Poirot,

"I read it, Mr Shirty. I understood it."

"majestic and sterling rhetorical gobbedlygook ..."contorted and opaque reasoning"

Then only one of the statements is true to you. So were you lying or ignorant?

Squarwk!

SM's run out of seed again.

You prize definition was contorted and opaque. I understand that it's the best you can do, under the circumstances, but some of us prefer conciseness to prolix.

Then again, SM, perhaps we should both stop flapping around on this thread trying to prove which one of us has the sharper beak. It's a waste of time and energy.

I'm sure the writers and editors at Oxford go out of their way to make their definitions contorted and opaque. Perhaps their efforts to go deeper into the commonly accepted meanings of words are wasted and they should settle for the one line "concise" ambiguity that you prefer.

For me (not an English scholar) the definition was as concise as possible without losing meaning, and suspect that you simply didn't understand it.

Feel free to suspect anything you want, SM.

I wasn't criticisng the meaning. I was having a go at your going to such convoluted lengths to prove your point....which, of course, you're entitled to do. And I'm entitled to rib you about it.

(All's fair in love and war on OLO)

Cheers : )

You should be looking at the Macquarie dictionary Gerard. Then you can get the latest definitions based on the government's incorrect usage of words in their rhetoric.

I'm waiting for the new pronunciation, perhaps even a new spelling of hyperbole. Hyperbowl perhaps.