Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- From: "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:54:27 GMT
Ron Hardin wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
I don't read liberal columnists. They're not interesting. They don't
have anything to say.
If you don't read them, how do you know whether they're interesting, or
whether they have nothing to say?
Do you know about semantic shifts?
On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.
I can identify hypocrisy.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@xxxxxxx
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- From: Ron Hardin
- Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- References:
- WSJ anacoluthon
- From: Ron Hardin
- Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- From: Ron Hardin
- Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- From: Ron Hardin
- WSJ anacoluthon
- Prev by Date: Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- Next by Date: Re: Sicilian Greek
- Previous by thread: Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- Next by thread: Re: WSJ anacoluthon
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|