Link: Copy link
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]OK. This was part of the quoted post by Sonny from "wave runner":[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]This post has been transferred to this thread:[/color]
... I left there a month or so ago. Seems to me to be a rather childish site operated by a few who control and prevent any meaningful discussion. The most heated debate recently seems to center around correcting the spelling and grammar of the "liberals." ...
You can find "well-worded" under "well" in one dictionary, unabridged at that, and under "word" in another dictionary.From his desire to remain obtuse, I gather that Dave has never looked in an unabridged dictionary anywhere for "well-worded." Whether it is found under "well" or "word" makes no difference. If Dave wants to broaden his vocabulary and discard his reputation of ignorance, he will realize that "well-worded" is a legitimate word that I certainly did not invent. Does Dave really believe that words MUST stand alone in the dictionary to be legitimate? How absurd! Is Dave now dictating how words are derived? Many complex or hyphenated, legitimate words are derived from simpler words. Such is the case with "well-worded." I'm a bit surprised that Dave refuses to accept that fact. Is Dave really that obtuse? Perhaps he is. More likely, Dave pretends to be obtuse only to perpetuate his useless argument.
We know that "well-worded" can be found under "word" at dictionary.com. An example of an unabridged dictionary that presents "well-worded" under "well" is The Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition, page 2159.
Don't be so obtuse, Dave.
I simply stated that based on Brother Cruz not posting some of my messages that he may end up denying me input altogether. Perhaps Brother Crump childishly "wishes" to get under my skin and immaturely "wants" me to leave?You mean Sonny "left" because he allowed ONE thread among the many threads at CM to get under his skin? Most people do not like to be corrected. Some retaliate by hurling insults and using smear tactics. Others simply leave to avoid being corrected. Those with strength and fortitude don't allow such things to get under their skin.
Whether "well-worded" exists by itself or not in the dictionary is not the issue. The issue is whether that word exists in the dictionary at all, which it does. Therefore, "well-worded" is not an imaginary word. It is legitimate.You can find "well-worded" under "well" in one dictionary, unabridged at that, and under "word" in another dictionary.
However, you cannot, I repeat, you CANNOT.....find the WHOLE word, "well-worded," by itself anywhere.
But it's me being obtuse?
HA! Life is soooooooooooo good!!!
Keep dancing William, for the piper is calling.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Sonny,I simply stated that based on Brother Cruz not posting some of my messages that he may end up denying me input altogether. Perhaps Brother Crump childishly "wishes" to get under my skin and immaturely "wants" me to leave?
I don't have to "wish" to get under anyone's skin. People who are naturally childish and immature will allow my comments and observations to get under their skin. Perhaps that especially hits close to home with Sonny.I simply stated that based on Brother Cruz not posting some of my messages that he may end up denying me input altogether. Perhaps Brother Crump childishly "wishes" to get under my skin and immaturely "wants" me to leave?
With nearly 160 replies at this moment, this thread has the highest number of replies since the thread entitled "WHAT HAPPENED AT MADISON THIS WEEKThe Timeline (Part X)" was locked in 2006. That thread ended with nearly 280 replies. As long as this present thread remains open and at the rate people are responding, this thread could set a record with the highest number of replies in the history of Concerned Members!Donnie asked me to start a special thread devoted to observations about errors in spelling and grammar--and punctuation. I am happy to comply. Since it seems that posters tend to act negatively whenever they are corrected in any way--whether it's about poor English or faulty theology--this thread at least allows us to post observations of people's English errors without mentioning specific names as such to save them from embarrassment. However, we should at least mention the thread or location wherein the error(s) is/are found and the sentence(s) or phrase(s) involved, along with the appropriate correction(s), so that the poster(s) who made the errors can study them.
Corrections to all errors should always be accompanied by a reference, either printed or online.
This is not a "class" in creative writing.
Let's not get carried away with condemning popular, recognized colloquialisms such as "kinda" and "gotta" and similar words. In fact, "kinda" (meaning "kind of") is a recognized adverb, and "gotta" (meaning "got to" or "have got to") is a recognized verb. Reference: dictionary.com.
I ask that off-topic messages--such as those with an aim to be sarcastic, to insult, and to smear others--not be posted here. Thanks.
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]CM: Original post unedited.[/color]