I have been corrected twice in the sentence
I was not alive, at that point in time.
We were having a discussion involving life in the 1980s, and at some point I said I was not alive so I would not know. Someone corrected me saying the correct way of saying it is I was not born at point in time.
To me it seems perfectly grammatically correct to say I was not alive, for it is a true statement. It seems to me that saying I was not alive means that I was dead before, which then turns it into a philosophical argument.
I was not alive at the point in time.
This seems to be equally valid with I was not born or I did not exist.
Is it just context or it is just the way we say it just because? Am I correct to keep saying I was not alive?
Answer
You might want to remove the comma so that it reads, "I was not alive at that point in time." Other than that, there appears to be nothing grammatically wrong.
The argument is likely a philosophical one at heart, due to the ambiguous definition of when we "become alive," if we inherit the liveliness of our parents, etc.
If you want to avoid didactism and mantra, suggest that you weren't born at that point. A sentence like "I wasn't born yet" does suffice, since you are conveying the same sentiment without giving anyone the ability to inject their philosophy into an argument.
No comments:
Post a Comment