I agree with Jennyber with coming up with more qualifiers and try to overlap in some way with the basic definition of it so that you have somethings in common when considering the ven diagram shown in class today! Good word to choose though and I like the direction you took your simple definition in.
I agree with both Jennyber's and Kenny's opinion, you should figure out more qualifiers. And also, in my opinion, does the word "fag" can only use with "a person"? Can it use on "an animal"? I think that should be in one of your argument.
I would think of more qualifiers such as how they dress, how they act (other than your description of annoying), and their general behavior/mannerisms--what makes them annoying? Also, will you be able to find enough research to prove that they are under 60? Maybe explain why this age is the "boundary" line...
Your word choice makes a good argument. Why are only people under 60 annoying? or do you mean no one older than 60 can be called a fag-- if your definition of it is labeling some one 'annoying'?
I like you word choice and simple definition. But you need more qualifiers. I don't think only people under 60 are annoying. Because by the ages of 60, most people may retire. Some of them have the time of the whole world. They do nothing but on the phone and judge people.
I love this topic. there definently need to be some more qualifiers such as who would you use this word around stranger or friends? I also liked kenny's idea about overlapping with the old definition. and also keep in mind that it was a term in france long before it was over here in the states.
South Park? You're really going to have to anticipate the arguments present in the episode, such as that most people today know this word to be a derogatory term for gay people!
You should throw some more qualifiers in there and you should elaborate on what exactly makes a person 'annoying' and I think you'll be set. This is a very debatable definition
I’m confused to what direction your paper is going to go in. Though your definition is extremely unique and argumentative, I recommend not using the word annoying for that word will need a definition by itself. If you still want to use the word annoying your qualifiers should contain why a fag is annoying.
^^^ I agree^^ I think you have a good start, but I think you can go a little deeper on your definition, i feel like its a little too broad. Also you can get a lot of qualifiers for your definition if you are a little more specific.
You could say how the use of fag could be a negative thing or a positive thing. You could also think of opposing view points. But good start on the definition.
Good simple definition, but you should think of more qualifiers.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jennyber with coming up with more qualifiers and try to overlap in some way with the basic definition of it so that you have somethings in common when considering the ven diagram shown in class today! Good word to choose though and I like the direction you took your simple definition in.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both Jennyber's and Kenny's opinion, you should figure out more qualifiers. And also, in my opinion, does the word "fag" can only use with "a person"? Can it use on "an animal"? I think that should be in one of your argument.
ReplyDeleteI would think of more qualifiers such as how they dress, how they act (other than your description of annoying), and their general behavior/mannerisms--what makes them annoying? Also, will you be able to find enough research to prove that they are under 60? Maybe explain why this age is the "boundary" line...
ReplyDeleteI didn't know that the word fag was describing someone annoying, just describing someone that was gay. This could probably be one of your arguments.
ReplyDeleteGood simple definition. But what makes a person "annoying" in your qualifiers try explaining that .
ReplyDeleteYour word choice makes a good argument. Why are only people under 60 annoying? or do you mean no one older than 60 can be called a fag-- if your definition of it is labeling some one 'annoying'?
ReplyDeleteI like you word choice and simple definition. But you need more qualifiers. I don't think only people under 60 are annoying. Because by the ages of 60, most people may retire. Some of them have the time of the whole world. They do nothing but on the phone and judge people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with others, you need more qualifiers. You need to make an argument here. Be more specific, and you will have a good paper!
ReplyDeleteI love this topic. there definently need to be some more qualifiers such as who would you use this word around stranger or friends? I also liked kenny's idea about overlapping with the old definition. and also keep in mind that it was a term in france long before it was over here in the states.
ReplyDeleteSouth Park? You're really going to have to anticipate the arguments present in the episode, such as that most people today know this word to be a derogatory term for gay people!
ReplyDeleteYou should throw some more qualifiers in there and you should elaborate on what exactly makes a person 'annoying' and I think you'll be set. This is a very debatable definition
ReplyDeleteI’m confused to what direction your paper is going to go in. Though your definition is extremely unique and argumentative, I recommend not using the word annoying for that word will need a definition by itself. If you still want to use the word annoying your qualifiers should contain why a fag is annoying.
ReplyDelete^^^ I agree^^
ReplyDeleteI think you have a good start, but I think you can go a little deeper on your definition, i feel like its a little too broad. Also you can get a lot of qualifiers for your definition if you are a little more specific.
I feel like the definition is just a little bit to simple and you try to think of some more qualifiers. Good luck.
ReplyDeleteyou can argue that because it is broad you are going to need more qualifiers in attracting another person
ReplyDeleteYou could say how the use of fag could be a negative thing or a positive thing. You could also think of opposing view points. But good start on the definition.
ReplyDeleteNeed more qualifiers.
ReplyDelete