|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ancient_dweller
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 415
Location: Woodland Bench
|
 Posted: Thu May 24, 2012 2:41 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| although, i get your point now - didn't read your post properly. Ambiguity in your in question... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PC Parrot
Joined: 11 Dec 2009
Posts: 459
Location: Moral Police Station
|
| Posted: Sun May 27, 2012 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hold on a minute ... Ambiguity in my question? ... I'm at fault here?
Let's have a look at this ....
You invent an erroneous statement, attribute it to no-one in partciluar, and then spout forth your correction of the erroneous statement ..
Then, when it is pointed out to you that your earlier statement was invented and had not in fact been stated by anyone, you mis-read the reply and accuse someone else (me) of creating obstacles to communication .. ha ha !
I could say, regarding your mis-reading of my post, that there is a big difference between "Who said it was?" and "Who says it is?" ..
Looking at it briefly, the interaction ran like this:
| Quote: |
You - "(I) interest is not a capital gain - (II) it is income"
Me - (III) "Who said it was?" |
Clause (I) is your comment about previous text - albeit previous text which didn't actually exist. It is 'given' information, and as such, it could elicit a response of either "Who said it was?" or, at a stretch, "Who says it is?"
Clause (II) is presenting 'new information', and as such, out of the two options above, it can only elicit a response of "Who says it is?"
I said "Who said it was?", which by the reasoning above, indicates I was referring to clause (I) and not clause (II) - the part which you took to be the one I was questioning ... God only knows why you thought I would be questioning clause (II) .. it is pretty much a fact that 'interest is income' .. anyone with half a brain knows it ..
So ... that's twice you have willfully misread what's being said .. the first time you did so, you did it to correct someone ... the second time you did so, you blamed someone elase for your mis-reading ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Perilla
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 792
Location: Hong Kong
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A very impressive analysis PC Parrot. You should have been a barrister! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mrguay84
Joined: 03 Dec 2009
Posts: 125
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dedicated wrote: |
| So if you come from abroad, work on a pre-sessional course, for example, and get taxed, then you can claim it all back. |
Yeah, but not before you've long left the misery.
I swear I'm owed money from last time I did the silly (summer) season back in 2010. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
