|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Stevie_B
Joined: 14 May 2008
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| billybrobby wrote: |
I never usually care about grammar, but no no no. If you have "such as" you don't need a colon. And all the semi-colons should be commas. It looks like a train wreck the way you have it.
|
Ya... I can't say I go around making lists, or proof reading my comments, that often.
| Quote: |
I like this quote by hemingway:
My attitude toward punctuation is that it ought to be as conventional as possible. The game of golf would lose a good deal if croquet mallets and billiard cues were allowed on the putting green. You ought to be able to show that you can do it a good deal better than anyone else with the regular tools before you have a license to bring in your own improvements. |
I disagree with this. Lots of people can't use conventional methods well but manage to use others way better than amateurs or even pros. For instance, painters with out eyes, or painters with out hands. Or, architects. Some architects never design a single normal looking building, but can come up with loads of wonderful creations with no prior experience with convention. |
Are you suggesting that an architect can come along and design a building without any knowledge of the conventions of building design? Really, are you?
(Also, 'without' is all one word. A seven-year-old could tell you that. Tsk.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thematrixiam
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie_B wrote: |
Are you suggesting that an architect can come along and design a building without any knowledge of the conventions of building design? Really, are you?
(Also, 'without' is all one word. A seven-year-old could tell you that. Tsk.) |
Can they? Yes. Getting it to stand up is up to the engineer. Trust me, I used to date an architect.
As per the semantics, "Let's not argue about semantics". At least not those that have nothing to do with the present context. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie_B
Joined: 14 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
Are you suggesting that an architect can come along and design a building without any knowledge of the conventions of building design? Really, are you?
(Also, 'without' is all one word. A seven-year-old could tell you that. Tsk.) |
Can they? Yes. Getting it to stand up is up to the engineer. Trust me, I used to date an architect.
As per the semantics, "Let's not argue about semantics". At least not those that have nothing to do with the present context. |
Semantics? What semantics? And an architect doesn't have to design buildings that stand up?!
I know you've fought long and hard to be recognised as the most breathtakingly stupid poster on this board, and I know you've faced some harrowingly stiff competition, but I think you might have finally clinched it... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thematrixiam
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie_B wrote: |
Semantics? What semantics? And an architect doesn't have to design buildings that stand up?!
I know you've fought long and hard to be recognised as the most breathtakingly stupid poster on this board, and I know you've faced some harrowingly stiff competition, but I think you might have finally clinched it... |
the semantics of "without".
And yes. I know they don't. I already said they don't. That's the engineers job.
And thank you for the ad hominem. it supports your argument well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thematrixiam
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Many people don't think of an engineer as someone who de signs buildings. When we think of engineers, we think of the cartoon character Dilbert or maybe someone like electric company mogul George Westinghouse.
Architects tend to get the credit for buildings. There are dozens of books displaying the creations of Frank Lloyd Wright or Louis Sullivan.
It's the architects' work that you see in a finished building. But the stuff you don't see is just as important, and that's where engineers come in.
Structural engineers keep the building standing |
http://www.graduatingengineer.com/resources/resources/20000207/Structural-Engineering
| Quote: |
| The architect comes up with a building design, and then it's the structural engineer's responsibility to fit the structure to the architecture, and decide on what structural system is best suited to that particular building. We design the beams, the columns, the basic members to make the building stand up |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie_B
Joined: 14 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
Semantics? What semantics? And an architect doesn't have to design buildings that stand up?!
I know you've fought long and hard to be recognised as the most breathtakingly stupid poster on this board, and I know you've faced some harrowingly stiff competition, but I think you might have finally clinched it... |
the semantics of "without".
And yes. I know they don't. I already said they don't. That's the engineers job.
And thank you for the ad hominem. it supports your argument well. |
There was no argument, you cretin. You claim that architects require neither knowledge of the conventions of building design nor the ability to design a building that will stand up to be successful architects. This bipartite falsehood could be compassionately permitted only from the mouth of an utter moron or a patient recovering from invasive cranial surgery.
Semantics is the study of meaning. I was correcting an elementary spelling error that you made. Semantics does not enter into it.
You are a very, very, very stupid boy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thematrixiam
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie_B wrote: |
There was no argument, you cretin. You claim that architects require neither knowledge of the conventions of building design nor the ability to design a building that will stand up to be successful architects. |
No. I claimed:
| Quote: |
I disagree with this. Lots of people can't use conventional methods well but manage to use others way better than amateurs or even pros. For instance, painters with out eyes, or painters with out hands. Or, architects. Some architects never design a single normal looking building, but can come up with loads of wonderful creations with no prior experience with convention. |
I was claiming that no prior knowledge and/or skill of convention was needed to step outside of convention.
Later I argued that they do not need to stand up. Which is also true. Go watch videos of old dudes moving around cardboard paper that is folded and contorted then handing it to an engineer and say "here,make this". That actually how a lot of new engineering science has come about. Because they were forced to design a building to stand up that typically wouldn't.
| Stevie_B wrote: |
This bipartite falsehood could be compassionately permitted only from the mouth of an utter moron or a patient recovering from invasive cranial surgery. |
That's a false dichotomy and ad hominem.
Clearly if I am making this argument than it is not restrictive to those two areas.
| Stevie_B wrote: |
Semantics is the study of meaning. I was correcting an elementary spelling error that you made. Semantics does not enter into it.
|
You're right. My bad.
| Stevie_B wrote: |
You are a very, very, very stupid boy. |
Another ad hominem.
Myself suggesting that the usage of the words "with" and "out" having meaning derived from them in such a way to be similar to that of without, has nothing to do with my intelligence, or my age. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie_B
Joined: 14 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
There was no argument, you cretin. You claim that architects require neither knowledge of the conventions of building design nor the ability to design a building that will stand up to be successful architects. |
No. I claimed:
| Quote: |
I disagree with this. Lots of people can't use conventional methods well but manage to use others way better than amateurs or even pros. For instance, painters with out eyes, or painters with out hands. Or, architects. Some architects never design a single normal looking building, but can come up with loads of wonderful creations with no prior experience with convention. |
I was claiming that no prior knowledge and/or skill of convention was needed to step outside of convention.
Later I argued that they do not need to stand up. Which is also true. Go watch videos of old dudes moving around cardboard paper that is folded and contorted then handing it to an engineer and say "here,make this". That actually how a lot of new engineering science has come about. Because they were forced to design a building to stand up that typically wouldn't.
| Stevie_B wrote: |
This bipartite falsehood could be compassionately permitted only from the mouth of an utter moron or a patient recovering from invasive cranial surgery. |
That's a false dichotomy and ad hominem.
Clearly if I am making this argument than it is not restrictive to those two areas.
| Stevie_B wrote: |
Semantics is the study of meaning. I was correcting an elementary spelling error that you made. Semantics does not enter into it.
|
You're right. My bad.
| Stevie_B wrote: |
You are a very, very, very stupid boy. |
Another ad hominem.
Myself suggesting that the usage of the words "with" and "out" having meaning derived from them in such a way to be similar to that of without, has nothing to do with my intelligence, or my age. |
La la la la. Ad hominem! False dichotomy! Why is it that dullards have suddenly rediscovered the Aristotelian analyses of fallacy and employ them solely on internet message boards? Do you think it makes you sound clever? I don't come here to have my rhetorical thrust inexpertly vivisected, you know - I come here to pick chucklesome skirmishes with arsewits like yourself. If you can't respond to an argument without using Latin phrases you no doubt picked up from 'Tedious Lunkhead Monthly' then you have no right to argue in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thematrixiam
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie_B wrote: |
La la la la. Ad hominem! False dichotomy! Why is it that dullards have suddenly rediscovered the Aristotelian analyses of fallacy and employ them solely on internet message boards? Do you think it makes you sound clever? I don't come here to have my rhetorical thrust inexpertly vivisected, you know - I come here to pick chucklesome skirmishes with arsewits like yourself. If you can't respond to an argument without using Latin phrases you no doubt picked up from 'Tedious Lunkhead Monthly' then you have no right to argue in the first place. |
haha.
nice.
I don't use it to sound clever. I use it because it helps to point things out.
Is 'arsewits' a word?
I didn't pick them up from that monthly publication, no. Got it from a reasoning and argumentation philosophy course.
I paid good money for that scorn provoking Latin. Might as well use it some time.
BY the way. All of what you just said basically breaks down to, I know you are but what am I.
I love that you top it off with compositions such as "rhetorical thrust". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie_B
Joined: 14 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
La la la la. Ad hominem! False dichotomy! Why is it that dullards have suddenly rediscovered the Aristotelian analyses of fallacy and employ them solely on internet message boards? Do you think it makes you sound clever? I don't come here to have my rhetorical thrust inexpertly vivisected, you know - I come here to pick chucklesome skirmishes with arsewits like yourself. If you can't respond to an argument without using Latin phrases you no doubt picked up from 'Tedious Lunkhead Monthly' then you have no right to argue in the first place. |
haha.
nice.
I don't use it to sound clever. I use it because it helps to point things out.
Is 'arsewits' a word?
I didn't pick them up from that monthly publication, no. Got it from a reasoning and argumentation philosophy course.
I paid good money for that scorn provoking Latin. Might as well use it some time.
BY the way. All of what you just said basically breaks down to, I know you are but what am I.
I love that you top it off with compositions such as "rhetorical thrust". |
You did a course in philosophy? I don't believe that for a second. Did they let you write your final essay in crayon? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thematrixiam
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie_B wrote: |
You did a course in philosophy? I don't believe that for a second. Did they let you write your final essay in crayon? |
Is it just me or did you eat some troll serum recently. The creativity and logic behind your comments just keep degenerating.
And to answer your question, no. I believe I wrote it in pen. Although most of my recent exams I wrote on a computer, in a separate room, with an extra hour for each hour given to the typical student. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie_B
Joined: 14 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
You did a course in philosophy? I don't believe that for a second. Did they let you write your final essay in crayon? |
Is it just me or did you eat some troll serum recently. The creativity and logic behind your comments just keep degenerating.
And to answer your question, no. I believe I wrote it in pen. Although most of my recent exams I wrote on a computer, in a separate room, with an extra hour for each hour given to the typical student. |
*Sigh* go on then - explain why you got special treatment... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiberious aka Sparkles
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Location: I'm one cool cat!
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Listen; as someone who knows his way around punctuation, I'm all for flexibility. Personally, a writer such as Hemingway is a little dull for my taste, but that's not to say his syntax was ineffective. Far from it; Ernest Hemingway was a master of economical prose. On the other hand, Thomas Hardy and Herman Melville -- to use two examples -- were, similarly, masters of prose who would often write one-page, single-sentence paragraphs full of colons, semi-colons, elipses, parentheses...you get the picture. Neither style is in and of itself particularly better; however, those are examples of very gifted writers. Without proper knowledge of how and when to use punctuation correctly (and this applies to 90% of the posters on this forum), the English language -- or any language, for that matter -- becomes lifeless and devoid of what makes language beautiful: style. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thematrixiam
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Stevie_B wrote: |
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
You did a course in philosophy? I don't believe that for a second. Did they let you write your final essay in crayon? |
Is it just me or did you eat some troll serum recently. The creativity and logic behind your comments just keep degenerating.
And to answer your question, no. I believe I wrote it in pen. Although most of my recent exams I wrote on a computer, in a separate room, with an extra hour for each hour given to the typical student. |
*Sigh* go on then - explain why you got special treatment... |
Because my mom thinks I'm special  .... haha. no.
I am special, but I'm not by any means going to lay it out on the table to have myself get ridiculed further for being different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stevie_B
Joined: 14 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
| thematrixiam wrote: |
| Stevie_B wrote: |
You did a course in philosophy? I don't believe that for a second. Did they let you write your final essay in crayon? |
Is it just me or did you eat some troll serum recently. The creativity and logic behind your comments just keep degenerating.
And to answer your question, no. I believe I wrote it in pen. Although most of my recent exams I wrote on a computer, in a separate room, with an extra hour for each hour given to the typical student. |
*Sigh* go on then - explain why you got special treatment... |
Because my mom thinks I'm special .... haha. no.
I am special, but I'm not by any means going to lay it out on the table to have myself get ridiculed further for being different. |
Fine. I'll just assume you type with a head-wand. |
|
| 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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
