As a statement about poetry, the bible, mythology or a metaphor; that comment would make sense, and be in the proper context of the expression. If his [the original] comment was something like: I am feeling blue [poetic expression example] which would connote [not literal]; rather than denote [literal] then he, other poster, would have made sense. But the original poster said something literal; even as an attempt at humor; it is a LITERAL statement: HOW ABOUT NUKES IN BF2.Tyferra wrote:
Yes! Nuclear bombs in BF2!
Wait... wait...
...I mean no.
Edit:What?topal63 wrote:
LOLTarasque wrote:
Dont take everything you read literaly.
Now that my friend is a truely ironic (and oxymoronic) statement.
Thank you(!) for being so funny.
1) It's not irony.
2) It is not an oxymoron
3) How is it funny?
NOT literal and read combine to form an oxymoron. To say reading WHAT IS LITERAL is not literal is an ignorant use of the proper expression: taking things [to] literal. Read/write carries nearly the same meaning as the word literal in the context presented and that is subtle compound oxymoronic combination.
That [he/she] whomever would say something stupid to seem smart, now that is IRONIC, and fits the definition of the word. And that of course is funny to me. If [he/she] whomever wishes to revise their idea that this attempt at humor falls in the realm of the ABSURD then I concur - because the absurd is category in which the stupid reside.
Last edited by topal63 (2005-12-30 11:20:27)