|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 105 OF 253 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-07-07 | | sitzkrieg: Ok. In conclusion Daniel just talks nonsense and Slo is worse in spelling. |
|
| Feb-07-07 | | Plato: <danielpi> Two rules that are wise to follow. The first, which I pointed out already, is that you shouldn't ridicule someone else's spelling if you make spelling mistakes yourself. Besides, spelling is a pointless thing to ridicule someone about in the first place. The second rule, which is even more important, is that if you are going to "accuse" someone else of misspelling a word, you should first check to make sure that it's really spelled wrong. Otherwise you come across as even more ridiculous. Case in point: <aggressivity> is, in fact, the correct spelling... :P |
|
| Feb-07-07 | | s4life: <Plato: The second rule, which is even more important, is that if you are going to "accuse" someone else of misspelling a word, you should first check to make sure that it's really spelled wrong. Otherwise you come across as even more ridiculous. Case in point: <aggressivity> is, in fact, the correct spelling... :P> Ouch...that was some blunder.
Round 1. Plato vs danielpi 1-0.
|
|
| Feb-07-07 | | Laocoon: "aggressivity" -? <Plato>, don't you mean 'aggressiveness?' |
|
| Feb-07-07 | | danielpi: <sitzkrieg> You assert where you're expected to reason. <Plato> I disagree with "rule #1". I could be the worst speller in the world, and if I say, "you spelled X incorrectly," I can still be correct. You're just repeating your ad hominem argument. As for the second point, maybe it's the correct spelling of a nonexistent word? The point, I think, is that the word doesn't exist. http://www.askoxford.com/results/?v... http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oe... |
|
| Feb-07-07 | | drkodos: Aggressivity is a real word. No doubt it is only usually found floundering amongst the fallow thoughts of the pompously verbose, but it is an actual word. |
|
Feb-08-07
 | | chancho: <When he became world champion he pressed all creative chess players in the Soviet Union into his service. When a master became known for his ideas about a certain opening he was brought to Moscow and was instructed to put his findings on paper, of course in the utmost secrecy. In short, we can see Karpov as an exploiter of other people's ideas. His ability to use these ideas is not an issue, but he himself is about as fertile as a woman who has been sterilized.> Mikhail Botvinnik
|
|
| Feb-08-07 | | ughaibu: "floundering amongst the fallow thoughts of the pompously verbose", nice! |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | sitzkrieg: <Danielpi's> standard argument when it's pointed out that he is not right..: " i am not for you misspelled"..
Jeej how old is that guy.
Wannabe intellectual with those 3 majors he still hasnt finished. |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | danielpi: <sitzkrieg> Straw man. Never said that anyone was wrong because they misspelled. Only ever observed that people are wrong AND misspell. Actually, I've completed two majors. Still working on Philosophy... |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | Plato: <danielpi: As for the second point, maybe it's the correct spelling of a nonexistent word?> You really should quit arguing about this while you're behind, because you're digging your own grave here. The more you argue about this the more you reveal your ignorance. You're giving me a link from "Ask Oxford" to prove that "aggressivity" isn't a word?! Try Merriam-Webster, or dictionary.com, or any standard household English dictionary for that matter. It was bad enough when you searched a few pages of my kibitzing history just to find a misspelled word, and came up with a word that was actually spelled correctly. But to continue arguing about it after having been corrected is just laughable. You might as well try to argue that 2+2 is 5. |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | Plato: <danielpi: You're just repeating your ad hominem argument.> <danielpi: Still working on Philosophy...> I can see that. For starters, you need to work on properly identifying ad hominem arguments. As for rule #1, it's not that you were wrong about the spelling mistake (like you were in my case), but that it's a stupid thing to criticize someone about in the first place. If there's nothing better to criticize your opponent about than his or her spelling, then you might as well stop arguing. But it's all the more ridiculous if you make spelling mistakes yourself, since then it's like William Bennett writing "The Book of Virtues." |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | whatthefat: This seems a rather pointless argument (about a rather pointless word), but for what it's worth, aggressivity is not included in the Oxford English Dictionary. |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | Plato: <drkodos> I doubt you really think that, but if you do, so much the worse for you. The truth is that "aggressivity" is not such an obscure word at all, <danielpi>'s vocabulary notwithstanding. Impressive writing, though. I don't know many people who aren't pompously verbose who are able to write phrases like "it is only usually," or lines like "flounder amongst the fallow thoughts of the pompously verbose." |
|
Feb-08-07
| | chancho: <Morphology is the study of the structure of words, and how they can be broken down or combined to form new words. E.g. "aggressivity" is not a word found in the dictionary, but any native English speaker would probably be able to understand its meaning.> http://www.nickoh.com/emacs_files/l... |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | Plato: Merriam Webster: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/aggre... dictionary.com
http://dictionary.reference.com/bro...
yourdictionary.com
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/s... |
|
| Feb-08-07 | | danielpi: <Plato> The ironic thing is that your posts are the most pompous writing on this page- and all you're really doing is accusing everyone else of being pompous! The OED isn't a mainstream dictionary? On what planet are you living? "Aggressivity" is no more a word than "Unparticipation". <I can see that. For starters, you need to work on properly identifying ad hominem arguments.> So: I criticize <slomarko>'s spelling. You claim that I can't do that because I misspell, too. That's a pretty classic ad hominem argument. The only way you could be more blatant about it is if you claimed that <slomarko> spelled correctly because I spelled incorrectly. And I didn't search through tons of your kibitzes to find a spelling error. Your "aggressivity" post was written on the same day. How long did you search for <my> spelling errors? If you want to defend <slomarko> and his illiterate ilk, then that's fine by me, but I really don't understand people like you. Why do you feel this need to defend some barely cogent creature, who misspells every other word he writes. Do you imagine you're some sort of crusader, jumping in to rescue the mentally degenerate? I'll never understand what motivates your type. Some repressed resentment of some grammar teacher of your youth perhaps... And the weirdest part of all is your attitude. What are you criticizing? My pomposity? My presumption of intellectual superiority? If this is so wrong, then why would you take up that very attitude when criticizing that attitude? Bizarre. If you're accusing ME of hypocrisy, I need only point out that my typos don't even approach the egregiousness or frequency of <slomarko>'s. Now, how do you account for the fact that you're MORE pompous than anyone you've accused of pomposity (which, incidentally, IS a word). As for your "rules", I'm doing quite well without your "advice", thank you very much. And I'll be quite happy to continue being what I am and doing what I do. If I were to take your advice, I fear I might become something like you. And incidentally, just because your sobriquet is <Plato>, this doesn't earn you the right to preach your pseudo-philosophical garbage, when it's pretty clear you never learned how to construct a proper argument. I'm done with you. |
|
| Feb-09-07 | | you vs yourself: <...some barely cogent creature> You're unworthy of criticism, daniel. |
|
| Feb-09-07 | | danielpi: <you vs yourself> Hah. Oh yeah? Unworthy of criticism like <You're unworthy of criticism, daniel>? |
|
| Feb-09-07 | | Monoceros: Hey, shouldn't you take this stuff to the Veselin Topalov thread where it belongs? |
|
| Feb-09-07 | | Plato: <danielpi: How long did you search for <my> spelling errors?> Not too long, considering I had just read one of them on the same page (whereas the spelling "mistake" that you "caught" was on a kibitz that you had to go three pages back to find, only to discover that it wasn't a mistake. <Your "aggressivity" post was written on the same day.> Sigh. No, daniel, it was not the same day, unless you really believe that Feb 6 is the same day as Feb 7 (just like the way you think "aggressivity" is not a word). You really have to quit this habit of making blatantly false statements. It's like painting a bright red target on your forehead. <"Aggressivity" is no more a word than "Unparticipation".> Keep telling yourself that, then go to the Merriam-Webster dictionary and look up the two words and see which one you find. Or do a search on Google and see how many results come up for "aggressivity" and how many come up for "unparticipation." Oh, and by the way... do you suppose the Yale University Press publishes scholarly works with nonexistent words in the title? Just wondering: http://yalepress.yale.edu/yupbooks/... You should at least write an e-mail to Dr. Kernberg informing him that the first word of his title is not a real word, that way he and others hopefully won't repeat the mistake in the future. Like I said, you should have given up this "aggressivity" debate from the moment you made the mistake of including it as a misspelled word. The more you carry on with it, the more ridiculous you appear. |
|
| Feb-09-07 | | Plato: <I'll never understand what motivates your type. Some repressed resentment of some grammar teacher of your youth perhaps...> Funny you should say this, considering how you were the one who accused someone of the high crime and absurdity of misspelling a word (<"more absurd than your spelling of...">), which is what got this whole thing started. I came in to point out how stupid it is to start wrangling over a spelling mistake (especially when you've just committed such mistakes yourself, which we all do). Honestly, if criticizing your opponent's spelling is the best criticism you can think of, it seems like he or she is doing pretty well. Instead of accepting this, you decided to retaliate by finding a spelling mistake of mine ... and we all saw how that one turned out. <And incidentally, just because your sobriquet is <Plato>, this doesn't earn you the right to preach your pseudo-philosophical garbage, when it's pretty clear you never learned how to construct a proper argument.> Do let me know when you get accepted to a Ph.D program in philosophy at Columbia (or anywhere else). I imagine it will be quite a while, not least of all because you're still working on your first degree in Philosophy. But, one last word of advice... if you're trying to avoid spouting "pseudo-philosophical garbage," as you call it, you'll really need to work on learning to identify what is and what isn't an ad hominem argument. But I don't plan on giving you any free philosophy lessons on top of the vocabulary lesson. |
|
| Feb-09-07 | | danielpi: <Plato> *sigh* Okay. You can find "ain't" in some dictionaries, too. That doesn't mean it's acceptable. If you want to keep insisting that "aggressive" has two noun forms (i.e. "aggressiveness" AND "aggressivity"), then that's your right, I guess. Seems to me that more people agree with me, and a google search yields quite a few hits, where people are saying that "aggressivity" is not a word. As for your "Columbia PhD" retort, I assume you're trying to imply that you attended Columbia's grad program for philosophy? Oh wow. And by your careful phrasing, I assume you didn't actually get that doctorate. No matter, the fact that you're an alumni of that institution makes sense, since it's not ranked among the top-10 philosophy grad programs. Well, that's it. I don't really have much more to say to you- as pleasant as this has been. You seem to be stuck on insisting that "aggressivity" is a word, and you just keep repeating yourself about how this somehow makes ME look foolish. FYI, asserting P is not the same as proving P. You can sing your victory songs 'til the cows come home, but you haven't really achieved anything but the support of characters like <s4life> and <slomarko>, who are always ready bark along with the tune. So, I guess that's where we'll leave it. I don't terribly much care about your righteous indignation, "rules", warnings, or sundry assertions. You see, <Plato>, I don't really respect you enough to care what you think about me, much less what you think about anything else in the wide world. Have fun with your life of moral crusading and all that. |
|
| Feb-09-07 | | Ziggurat: <You see, <Plato>, I don't really respect you enough to care what you think about me, much less what you think about anything else in the wide world.> One could get the impression that you do care quite a lot, you know ... |
|
Feb-09-07
 | | Eric Schiller: I donb't understand this spat. A google search on aggressivity turns up many references, some specialized. There is no doubt the word is used. As for dictionaries, they don't have any real authority on meaning, they re just collections of observations with standardized spellings. Many words are not in dictionaries (many examples in the Harry Potter books), and many of the words in those books are not used by over 99% of the speakers of the language. Personally, I don't believe I have ever used aggressivity or aggressiveness, and would more likely choose aggressive style or aggressive nature. And I do have a Ph.D. in Linguistics, from the University of Chicago, so you must RESPECT MY AUTHOR-IT-TIE! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 105 OF 253 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
