The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Ing Options
Helenej
Posted: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 3:49:25 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
Even didn't bother reading your post.

D00M wrote:
It's certainly characteristic of my culture … to fight back against evil; otherwise, I will be part of evil.

D00M wrote:
For me to stand my ground and stand against evil is the most effective means of spending my time.

D00M wrote:
I'm on the right path and enjoy it; that's a valuable help to other members

What does it mean you didn’t read my post? I am completely confused.

Is it no longer characteristic of you culture to fight back against evil?

Are you not afraid to become part of evil now?

Is your standing against evil no longer the most effective way of spending your time?

Don’t you enjoy your path any longer?

Don’t you want to help other members anymore?

Or maybe all those lofty words of yours were merely gibberish?


D00M
Posted: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 4:27:10 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
That certainly gives you a lot of trouble, the pesky and uninviting pest of my thread. Come on, quote, highlight, turn a blind eye to truth, cut and cherypick people's words, and write more rubbish stuff. Boo hoo!

Be creative, try hard. Applause



The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 4:40:59 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
I see. As you have nothing to answer to my questions, then you have definitely betrayed your tribal culture and your upbringing provided to you by your precious mom. The poor woman must feel extremely frustrated right now, seeing her son unable to fight back evil and turning into evil himself.
FROSTY X RIME
Posted: Monday, October 8, 2018 11:06:37 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/20/2015
Posts: 1,009
Neurons: 11,157
The difference between present continuous and be going to

It may help. It is very well written and explained.

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
BobShilling
Posted: Monday, October 8, 2018 1:44:38 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 545
Neurons: 3,474
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
FROSTY X RIME wrote:
The difference between present continuous and be going to

It may help. It is very well written and explained.

It's not bad for a basic summary, but the writer believes that "Be going to [...] puts an extra emphasis on the idea of intention." As I pointed in an earlier post, Be going to does not emphasise, or even necessarily involve, intention:

There is no sense of intention or determination in such natural sentences as:

1. Look at those black clouds. It's going to rain soon.
2. John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day
.
FROSTY X RIME
Posted: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 5:37:29 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/20/2015
Posts: 1,009
Neurons: 11,157
BobShilling wrote:
FROSTY X RIME wrote:
The difference between present continuous and be going to

It may help. It is very well written and explained.

It's not bad for a basic summary, but the writer believes that "Be going to [...] puts an extra emphasis on the idea of intention." As I pointed in an earlier post, Be going to does not emphasise, or even necessarily involve, intention:

There is no sense of intention or determination in such natural sentences as:

1. Look at those black clouds. It's going to rain soon.
2. John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day
.



Hello BobShilling,

Let's say it is true There is no sense of intention or determination in such natural sentences as:

1. Look at those black clouds. It's going to rain soon.
2. John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day
.[/color][/quote]

but it does not mean that the the rules are not applicable to other cases. Be Logical.

The cases of weather have been always dealt as exceptional cases, for example when you say "It's hot," the "it" in the sentence does not play the same role as the "it" in the sentence "It is a pen."

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
BobShilling
Posted: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 6:09:29 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 545
Neurons: 3,474
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
FROSTY X RIME wrote:
Be Logical. The cases of weather have been always dealt as exceptional cases, for example when you say "It's hot," the "it" in the sentence does not play the same role as the "it" in the sentence "It is a pen."


John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day. This has nothing to do with weather, so we apparently have another type of exception.

My contention is that there is no need for exceptions if we consider 'BE going to' as used when there is some form of present evidence for a future situation.
FROSTY X RIME
Posted: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 6:30:43 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/20/2015
Posts: 1,009
Neurons: 11,157
BobShilling wrote:
FROSTY X RIME wrote:
Be Logical. The cases of weather have been always dealt as exceptional cases, for example when you say "It's hot," the "it" in the sentence does not play the same role as the "it" in the sentence "It is a pen."


John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day. This has nothing to do with weather, so we apparently have another type of exception.

My contention is that there is no need for exceptions if we consider 'BE going to' as used when there is some form of present evidence for a future situation.


Dear Bobshilling,

"be going to" has some other function than "determination or intention". That is "prediction".

The example you have given above simply states a prediction.

I hope it helps.

Check out the link below.

Prediction

What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
BobShilling
Posted: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 7:58:00 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 545
Neurons: 3,474
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
BobShilling wrote:
John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day[/quote]

FROSTY X RIME wrote:
"be going to" has some other function than "determination or intention". That is "prediction".

Fine, but the prediction is based on the present evidence we have that Bob drives too fast. That is why, in this case, the present progressive is not appropriate.

By the way, I see that the page you linked us to contains these words (my emphasis added):

Be going to is used when we want to emphasise our decision or the evidence in the present:

[An ‘A’ road is a main road. A ‘B’ road is a smaller road.]

We are now very late so we’re going to take the ‘B’ road
. (the speaker refers to the present and emphasises the decision)

I know the ‘B’ road will be quicker at this time of day. (the speaker states a fact)


In both the examples, the speaker's decision is based on evidence - the knowledge that the B road will be quicker.
FROSTY X RIME
Posted: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 10:39:29 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/20/2015
Posts: 1,009
Neurons: 11,157
BobShilling wrote:
BobShilling wrote:
John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day


FROSTY X RIME wrote:
"be going to" has some other function than "determination or intention". That is "prediction".

Fine, but the prediction is based on the present evidence we have that Bob drives too fast. That is why, in this case, the present progressive is not appropriate.

By the way, I see that the page you linked us to contains these words (my emphasis added):

Be going to is used when we want to emphasise our decision or the evidence in the present:

[An ‘A’ road is a main road. A ‘B’ road is a smaller road.]

We are now very late so we’re going to take the ‘B’ road
. (the speaker refers to the present and emphasises the decision)

I know the ‘B’ road will be quicker at this time of day. (the speaker states a fact)


In both the examples, the speaker's decision is based on evidence - the knowledge that the B road will be quicker.
[/quote]

Hello BobShilling,

Regarding the evidence thing you have been mentioning, of course there must be evidence for an assumption or prediction. It's a natural process of thinking to come to a prediction.

I think we are discussing the issue whether there is a difference between "be going to" and "present continuous". Whilst many others argue there is no difference between those two, some do think there is a difference. I do not know where your pointing-out the evidence things is heading for in connection with the difference between the two. What is your exact intention of bringing it up?

Having evidence to make a statement does not lead to anywhere. Why is that? According to some peole's belief there is a difference between the two, when you say, "we are going to have a party tomorrow", you are declaring that you have determined to have a party tomorrow or you are intending to . It does not necessary mean you have evident to support your decision. One day you just woke up and came up with an idea and said that and then after that, you would start preparing for a party-sending out invitations or going shopping to buy stuff you will need-, which was to be evidence to your later declaration, "I am having party tomorrow." If I have gotten it right, "We are going to have a party tomorrow," precedes "I am having party tomorrow."

In short, when you say, "we are going to have a party tomorrow," you do not have to have evidence to state it but you just need your determination/intention only whilst when you say "it's going to rain tomorrow" or "you are so clumsy. you are going to break the vase someday," or "John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day," you have some sort of evidence to state them.

If those two "be going to" and "present continuous" are the exactly same things, they should be interchangeable but they are not.
For example, you would never hear anybody saying, "It's raining tomorrow," or "John drives far too fast. He's having an accident one day."






What should be shall be-The fellowship of the ring-
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Thursday, October 11, 2018 4:53:38 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 30,140
Neurons: 176,780
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
Hi Frosty.

The reason this is being discussed at all now is that one early post stated that "I'm going to have a party" only shows a vague idea that a party may be nice - but including the ideas "If a couple of my friends won't be able to come, I will probably put the party off" or "If my parents strongly object, I will cancel the party" or "If it rains next Saturday, I will cancel the party because it is meant to be a barbeque one."

This is very different from the way British (and I think American) people use that form.
As you say "One day you just woke up and came up with an idea and said that [I'm going to have a party] and then after that, you would start preparing for a party - sending out invitations or going shopping to buy stuff you will need."

Your description shows "intention" - "determination", "deliberation".
You say "I'm going to have a party" - and you put on a party.

Helenj's description is '"I'm going to have a party next Saturday" implies you have an intention to make a party. But you may have in mind some of the following thoughts: "If a couple of my friends won't be able to come, I will probably put the party off" or "If my parents strongly object, I will cancel the party" or "If it rains next Saturday, I will cancel the party because it is meant to be a barbeque one."
'. . . anyone who has heard "I am going to have a party" should assume that I only have an intention to throw a party. Therefore, people who will turn up after my "I am going to have a party" and say, "Where's the party" should be less upset than if I had said, "I am having a party", which, as Drag0 pointed out, means "it's definite".
' [As a note, I said that BOTH mean "It's definite"]

This description shows "doubt".
You say you're going to have a party - this means that probably something will go wrong and no-one should be at all surprised that you don't have one.

**********
I do understand your distinction between the two.
"I'm going to have a party" is the decision and determination - THEN you invite people and make all the arrangements and make it happen - though this COULD be used right up to the final moments when you start pouring the welcome drinks.

"I'm having a party" COULD be used before starting the preparations, but would more likely be used part-way-through.

Neither one allows for any doubt.

Maybe I'm unusual - but, if I intend to do something, I do it.

If there's a doubt I say something like "I'm looking at the idea of having a party" or "I think I might have a party" - I haven't decided yet. I don't have an intention, I have a vague thought.



Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
BobShilling
Posted: Thursday, October 11, 2018 6:35:49 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 545
Neurons: 3,474
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
FROSTY X RIME wrote:
I do not know where your pointing-out the evidence things is heading for in connection with the difference between the two. What is your exact intention of bringing it up?

I was simply responding to your:
Quote:
"be going to" has some other function than "determination or intention". That is "prediction".


My point has always been that while the use of Be going to can suggest determination, intention, prediction, inevitability, decision, etc, it does not necessarily do so. My study of this form leads me to believe that there is always some present evidence involved in it use. The present evidence can be the thought in a speaker's mind.

The use of the present progressive almost always seems to be associated with some sort of arrangement. This arrangement may simply be the thought in the speaker's mind of a future situation.

In some situations, the evidence is the arrangement. In such cases there is no significant difference in meaningbetween the two forms.


Quote:
In short, when you say, "we are going to have a party tomorrow," you do not have to have evidence to state it but you just need your determination/intention only

As I have said, that determination/intention is the evidence.
Quote:
whilst when you say "it's going to rain tomorrow" or "you are so clumsy. you are going to break the vase someday," or "John drives far too fast. He's going to have an accident one day," you have some sort of evidence to state them.

There is external evidence in those sentences.

Quote:
If those two "be going to" and "present continuous" are the exactly same things, they should be interchangeable but they are not.

They are effectively interchangeable when the evidence is the arrangement (or vice versa).

Quote:
For example, you would never hear anybody saying, "It's raining tomorrow," or "John drives far too fast. He's having an accident one day."

That's because, outside the realm of science fiction, these things cannot be arranged.
Helenej
Posted: Saturday, October 13, 2018 8:59:40 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
Another proof that D00M is a toady. Now he doesn’t dare to say, “Frosty, why are you so argumentative?” He is only brave enough with non-natives, preferably females.

A lion among sheep, a sheep among lions.
D00M
Posted: Saturday, October 13, 2018 10:48:08 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Helenej wrote:
Another proof that D00M is a toady. Now he doesn’t dare to say, “Frosty, why are you so argumentative?” He is only brave enough with non-natives, preferably females.

A lion among sheep, a sheep among lions.


Daydreaming!

A rat among humans!

Some people come to learn, but some come to mislead others. You are the latter.

As "hope123" said, my judgment was fine.

Bob also didn't have to hit his head against brick walls while getting his points across for anybody but you.

And another proof that you are an argumentative psycho is that you are still arguing here with ad hominem attacks.



The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
BobShilling
Posted: Saturday, October 13, 2018 11:17:17 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 545
Neurons: 3,474
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
Well, for a few days. Frosty, Drago and I managed to get the thread back on topic. Tt's gone back down the drain again.

Hey ho.
Helenej
Posted: Saturday, October 13, 2018 6:29:07 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
And another proof that you are an argumentative psycho is that you are still arguing here with ad hominem attacks.

Well, quite expectable. Wet pants when it comes to calling “argumentative” anyone other from a non-native female. Are all men in your nation that cowardly as you?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Also, D00M, you are repeating yourself. You have already called me “psycho”. Run out of ideas? Forgot other words your mommy taught you? Come on, strain your brain and try to be inventive.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Along with that, your statement lacks logic.

If I am an argumentative psycho just because I am still arguing here with ad hominem attacks,
then who are you if you are still arguing here with ad hominem attacks?

If your mom couldn’t find anyone in your nation who was able to teach you simple logic, she should have hired someone from a more developed nation.

D00M
Posted: Saturday, October 13, 2018 7:01:09 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
You stink, rat!

I'm not willing to insult your family and nation. They are respectable to me. And it's not bravery to do so. We associate such traits with bitches.

And you are certainly a shame to your people.


The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Saturday, October 13, 2018 8:03:12 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
You stink, rat!

It stinks you logic, according to which you publicly called yourself “argumentative psycho”. Breath deeply, honey. I think the smell will serve you right and teach you good manners. Listen, I know a good logic teacher in your country. He doesn’t charge beginners too much. I'll ask him and he will give you lessons for just a box of bananas each.

D00M wrote:
I'm not willing to insult your family and nation.

I haven’t insulted your family or nation, either. By the way, have you finally found those words with which, as you alleged, I insulted your mommy? I can’t wait to read them.
____________________________________

Still in wet pants? I know it is scary for you to say to a man what you easily say to a woman, the more so if you depend on him for the answers to your questions.

D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 2:45:01 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
By now it is evident to everyone you are a crazed psycho who doesn't understand what she says herself or what others articulate; as Lotje put it: Confusion! You still don't know how to use "should" correctly, as DragonSpeaker proved. As you didn't make sense of what Bob said with his good will; as Hope123 pointed out; the list goes on!

Go and learn the correct usage of the English lexicon and then you might be qualified to discuss with or given answer.

May God help you.
You really need that.


The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 5:28:59 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
You are still here breathing in your logic, whose smell reminds you that of the rats in your home? Nostalgic reminiscences?

D00M wrote:
By now it is evident to everyone By now it is evident to everyone…

By now it is evident to everyone that your psych profile is as follows.

1. You are a primitive foul-mouthed human with vulnurable self-esteem who always feels the urgent need to maintain his positive image. Devaluation of others is a defensive mechanism of your psyche. You believe that by lowering other people, you elevate yourself.

Here are the words with which you try to defend your suffering self-esteem:

“pesky kid”
“idiot”
“poor creature”
“pest”
“crazed psycho”
“annoying fly”
“You are a rat”
“You are disgusting”
“I'm not a psychiatrist!
“You leave bullshit on my threads”.


2. You are a sycophant who tries to get what you want and earn others’ respect by using flattery. You are ridiculous with your constant “respected teachers”, being unable to see how servile it sounds as compared to others’ “Dear forum members”, “Dear teachers” or just ”Hi, everyone”. Your calls “We, English learners, should always trust native speakers when they…” demonstrate clearly how crucial is for you to be liked by those who you depend on.

3. You are a liar who alleged that I insulted your mother. You still can’t produce any proof of that to the “respected teachers”.

4. You are a coward who avoids strong people and only preys on those who seem weak to you. When one of the latest members in this thread began arguing about the topic, having his own point of view, you didn’t ask him “Why are you so argumentative?”, as you had asked me. You have never asked any of the native speakers why they are you so argumentative in spite of the fact that they have been arguing here for years. So, a coward.

4. You are, let's say, not very bright or good at logic. As you demonstrated us above, you got completely confused in your reasoning and proved to everyone that you are “an argumentative psycho” yourself just because you are still arguing here with ad hominem attacks. I still recommend you a good logic teacher. Do you find his charge too high for you? Come on, it’s a bargain.

D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 5:56:27 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Loose language.
Nonsense.
Confusion.
Ad hominem.

Do what I advised in my previous post.


The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 6:33:21 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
Loose language.
Nonsense.
Confusion.
Ad hominem.

Those are sheer llegations. Where is your proof of what you said? Exhausted? Run out of arguments? I allow you to call your mommy. Maybe she can help.

Anyone can clearly see my proof of the fact that you are:

- a primitive dirty-mouthed human with vulnerable self-esteem;

- a sycophant who tries to get what you want and earn others’ respect by using flattery;

- a liar who alleged that I insulted your mother;

- a coward who avoids strong people and only preys on those who seem weak to you;

- not very bright or good at logic who calls himself "a psycho" as a result of your own lame reasoning.

D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 7:24:16 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Paralogism.
Do what I advised in my previous post.

The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 7:44:46 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
Paralogism.

Another allegation, in addition to:

Loose language.
Nonsense.
Confusion.
Ad hominem,

which you can’t prove.


Unlike you, I provided convincing evidence of the fact that you are:

- a primitive dirty-mouthed human with vulnerable self-esteem;

- a sycophant who tries to get what you want and earn others’ respect by using flattery;

- a liar who alleged that I insulted your mother;

- a coward who avoids strong people and only preys on those who seem weak to you;

- not very bright or good at logic who calls himself "a psycho" as a result of your own lame reasoning.


D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 8:07:55 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
D00M wrote:
By now it is evident to everyone you are a crazed psycho who doesn't understand what she says herself or what others articulate; as Lotje put it: Confusion! You still don't know how to use "should" correctly, as DragonSpeaker proved. As you didn't make sense of what Bob said with his good will; as Hope123 pointed out; the list goes on!

Go and learn the correct usage of the English lexicon and then you might be qualified to discuss with or given answer.

May God help you.
You really need that.


Read again. You certainly don't understand what people say, as you have proved so far. But read it a thousand times.

The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 9:30:41 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
Read again. You certainly don't understand what people say, as you have proved so far. But read it a thousand times.

Read again. You certainly don't understand what people say, as you have proved so far. But read it a million times.

By now it is evident to everyone that your psych profile is as follows.

1. You are a primitive foul-mouthed human with vulnurable self-esteem who always feels the urgent need to maintain his positive image. Devaluation of others is a defensive mechanism of your psyche. You believe that by lowering other people, you elevate yourself.

Here are the words with which you try to defend your suffering self-esteem:

“pesky kid”
“idiot”
“poor creature”
“pest”
“crazed psycho”
“annoying fly”
“You are a rat”
“You are disgusting”
“I'm not a psychiatrist!
“You leave bullshit on my threads”.


2. You are a sycophant who tries to get what you want and earn others’ respect by using flattery. You are ridiculous with your constant “respected teachers”, being unable to see how servile it sounds as compared to others’ “Dear forum members”, “Dear teachers” or just ”Hi, everyone”. Your calls “We, English learners, should always trust native speakers when they…” demonstrate clearly how crucial is for you to be liked by those who you depend on.

3. You are a liar who alleged that I insulted your mother. You still can’t produce any proof of that to the “respected teachers”.

4. You are a coward who avoids strong people and only preys on those who seem weak to you. When one of the latest members in this thread began arguing about the topic, having his own point of view, you didn’t ask him “Why are you so argumentative?”, as you had asked me. You have never asked any of the native speakers why they are you so argumentative in spite of the fact that they have been arguing here for years. So, a coward.

4. You are, let's say, not very bright or good at logic. As you demonstrated us above, you got completely confused in your reasoning and proved to everyone that you are “an argumentative psycho” yourself just because you are still arguing here with ad hominem attacks. I still recommend you a good logic teacher. Do you find his charge too high for you? Come on, it’s a bargain.

D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 10:46:00 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Paralogism again.


The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 3:17:36 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
Paralogism again.

A complete loss of the ability to think again. Some scientists call this dangerous state “brain constipation” and recommend nasal enemas with castor oil or urgent craniotomy.
D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 3:33:29 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Recently you prescribed memory supplements for teachers. Now other drugs, Dr Rat. Your familiarity with such stuff is indicative of your painful experience as a psycho.

You are not worth of thinking, psycho. Confusion is confusion! As drago said, you mean something but write something else. Is such stupid and uncivil psycho worth of anything but being played with like a rat?






The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 4:55:34 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
As I can see, the nasal enemas with castor oil have worked! Your brain constipation is slowly going away. You have stopped repeating “Paralogism again” and started trying to produce something different. You should be grateful to me for my advice.

D00M wrote:
You are not worth of thinking.

Maybe. But I still make you think about me. You’ve been constantly thinking about me for 16 days, since September, 29! You have been writing to me several times a day! You know, even my husband didn’t do it so often when he was courting me. Please, keep doing it. You see, I am working on an important thesis called “The treatment of brain constipations through nasal enemas with castor oil”. I must describe any changes in your mental health. Please, let me know about them as often as possible and I promise to mention your name in the Acknowledgements section of my work.

D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 6:06:07 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Confusion.
Loose sentences.
Should Drago come here and teach you the correct usage of words?
Boo hoo!

I care about you more than your husband.
Probably his lack of affection has made a poor psycho out of you. I will help you then, don't worry. I will think about you for 1600 days, even more if needed.

The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 6:47:36 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
Confusion.
Loose sentences.

Hmm... What can these fragmentary phrases mean? I see. He is experiencing confusion and is complaining that he can only speak with loose sentences. Quick, we are losing him. Nasal enemas didn’t work. He needs to have urgent craniotomy for evacuation of the hematoma, which he got as a baby when his mom accidentally dropped him while breast-feeding.

D00M wrote:
You are not worth of thinking.

D00M wrote:
I care about you more than your husband.

Now I am not worth thinking of and then he cares about me. Hmm...

My husband says it must be delirium tremens. He is a doctor, you see, so he knows for sure. He says you should call the ambulance immediately and take one pickle every three minutes until it arrives.


D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 7:09:15 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Two doctors! Applause Now you can serve the whole forum.

You do deserve being thought of and played with like a rat, psycho, indeed!

By the way, tell him, alongside with treating, to teach you the lexicon of the English language and proper communication.

Or should Drago come here and teach you the correct usage of words?

Oh, "let's keep it SIMPLE," understandable for stupid psychos.







The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Helenej
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 7:21:46 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/24/2013
Posts: 2,118
Neurons: 10,382
Location: Kiev, Kyiv City, Ukraine
D00M wrote:
Two doctors!

Now he is seeing double! It’s a dangerous symptoms. If tissue necrosis begins, he may remain mentally disabled forever. Where on earth is that ambulance? Are you sure you are taking enough pickles, D00M?

D00M wrote:
You are not worth of thinking.

D00M wrote:
You do deserve being thought of.

The poor guy is already raving. Hold on, D00M and double the doze of pickles.
D00M
Posted: Sunday, October 14, 2018 7:53:09 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/24/2017
Posts: 1,609
Neurons: 7,593
Those boring nonsense.

Be creative. I was having fun.

I triple the doSe of
the pesticide if it does you good, psycho.

Have you finished high school, Dr. "doze"?


Read the following, and maybe you get more pissed off helping your ill mind to pour out.

"By now it is evident to everyone you are a crazed psycho who doesn't understand what she says herself or what others articulate; as Lotje put it: Confusion! You still don't know how to use "should" correctly, as DragonSpeaker proved. As you didn't make sense of what Bob said with his good will; as Hope123 pointed out; the list goes on!

Go and learn the correct usage of the English lexicon and then you might be qualified to discuss with or given answer.

May God help you.
You really need that."


Or even you can open another open-letter thread, Dr rat!




The custom of speaking is the original and only just standard of any language. Joseph Priestly- Rudiments of EG, 1761.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.