posted
If I ever say "it's just a semantic argument". Maybe it's because of my Linguistics training, I just roll my eyes when the word "semantics" is invoked to cover one's butt in an argument. Any discussing involving words is ultimately semantic. If you've been proven wrong, why not just acknowledge it?
Thankfully, deferring to "semantics" is very rare on Hatrack. I've just seen it a few times in a few days (if it was you, please know I made a separate thread so as not to pants you in the middle of the argument where you used it.)
posted
Is that the same thing as saying "your definition of sproogle is obviously different from my definition of sproogle," and then continuing to show why your definition is better?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
(((Hobbes))) I was trying to not embarass you. But you get a medal for apologizing. m_p_h: I think that is what you are saying. :runs off to copyright "sproogle":