Posted by Lou Pilder on April 28, 2008, at 8:30:23
In reply to Lou's request to Dinah for a rationale » Dinah, posted by Lou Pilder on April 28, 2008, at 8:09:30
> > Well, I don't disagree precisely. But someone has to have the power. Dr. Bob isn't such a terrible choice, considering.
>
> Dinah,
> You wrote,[...someone >has< to have the power...]
> I am unsure as to what you are wanting to mean in that statement. For could not there be a community where one person {does >not< have to have the power}? If you are wanting to mean that there could not be a community where one person does not have the power, could you post here your rationale for such? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
> LouDinah,
I am unsure as to what meaning of the word,{has} is the meaning that you are wanting to mean in the context of your statement in question here. The generally accepted meaning of the word {has} is that it is the present 3(d) singular of {have}
The word {have} could have numerous conotations (citation m-w-have) and I am unsure as to which one you are wanting to mean in the context of your statement here. If you could post here the meaning that you are intending, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
(citation m-w-have)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/have
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:822322
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20080424/msgs/826010.html