Where's the mistake?
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Stephen, I am saddened by this sassy retort. You seem determined to annoy as many people as you can on this forum. What's the point of that? Your attitude is very aggressive if you disagree with something someone says here. Why does that seem necessary to you?
Do you behave this way with your students as well?
Larry Latham
Do you behave this way with your students as well?
Larry Latham
-
- Posts: 1421
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 5:25 pm
Dear larry,
I had made no comment at all about CS until he decided to take imaginary offence and write a post that consists of nothing more tnan personal slurs.
It no doubt would be more "Christian" to turn the other cheek, but I am not feeling in a charitable mood.
I never make personal attacks when I disagree with somebody's point. I simply state my point succintly and back it up as stronlgy as I can. It is a way of showing respect for the person's ideas. If they were obviously idiotic I wouldn't waste my time replying.
If CS seeks to be annoyed for no reason, I have no objection to giving him something to be really annoyed about.
And, Larry, somehow I have the sneaking suspicion that you are looking for other places to post so as to avoid explaining how your description of the fundamental nature of will fits in with the examples I gave in the other thread. Please prove me wrong
I had made no comment at all about CS until he decided to take imaginary offence and write a post that consists of nothing more tnan personal slurs.
It no doubt would be more "Christian" to turn the other cheek, but I am not feeling in a charitable mood.
Let's look at what he says Larry.Your attitude is very aggressive if you disagree with something someone says here
"Scholarly discussion" indeed! Incidentally, you don't need to be much of a language despot to see thatby prescribing, in a rather rude and impolite fashion, I might add, what is obviously the rantings of a language despot.
is wrong"both a probablilty or an intention"
I never make personal attacks when I disagree with somebody's point. I simply state my point succintly and back it up as stronlgy as I can. It is a way of showing respect for the person's ideas. If they were obviously idiotic I wouldn't waste my time replying.
If CS seeks to be annoyed for no reason, I have no objection to giving him something to be really annoyed about.
And, Larry, somehow I have the sneaking suspicion that you are looking for other places to post so as to avoid explaining how your description of the fundamental nature of will fits in with the examples I gave in the other thread. Please prove me wrong
-
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Why do you suppose he wrote his post, Stephen? Do you think CS woke up this morning and said to himself: "I think I'll jump on Dave's ESL website today and give that Stephen Jones a piece of my mind."? Did he have no justification? It is true you weren't speaking to him directly, but then you do expect other people to read your posts don't you? Can you not imagine they might be offended by your rhetoric at times? Are they just being "sensitive", and should mind their own business? I do believe you have a tendency to irritate many who might read what you write, Stephen, not because of your ideas, but because of the abrasive way you so frequently seem to put them.I had made no comment at all about CS until he decided to take imaginary offence and write a post that consists of nothing more tnan personal slurs.
See what I mean?If CS seeks to be annoyed for no reason, I have no objection to giving him something to be really annoyed about.
I feel compelled to ask again, do you treat your students that way?
Larry Latham
All grumblies aside, the fact of the matter still remains that I've/We've yet to see any kind of argumentation on your part that would sway me/us into accepting your view of the sentence in question. Now, that is not to say that I am held fast to my interpretation and unwilling to budge. On the contrary, I am rather looking forward to seeing you argue your point in a way that serves to impart a better understanding of problem. Question is, can you do it? I'm neither your superior nor your inferior, I am your equal, and as your equal, I am asking that you treat me as such.Stephen Jones wrote:Dear larry,
I had made no comment at all about CS until he decided to take imaginary offence and write a post that consists of nothing more tnan personal slurs.
It no doubt would be more "Christian" to turn the other cheek, but I am not feeling in a charitable mood.
Let's look at what he says Larry.Your attitude is very aggressive if you disagree with something someone says here
"Scholarly discussion" indeed! Incidentally, you don't need to be much of a language despot to see thatby prescribing, in a rather rude and impolite fashion, I might add, what is obviously the rantings of a language despot.is wrong"both a probablilty or an intention"
I never make personal attacks when I disagree with somebody's point. I simply state my point succintly and back it up as stronlgy as I can. It is a way of showing respect for the person's ideas. If they were obviously idiotic I wouldn't waste my time replying.
If CS seeks to be annoyed for no reason, I have no objection to giving him something to be really annoyed about.
And, Larry, somehow I have the sneaking suspicion that you are looking for other places to post so as to avoid explaining how your description of the fundamental nature of will fits in with the examples I gave in the other thread. Please prove me wrong
-
- Posts: 1421
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 5:25 pm
Dear CS,
Lets look at your statement regarding this sentence.
Although she is very tired, she could finish the race.
and the sentence appears quite correct to me.
Also as I pointed out there are various changes you can make whilst keeping the verb in the past and the sentence still appears to be good English.
Although she was very tired in the mountain stage yesterday, she could still win the Tour de France in the final spurt to Paris today.
I am also unclear as to whether you consider the sentence correct or not, which was the question made by the original poster. Are you saying as I am that the sentence is correct and the equivalent of
Although she was very tired, she was able to win the race.
or that the sentence is incorrect and should be replaced by the above sentence? Or are you saying that the sentence may be ambigous and it would be better style to replace it with the above sentence?
Lets look at your statement regarding this sentence.
whereas the independent clause 'she could finish the race' expresses both a probablilty or an intention.
- 1. 'both' can't be used with 'or' as we established before.
2. 'Could' does not express probability but rather possibility. 'Could well' or 'could indeed' are used to express probability but 'could' on its own is not.
3. 'Could' does not deal with intention. Possibly you were confusing intention with induction or possibly you were confusing 'will' with 'could'.
4. You were quite right to put a full stop at the end of the sentence, so I can't say your explanation was completely wrong.
Change the subordinate clause to the present,It's the connection between fact and probability and intention that's semantically odd.
Although she is very tired, she could finish the race.
and the sentence appears quite correct to me.
Also as I pointed out there are various changes you can make whilst keeping the verb in the past and the sentence still appears to be good English.
Although she was very tired in the mountain stage yesterday, she could still win the Tour de France in the final spurt to Paris today.
I am also unclear as to whether you consider the sentence correct or not, which was the question made by the original poster. Are you saying as I am that the sentence is correct and the equivalent of
Although she was very tired, she was able to win the race.
or that the sentence is incorrect and should be replaced by the above sentence? Or are you saying that the sentence may be ambigous and it would be better style to replace it with the above sentence?