Turning The TW200 Into A Street Bike (Mostly) - Page 4

 



Let's take an easily understandable analogy. Fighter aircraft.

Specifically, the Polish PZL11. Primarily designed for air superioity.
Not suitable for air superiority, as it was shot out of the skies in
1939.

You see, words and language are my thing. They are how I earn my living.
I exercise vastly more precision in using them than you do. The English
language is a very exact instrument. If you want to argue specifics, as
you did, you must be prepared to be tripped up by someone who can wield
the instrument better than you can.

Now, yes, your lovely dual-purpose tyres will be better than the
knobblies fitted to your toy motorcycle as standard.

--
BMW K1100LT  Ducati 750SS  Yamaha XT600E  Honda CB400F
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
"What you're proposing to do will involve a lot of time
and hassle for no tangible benefit."

 

On Aug 11, 2:11 pm, totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk (The Older
Gentleman) wrote:
ning to anyone
whose agenda is not just to be an argumentative old grouch.  My Uncle
Jay was right, you definitely are someone who's useless in the
information department since all you like to do is argue about
anything you don't bring up yourself.


itable for air superiority, as it was shot out of the skies in 1939.

Gawd, a horribly weak analogy that has no bearing on the subject at
hand.


guage is a very exact instrument. If you want to argue specifics, as you di=
d, you must be prepared to be tripped up by someone who can wield the instr=
ument better than you can.

The only thing you "exercise" is your self-inflated view of yourself.
And your lame wielding of the "instrument" could easily lead to you
being derided, especially after that weak preceding so-called
"analogy" you spewed forth.  Dictionary definitions....

primarily = "for the most part," therefore the stock knobbies on the
TW200 are designed, "for the most part for off-road use."  An
absolutely TRUE statement without any qualifications and using quite
correct English.

more suitable = "more designed for a particular use," therefore the
stock knobbies on the TW200 are "more designed for the particular use
of off-road riding."  An absolutely TRUE statement without any
qualifications and using quite correct English and also meaning the
exact same thing as the previous definition.

Now you can twist and turn that all you want but they mean ESSENTIALLY
the same thing Mr. Big English Expert so go try your smokescreen of
knowledge on someone else.  You're still a failure here.


And calling it a "toy" motorcycle is just further indication of your
little boy immaturity of being snippity when you're proven to be
wrong.

Bill

 



Specifically, the Polish PZL11. Primarily designed for air
superioity.Not suitable for air superiority, as it was shot out of the
skies in 1939.

No. A perfect one. One that illustrates the difference between 'designed
for' and 'suitable for' perfectly.

I exercise vastly more precision in using them than you do. The English
language is a very exact instrument. If you want to argue specifics, as
you did, you must be prepared to be tripped up by someone who can wield
the instrument better than you can.

Agreed.

Wrong. Which dictionary did you get that from, out of interest?

Are you going to turn into another JS, by the way? Because having not
one but two ranting rattle-throwers in the same month is rare fortune.

--
BMW K1100LT  Ducati 750SS  Yamaha XT600E  Honda CB400F
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
"What you're proposing to do will involve a lot of time
and hassle for no tangible benefit."

 

On Aug 11, 11:29 pm, totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk (The Older
Gentleman) wrote:

Wrong again.  I never said "designed for," I said "PRIMARILY designed
for."  Once again you conveniently fail to include accuracy of
previous posts to futiley enhance your point that continues to fail,
miserably so.



Webster's, not like the dictionary you make up in your head to serve
your purposes of argument.


No, I'm just not going to let you get away with spewing your bullshit
and lies without calling you on the carpet and exposing you for the
phony argumentative asshole you truly are.

Bill

 




Well, that's really, really interesting. You see, I don't know of
dictionaries that actually provide meanings for phrases (groups of
words) unless the actual word in question has different meanings
according to which other words it's placed alongside.

It just struck me that the definition of 'more suitable' came more
from your own brain than from Websters. So I looked up more suitable
on Websters online. And it failed to provide a meaning.

I looked up 'suitable' and got this (http://www.websters-online-
dictionary.org/definition/suitable):

STARTS
Suitable
Adjective

1. Suitable for the desired purpose; "Is this a suitable dress for the
office?".

2. Meant or adapted for an occasion or use; "a tractor suitable (or
fit) for heavy duty"; "not an appropriate (or fit) time

(for flippancy".

3. Appropriate for a condition or occasion; "everything in its proper
place"; "the right man for the job"; "she is not suitable for the
position".

4. Worthy of being chosen especially as a spouse; "the parents found
the girl suitable for their son".
ENDS

'More suitable' and 'more+suitable' failed to score hits. I'd suggest
that 'more designed for a particular use' is your own definition. If
that is indeed the exact definition result you got, perhaps you'd like
to post the link?

If you can't, then I'm afraid it won't reflect well.