| |
In lugnet.harrypotter, Matthew Gerber writes:
> So , you're saying that "begs the question" somehow DOESN'T belong in the
> catagory of reasoning processes?
>
> It's not an antonym of reasoning?
>
> In the way I used it, it's NOT a verb facetiously inviting folks to reason
> out the meaning of a possibly glowing Snape head in the Harry Potter line,
> when there is no evidence of this phenomenon in the books?
>
> When used in this way, it becomes rhetorical, correct?
>
> And that was my point...there really IS no question...if it does, it
> shouldn't, but it looks as if it might, which is strange since there is no
> evidence of it in the books...so, why, but not in the sense that I'm
> expecting an actual answer...just that I'm pointing out to folks that they
> may have reason to wonder if, in fact, it does when it shouldn't! *WHEW*
Um, could you provide a sentence diagram for the above? I got lost in a maze
of twisty little negations, all different, and now there's a dwarf throwing
an ax...
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
36 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
