BG> anything by Burroughs, Verne, or H G Wells is eminently
BG> readable, as they all had wonderfully prosaic styles.
BL>                                       ^^^^^^^
BL> ROFL!!! Either you are being very sly, or
BL> you need to look up the meaning of "prosaic".

BG> I was actually quite serious, and was just about to tell
BG> you to go and fuck yourself, but decided to look it up
BG> just in case. And bugger me, it has an alternative meaning...

BG> Prosaic adj. 1. commonplace or dull, matter-of-fact or unimaginative.
BG>              2. having the character or spirit of prose as opposed to
BG>                 poetry, as verse or writing.

FM> That's not actually 2 meanings, it's 2 interpretations of
FM> one meaning - unimaginative (etc) like prose, cf poetry.
FM> (Although I've seen some pretty unimaginative poetry :-))

BG> Dunno, that's not the way I'd read definition #1 at all.

Yeah, he has had a massive brain fart on that one.

BG> If they meant "like prose", they should have said so, the whole
BG> point being that I don't find prose unimaginative or dull at all
BG> (in general; as you say, there is certainly some unimaginative
BG> poetry about). Matter-of-fact just doesn't fit at all though.

Yep, his claim is crap.

BG> In case you wondered, in its original context, mine is definition #2.

FM> In its original context you meant to use the word "prose",
not "prosaic".

Thats crap too. It makes no sense, 'anything by blah blah
is wonderfully prosey'. Makes no sense to say that Frank.

You just fucked up completely what 'prosaic' means
and wont admit it and are faking away like mad |-)

BG> Let's just say that I mean "prose" (and still do) in
BG> its adjectival form.  As in "prose-like", for example.

No thank, still makes no sense to use the form of words you did.
You could certainly say that those all have wonderful styles, and
add some adjective describing in what way they are wonderful. But
it makes no sense at all to say they are prose, we already know that.

BG> Not my fault if the Macquarie and COD are wrong. Indeed,
BG> I'd be interested to know what your COD has to say about that.

It says you are faking and convincing no one.

BG> So you're saying that I can't describe the works of the likes of
BG> Wells, Verne, Dickens etc as "prosaic", although
"prose-like" is OK?

Yeah, he has fucked that up. Hi Dave.

BG> If so, I shall do a Rod, thumb my nose at convention,
BG> and do it anyway.  :)

Ah, but you were faking away like mad trying to claim that you
were using an accepted dictionary definition, just didnt realise
there were two different ones. Pity you werent using either.

Notice poor old Bob has gone back into his rat hole |-)

--- PQWK202