Posted by Michael W. Pearson on September 23, 2002 05:18:44 UTC


Hi Aaron and Hardeep

However, what I posted was as official as any you posted, since I quoted fairly and named the sense in which I was using the term. That is the same as defining the term officially.

My definition of avatar was the MOST pertinent because it pertained to what I had written and was being asked to explain ...

The dictionary I used was Webster's New World Dictionary, 1966 edition.

Further context:
Dictionaries are written for the entire language.
Some questions arise for which future editions may add to the meanings. If ideas are well-founded, as mine are, they sometimes linger long enough to find their way into the conversations and literature read by dictionary makers.
Dictionary-makers are trendsetters in the sense that they are the arbiters of language, but I don't think they reserve to themselves the exclusive right to attach meanings to words.

Since no religion properly extends the topic for which I employed the term "avatar" to attempt to answer questions which a scientifically literate,
21st century thinker might ask,
I have the right to use the term in context to do that -- even before the dictionary does so -- especially if I am willing to hang around and explain it...which I am.
And include typos.

• ok.. watever u say.. - n_dhot - September 27, 2002 - 08:44 UTC
  • Really! I must be careful and choose carefully! - occupant - September 28, 2002 - 07:37 UTC
• I sense... - n_dhot - September 28, 2002 - 10:57 UTC
  • Kona Ttupe Noa Soe micana Haha - occupant - September 28, 2002 - 15:32 UTC
    • I cant make heads or tails - n_dhot - September 29, 2002 - 11:05 UTC
      • By the way - n_dhot - September 29, 2002 - 11:20 UTC