “n”

    They didnt mean all comparisons, per the words they used. I hope you stretched before those gymnastics.

    You’re just sad and mad that you’re wrong and that people online — the one place where you felt comfortable — told you as much. You’re trying to cover up your ignorance with pathetic equivocation. (Yes, I know you need to check what that word means. Maybe stay on Wikipedia a year or two and well see about having a new conversation when you can actually understand at least half the terms used.)

    Sorry, what was that you were saying about projecting again? Don’t worry, your antisocial outbursts aren’t definitely confirming anything. So, you just carry on, even if only one of us has had to lower themselves to an outburst like that.

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Its not a mistake to use an accurate definition of a term. Why would I admit a mistake for that?

      Oh like confusing “language” and “linguistics”? That sort of an ACCURATE definition, eh?

      You still don’t understand that there are no “correct definitions” in colloquial language, that’s why it’s called colloquial. You’re again, being 100% prescriptive, because you’re some ignorant fool who’s too intellectually lazy to educate themselves, so you still don’t even understand the BASIC LINGUISTIC TERMS DOZENS OF PEOPLE HAVE TRIED TEACHING YOU.

      You’re loaning half a sentence from an authority, removing it completely from context and trying to cover up your childish mistakes. This isn’t about antisemitism, this isn’t about Israel. This is about you, personally, not being big enough to be able to accept having made mistakes, having been stupid publicly. I know a lot of people like that. Most grew out of that by the time we left grade school, but a minority didn’t, and never will. So I really hope you’re still of the age to be in grade school.

      You’re literally trying to argue that “linguistics” is synonymous with “language”, because you can’t accept your own mistakes. You’ll never grow or learn like that.

      • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Oh like confusing “language” and “linguistics”

        No, that was you trying to slip out of explaining why you would write to someone with no knowledge of grammar.

        You still don’t understand that there are no “correct definitions” in colloquial language

        You don’t understand that there being none doesn’t lend wight to you “not a hard N” argument.

        I disagree with you but that doesn’t mean I care if my username became associated with getting something wrong on an Internet forum with like 20 people on it.

        Talking to you was a mistake, as you’re clearly a deeply unpleasant person who can’t handle somone politely disagreeing with you. Now that I’ve admitted a mistake I’ve made, how do we reconcile that with what you say here?

        This isn’t about antisemitism, this isn’t about Israel. This is about you, personally, not being big enough to be able to accept having made mistakes, having been stupid publicly. I know a lot of people like that. Most grew out of that by the time we left grade school, but a minority didn’t, and never will. So I really hope you’re still of the age to be in grade school.

        I admitted the same mistake before already. So, despite admitting as mistake to you already, you still said all of that.

        And you just went on and on and on

        • Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          explaining why you would write to someone with no knowledge of grammar.

          This is the third time I’ve said this. You acquire the rules of grammar through language acquisition, which is an inherent property in humans. Just like you don’t need to study medicine to be able to know how to breathe, you don’t need to study linguistics to be able to understand grammar. This is stated very clearly in the very simply written Wikipedia article, which you refuse to read, because you’re a willfully ignorant dolt. You’re afraid of looking dumb, so you double down and look even dumber.

          You’ve admitted to no mistakes. You can’t say “I was wrong”. You can’t. You can’t say that. You’re unable to.

          You wrote "If I didn’t understand “the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.” What you meant is “If I don’t understand the language we’re using, how are you able to communicate to me”, thinking you have some sort of gotcha. Then I point out that linguistics and language are nowhere near synonyms. You get ashamed that you’ve been stupid and double down. And now there’s three replies from you again, because you’re being emotional, because you can’t admit to not understanding linguistics.

          Come on now. Think before you write. Please.

          • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I was wrong to talk to you, as you seem to be a deeply unpleasant person with severe social problems.

            See, that was easy.

            I’m good to be honest. I was using it colloquially. So, I used it correctly.

            I wish I could see your face right now

            • Dasus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              “Colloquially” doesn’t mean “it’s to be taken however I later decide it will”.

              Why won’t you just google these terms you CLEARLY do not understand? It’s beyond incredible to me that someone who knows they’re completely unaware of a thing starts arguing over it as if they actually were an expert.

              The fact that this is an informal conversation doesn’t change the meaning of your sentence in the slightest, nor the mistake you made.

              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.

              • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Oh really? About things meaning whatever we want, tell me again about how the ECHR definition of antisemitism not including colloquialisms. Id love yo heat all about that.

                • Dasus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  “not including colloquialisms”

                  It’s like watching a six year old talk about car parts. They think they’re making valid, adult sentences with meaning, and are completely oblivious to the adults laughing at them.

                  You’re simply raging that you can’t admit to having publicly humiliated yourself with your own stupidity. You can’t walk back on it, and removing the comments at this point would be ridiculous by any standards. So you obsess over this “conversation”, you have to reply, but you simply can’t address the fact that for the entire thread, it’s been about linguistics, and you don’t even understand what the term means.

                  ##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. ;)

                  • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    You still can’t admit that calling Jewish people nazis is wrong huh? As if you spent all that time writing that bullshit out that no one will read, not even me, to attempt to justify being antisemitic is just tragic.

                    Its almost as if you have an inability to admit when you’re wrong.