<Alan> wrote:
> (Victor Sack) wrote:
>
> ><Alan> wrote:
> >
> >> (Victor Sack) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Is it a good idea to follow the example of those people? The same
> >> >people also call raw, unformed minced/ground meat either "hamburger or
> >> >"sausage",
>
> No, you equated "hamburger" and "sausage" -- two different
> food items.
I think you are unable to read and to grasp a simple argument, as
illustrated above.
Are you really trying to convince *me* that "hamburger" and "sausage"
are supposed to be different? What a hoot!
Are you even aware of what I am - and have been - talking about?
> It would be "unseasoned minced meat in casings" or ground
> meat, but not sausage.
Not that this really matters, but here, again, is a dictionary
definition:
> >*** noun 1 a short tube of raw minced meat encased in a skin, that is
> >grilled or fried before eating.
No mention of seasonings.
> >Only in America. Did you actually read my post? Did you comprehend it?
And... did you?
> >These are, by the way, rhetorical questions, so just re-read the
> >paragraph you quoted below - about the yet another example of the
> >general supplanting the particular in the American version of English.
Does not the above, repeated twice, give you any idea of what I am
really talking about?
> >*** noun 1 a person studying at a university or other place of higher
> >education. 2 chiefly N. Amer. a school pupil. 3 before another noun
> >denoting someone who is studying to enter a particular profession: a
> >student nurse. 4 a person who takes a particular interest in a subject.
>
> Uh. Did you notice definition #2. A school pupil.
> No age or other specification.
No, I guess it *is* futile to even try to argue with you. You keep
arguing with yourself or with some imaginary opponent, no matter what I
say.
> Well, Victor, your facts are mostly disputable, and you are
> obviously more willing to argue than deal in facts.
You have yet to present a single fact for me to deal with, and a single
evidence of why my facts (and which ones) are disputable. No surprise,
since you are unable to even understand what it is I am really talking
about.
> And you seem to hold yourself above the rest for being able
> to express your questionable knowledge.
The "rest" being you, presumably? I suspect you are the only one
overwhelmed by my oh-so-superior expression in my poor, non-native
English.
> Snot. Snob.
You are unable to even follow a simple line of thought and so you resort
to calling people names. Very nice. How do your parents react, or used
to react, to such behaviour, I wonder?
> It's one thing to be a snob. It is another to be snotty
> about it by still standing by expressing "knowledge" which
> is not particularly true, or by continuing to declaim your
> own, very proscribed definitions of what something is.
> Pizza, for example.
Physician, heal thyself!
To paraphrase Russ Allbery, if you were projecting any more, you could
rent yourself out as a cinema.
Victor