Le 08/08/2026 |a 14:30, Mitchell Holman a |-crit :
FU2 aue only.
Hibou posted:
FU2 aue only.
OK, that's a step in the right direction, but only a step. please don't imitate Steve Hayes. Answering trolls is not usually a good idea.
OK, that's a step in the right direction, but only a step. please don't imitate Steve Hayes. Answering trolls is not usually a good idea.
athel.cb@gmail.com hat am 08.08.2026 um 16:10 geschrieben:
OK, that's a step in the right direction, but only a step. please
don't imitate Steve Hayes. Answering trolls is not usually a good
idea.
Native English speakers like Athel MUST be right, but I would have
written: "Answering trolls is usually not a good idea."
Is my sentence just as good as Athel's or not? If not, why not?
On 09/08/26 05:50, Silvano wrote:
athel.cb@gmail.com hat am 08.08.2026 um 16:10 geschrieben:
OK, that's a step in the right direction, but only a step. please
don't imitate Steve Hayes. Answering trolls is not usually a good
idea.
Native English speakers like Athel MUST be right, but I would have
written: "Answering trolls is usually not a good idea."
Is my sentence just as good as Athel's or not? If not, why not?
Your version looks logical, it's true, but we native speakers use both >versions with no change in meaning. "Not" is one of those words whose >position in the sentence is not rigidly fixed.
On Sun, 9 Aug 2026 10:49:37 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:
On 09/08/26 05:50, Silvano wrote:
athel.cb@gmail.com hat am 08.08.2026 um 16:10 geschrieben:
OK, that's a step in the right direction, but only a step. please
don't imitate Steve Hayes. Answering trolls is not usually a good
idea.
Native English speakers like Athel MUST be right, but I would have
written: "Answering trolls is usually not a good idea."
Is my sentence just as good as Athel's or not? If not, why not?
Your version looks logical, it's true, but we native speakers use both
versions with no change in meaning. "Not" is one of those words whose
position in the sentence is not rigidly fixed.
Sometimes the 'not' is more logical in one place or another, but
the idiomatic usage need not follow logic. For this sentence, I
offer another choice (with a condescending tone) -
"Usually, answering trolls is not a good idea."
Rich Ulrich hat am 09.08.2026 um 15:10 geschrieben:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2026 10:49:37 +1000, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org>
wrote:
On 09/08/26 05:50, Silvano wrote:
athel.cb@gmail.com hat am 08.08.2026 um 16:10 geschrieben:
OK, that's a step in the right direction, but only a step. please
don't imitate Steve Hayes. Answering trolls is not usually a good
idea.
Native English speakers like Athel MUST be right, but I would have
written: "Answering trolls is usually not a good idea."
Is my sentence just as good as Athel's or not? If not, why not?
Your version looks logical, it's true, but we native speakers use both
versions with no change in meaning. "Not" is one of those words whose
position in the sentence is not rigidly fixed.
Sometimes the 'not' is more logical in one place or another, but
the idiomatic usage need not follow logic. For this sentence, I
offer another choice (with a condescending tone) -
"Usually, answering trolls is not a good idea."
I had thought about your version and I thank you and Peter.
Just for the record: would "Answering trolls is not a good idea,
usually." also be idiomatic or at least acceptable?
The important lesson for me as a foreigner came from Peter:
"Not" is one of those words whose position in the sentence is not
rigidly fixed.
In English. In Italian the position is rigidly fixed: "non |?"
(literally: not is). And in German the negation would be merged with the indefinite article: "keine gute Idee" (a not good idea).
There's the question of split infinitives, if you care about it. Only
some do.
There's the question of split infinitives, if you care about it. Only
some do.
To not care has become the majority view, I believe.
Le 08/08/2026 |a 14:30, Mitchell Holman a |-crit :
-a-a Ahem.
-a-a Refute is a verb, not a noun, "carajou" is right.
'Refute' as a noun has been an alternative to 'refutation' and is still occasionally encountered.
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph? content=the+refutation%2C%28the+refute*40%29&year_start=1600&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3>
It's sense 2 of "refute n. 2" in the OED: "The action or an act of
refuting or disproving a statement, charge, theory, etc.; = refutation
n. 1."
"Keep the quarrel as clean and unmixt as you can, and this will
advantage you much both within, and without, in the peace and firmness
of your minds, and in the refute of your enemies" - Leighton, 1684.
("There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
-a Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.")
FU2 aue only.
Le 08/08/2026 |a 14:30, Mitchell Holman a |-crit :
-a-a Ahem.
-a-a Refute is a verb, not a noun, "carajou" is right.
'Refute' as a noun has been an alternative to 'refutation' and is still occasionally encountered.
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph? content=the+refutation%2C%28the+refute*40%29&year_start=1600&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3>
On 08/08/2026 16:01, Hibou wrote:
'Refute' as a noun has been an alternative to 'refutation' and is still
occasionally encountered.
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=the+refutation%2C%28the+refute*40%29&year_start=1600&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3>
[ASIDE] what is the point of frigging the one of the axes (by a factor
x40 in this case)?
Wouldn't it be easier to accept that it is 'rarely
used' rather than 'occasionally encountered'?
Le 10/08/2026 |a 09:27, occam a |-crit :
On 08/08/2026 16:01, Hibou wrote:
'Refute' as a noun has been an alternative to 'refutation' and is still
occasionally encountered.
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?
content=the+refutation%2C%28the+refute*40%29&year_start=1600&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3>
[ASIDE] what is the point of frigging the one of the axes (by a factor
x40 in this case)?
Readability.
Wouldn't it be easier to accept that it is 'rarely
used' rather than 'occasionally encountered'?
On 10/08/2026 11:24, Hibou wrote:
Le 10/08/2026 |a 09:27, occam a |-crit :
On 08/08/2026 16:01, Hibou wrote:
'Refute' as a noun has been an alternative to 'refutation' and is still >>>> occasionally encountered.
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?
content=the+refutation%2C%28the+refute*40%29&year_start=1600&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3>
[ASIDE] what is the point of frigging the one of the axes (by a factor
x40 in this case)?
Readability.
Deceitful first impression, more like.
If you look at the untampered
curved (below), you realise that *at no point* was 'the refute' more
popular than 'the refutation'.
<https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=the+refutation%2Cthe+refute&year_start=1600&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3>
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (1 / 5) |
| Uptime: | 51:12:27 |
| Calls: | 1,101 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,016 |