Here’s the quote. Note the bold italic text at the end:
Zhuge Liang garrisoned at Yangping (陽平; around present-day Hanzhong, Shaanxi) and ordered Wei Yan to lead the troops east. He left behind only 10,000 men to defend Yangping. Sima Yi led 200,000 troops to attack Zhuge Liang and he took a shortcut, bypassing Wei Yan’s army and arriving at a place 60 li away from Zhuge Liang’s location. Upon inspection, Sima Yi realised that Zhuge Liang’s city was weakly defended. Zhuge Liang knew that Sima Yi was near, so he thought of recalling Wei Yan’s army back to counter Sima Yi, but it was too late already and his men were worried and terrified. Zhuge Liang……
Clearly you just made a mistake and left in a bit of text from the following sentence unintentionally. That’s what I’ve been talking about all this time, not any of the things you’ve been talking about in your replies. I don’t know how to explain it any more clearly.
I left the little bit of text so people knew there was still more to the story….
That’s normal for quotes, to show there’s more, but it’s not relevant to the story.
Clearly you just made a mistake and left in a bit of text from the following sentence unintentionally. That’s what I’ve been talking about all this time.
… no… intentional… and speaking of talking about this entire time…
The rest of the story, as explained multiple times… by the embellished OP story, the wiki article, the article about Liang, and the specific historical account… his renown preceded him, they took his bait, and left. What’s the point of quoting the same shit for the umpteenth time…? The linked article has the information, I’m sorry you can’t be arsed to due a prime effort in your end to get already presented information…. The fuck is wrong with people… seriously….
This never had anything to do with wanting more information, just wondering why you left the dangling name. I’ve never seen anything like that done intentionally before. Thank you for clarifying.
Lmfao, again you show your laziness or at this point frankly pure ineptitude/arrogance to read provided source material, that’s literally how you remove irrelevant information from the end of the quote…. My
Link even talked about this.
I’m gonna just block your trolling ass now. Everyone but you seems to understood how the quote works… You are, just as explained before, making an ass out yourself at this point. Twice now you’ve ignored provided source material. The fuck is wrong with you?
I’ll try to explain again.
Here’s the quote. Note the bold italic text at the end:
Clearly you just made a mistake and left in a bit of text from the following sentence unintentionally. That’s what I’ve been talking about all this time, not any of the things you’ve been talking about in your replies. I don’t know how to explain it any more clearly.
I left the little bit of text so people knew there was still more to the story….
That’s normal for quotes, to show there’s more, but it’s not relevant to the story.
… no… intentional… and speaking of talking about this entire time…
The rest of the story, as explained multiple times… by the embellished OP story, the wiki article, the article about Liang, and the specific historical account… his renown preceded him, they took his bait, and left. What’s the point of quoting the same shit for the umpteenth time…? The linked article has the information, I’m sorry you can’t be arsed to due a prime effort in your end to get already presented information…. The fuck is wrong with people… seriously….
This never had anything to do with wanting more information, just wondering why you left the dangling name. I’ve never seen anything like that done intentionally before. Thank you for clarifying.
It’s normal Lexicon and is well used in articles and other relevant media.
Quite shocking that you’ve never seen this quite normal thing before….
I’m very familiar with that, and that’s not how that works. It still needs to be a complete sentence with the words omitted. You don’t just…
Lmfao, again you show your laziness or at this point frankly pure ineptitude/arrogance to read provided source material, that’s literally how you remove irrelevant information from the end of the quote…. My Link even talked about this.
I’m gonna just block your trolling ass now. Everyone but you seems to understood how the quote works… You are, just as explained before, making an ass out yourself at this point. Twice now you’ve ignored provided source material. The fuck is wrong with you?