User Comments - Right-Wingnut

Posted on: Rich and Poor

Thanks for the explanation. I think I would say "Buy a unit". You could also say "I live in a block of units" (or a block of flats). An 'apartment' sounds as though it is somewhat larger or perhaps in a high-rise block (my block has only 3 floors), but that is only a gut feeling. Do you have 'bed-sitters' and 'granny flats' in the US?

Posted on: Rich and Poor

The 2-condo buildings sound like what I would normally call a 'duplex'. However all duplex's I've seen were built that way in the first place. Is the entire lot subdivided, or do the grounds become common property?

Also, is subdividing like this just a way for an owner to make a profit? ie. can he get more for selling the subdivisions than he would for selling the whole property?

Posted on: Rich and Poor

What is a condominium? I've heard the word before on TV but assumed it was just an American word interchangeable with 'flat' or 'unit'. It sounds to me as though it belongs on the Periodic Table, but of course then the Americans would spell it condominum.

Posted on: What are you doing?

Have a listen to this Qingwen:

Qingwen 10 - To Finish Something Off

Posted on: Hamsters, Snakes, and Owls

RJ, everything you say makes sense. I only hope that you say this with TWO people in mind. (I don't mean you or richwarm2)

Posted on: Hamsters, Snakes, and Owls

RJ, it is not my wish to create enemies here. I urge you to read carefully through the thread again with the following considerations.

My initial reaction to Tal's sarcasm and humour was a short reply to indicate that I was not going to reply to what I considered as bluster. Did this particular comment make you uncomfortable?

After rejoining the thread 4 days later and BEFORE Tal's next reply, I believe I steered well clear of saying anything that could possible start WW3 - it was all definitions plus comments unrelated to this topic. Please check MY comments from this period and let me know which if any make you uncomfortable.

THEN came Tal's reply. You may not agree with my personal assessment of it, but you cannot deny that it was provocative. Had there been 'name-calling', and if so what had I called him? Was it OK to attack polite conversation between 2 people about things that had nothing to do with him? Was he correct in claiming that he had been baited? I ask you again to make this judgement based on MY comments UP TO THIS TIME.

After Tal's reply, Yes, I went overboard by referring to "smug cleverness combined with vile hatred", but it was not totally without basis. Other than that sentence, is there anything in that post which is incorrect or unwarranted? Or do you believe I should sit idly by while someone rips into me?

Do you really find discomfort in my comments, while seeing nothing wrong with me being called an insecure, egocentric posturer (that's right, the only name-calling in that exchange came from Tal), and in particular do you see nothing wrong with Tal's last comment?

I regret labelling the earlier commenter as a 'hater', as I had been very careful up to that point NOT to 'name-call' (ie. fix a label to s/o); any challenge before this was designed to directly address the words on the page and the tone used.

NOW I will move on.

Posted on: Hamsters, Snakes, and Owls

Actually I was using a bit of artistic licence (BS in other words) by representing how I was a number of years ago. Only the occasional beer remains as part of the habit. I don't think I ever came close to being Onslow. But I wish I had his ability to remain outwardly calm when in the company of a nagging woman.

Anyway, it seems we have another hater in this thread, so its time to move on.

Posted on: Hamsters, Snakes, and Owls

Hi Daniel,

I hope you didn't think that the hate-speech comment was directed at you, but I realise I wasn't particularly clear about that.

I'll have a read of that article when I get the chance.

Posted on: Hamsters, Snakes, and Owls

I DID say "I too distinguish between rats and mice in speech". So I didn't say that the distinction wasn't useful, its just not absolutely necessary.

And clearly I have not rejected the 'natural' language (whatever 'natural' might mean in this context).

My whole point was simply that it is perfectly understandable why the Chinese don't see the necessity to make this distinction. That is all. Its a pity someone felt the need to resort to hate-speech without making an attempt to understand my point in the first place.

Posted on: Carpooling

Is there any difference between 什么的 and 之类的 ?