----- Original Message -----
From: "Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 4:33 AM
Subject: Re: And here we go again. (L3)


> Robert Seeberger wrote:
>
> >
> > I see 2 patterns superimposed on each other.
> > 1 You like to argue with Americans
> > 2 You have a problem admitting that you are a disagreeable cuss
>
> I'd say the latter is an inexcusable personal attack (weather it was meant
funny
> or not). If Jeroen had said something like this he'd be crusified by a
number of
> people on this list by now. I don't think it is funny and it doesn't
contribute
> anything to the discussion.

"Disagreeable cuss" was intended to make Jeroen laugh.
I'm pretty sure I put a <G> in the post (I'm gonna make myself late to work
by answering this post)
Now if you used a dictionary to try to understand what a "disagreeable cuss"
is, you might get the idea that it is a great insult. But in colloquial
english as commonly used in this part of the USA it is about as mild an
insult as could possibly be made, and is obviously an attempt at humor (in
that it makes fun of the entire situation).
The fact that you would even think to complain about it shows how easy it is
to misunderstand a "second language", and how easy it is to jump to
conclusions.
"Disagreeable cuss"  was a friendly jibe and should not be viewed as an
actual insult.

xponent
Just The Facts Maam Maru
rob

Reply via email to