Yet every native speaker in this off-topic discussion understood his meaning fine. So no, not by any perspective. In this case, only by yours.
Sometimes it’s worth just acknowledging our own limitations and accepting that others actually do know what they are talking about, even if you can’t quite comprehend it, through no fault of your own.
Another appeal to popularity.
Again, you are wrong. The definition can’t be used for the saying, so can’t be used when applying the saying.
Just because you accept that definition in the general sense does not mean it makes sense in that specific context.
You do realize that if you stop replying to it, it will go away…
Please can someone show me when Defend ceased to be a verb please?
Im sure that will end this
lol
Nope. Just the facts above. Every native speaker in this part of the discussion understood him fine.
By definition, that makes your claim that it can’t be used in that context, incorrect.
Nothing popular about it. Just evidence based from above.
That may or may not be so, but the point stands.
Others understood, in context, exactly what I meant.
Which is literally an appeal to popularity.
By definition, it means that your argument is not receivable.
Indeed. It’s just stupid.
Which does not mean that what you wrote made sense in the context you used it.
as I already wrote :
That’s literally what you are claiming, and it’s a polysemy fallacy : using a definition that can’t be used in the context.
Are you sure now you understand the definition of that meme within the context as set on this day, the year of our Lord 2020AD?
It made perfect sense in the context that I used it, as evidenced by the fact that people understood what I wrote and the context it was written in.
The only person who apparently didn’t understand it was you.
No, that’s an appeal to popularity.
I understood it, and therefore told you it’s a polysemy fallacy.
Just to be clear : Just because you are ten people agreeing together does not make you right. You can be ten people wrong.
I told you why your definition can’t be used in that context. All you got was “no we all agree it’s correct”, which is not an argument about its correction, but an appeal to popularity, and you trying to dodge my point with fallacious arguments.
You going to show me where its not a verb or what?
Obviously not, because if you had you wouldn’t be telling me that I can’t use the word defend in the context that I did; a context that was clearly understood by others.
I’ll accept that word defend has different meanings depending on how it’s used, the way in which I used it is apparently acceptable to speakers of English in at least 3 different countries where English is the most prevalent language.
Peer review is an appeal to authority AND popularity, so all science is obviously double BS
appeal to popularity.
BS.
Again, you are dodging my point.
Peer review is not a way to confirm things, but a way to avoid common pitfalls. It does not prevent ALL errors, and was never meant to.
