That's not right. BTQ is replaceable with assumes the question or assumes the argument.
Agreed. Things that are hard to understand should be replaced with things that are easy to understand if the easy things do the job just as well. It's like, uh, the evolution of language.
If we were created by a loving, omnipotent God, why does He allow us to keep having the proscriptivist/descriptivist debate?
Because even God needs to watch something funny once in a while.
Perhaps we need to establish a Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Grammar ... or possibly Language as a whole.
"Which leads me to the question..."
I dunno. It's one of the few philosophy thingies I've ever understood right away, so I'm like Rainman/Wapner about it.
Because even God needs to watch something funny once in a while.
Actually, that explains alot.
If we were created by a loving, omnipotent God, why does He allow us to keep having the proscriptivist/descriptivist debate?
I like Woody Allen's version of this, from an early essay:
"If there is a God then tell me Uncle, why is there poverty . . . and baldness."
Speaking of the evolution of language, I read the phrase "equality and parody evaluations" this morning in an HR context. Which sort of mocks itself, really.
Also, I am rip-roaring mad at my child care center, the lying fuckity-fucks who owe me $170.
Maybe we're just an elaborate reality show for a race of hyperdimensional beings with too much time on their hands (or pseudopods, energy fluxes, whatever).
"Which leads me to the question..."
That works, except that usage of "begs the question" implies that a typical, intelligent reader will come up with the same question. I think.
Maybe, "Which leads us to the question..."?