Oh dear Lord. If only I could take back that erroneous apostrophe. On Mon Feb 1 10:58 , Evan Read <eread@xxxxxxxxxxxx> sent: >When do American's mix up the words fact and opinion? Could you use them in >sentences with their American meanings? > >Thanks. > >Evan. > >On Mon Feb 1 12:52 , 'Geoffrey Marnell' geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> sent: > >.. >>As for your US correspondents who mix up the meanings >>of "fact" and "opinion", well, there will always be people who use language >>unconventionally (deliberately or through ignorance). They're not, though, >>using >>language incorrectly. They are simply not using it as the majority of English >>speakers use it, at present. It's much like "regular" and "frequent". These >>were >>once distinct words. Now there is a such a critical mass of folk using >>"regular" >>to mean "frequent" that the words are in transition, and best avoided until a >>single strong primary meaning re-appears. Maybe "fact" will mean "opinion" in >>of "theorum" in his latest book. A useful little word. I hope it takes >>off. >>Cheers >>Geoffrey >>Marnell >>Principal >>Consultant >>Abelard Consulting Pty >>Ltd >>T: +61 3 9596 >>3456 >>F: +61 3 9596 >>3625 >>W: www.abelard.com.au >>Skype: >>geoffrey.marnell >> >> >> >>From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>[austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx','','','')">austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> On Behalf Of Christine >>Kent >>Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 12:03 PM >>To: >>austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>Subject: atw: Re: Correct usage conundrum: >>"Match to" vs "Match with" >> >> >> >> >>So >>can we now use alternate instead of alternative? >>I >>which result in a degradation of the language and the nuances we can express >>using language. >>I >>have just had an argument on an American based forum where I have tried to >>explain that opinion is opinion and fact is fact, as most on the forum do not >>the language, because some cannot differentiate between fact and opinion. >>divergent ideas are openly discussed, and abuse where people are insulted for >>intellectual debate is now seen as personal abuse? >>Perhaps >>we should have an unwritten rule that we adapt the language any which way we >>so who is the arbiter of loss of meaning and subtlety? >>Christine >> > > >************************************************** >To view the austechwriter archives, go to >www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter > >To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with >"unsubscribe" in the Subject field (without quotes). > >To manage your subscription (e.g., set and unset DIGEST and VACATION modes) go >to www.freelists.org/list/austechwriter > >To contact the list administrator, send a message to >austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >************************************************** >) ************************************************** To view the austechwriter archives, go to www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the Subject field (without quotes). To manage your subscription (e.g., set and unset DIGEST and VACATION modes) go to www.freelists.org/list/austechwriter To contact the list administrator, send a message to austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **************************************************