wouldn't more unobtrusive be sorta like stating your gas tank is more empty than empty?
-- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net) Join the CD PLAYER & DISC Discussions : http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdsound/ -----Original Message----- From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of John Sessoms Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 3:44 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: fa 100mm f2.8 macro or da 77m f1.8 ltd From: eckinator > 2010/4/12 John Sessoms <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com>: >> > From: eckinator >>>> >>> >>>> >>> more unobtrusive >>> >> >>> >> or less obtrusive if you prefer proper english =/ >> > >> > What's improper about "more unobtrusive"? > > In my understanding un- means not, i.e. zero. Thus, more unobtrusive > means less than zero obtrusive. I doubt there is such a thing. It is > like the more perfrect solution. Actually, it means not obtrusive; inconspicuous, unassertive, or reticent. As such, "more" is a suitable modifier. "More" unobtrusive == more inconspicuous, more unassertive or more reticent in addition to indicating a greater degree of "not obtrusiveness." There's no improper English in the construction. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
