From: Damien Broderick (damienb@unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Fri Jun 20 2003 - 19:36:08 MDT
At 02:30 PM 6/20/03 +0100, Steve D wrote:
>Too bad Bill, looks like another battle has been lost. I fear I'll have to
>give up insisting that "aggravate" does not mean "irritate/annoy" as well.
>However I am still fighting the good fight against the confusing of "rebutt"
>with "refute" (a very important distinction) and (vainly I fear) of "flout"
>with "flaunt".
I think you're correct about `aggravate' being lost.
It's truly astonishing how often some politician is said on Oz TV to have
`refuted' some claim by simply denying it.
The stupid solecism that is fingernails down the blackboard to me is
`Begging the question', which we see here a lot as if it meant `Urgently
raising the question' when of course it means the exact opposite: `Blandly
*evading* the question by assuming the truth of some dubious assertion'.
Damien Broderick
[speaking for his ilk]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 19:43:45 MDT