Calling forum members by their names?

I’m not sure how requesting evidence for an allegation can be construed as “sniping”.


If I could make a mild response to a related comment in another thread:

If posts consist of “attacks”, and are deleted, how would you know who had deleted them, if it isn’t possible to “find proof for such”?

Either you know who deleted them, and therefore have proof; or you have no proof, and therefore don’t know.

(I should add that I don’t mind your comments, and I hope you’ll continue to express your views; but the lack of logic in this instance was irresistible.)

MrP

I don’t think MrP has ever attacked anybody. And I also don’t think he’s ever written anything vicous, so why do you feel ‘sniped’ or attacked? In fact, I’d say MrP’s posts could serve as a paradigm for civilised communication, don’t you think?

Another sheep joins the fold.

Yes, we all know that you have no problems attacking others.

Have you ever noticed that other forum members don’t usually attack each other? Don’t you think it exceptional that poeple only ever get in trouble with you?

One of the best things about not having many “friends” here is i don’t have to suck up to anyone.

That “usually” is telling.

Most of the people who “have trouble” with me are native-speakers who get p*ssed off when any nonnative questions their “authority”. Nonnatives who have trouble with me are normally those who suck up to native-speakers. I never “have trouble” with Alan, for example and Nessie, Sweetpumpkin, Haihio. Pamela and a few others.

Face it, Ralf, you’re just part of a flock with Mr P-astor as head. Think for yourself sometime, will ya?

People are scared of you, Molly, because they are afraid of being attacked by you.

But being a black sheep is nothing special, Molly.

That would only be a reasonable assumption if all those native speakers accepted that you were non-native.

For instance, you’ve lobbed the odd snippet of entertaining invective my way, from time to time; and I certainly don’t think you’re non-native, as this thread proves.

MrP

Well, I guess it makes it easier for them to assume I’m native. Who the hell wants nonnatives questioning native “authority”, eh?

I would say that native speakers often change or refine their position, in response to non-native questioning.

MrP

On the level of pedagogical grammar, yes, but beyond that…

I think on questions of interpretation too.

MrP

Go think, if it makes you happy.

molly, what are “nonnatives”?

(i’m pronouncing it “NAHN-uh-tihvz”)

Don’t forget the hyphen! Non-natives!

hehe

Why would one need a hypen?

Indeed. Why would one need a hyphen? :wink:

.
.
Hi Tom

I’m not sure whether there is any universal agreement that ‘nonnative’ doesn’t need a hyphen, but you will find it as an unhyphenated adjective in Webster’s. The Cambridge Dictionary, for example, lists many “non-” words (i.e. with hyphen).
.

…because without it your word is ambiguous. What is “nonnative” (non-a-tive)?

With the hyphen you’re clearly saying “someone who is not a native” – non-native.

There are such words in which the hyphen is not necessary, but in this case it really does help IMO.

Okay, Amy, then let’s use it for disambiguation’s sake! Employ the hyphen for peace of mind!

hehe

check it out – here’s one for which the hyphen actually might make an huge difference in meaning:

antifreeze

Antifreeze is a product used to keep engines from freezing.

Meanwhile, anti-freeze is the state of being against “freeze”, whatever that is. lol

“I’m pro-melt.”
“Like, totally. I’m anti-freeze.”

hehe

How about antinative/anti-native, Prez? :wink:

lol