Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen <realemailonsite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:33:41 +0100
11 Mar 2007 13:32:08 -0700: "Peter T. Daniels"
<grammatim@xxxxxxxxxxx>: in sci.lang:
I'm sure you knew this already, or could have looked it up with ease.
Then "negative" was an inapt characterization.
I refer you to Orwell's Doublespeak.
Or perhaps to Bolinger's *Language as a Loaded Weapon*.
Negatives have "negative" connotations. That's why that's the label
for such connotations.
Please refer to some dictionaries, and see that one word usually has
many meanings. Saying one meaning is wrong because another meaning is
different is a mistake that beginners often make.
--
Ruud Harmsen - http://rudhar.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- References:
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Joachim Pense
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Joachim Pense
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Prai Jei
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Padraic Brown
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- From: Peter T. Daniels
- Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Prev by Date: Re: Wopwops
- Next by Date: Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Previous by thread: Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Next by thread: Re: Esperanto and Interlingua
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading