|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
A poll for male UFies | by retiqlum2 | 2004-04-12 15:30:32 |
|
*grin* | by oot | 2004-04-12 15:56:51 |
|
Don't forget to add elective castration! | by Surgo | 2004-04-12 15:58:10 |
|
Different body parts | by oot | 2004-04-12 16:00:51 |
|
Actually, it's a generalization. | by Atrahasis | 2004-04-12 16:27:56 |
|
Are you sure? | by oot | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Quite so. | by Atrahasis | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Uh-uh | by oot | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
We could do this all day... | by Atrahasis | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
YOU ARE WRONG. | by Naruki | 2004-04-12 17:38:15 |
|
Well, thanks for caring (; | by Atrahasis | 2004-04-12 17:59:41 |
| You misunderstand me in many things. |
by Naruki |
2004-04-12 18:39:51 |
Castration IS a word, of course. It means to remove the gonads. The gonads are the testes on a man and the ovaries on a woman. What makes you think I "don't think it should be a word"?
My "immediate" dismissal of the Urban Dictionary is based on the fact that it is a joke dictionary - NOT a serious lexicographical work. If you want to refer to it for fun, that is perfectly acceptable. But you would be foolish to attempt to pass it off as a scholarly reference tome.
Your attempt to do just that shows that you are desperate to find support for your weak argument against the actual definition of castration.
And the urban "dictionary" you referenced is clearly NOT professionally edited. I'm surprised you would even have to wonder about that. There might be case for the second one, but it is not to be trusted given the sparsity of the "definition" it gives.
If a word's common usage has a given meaning, it goes into a reputable dictionary with that meaning. That's what makes those things dictionaries. Your attempt to dismiss those professionally edited works as "prescriptive" is both disingenuous and sad. You seem to think that all the reputable dictionary publishers try to impose definitions on the public rather than try to capture the public's definition. That _is_ ignorant of you.
You can claim anything you want, of course, as long as you offer no proof. Claiming that castration has had something to do with the penis since Freud's time is hard to swallow, and until you show some proof it will be ignored as irrelevant to this discussion.
The definition of gonad, as I have shown, is entirely relevant to this discussion. It is the very removal of which that constitutes castration. So take your non sequitur accusation and save it up until you can use it accurately.
And I did not imply that _you_ are ignorant. I was talking about the "common usage" you referred to and "proved" by linking to a joke dictionary. People who misunderstand the real definition, such as the writer of that joke dictionary, ARE ignorant.
If you are one of those people, then you, too, are ignorant. So what? EVERYONE is ignorant of something. For you, one of those things happens to involve understanding of lexicography. I think you'll survive.
You are deliberately misleading yourself by relying on disreputable sources for something that has a clear definition. If you want to remain ignorant in that regard, that's your choice. But I'm not going to let you try to spread such disinformation here without a challenge. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
These just get longer and longer... | by Atrahasis | 2004-04-12 20:26:32 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
