dont_do_it_doug. Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Lexicon you are confusing capable with eligible. No, I'm not. I looked at what he said as a clause ('capable of being called up by England') rather than just a word. I know exactly what he meant but I chose to interpret it in a different way, which is easy to do when you write a sentence like that. That clause literally means 'he has the ability or skill to be called up by England' So your original statement is still wrong. It's not wrong because there are different ways what he said can be interpreted. There is nothing you can say that will convince me otherwise, so you may as well just give up. The ways it can be interpreted are defined by the context surely? Without context Stefan could have been saying "he could play for the England national tiddlywinks team if he so wished", which would also be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Lexicon you are confusing capable with eligible. No, I'm not. I looked at what he said as a clause ('capable of being called up by England') rather than just a word. I know exactly what he meant but I chose to interpret it in a different way, which is easy to do when you write a sentence like that. That clause literally means 'he has the ability or skill to be called up by England' So your original statement is still wrong. It's not wrong because there are different ways what he said can be interpreted. There is nothing you can say that will convince me otherwise, so you may as well just give up. Just like Woodytom's opinion on Westwood, put your fingers in your ears and shout "la la la I'm right I'm right la la la" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Lexicon you are confusing capable with eligible. No, I'm not. I looked at what he said as a clause ('capable of being called up by England') rather than just a word. I know exactly what he meant but I chose to interpret it in a different way, which is easy to do when you write a sentence like that. That clause literally means 'he has the ability or skill to be called up by England' So your original statement is still wrong. It's not wrong because there are different ways what he said can be interpreted. There is nothing you can say that will convince me otherwise, so you may as well just give up. The ways it can be interpreted are defined by the context surely? Without context Stefan could have been saying "he could play for the England national tiddlywinks team if he so wished", which would also be true. Yes, exactly - context means a hell of a lot in language. It's obvious what the correct interpretation is but to say that there are no other ways of interpreting it is just plain wrong. The fact is, it wasn't a well crafted sentence in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 You created your own context. By the definition of the word, you're wrong. Making up a context to make yourself doesn't work im afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post BOF Posted August 20, 2015 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted August 20, 2015 The wonderful world of VT, where someone can knowingly play silly buggers by ignoring the context of a conversation in order to be 'right' in their mind. We all know what we're talking about. You're not 'capable' of being called up to the England squad . You're eligible. The way you are choosing to use 'capable' in this conversation has zero relevance and the fact you've said there's nothing we can say to convince you otherwise means we'll just park this one here and get back to talking about Westwood. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Yes, exactly - context means a hell of a lot in language. It's obvious what the correct interpretation is but to say that there are no other ways of interpreting it is just plain wrong. The fact is, it wasn't a well crafted sentence in the first place. Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Lexicon you are confusing capable with eligible. No, I'm not. I looked at what he said as a clause ('capable of being called up by England') rather than just a word. I know exactly what he meant but I chose to interpret it in a different way, which is easy to do when you write a sentence like that. That clause literally means 'he has the ability or skill to be called up by England' So your original statement is still wrong. It's not wrong because there are different ways what he said can be interpreted. There is nothing you can say that will convince me otherwise, so you may as well just give up. The ways it can be interpreted are defined by the context surely? Without context Stefan could have been saying "he could play for the England national tiddlywinks team if he so wished", which would also be true. Yes, exactly - context means a hell of a lot in language. It's obvious what the correct interpretation is but to say that there are no other ways of interpreting it is just plain wrong. The fact is, it wasn't a well crafted sentence in the first place. It is obvious what Gentleman meant, the context is clear, and there are no other ways of interpreting it. It is also obvious what you mean. And you did not misinterpret his post, you simply did not consider what `capable' means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 So, Ashley Westwood . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 So, Ashley Westwood . . . capable player 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post VILLAMARV Posted August 20, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted August 20, 2015 eligible for england I think he's a **** I like him I don't know what he brings to the table He's amazing, best player we have, easily the most consistent consistent? hah, consistantly **** you mean Good pass the other day **** pass the other day average player, ship him out great player sign him up for life youre wrong there mate no youre wrong there about me being wrong there mate dont call me mate, mate. did you look at my pint? did you spill my missus? repeat till the end of his time with us 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 It's also possible that he'll continue to improve, and then we can have rumbles over whether he's great-but-not-world-class-are-you-joking-he's-excellent-but-I-would-never-say-great. This messageboard is truly a limitless mine of self-inflicted masochistic angst for those of us who like that sort of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 The wonderful world of VT, where someone can knowingly play silly buggers by ignoring the context of a conversation in order to be 'right' in their mind. We all know what we're talking about. You're not 'capable' of being called up to the England squad . You're eligible. The way you are choosing to use 'capable' in this conversation has zero relevance and the fact you've said there's nothing we can say to convince you otherwise means we'll just park this one here and get back to talking about Westwood. I'm not ignoring anything and I'm not disputing what the original poster said, other than the fact that it's not a well-crafted sentence. The relevance lies in the debate that there is more than way to interpret what somebody says, that's the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 And I thought I was invovled in some pointless arguments on here. Well played lexicon, this will take some beating. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted August 20, 2015 Moderator Share Posted August 20, 2015 And I thought I was invovled in some pointless arguments on here. Well played lexicon, this will take some beating. Is it a 50/50 chance it'll be beaten? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 You created your own context. By the definition of the word, you're wrong. Making up a context to make yourself doesn't work im afraid. sorry, doesn't work im afraid I'm not ignoring anything and I'm not disputing what the original poster said, other than the fact that it's not a well-crafted sentence. The relevance lies in the debate that there is more than way to interpret what somebody says, that's the point. sorry, not a well crafted sentence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osmark86 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 semantics aside, but is he **** or good is what I wanna know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 semantics aside, but is he **** or good is what I wanna know. Why don't we all watch him super close in the next game and then come here and discuss it. That's bound to clear it up once and for all 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osmark86 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 semantics aside, but is he **** or good is what I wanna know. Why don't we all watch him super close in the next game and then come here and discuss it. That's bound to clear it up once and for all My eyes will be glued on him. time to get factual and all that jazz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delphinho123 Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 semantics aside, but is he **** or good is what I wanna know. Why don't we all watch him super close in the next game and then come here and discuss it. That's bound to clear it up once and for all He won't do anything different to the last 100 or so games he has played for us. It will be a 5.5/10 performance, he'll take it off one full back, give it to the other and maybe, just maybe, he'll get an assist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 And maybe, just maybe we should stop using assists as a criteria to judge him. He does have it in his locker though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts