| |
In lugnet.harrypotter, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> 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...
Actually, in the interest of lack of imagination, I let the eye-biting
monkey sit down at the keyboard, and...well, you know how he is...
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
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
|
|
|
|
