Ok to restate my point of view (and I am restating because there seems to be some misconception about what I said, apparently my post was too long to read...
Most of the people jumping in and taking me to task are taking me to task for the wrong reason. They say that create was, strictly speaking, the wrong word to use in this context. They are correct. As I have stated before my interpretation of this comment is that it is on the same level as Bush's waving at Stevie Wonder. That is that some people, if predisposed to do so, can reasonably slam the actor and say that they acted like an idiot. But I also maintain that reasonable people can see *nothing* wrong with what the actor did and not see any reason to slam them at all.
So please, before you see fit to think me an idiot for thinking that the word create can not mean "to bring something into existence which did not exist before" realize that is not my position. I maintain that create can mean that *and* it can also mean "to improve or make better something which did exist before". Strictly speaking this is gramatically incorrect, but I have strong problems with "grammer Nazi's" and you should to
It is still natural language and people can and do use the word this way. I have already posted one example which was not refuted and here's another:
If someone goes out and looks at their backyard treehous and thinks (boy that could use a new wing and a kitchenette) and then goes and adds a new wing and a kitchenette then they could using natural language say that they created a treehouse. They would be gramatically incorrect in doing so, but we should not pretend that we did not know what they meant and that they were an idiot for saying so.
Teal, who knows he should not write anything longer than a paragraph on a forum, but does so anyways because he can't help but think in paragraphs...
