A simple "thank you" would do.

Gentlemen of the Court, I present, Case I for your perusal:-

A: So there was this person I know who selled her house.....
B: Sold.
A: Sorry?
B: Past tense of sell, is sold. Not selled.
A: *sneering look* Well, not everybody can be good at English like you..




I hereby submit this Case to be recorded as exemplary of the stunted mind. "A" has completely ignored the fact that "B" is trying to do "A" a favour by helping his language along the way; which "A" reciprocates by inferring that "B" is attempting to undermine "A". Perhaps tact might have been used by "B" in correcting his comrades tenses; however, as the Case demonstrates, "A" was in the midst of telling a story to "B", and "B" didn't want to cut in too much and interrupt "A"s story. While at the same time, had "B" waited til the end of the story, "A" might have forgotten that he had committed the infraction in the first place.


However, instead of looking at it from "B"s perspective, "A" has taken a small corrective intention to a whole new level of ignorance. Does "A" expect to stay in that range of language capacity? That might explain why he infers to "B" that not everybody can be as good at the language. Does "A" further believe that there is a quota that requires his to stay within his limited language capacity? Hence the usage of "not everybody" in the aforementioned sentence?


There is this breed of society that believes that only in a classroom setting may he learn and be taught. Anyone else trying to do so along the way is considered showing off and out of line. I hope I never become part of that breed. For as far as I am concerned, no matter where the lesson comes from, as long as it carries virtue, truth, and thought, then it is worth at least a gratified word of thanks.