Posted: Mar 21, 2014 1:41 am
by hackenslash
seeker wrote:Why not? It's a discipline that is doing some empirical research about those topics. I'm interested in empirical research.


Well, the problem is that linguistics is a descriptive discipline, and you seem to be looking for authority. Linguists aren't authoritative on what words mean.

TBH, your entire endeavour is a lost cause, because what really defines a word is usage. If you want rigour, linguistics is the wrong place to look. You'd be better off with the philosophers, as long as you can find some that know their arses from their elbows.

What do you mean by "dictating terms of discourse"?


It's a fairly unambiguous phrase. When you enjoined Aggie not to 'add irrelevant noise to the thread', you were attempting to dictate the terms of discourse. This might work for you elsewhere, but when people try it here, I make it my business to ensure that your terms are not met. The terms of discourse are set by the FUA. Your opinion regarding the contributions of others is worth precisely fuck all. Should Aggie wish to respond to your posts with pictures of turds, that is her right and fuck all to do with you.

Hope that's clear.