lalasticlala:

TheSonOfMark:
[size=14pt] Vanity is a woman's stocktrade.
[/size]

Babe2sure:



Correction: it is stock-in-trade not stocktrade.

Correction: Always use quotation marks to define or compare words. Example: 'stock-in-trade' not 'stocktrade'.

TheSonOfMark:


Correction: [b][Always/b] use quotation marks to [b]define or compare words. Example: 'stock-in-trade' not 'stocktrade'. [/b]

Babe2sure:



Correction: one should always use quotation marks to compare words.
But we cannot always use quotation marks to define words. E.g
A law-breaker is a person who does not obey the law.
You can see that, there is no need for quotation marks in the above definition.

Correction: You were COMPARING the validity of the afore-stated ('stock-in-trade' and 'stocktrade') .You weren't even DEFINING (if you know what defining means). You should have used quotation marks.

TheSonOfMark:

Correction: You were COMPARING the validity of the afore-stated ('stock-in-trade' and 'stocktrade') .You weren't even DEFINING (if you know what defining means). You should have used quotation marks.

Babe2sure:


Correction: You have cleverly deviated from what I was trying to point out to you. I defined Law-breaker, and I pointed out that there will be no need for quotation marks. You said initially that, 'one should always use quotation marks to define words' which is wrong.

Corrections: 1. You conveniently skipped acknowledging the fact that you should have used quotation marks.

2. You also didn't acknowledge the fact that you learnt using an uppercase letter as against a lowercase letter to continue a sentence after a double colon mark from me. Yes, I noticed.

TheSonOfMark:


Corrections: 1. You conveniently skipped acknowledging the fact that you should have used quotation marks.

2. You also didn't acknowledge the fact that you learnt using an uppercase letter as against a lowercase letter to continue a sentence after a double colon mark from me. Yes, I noticed.

Babe2sure:


Corrections: 1. This is a case of pot calling kettle black. I corrected you initially, but you did not acknowledge it. You went straight to telling me I did not put quotation marks.

2. I corrected you that, you should not always put quotation marks when you define words, but you failed to acknowledge it also.

3. Your second accusation is laughable. Not at all. I didn't learn that from you. Who will not know that?

OP, sorry for derailing your thread. I and TheSonOfMark are learning from each other.

Ever heard of the word 'logomachy'? It's what we are engaging in. Admit it: This is more or less a battle of wits and neither of us wants to be seen as ' the vanquished'. You, especially, do not want to lose to a MAN. Which brings us back to my afore-posted comment about vanity. It corroborates my assertion, doesn't it?

TheSonOfMark:


Ever heard of the word 'logomachy'? It's what we are engaging in. Admit it: This is more or less a battle of wits and neither of us wants to be seen as ' the vanquished'. You, especially, do not want to lose to a MAN. Which brings us back to my afore-posted comment about vanity. It corroborates my assertion, doesn't it?