[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [New Search]
Eh? Woops! The original person used the word "lacking" in the least-commonly-used sense. Per, who I presume is not a native speaker of English, responded in a manner which indicated that he was parsing the word "lacking" according to one of its more frequently-used definitions. (He was commenting on what the *Bentley* was lacking, which is not what the original poster had meant.) I saw the confusion, and made a quick post w/ the reference. Perhaps I should have responded just to Per with an explanation of the nearly-idiomatic usage. Perhaps I'm the one who's lacking... Regards, -Greg On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Edenfield Justin D CONT BATH wrote: > > Nice way to think of list members who have not seen a Bentley and may not > have realized that it was for only '68-'73. They may have missed an email > or 2 that said that. I know I don't read all the posts. I may read even > less now. I have been meaning to say something the last couple of times you > (Greg) have come back with a smart-a$$ answer, but have held back. If you > are only joking, that's different, but you don't specify and we all know > that "intent" can't be discerned from email. > > --- > Justin > http://edenfieldjd.tripod.com > '95 CBR9 FeRRari red masquerading as a '93 > '84 XR200R RFVC > '71 Type 3 Squareback > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Search old messages on the Web! Visit http://www.vwtype3.org/list/