--- In [email protected], Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> --- authauthfriendtejsteinipanix> wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairFairfieldLifeoyahoogroups, "L B
> ShriShriver <l_b_shrishriver.> 
> > wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > The difference is only in the superficial variety.
> > Peter is a shoot-
> > > from-the-hip asshole, whereas AkasAkasha
> > AuthAuthfriend obsessive-
> > > parsing-assholes.
> > 
> > So now it's "obsessive parsing" to point out that
> > a disagreement between two people has occurred
> > because
> > they think a word means different things?
> > 
> > Interesting.
> 
> Words do mean different things to different people.
> It's just when one person claims their understanding
> of a word is the best/actual/real common sense/ etc.
> that the problems start.

Some words have a wide range of different and
sometimes even contradictory meanings, and you
can't assume you know for sure what someone
means by them unless the context makes it clear,
or unless they explain what meaning they're
using.

But when a word has a well-defined meaning in 
common usage, as I said in another post, that
meaning is "privileged"--in other words, if you
want to use the word to mean something else,
the onus is on you to explain how you're using
it.  You can't expect your listeners/readers to
read your mind and discern that you were using
it in a nonstandard manner.

> "Tacky" means one thing to me
> and something slightly different to Akasha problem
> with Akasha is that he keeps on claiming that his
> definition is the actual, common sense, self-evident,
> obvious definition and is therefore "the" definition
> and any problems I have with it are deficits in my
> character or something of that ilk and have nothing to
> do with him or what he writes because HE DOES NOT
> INTEND THAT EFFECT. That is the exact point I'm trying
> to make!

Yeah, you're reading a whole lot into what he
said.  All he said (and all I said) was that his
understanding of the term was in accord with the
standard dictionary definition.  If there was any
"deficit" in your character implied, it was only
that you seemed to think the misunderstanding was
his fault rather than accepting that it occurred
because you had used the term to mean something
other than what it's generally understood to mean.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to