So why isn't the word used every time then? You must have noticed that sometimes two elements are not preceded by 'both'? Indeed very often it precedes three or more elements - how weird is that? Especially when there was no need to use it in the first place - it just confuses, don't you think? Still trying to disprove I'm a published writer I see? Oh well, if it makes you happy, I don't mind.
I am not trying to "disprove" anything. (And I am willing to take your word for it, that you are a "published writer"--which, really, proves nothing, as regarding my original point.) Yes, "sometimes two elements are not preceded by" the modifier, "both." But if one intends to intensify the matter, there is certainly a difference in degree: "you and your publisher" is certainly not as intense as "both you and your publisher." But getting back to the original point (from which, you have--perhaps intentionally--digressed): You are using "they" (more precisely, the contraction, "they'll) as the equivalent of its antecedent, "anyone." One is plural, whereas the other is singular. Do you not see some political correctness here (which has intruded upon the grammar that we were taught, as children)?
Thank you for the lecture, professor. (I think.) But the metaphor is not really precise: A garden fence, presumably, is owned by one of those neighbors. Are you suggesting that Russia should be recognized as the owner--in practical terms, anyway--of these former "satellite" states?
O death, where is thy sting? Yes, I suppose I do, but is it worth obsessing over? Like I think I pointed out to you - it was a messageboard post, not an effing dissertation?
But whichever party owns the fence, it's still a means of separation, and it's that aspect which is relevant here? I'm afraid I don't know anything about Russian satellites states, so am unable to opine on it.
Actually, I think you are the one "obsessing" over the matter; I have just responded to your (attempted) defense of the matter. But let us put that aside, and get back to the real point: Do you really believe that those countries contiguous to Russia are, essentially, the equivalent of a "garden fence" (i.e. owned by Russia, just as a landowner owns the garden fence)?
Presumably, then, you are quite young, as the former Soviet Union--with all its satellite states--dissolved in 1991. At that time, I was already 43...
Go up 2 posts and read my 107. I can't put it better than that, nor am I going to indulge your need to control by entering into your semantics and word games.
You who? Learn to quote a response when replying to it. As above, simply punch the quote button and edit the quote as you see fit. Then respond to it. DO NOT EXPECT SOMEONE TO RESPOND UNLESS THEY ARE NOTIFIED, WHICH IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU RESPOND IN THE ABOVE FASHION. Yes, I do. With the exception of the Ukraine - that he invaded. Russia is in turmoil and have not even recognized it because the Russians have no sense whatsoever of a market-economy. You don't that sense by changing leaders, and this present case they have had in charge a KGB-guy. What the hell in economic-sense training does one get in the KGB. All you learn is to ask the question Who is the enemy and how do I undermine them? Putin got reelected because he put in jail the one guy that could have taken his place. If the Russians cannot see beyond that manipulation, then they deserve whatever happens to their standard of living. And watch that come crashing down as Europe liberates itself from Russian gas and the world from its oil exports. Any Russian going to Poland or the Czech Republic or Slovakia/Slovenia will see the improvement brought about by a true market-economy that responds to Customer Demand. What you have in Russia today is a country run by a bunch of thugs who, after the break-up of the Russian communism grabbed all the assets they could to create personal fortunes. They now run the country and fear only one man - the guy who can put them in jail in a nano-second. They all learned that when Putin put Khodorkovsky in jail. At the time, in 2003, Khodorkovsky was believed to be the wealthiest man in Russia (with a fortune estimated to be worth $15 billion) and was ranked 16th on Forbes list of billionaires. He stayed in jail until "pardoned" by Putin in 2013, and he skedaddled to Switzerland where he had stashed some of his billions ...
How little some members of PF know of the realities of real politik. Putin, ex-KGB or not, is a lot smarter than any of our so-called leaders - especially May and Macron.
Translation: You simply cannot respond intelligently. Well, I much prefer to interact with people who can respond intelligently. So it would be well, I suppose, to just ignore your future (less-than-intelligent) posts...