Subject:
|
Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 16 Mar 2000 17:21:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1616 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman wrote:
[about 'the exception which proves the rule']
> I could be wrong about its primary use these days... I've never heard it
> used in any was _but_ with ironic (or sarcastic) intent, but I'll buy into
> the old English grammar etymology of it! :)
Thinking about it, I can't remember the last time I've actually heard
this expression used. So the 'primary use these days' doesn't really
apply.
Maybe we could PC it, and have it changed to "the exception which
illustrates the guideline".
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
541 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
