You do know what ‘context’ means, right? That it doesn’t mean ‘what you said’, but rather, well…
So when you accuse me of ‘portraying [your statements] out of context’, you’re accusing me of taking what you said, and not considering what they were said in response to, right?
Because really, I gotta say:
Yeah, that’s what you were responding to. You know, just in case you decide to go edit the earlier post to try to make it not seem like it.
Now you’re claiming that your words should be taken as:
“You know, flapping your arms won’t let you fly to the moon.”
“Yes it will, I can totally get a rocket.”
And that somehow, that shouldn’t be taken as including the claim that ‘Yes it will’ means 'Yes it will [let you fly to the moon].
Because, under normal English construction, your words are taken as:
“Yes it does [get them trained any faster], it actually schools them on how to work with the Market interface [etc].”[1]
As in, the understood object of your initial subject-verb clause is the object of the subject-verb combination in the sentence you’re responding to—as evidenced by you quoting that sentence, in order to single it out for response.
Are you sure I’m the one who needs to learn to read, here? Anyway. 4am here, and I have articles to edit in the morning, so, g’night.
- For the record, this also means that ‘it actually schools…’ etc is taken as expansion and support of 'Yes it does [get them trained any faster], and that the two parts of the sentences are in agreement.