Re: OT: ago
| From: | Harold Ensle <heensle@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Sunday, January 22, 2006, 21:15 |
|---|
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006 09:15:22 +0000, R A Brown <ray@...>
wrote:
>Kris Kowal wrote:
>> Friends,
>[snip]
>>>Nor is 'ago' exactly unique. There are other words that behave in a
>>>similar fashion. Our attention has already been drawn to 'away' as:
>>>He lives three miles away.
>>>She lives far away.
>>
>>
>> However, none of them seem to have that one restriction that it must
>> precede a qualifier like 'I went many years ago'. While 'I went ago'
>> never occurs in idiomatic English,
>
>True - but, following the maxim of my English teacher "By their deeds
>shall ye know them", the uses of 'ago' are the same as those of quite a
>few other words in occurring after a phrase denote time or space. It is
>true that 'ago' cannot be used by itself and in this respect _may be_
>unique, but that is IMHO hardly a criterion for setting up another part
>of speech.
Excuse me if I interrupt the thread here...which by the way...I started.
But I have a few questions about how this list works.
Do people usually read the previous posts in a thread before they
add a new post? Or are they suppose to simply attach a new post
to the nearest unread thread by random selection?
In *this* thread the function of "ago" was already resolved.
Thereafter followed a swarm of posts which ignored the initial findings
in the thread but in fact ended up using many of the same
arguments and examples that were already stated before.
Though, for some reason, they were still...for the most part....
NOT able to come to the reasonable and confident solution that
the thread had already achieved.
This seems most inefficient.
Do the list members each see all of the posts in a thread
or are some posts invisible to some members?
Replies