Page 1 of 2

Ambiguity

Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:31 pm
by Pe├▒a Oxford United
Ambivalence.

Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:08 pm
by Snake
Hi Ed, and it's nice to see you back on OUFC's best Internet forum, but what exactly is your point?

Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:07 pm
by A-Ro
Anarchy?

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:07 am
by SmileyMan
the news post has &quotabiguity&quot (something liable to more than one interpretation) where it should probably have had &quotambivalence&quot (a state of uncertainty or indeciciveness - indifference)

I would have pointed it out, but I a) appreciate RO too much, and b) am not a sad pedant

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:50 am
by Matt D
i thought POU's ambivalence was entirely unambiguious.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:30 am
by Mally
I think the ambiguity of the posting is in the writers statement of ambivalence at the same time as declaring himself to be entirely disenchanted.

Being simultaneously ambivalent and disenchanted is an ambiguous position and would suggest that neither is the true state of affairs.

I would additionally affirm that agitated is apparently an appropriate and authentic approximate assessment apropos the aforementioned ascribed announcement.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:32 am
by Mally
I forgot to say that this has to be taken in the context of being after Altrincham.

Re: Ambiguity

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 10:36 am
by boris
&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:Ambivalence.
I concur.

Report has been duly amended.

Nothing wrong with pedantry.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:20 pm
by Pe├▒a Oxford United
&quotMally&quot wrote:I think the ambiguity of the posting is in the writers statement of ambivalence at the same time as declaring himself to be entirely disenchanted.
There is an apostrophe in &quotwriter's&quot.

Re:

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:47 pm
by Ancient Colin
&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote: There is an apostrophe in &quotwriter's&quot.
Strictly, ' there should be an apostrophe in &quotwriter's&quot ' as, evidently, there wasn't an apostrophe in Mally's original text.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 6:54 pm
by Pe├▒a Oxford United
I considered expressing myself in that way and chose not to because it was a little ambiguous, whereas my formulation is not.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:47 pm
by Ancient Colin
I suppose that this would balance on the difference between a normative and a positive statement. The statement
&quot there is an apostrophe in 'it's &quot
is correct in a positive sense. Its validity as a normative statement would depend on context.

Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:43 pm
by Hog
Bloody academics

It gets worse

Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:42 am
by Pe├▒a Oxford United
Should United beat the Shots, it will set another club record for an unbeaten run in the league in one season.
It will indeed, but such a run will surely also be created if the match is drawn.

Posted: Sat Oct 21, 2006 11:48 am
by Sideshow Rob
Very interesting but when was that record set?