DaleCooper
Established Member
Read my subsequent posting # 1376.
Which was necessary to clarify your meaning.
Read my subsequent posting # 1376.
I am not interested in the quotes of any American, living or dead,
Pedantry alert!
No dead Americans have said anything to be quoted; they had to be living at the time. 'Now dead' is probably what you meant.
But,
What Americans are neither dead nor alive? The 'living or dead' description is redundant.
The emphasis being only on the word "review", not automatic pay increases.
Americans currently dead, can have quotes made them during their lifetime used.
Indeed there's no automatic increases but in my field entry level roles aren't generally all that well paid but the market rate for someone with 5 years experience is significantly higher than for someone with <1 years experience. If an employer keeps freezing pay every year, they'll find their employee will go elsewhere and that they will have to get a more junior person to replace them, unless they are willing to increase their budget.
You might want to edit that if you're to maintain your position as guardian of the English language.
So how do both you and your employer deal with such a situation in actual financial terms.
It was already edited. Why you feel that someone of Polish heritage should be seen as a guardian of the English Language is beyond me.
but such laziness in the use of the English Language, where people cannot be bothered to use the correct word infuriates me.
Americans currently dead, can have quotes made by them during their lifetime used.
You never know...Currently dead? Is that status liable to change?
Of course people understand the difference between a pay cut and a pay cut in real terms. It's only you that has tried to play semantics, very unsuccessfully I might add.
Of course people understand the difference between a pay cut and a pay cut in real terms. It's only you that has tried to play semantics, very unsuccessfully I might add.
Nothing wrong in highlighting the use of incorrect terminology, though. I refer you to the use of the made statement of an alleged £1bn bribe earlier in the thread which would have made for some interesting cross-bench discussions in a Court of Law when the matter of the Bribery Act 2010 was being used in such a case.
Currently dead? Is that status liable to change? And while they were alive they said or wrote original comments which can quoted by other people.
You never know...
Sigh.
Nothing wrong in highlighting the use of incorrect terminology, though. I refer you to the use of the made statement of an alleged £1bn bribe earlier in the thread which would have made for some interesting cross-bench discussions in a Court of Law when the matter of the Bribery Act 2010 was being used in such a case.
Semantics can be either logical semantics or lexical semantics.
I imagine on the same basis he'd be very happy with 0.0001% increase on any savings he has, as his balance will increase but with inflation much higher than 0.0001% the balance will be decreasing in real times.
Interesting that you keep insisting mentioning the word bribe must imply the Bribery Act 2010 has been broken, despite no evidence to support that claim and evidence having been produced which indicates the word bribe can be used to refer to a legal transaction, even though it's usually used to refer to an illegal transaction. Prior to that act being introduced did the word bribe not exist?
Of course people understand the difference between a pay cut and a pay cut in real terms. It's only you that has tried to play semantics, very unsuccessfully I might add.
Of course people understand the difference between a pay cut and a pay cut in real terms. It's only you that has tried to play semantics, very unsuccessfully I might add.
I'm sure it would . But this is an internet forum , not a Court of Law , hence why it is deemed unnecessary , for someone to get use semantics in such a way
Are you saying that an internet forum is one where expressed preciseness of terminology is deemed to be subservient to the colloquial usage of the English Language?
Are you saying that an internet forum is one where expressed preciseness of terminology is deemed to be subservient to the colloquial usage of the English Language?
Taking the linguistic high ground just exposes you to criticism when your own use of English falls short which is bound to happen at times and would otherwise be ignored.Colloquial, conversational, informal refer to types of speech or to usages not on a formal level. Colloquial is often mistakenly used with a connotation of disapproval, as if it meant vulgar or bad or incorrect usage, whereas it is merely a familiar style used in speaking and writing. Conversational refers to a style used in the oral exchange of ideas, opinions, etc.: an easy conversational style. Informal means without formality,
Colloquial does not equate to imprecise.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/colloquial
Taking the linguistic high ground just exposes you to criticism when your own use of English falls short which is bound to happen at times and would otherwise be ignored.
You have already previously accused me of being a guardian of the English Language, to which I responded in my posting # 1387. I suggest that you read what my response said.
I can only judge from the evidence I see in this forum.
but such laziness in the use of the English Language, where people cannot be bothered to use the correct word infuriates me.
Are you saying that an internet forum is one where expressed preciseness of terminology is deemed to be subservient to the colloquial usage of the English Language?