Neglected positives in the New York Times Magazine.

I find it fitting that Scalia would hate something so obviously right and just.

About these ads

2 Responses to “Neglected positives in the New York Times Magazine.”

  1. wickle Says:

    I’ll make a point of using that word more often.

    Thanks for the tip.

    As a side note … shouldn’t Supreme Court justices have better things to do than nit-pick the language of attorneys?

    Happy New Year, by the way!

  2. Elizabeth Says:

    Yes. And, I say to Scalia: English ain’t Latin! I think it’s lovely that we can impose our own grammatical rules to invent new words where the meaning is sensible, etymology be damned.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: