John Barnett MVP wrote (in news:eXzAlyS$GHA.3584@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl):
> Alec S. wrote (in news:ebzWPJK$GHA.3352@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl):
> > Ted Zieglar wrote (in news:uudrkDJ$GHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl):
> > > John Barnett MVP wrote (in news:e0kfpzF$GHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl):
> > > > I've used this invaluable application for years now and am very pleased
with it.
> > >
> > > Not to be picky, of course, but 2004 to 2006 does technically count as
"years".
> >
> > Yes, technically. But, there's a connotation to the term.
>
> Not from my point of view there isn't.
Actually the connotation is *specifically* from your point of view. You said
it.
> The point i was making is that 'i've used it for a long time and can recommend
it.'
Exactly. Technically, "years" means two or more so in this case it
/technically/ applies. However when people say "for year", they don't usually
mean "for two or more years", but rahter "for a long time"/"for many, many
years". People don't usually say "for years" when they mean only two, in that
case they would say "for a couple of years". You said "for years" to indicate a
feeling of a long time, not to mean specifically two or more.
--
Alec S.
news/alec->synetech/cjb/net
>> Stay informed about: clearing web history 
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
