Moderated Using wrong pronouns= violence??

[Hercules56]

I see you didn't read the whole entry....

4. Vehemence or intensity of emotion, behaviour, or language; extreme fervour; passion.
▸ a1393 J. Gower Confessio Amantis (Fairf.) iv. l. 607 (MED) Whi hast thou drede of so good on..in hire is no violence Bot goodlihiede and innocence.

The definition is clear as a supernova. Violence is always a physical act, according to the preeminent English dictionary.

 

[Darat]

The definition is clear as a supernova. Violence is a physical act, according to the preeminent English dictionary.

That was a definition "according to the preeminent English dictionary" that you linked to!

Words can have more than one meaning - the use of violence to refer to topics, to words, to beliefs is as old as its use to mean physical actions. Both were in use back in the 14th century!

Your violence (1546) against the word violence is quite puzzling.

 

[Hercules56]

That was a definition "according to the preeminent English dictionary" that you linked to!

Words can have more than one meaning - the use of violence to refer to topics, to words, to beliefs is as old as its use to mean physical actions. Both were in use back in the 14th century!

Your violence (1546) against the word violence is quite puzzling.

There is no definition of the word "violence" in the OED that does not include a physical act.

 

[Hercules56]

https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/violence

"the use of physical force to harm someone, to damage property, etc."

 

[Darat]

There is no definition of the word "violence" in the OED that does not include a physical act.

Apart from the ones that do you mean. For example:

c. Improper treatment or use of a word or text; misinterpretation; misapplication; alteration of meaning or intention. Also: an instance of this.

And to as it were put the icing on top of the cake, also in the definition you linked to, the phrase "to do violence to"

P1. to do violence to (also †unto): to inflict harm, injury, or damage on; (also) to restrict, constrain, or alter unnaturally; to distort the meaning of.
In early use also with double object.
▸ a1393 J. Gower Confessio Amantis (Fairf.) viii. l. 1937 Appolinus..telleth hem the violence Which the tretour Strangulio And Dionise him hadde do.

I am gobsmacked that you didn't read the link you provided.

 

[Hercules56]

Apart from the ones that do you mean. For example:

c. Improper treatment or use of a word or text; misinterpretation; misapplication; alteration of meaning or intention. Also: an instance of this.

And to as it were put the icing on top of the cake, also in the definition you linked to, the phrase "to do violence to"

P1. to do violence to (also †unto): to inflict harm, injury, or damage on; (also) to restrict, constrain, or alter unnaturally; to distort the meaning of.
In early use also with double object.
▸ a1393 J. Gower Confessio Amantis (Fairf.) viii. l. 1937 Appolinus..telleth hem the violence Which the tretour Strangulio And Dionise him hadde do.

I am gobsmacked that you didn't read the link you provided.

Oxford English Dictionary and the Encyclopedia Britannica both agree, violence against a person or object always involves physical force.

 

[lobosrul5]

There is no definition of the word "violence" in the OED that does not include a physical act.

You are getting into 1984 levels of denial here.

 

[Hercules56]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence

"the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy"

 

[Hercules56]

Yes, so as to reduce interpretation, argument and disagreement, I am sticking with the commonly-held, traditional and indisputable definitions for "violence".

It is a physical act. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the Britannica Dictionary and the Merriam-Webster dictionary. Case closed.

 

[lobosrul5]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence

"the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy"

Why are you excluding their other 3 definitions of the word?

ETA: lol hilariously their 2nd definition fits the student group at CU-Boulders meaning perfectly.

 

[Hercules56]

Why are you excluding their other 3 definitions of the word?

Because they do not pertain to persons or objects.

 

[Darat]

https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/violence

"the use of physical force to harm someone, to damage property, etc."

You need to let Hercules56 know that they were wrong to use the ..premier dictionary on English words, Oxford English Dictionary... they have stated that:

The premier dictionary on English words, Oxford English Dictionary, disagrees.

...snip....

From the link Hercules56 gave us:

Vehemence or intensity of emotion, behaviour, or language; extreme fervour; passion.

 

[Hercules56]

You need to let Hercules56 know that they were wrong to use the ..premier dictionary on English words, Oxford English Dictionary... they have stated that:



From the link Hercules56 gave us:

Vehemence or intensity of emotion, behaviour, or language; extreme fervour; passion.

Those do not pertain to acts upon persons or objects. That is using "violent" as an adjective.

 

[lobosrul5]

Because they do not pertain to persons or objects.

I see you haven't read, or did not understand all of their examples.

 

[Darat]

Those do not pertain to acts upon persons or objects. That is using "violent" as an adjective.

From the article you linked to it says "can also be considered an act of violence" that says nothing about it being an "act upon persons or objects".

 

[Hercules56]

I see you haven't read, or did not understand all of their examples.

Actually yes, I did.

They all define "violence" as a physical act upon a person or object.

They do however use the term "violent" to be an adjective for other things.

But they do not use the term "violence" to mean anything other than a PHYSICAL act upon a person or thing.

 

[Hercules56]

From the article you linked to it says "can also be considered an act of violence" that says nothing about it being an "act upon persons or objects".

Sigh....

They define a "violent" act upon a person or object as something involving physical acts.

 

[Darat]

Those do not pertain to acts upon persons or objects. That is using "violent" as an adjective.

Like I say it's this Hercules56 person you need to argue with - they said that the OED was the "premier dictionary on English words" and provided a link to it. If they are wrong and it's not the "premier dictionary on English words" you should let them know.

 

[Upchurch]

I stand by my earlier statement:

The one, single, solitary use of the word "violence" has a clear context and plenty of people have provided appropriate and widely used definitions for non-physical violence. At this point, suggesting that CU Boulder meant otherwise is merely stubbornness or bad-faith arguments.

QED

 

[Darat]

Sigh....

They define a "violent" act upon a person or object as something involving physical acts.

No they don't. I went and reread the article. You are now simply lying about clearly checked facts.