The Order of Things......

[worm]

So Stephen Fry is wrong and you're right. You know everything, and Fry is shit. OK.

[worm]

Except of course nothing about "dia" means "two".

[eFestivals]

I've already explained eight or nine times how one person can put forward a dialogue. They would be the author of the dialogue though, not one of the people having it.

You'd have a point if that was what was being referred to.

You said previously that I've mis-understood Fry's context, without you knowing the context that Fry has used. I guess you're using telepathy ... or - just perhaps - you're winging it.

And the right answer is ....? You're winging it. And as wrongly as ever.

[eFestivals]

Indeed. It means the interaction between two points. Duo means two, from which dia is derived.

Really? That would be mightily clever, seeing that "dia" is from the Greek, and "duo" is from the later-dated latin.

But you're not winging it, oh no.

[worm]

You'd have a point if that was what was being referred to.

[worm]

Really? That would be mightily clever, seeing that "dia" is from the Greek, and "duo" is from the later-dated latin.

Edited April 5, 2011 by worm

[eFestivals]

Let's put it another way so that we can be clear:

If Fry (or anyone for that matter) is saying that a dialogue is not necessarily a narrative formed from an interaction between two or more narrative positions then he's wrong.

My assumption is that he hasn't said anything of the sort because he's an author and should know this. If he has, then yes, he's wrong.

yeah, Stephen Fry knows nothing. When he wants to know something he gives you a call. That Cambridge education was wasted on him,

while your own education at a lowly uni was of the highest order.

And of course, the fact that you've given varying and contradicting explanations is something which should be ignored, because you winging it is of no relevance to your display of deep () knowledge.

[eFestivals]

Duo or 'Dyo' is greek for two, coming from the exact same Italic vocabulary as the Latin term. -di is the prefix for two affirmed as one, just as -dia is the prefix for two affirmed as seperate. Therefore, -di meant the splitting or seperation of a whole (i.e. divide, disntict), while -dia meant the interaction between the two points making it a whole (i.e. dialogue, diagram).

oh, so dialogue is definitively just two now is it?

Shall I ignore the fact that you've also said it's not two? Or shall I point out that you've contradicted yourself yet again, and shown yourself as winging it yet again?

[worm]

yeah, Stephen Fry knows nothing.

[worm]

oh, so dialogue is definitively just two now is it?

[eFestivals]

Yeah, because that's what I've said. Idiot. Absolutely nothing contradictory about what I've said Chief.

For you to know if nothing was contradictory or not you'd have to know what Fry said. Do you?

So do tell me.

[eFestivals]

Diagram refers to thing that exists between the points, not the number of points.

Do they really? That's pretty clever, as words can be a diagram, and there's no points with words.

It isn't two. It's derived from two (duo), as I've just explained.

Explain wing it all you like.

It doesn't mean "two" or reference "two". It means "across" or "through", with nothing of that referring to or referencing the numbers involved. Worm the wing nut.

[worm]

A brief explanation on how the derivative works for you Neil, as you're clearly struggling:

-dia is derived from two. Unlike its sister -di, which looked at the seperation of one into two, -dia looked at the opposite: how the two formed as one.

However, you can have more than one seperation and more than two things forming a whole. Therefore, -di and -dia may refer to more than one seperation or formation.

What it can't ever do Neil is refer to a unified whole; a singularity.

Edited April 5, 2011 by worm

[worm]

Do they really? That's pretty clever, as words can be a diagram, and there's no points with words.

Edited April 5, 2011 by worm

[worm]

For you to know if nothing was contradictory or not you'd have to know what Fry said.

[eFestivals]

What?

another brilliant chalk up to the wing-nut score. Another demonstration that you don't know what the f**k you're talking about. :lol.:

Given clear evidence before you, you still hark back to your party line. It makes you look a complete tit.

Evidence? It's just you winging it continually - as shown by your constant contradictions of yourself. As you don't know what you're saying or meaning (as shown by those contradictions and inconsistencies), how the f**k do you think that others can?

The tit is the man who is winging it while pretending that he's not. You're so dumb you've probably even started to believe yourself.

[greenfairy43]

diameter - the distance across the same circle twice.

diabetic - two people with kidney problems.

diabolical - two awful things.

diagnose - two examinations.

[eFestivals]

So you're telling me that Fry specifically said that: ''a dialogue is not necessarily a narrative formed from an interaction between two or more narrative positions''.

Firstly, you're a liar who'll say f**king anything but admit you're wrong. Secondly, present this to me.

Fry didn't use those exact words, but that's certainly what was being said.

But why do I need to present this to you....?

1. you've told me that I've taken him wrongly, something you could only know if you knew what he's said. Another wing-nut score.

2. you're so certain of yourself that you couldn't possibly be wrong, could you? So there's nothing you need to know.

[eFestivals]

Sorry for butting in on your dialogues (or is it really a series of monologues?) but Neil, enlighten me?

I was taking the piss out of wing-nut, nothing more.

You've made the mistake of thinking that I have full personal belief in all that I've posted here.

Wing-nut got exposed very early in this thread of being happy to post just about anything from his position of gross ignorance. His gross ignorance is such that he's not yet cottoned on to just how clearly he exposed his ignorance and just how much he wings it.

Edited April 5, 2011 by eFestivals

[worm]

It's just you winging it continually - as shown by your constant contradictions of yourself.

Edited April 5, 2011 by worm

[worm]

Fry didn't use those exact words, but that's certainly what was being said.

[worm]

Oh and get a room you two.

[eFestivals]

Duo means two

No shit sherlock. :

Shame it's of no relevance at all tho, eh?

Dia means the intersection betwen the points of a whole.

Wing-nut.

"dia" means across or through, and f**k all about "the intersection betwen the points of a whole".

Your conclusion is bullshit.

My conclusion is that you'll wing it with absolutely anything. As you've so clearly done here.

[eFestivals]

2. I'm so certain because it's a fact. There's no 'me' about it Neil.

you're so certain it's a fact that you've given fatally contradicting facts.

[worm]

Shame it's of no relevance at all tho, eh?

Edited April 5, 2011 by worm