From: Ivor Jones on
"Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9824D29EE13ABadrianachapmanfreeis(a)204.153.244.170
> Ivor Jones (ivor(a)despammed.invalid) gurgled happily,
> sounding much like they were saying :
>
> > > You still haven't said whether you recognise the terms
> > > American, Asian, African or Australian.
>
> > That's not relevant.
>
> It certainly is - because by your logic, there's no such
> thing as an Asian or African, because there's no country
> called Asia or Africa.

I'm not talking about Africa or Asia.

Ivor


From: Ivor Jones on
"Tony Raven" <junk(a)raven-family.com> wrote in message
news:4kp8fsFd7htcU1(a)individual.net
> Ivor Jones wrote on 19/08/2006 20:21 +0100:
> > "Tony Raven" <junk(a)raven-family.com> wrote in message
> > news:4kp56sFd3p9vU1(a)individual.net
> > >
> > > OED: European n.
> > >
> > > B. 1. A native of Europe.
> > >
> > > Ergo you are a European and saying otherwise will not
> > > change the fact.
> >
> > I'm not a native of Europe, there is no such country. I
> > can only be a native of a country, not a continent.
> >
>
> Since a native is "A person born in a specified place,
> region, or country, whether subsequently resident there
> or not " you can be a native of a continent.

You can if you want, I am not.

> Did you know that British soldiers sent to India under
> British rule were officially designated "European" to
> distinguish them from the native troops, not British or
> English?

So what..?

> > > You still haven't said whether you recognise the terms
> > > American, Asian, African or Australian.
> >
> > That's not relevant.
> >
>
> Well surely if you deny the existence of Europeans you
> must logically deny the existence of these other
> designations.

They're not relevant.

Ivor


From: Brimstone on
Ivor Jones wrote:
> "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:He6dnWUtrqQf-3rZRVnyig(a)bt.com
>> "Ivor Jones" <ivor(a)despammed.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:4kp6lrFda5s5U1(a)individual.net...
>
> [snip]
>
>> So you know better than the Oxford English Dictionary?
>
> I don't live my life defined by a dictionary.

So that's another "yes" then.


>>>> You still haven't said whether you recognise the terms
>>>> American, Asian, African or Australian.
>>>
>>> That's not relevant.
>>
>> So that's a "yes" then is it?
>
> It's a "not relevant"

But the question is very relevant.


From: Brimstone on
Ivor Jones wrote:
> "Chris Slade" <uce(a)ftc.gov> wrote in message
> news:4kp7d8Fcf335U1(a)individual.net
>> Ivor Jones wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not a native of Europe, there is no such country. I
>>> can only be a native of a country, not a continent.
>>
>> There's your problem. You simply don't understand simple
>> English. You can be a native of much more than just a
>> country.
>>
>> See e.g. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/native
>
> So you expect me to take notice of a website that anybody can
> modify..?
>>>> You still haven't said whether you recognise the terms
>>>> American, Asian, African or Australian.
>>>
>>> That's not relevant.
>>
>> It might show if you were consistently wrong. I can
>> understand why you might not want to admit that though.
>
> I am not consistently wrong. I am not a European, end of story.

It's everyone's right to be wrong occasionally but to be so strident about
it might lead people to think that one doesn't really know what one is
talking about and doesn't have the courage to admit it.


From: Brimstone on
Ivor Jones wrote:
> "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9824D29EE13ABadrianachapmanfreeis(a)204.153.244.170
>> Ivor Jones (ivor(a)despammed.invalid) gurgled happily,
>> sounding much like they were saying :
>>
>>>> You still haven't said whether you recognise the terms
>>>> American, Asian, African or Australian.
>>
>>> That's not relevant.
>>
>> It certainly is - because by your logic, there's no such
>> thing as an Asian or African, because there's no country
>> called Asia or Africa.
>
> I'm not talking about Africa or Asia.

So you do recognise the term "American"?