John Power wrote:
Just because a word is used as a colloquialism does not make it correct. The word "ain't" is in the dictionary also and is used as a colloquialism but I bet you wouldn't use it in your resume when applying for any job. Why? Because it is incorrect. The warehouse was burglarized. It was not robbed because warehouses are inanimate objects.
And it's like that in every country in the world, right? Terrific, how interesting.
It is definitively like that in the USA under these circumstances. Our complaintant Gochugogi was specifically talking about the commission of a crime therefore the definition/descriptive word that becomes operative is the one used in the criminal law legal lexicon, hence my correction from robbery to burglary. If the defendant was caught in his case and formal charges were filed by the prosecutor, those formal charges would be burglary not robbery no matter how much the victim (Gochugogi) might protest and insist that he had been robbed therefore the charge filed should be robbery. Again, since we were talking about a specific criminal act, the correct legal word should be used, not the colloquial one. But our complaintant is, for some unknown reason, resisting my efforts to clarify the differing meanings of these 2 words as applied to his specific set of circumstances. Oh well. I am sure neither of us will lose sleep over it.
I again submit, for the record, that if our respected and much loved fellow FMer Gochugogi was applying for a job, he would not say something like "I ain't never been fired for misconduct" in his resume. So much for colloquialisms being perfectly acceptable
John Power wrote:
Just because a word is used as a colloquialism does not make it correct. The word "ain't" is in the dictionary also and is used as a colloquialism but I bet you wouldn't use it in your resume when applying for any job. Why? Because it is incorrect. The warehouse was burglarized. It was not robbed because warehouses are inanimate objects.
Now, back to the boxes.
That's rather contrarian to state that common consensus use of a word is invalid.
Have you ever used the word "awesome" in your life? Hint: It doesn't mean "cool" or "neat".
CanAm wrote:
That's rather contrarian to state that common consensus use of a word is invalid.
Have you ever used the word "awesome" in your life? Hint: It doesn't mean "cool" or "neat".
You apprently did not understand my point. Had he stated "I was at the office Christmas party and someone came up and robbed my drink from me" or in the alternative "I was at the office Christmas party and someone came up and burglarized my drink from me" I would have said nothing because in that instance no legally cognizable crime would have occurred therefore the declarant can use any term he wishes. However, he described an actual criminal act therefore I pointed out the word that should be used to describe this particular criminal act.
miccullen wrote:
Fair enough, we all know it should be called the USAWW.
John Power isn't the first guy in this thread to say "in the US..."
And two guys from the same country arguing about a term doesn't mean they think the web belongs to the that country.
I remember a Brit telling another Brit to stop "whinging", and a bunch of others didn't know what that meant. One of them defined it, and no one claimed it should be the UKWW.
anyone want to burgal a 300 2.8 IS box from me for the low, low (it's so totally a STEEL at this price it'd be almost like your robbing me) price of $200? Yes, that is corect. Now that is cheap. The biggest heist of all time at ONLY $200 dollars four the box.
John Power:
By the way, how does it feel to FINALLY have something that is lusted over
The question may be put differently: "How did you feel when you found something that you thought, you would never have?" It felt GREAT! I could not believe my luck.
mfurman wrote:
The question may be put differently: "How did you feel when you found something that you thought, you would never have?" It felt GREAT! I could not believe my luck.
Well, even if you didn't have one, at least you'd know of another box in Canada, by Burningheart. Should he be offered an appealing trade item, he might be convinced perhaps to part with it.
My quest for the EF 50 f/1.0 box is significantly more difficult. I know of only one in existence, in Italy, by a fellow who is an ardent collector himself, and most certainly wouldn't sell the box without the lens to go with it.
All WTB ads have yielded no results so far.
)
