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

    You would still need to has some basic understanding of grammar and to have studied the structure, grammar and syntax to be able to read.

    No, you do not. Again, the very basics of linguistics. That is exactly like you saying that to drive a car you need to understand the basics of mechanical engineering. Then you’d make the argument that “to understand how brakes and the accelerator work you need to understand Newton’s laws of motions, the basics of mechanical engineering”.

    No-one would claim that. And you know that. You know how ridiculous you are being, and you know I know it. But again, it’s not about me. It’s about you. You can’t admit to yourself that you’ve made a mistake. You can’t accept having been wrong. And that quality in you will fuck your life over, mark my words.

    Humans naturally possess language acquisition. You do not need to even understand the concept of syntax or grammar to be able to correctly utilise both. I honestly keep overestimating you with each reply. Like I said some replies ago, it would’ve been far better for you to stop replying a long time ago. Now you’ll have made so many comments that removing or editing them will seem very silly indeed, and you have dug your heels in with this asinine denial of a simple mistake.

    You’re trying to avoid looking dumb, but the only thing you’re doing to do that is making you look even dumber. Highly entertaining. But not as entertaining as this HDR version of Logan, so since you won’t stop replying (because you’re obsessing over this, since you can’t accept being wrong), I’ll be back later tonight or tomorrow. See you.

    edit breaks -> brakes (see how easy it is to admit to mistakes?)

    • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      And on and on and on and on they went. They even planned to carry on the next day whether anyone was reading their replies or not and they would do so without a hint of irony.

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

        Oh it’s not about people reading the replies.

        It’s about you, writing replies that you’ll later feel ashamed of. :)

        If I didn’t understand "the very basis of linguistics, why would you write to me? Come on now. Think before you talk.

        You said that. You keep pretending to understand things you don’t have the faintest grasp over. You have the internet. Why don’t you just… check?

        Come on now. Check before you write.

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

          Its cute that you think ill ever think of you or this again, after this.

          I used it colloquially. Whats your problem here? Are you the only person who can use colloquial terms? What, do you not understand the very basics of linguistics or something?

          Anything but talk about you “not a hard N” argument huh?

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

            So now you think “colloquial” means whatever language?

            I can’t believe you keep topping this every reply. Each better than the last. Ah, brilliant.

            So again, common usage defines usage. Why do you keep arguing over things you know you don’t know shit about, when you keep humiliating yourself by doing it? I genuinely don’t understand why you wouldn’t spend a while learning what these terms actually mean so that you could improve your replies?

            Right now it’s like… uh, how to describe it… Well, imagine overhearing some 9-year olds talking about how “you’re supposed to pee in the butt to make a baby”. You’d know how they’re mistaken, and you’d understand that with their level of knowledge, such a silly and childish assumption isn’t too unreasonable to make.

            But now I’ve treated you like an adult for several comments, as have others, carefully and still respectfully detailing to you what you’ve got so wrong with your pretentious language use, but you won’t hear any of it. It’s incredible, truly. :D

            NO-ONE uses “linguistics” synonymously with “language”, just like no-one uses “driving” as a a synonym for “car”, unless they’re so inexperienced with the language that they haven’t had time for language acquisition.

            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
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Imagine spending all that time and typing all that out in defence of calling Jewish people nazis. As if you thought I’d bother reading all your self masturbatory bullshit.

              You can’t admit that its wrong to call Jewish people nazis and you bang on and on like that.

              Grow up and admit you’re wrong to do that and that it not being a hard N is a joke of an attempt to justify it.

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

                You’re so incapable of admitting to mistakes, that you’ll lie about not being unable to, while showing everyone you are. Who exactly do you think your deceiving? Yourself of course.

                You’re making up shit and getting offended when people call you out on it. “The Hard N” is just so brilliant as well. It showcases that you don’t actually understand what the difference is between a hard and a soft consonant actually even is. This whole thread has been about linguistics which you don’t have the faintest idea of, and which you’re willfully ignoring, despite everyone trying to politely teach you. It’s amazing.

                It’s not wrong to call Israelis nazis, no. It’s common usage and quite valid, as dozens of people in this thread have tried telling you, but you’re probably cognitively unable to go read short Wikipedia articles so you’d understand why everyone was laughing at your comments, just like you’re unable to admit to any mistakes. I’ll prove that. For several comments now, you’ve ignored the simple mistake you make, because you can’t defend it, but you’re not man enough to say “yeah, I made a mistake because I confused the words”. There’s nothing wrong with making mistakes, buddy. But there is a lot wrong in making mistakes and then doubling down into them.

                We’ve been through what “common use” is and how in informal conversation, the word “nazi” is completely apt and linguistically correct of a term to use for the fascists Israelis. I know you would like to go back to being furious over things you don’t understand, but we’re still on the point about you not being able to admit to being wrong. :) I’ll prove it ONCE again, by leaving these as the clear last lines, which you will purposefully ignore:

                ##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
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  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. What a sad, hateful little boy you must be.

                  Its cool though. The longer you’re here typing out bullshit no one will read, the more you’re kept away from children and small animals.

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

                    Oh, wow, you’re still desperately ignoring your silly little mistake, ashamed as you are of having publicly made a fool of yourself.

                    So like I asked in my very first comment, it would be antisemitic of me to call [these Jewish people] nazis? By your logic it is antisemitic.

                    Why are you replying to comments you claim to not even read? Why would you do that on a forum? You’re PROUD to be ignorant of the things you’re replying to? At this point, do you see the point I made several days ago about how you should just stop replying so that you’ll spare yourself more humiliation? This is exactly what I meant. :D

                    ##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. ;)