How can one "see" people becoming alienated if the alienation leads them to not engage with threads or post, isn't that just an assumption then, the whole struggle session took like what 7 threads over the course of two days, I easily ignored all of them, wasn't that hard
lol I understood perfectly what they meant, I was contesting their claim and asking for PROOF, that's why I put "see" in quotation marks because I wanted to know where they had come across these made-up alienated people mad about pronoun struggle sessions
lol I understood perfectly what they meant, I was contesting their claim and asking for PROOF, that’s why I put “see” in quotation marks because I wanted to know where they had come across these made-up alienated people mad about pronoun struggle sessions
How can one “see” people becoming alienated if the alienation leads them to not engage with threads or post
Yes, I took the obvious declarative statement literally, as in they had "seen" people making posts or comments describing their deeply felt alienation over a boring-ass struggle session, and not simply talking out their ass making wild assume-oh I'm sorry "prEdiCtiOns" about shit they're just guessing is happening..somewhere??? You do realize your reading of their comment makes them look dumb af right?
What does that even mean
It means you're gonna get your swamp back, congratulations
You still can’t accept that “I can see [thing]” means “I predict” huh?
If I didn't think their sentence meant "I predict" I wouldn't have called it an assumption, and you still can't accept that regardless of whether it's a prediction, its still a declarative statement about something that will happen, not a "turn of phrase" I was being generous and assuming they had something to BACK UP THEIR DECLARATIVE PREDICTION, but you are right they were just making a baseless conjecture
Uh yes, their prediction can't be confirmed if nobody actually sees the alienation they're predicting taking place, which makes their claim unfalsifiable horseshit, which is why I had assumed they had seen something to back that prediction up, and led to me asking them WHAT WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
Which led to you misunderstanding what the term "turn of phrase" means
Which led to me making a pronoun Faux pas, largely because I confused your pronouns with theirs?
Which led to you revealing you didn't have a childhood since you don't know what Shrek is
Which led to me explaining the basics of ENG 12 to you
Which led to you somehow assuming I hadn't realized they were making a prediction despite the fact I had indeed realized that the whole time, which is why I asked that question in my first comment
Did I miss anything, holy shit what a dumb fuckin thread
Autocorrect "corrects" MY comments when YOU receive them? I highly doubt that, stop fronting you got mad so you read too fast, it's ok happens to the best of us 👍
Shrek wore armor to save the Princess from the sexy Dragon in the movie, you're Shrek, I'm the Dragon and WHOEVER THE FUCK I was responding to originally before you decided to butt in lmao is the gender-neutral princess
Edit: Who the fuck is this third wheel who keeps downvoting along with you, bitch do you know how deep we are in this shit thread, stop following us
I just stated the meaning of the turn of phrase they used because it looked like you didn't know what it meant.
Then you somehow managed
to misgender them twice, when we all have our pronouns right next to our names, in a thread about a fucking pronoun struggle session.
You then argued that "I can see [thing i predict]" isn't a turn of phrase (it is)
Then you accused me of "white knighting" but tried to be cute about it
Does "turn of phrase" mean something different in British land, you literally don't know what the term means, since you confused a declarative statement that used the word "see" as an Intransitive Verb, there is no expression being used, they clearly thought they would literally see (as in the action of seeing regarding the action of reading) a state of alienation as a result of the struggle session
If they used the word "see" as an idiom then their comment is gibberish
Then you somehow managed to misgender them twice,
Yeah I don't know any trans people in real life so this doesn't come easily, I have to think and check before I type, and I got your pronouns stuck in my head instead thanks to your reflexive white knighting
It's not idiomatic, "I can see" is a positive declarative statement using an INTRANSITIVE VERB "see" to lead into another positive declarative statement in the form of a prediction, there's no "turning" because the phrase was already clear, there's no allusion
Neither the Merriam Webster, the Oxford English, nor the Cambridge dictionaries make any indication there needs to be allusion, it just means "a way of saying something"
MW Cambridge
Oxford isn't available online as far as i can tell, but I checked in my physical one
It only means something when used as a synonym for "idiom" which is why I've been disagreeing with you this whole time, THEY did not use an idiom which is why I asked them if they had anything to back up their declarative statement/prediction, then you went CRAZY!!! or as the brits say BONKERS!!! and tried to lop my head off
Well nephew I hope you learned a valuable lesson today
I CAN SEE THING HAPPENING IS A TURN OF PHRASE
YOU SAID IT ISN'T A TURN OF PHRASE
THAT IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN ARGUING
AND YOUR WEIRD DEFLECTIONS INTO MY NON EXISTENT WHITE KNIGHTING THAT I HAVENT BEEN DOING
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
How can one "see" people becoming alienated if the alienation leads them to not engage with threads or post, isn't that just an assumption then, the whole struggle session took like what 7 threads over the course of two days, I easily ignored all of them, wasn't that hard
Y'all sound a little butthurt
It means "i predict with a high degree of certainty"
So in other words, a butthurt assumption based on nothing but hurt feelings
Also you're not 90u9y8gb9t86vytv97g, let them speak on it
I'm telling you what that turn of phrase means and their pronouns are "they" dickhead
The word "see" is a 'turn of phrase' now, since when? And what do their pronouns have to do with anything?
They made a claim about folks getting alienated and I'm asking for proof, why y'all being weird
Edit: THEY
Are you fucking serious
Yeah that was a genuine whoops on my part, see I can own my mistakes, you don't see me getting all resentful and butthurt about it
"I can see [thing i predict will happen]" has been a turn of phrase in english for centuries
That's not a turn of phrase, that's just a declarative sentence, also are you like their significant other or something?
Like damn kiss-ass let them explain it for themself
You didn't know what it meant 20 minutes ago bud
No
It's an incredibly widely used phrase
lol I understood perfectly what they meant, I was contesting their claim and asking for PROOF, that's why I put "see" in quotation marks because I wanted to know where they had come across these made-up alienated people mad about pronoun struggle sessions
Goddamn Shrek in shiny armor over here
Looks like you took it literally to me mate
What does that even mean
Yes, I took the obvious declarative statement literally, as in they had "seen" people making posts or comments describing their deeply felt alienation over a boring-ass struggle session, and not simply talking out their ass making wild assume-oh I'm sorry "prEdiCtiOns" about shit they're just guessing is happening..somewhere??? You do realize your reading of their comment makes them look dumb af right?
It means you're gonna get your swamp back, congratulations
You still can't accept that "I can see [thing]" means "I predict" huh?
That didn't make it any clearer
If I didn't think their sentence meant "I predict" I wouldn't have called it an assumption, and you still can't accept that regardless of whether it's a prediction, its still a declarative statement about something that will happen, not a "turn of phrase" I was being generous and assuming they had something to BACK UP THEIR DECLARATIVE PREDICTION, but you are right they were just making a baseless conjecture
That definitely looks like you thought they meant seeing with their eyeballs
And you still haven't explained the shrek thing
Uh yes, their prediction can't be confirmed if nobody actually sees the alienation they're predicting taking place, which makes their claim unfalsifiable horseshit, which is why I had assumed they had seen something to back that prediction up, and led to me asking them WHAT WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
Which led to you misunderstanding what the term "turn of phrase" means
Which led to me making a pronoun Faux pas, largely because I confused your pronouns with theirs?
Which led to you revealing you didn't have a childhood since you don't know what Shrek is
Which led to me explaining the basics of ENG 12 to you
Which led to you somehow assuming I hadn't realized they were making a prediction despite the fact I had indeed realized that the whole time, which is why I asked that question in my first comment
Did I miss anything, holy shit what a dumb fuckin thread
I know what it is, i don't know wtf you meant by calling me "shrek in tiny armour"
And it is a turn of phrase
Reading comprehension bruh
Autocorrect "bruh" and you still haven't said what it means
Autocorrect "corrects" MY comments when YOU receive them? I highly doubt that, stop fronting you got mad so you read too fast, it's ok happens to the best of us 👍
No you bellend, it autocorrected MY comment when I typed shiny
So you literally don't know what the phrase "Knight in Shining Armor" means? Lol that's even funnier, is that a British thing?
I know what knight in shining armour means, dunno what the fuck shrek has to do with it
Shrek wore armor to save the Princess from the sexy Dragon in the movie, you're Shrek, I'm the Dragon and WHOEVER THE FUCK I was responding to originally before you decided to butt in lmao is the gender-neutral princess
Edit: Who the fuck is this third wheel who keeps downvoting along with you, bitch do you know how deep we are in this shit thread, stop following us
Not "defending them" at any point in this conversation, but ok
Edit: and I'm not downvoting you, except the two misgendering comments up top
This thread is literally on their behalf, that is LOVE bruh and don't you deny it
So there's two of them huh, damn got yourself a Donkey and Puss-y in Boots
I just stated the meaning of the turn of phrase they used because it looked like you didn't know what it meant.
Then you somehow managed to misgender them twice, when we all have our pronouns right next to our names, in a thread about a fucking pronoun struggle session.
You then argued that "I can see [thing i predict]" isn't a turn of phrase (it is)
Then you accused me of "white knighting" but tried to be cute about it
That's it
That's all this thread is
Does "turn of phrase" mean something different in British land, you literally don't know what the term means, since you confused a declarative statement that used the word "see" as an Intransitive Verb, there is no expression being used, they clearly thought they would literally see (as in the action of seeing regarding the action of reading) a state of alienation as a result of the struggle session
If they used the word "see" as an idiom then their comment is gibberish
Yeah I don't know any trans people in real life so this doesn't come easily, I have to think and check before I type, and I got your pronouns stuck in my head instead thanks to your reflexive white knighting
Want me to say it again
"I can see [thing i predict]" is an idiomatic way of saying "i predict [thing i predict]" which is what a turn of phrase is
And i literally have not defended them at all in this entire thread, go back and read it.
It's not idiomatic, "I can see" is a positive declarative statement using an INTRANSITIVE VERB "see" to lead into another positive declarative statement in the form of a prediction, there's no "turning" because the phrase was already clear, there's no allusion
Neither the Merriam Webster, the Oxford English, nor the Cambridge dictionaries make any indication there needs to be allusion, it just means "a way of saying something"
MW
Cambridge
Oxford isn't available online as far as i can tell, but I checked in my physical one
It's almost like the term is devoid of content and only makes sense when used as a synonym for "idiom"
You should both log off for a while.
Never!
Also fuck me, i can barely read this it's so squashed lol
you're right, but at the same time they should keep going because it's hilarious
Heck nah, I'm winning Dad
So you now argue that turn of phrase doesn't mean anything when proven wrong?
Lol
It only means something when used as a synonym for "idiom" which is why I've been disagreeing with you this whole time, THEY did not use an idiom which is why I asked them if they had anything to back up their declarative statement/prediction, then you went CRAZY!!! or as the brits say BONKERS!!! and tried to lop my head off
Well nephew I hope you learned a valuable lesson today
I CAN SEE THING HAPPENING IS A TURN OF PHRASE
YOU SAID IT ISN'T A TURN OF PHRASE
THAT IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN ARGUING
AND YOUR WEIRD DEFLECTIONS INTO MY NON EXISTENT WHITE KNIGHTING THAT I HAVENT BEEN DOING
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
It's a turn of phrase if you have a dumb definition of the term "turn of phrase"
I have a superior definition, which means I win
You can consider school out of session 👍
fuck it
ok