Waggy the Dog
Senior Member
Yung Wun,
I thought you answered your own...query, but I guess I was wrong. So very wrong. Its very strange how you could put a small clip of an add I bashed not too long ago. I don't know what you are really trying to say, or how it may further this delicious little debate that is occuring, but, I will try hard to understand what is going on with you and your point.
Fëanor,
"let's define elderly...
to 10 year old you are..."
lets break down this wildly offbeat sentence. First of which is, you begin with the phrase, "let's define elderly", which would lead one or anyone to believe that the following set of words is going to be a response to the given topic, so, in this case, you are going to DEFINE the term "ELDERLY". Okay, I am so far on the same page as you.
Herein lies the problem, the phrase which is suppose to be an answer to the above fiasco is neither answered but lacks the certain sentence structure to be comprehended.
The phrase as stands is, "to 10 year old you are". Okay, now, I wonder what you are trying to say. You start with "to", and then branch off into unknown territory. "10 [ten] year [s?] old you are"? Still does nothing for me. The possiblities of this sentence are limitless. But all I can conjure up, concoct if you will, is that you are asking me, "are you 10 years of age?". This would be all good and fine, but then where the devil does the "to" fit in? bit of a puzzle, isn't it? I think so. well, when the time comes for it to be understood, it will be known.
Its kind of like that S&M song by The Velvet Underground which was not understood in its time. Maybe we can say the same thing about this. Hmm, only time will tell.
But I still can't tell you how smart your response sounds. It is so smart, that it seems to extend the boundaries of human knowledge and understand, and in it, a part of us all is revealed