Coldplay - Higher Power: 10 locations in Seoul. Which have you been to?

If you were throwing a party and the person inviting you said a host of people were going to be there and there were 5, would you feel mislead?

If you said you were bringing a host of reinforcements to the battle and you should up with 5, would the general in charge be happy with you or angry you mislead him?

as you may have noticed based on your own examples, it depends on the context (as to whether its justified or not in the context of this conversation i have no idea and dont particularly care, just pointing that out)

How many times have i cited the dictionary to you only to have you say something about how the dictionary doesn't matter, it's all about how people use words? 

You often cite the dictionary to refer to legal matters, which rely on criminal statute, NOT the dictionary to define what is or is not something.

We're not talking a legal or criminal statute here. We're talking a definition.

Also, notice how you aren't arguing the point, just your past grievance with me? No one uses "host" to describe a quantity of five.

Question Mr. C- Do you as an English teacher, think "host" is the correct usage here? If one of your students used "host" in this case, would you say they correctly used it? If one of your students said "K-pop is popular in a host of countries. It has a diverse global following." and then proceeded to list Japan, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore as this "host of countries" would you let that stand or would you edit hostto several? Be honest.

as you may have noticed based on your own examples, it depends on the context (as to whether its justified or not in the context of this conversation

Under no circumstances in any of my examples or in any conceivable situation would five be considered a host. Especially when the total quantity of countries is 195.

"A host of nations are participating in the World Cup"
"Really? Which ones?"
"USA, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia. Maybe NZ"

"A host of nations are sanctioning Iran."
"Really? How many?"
"USA, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia. Maybe NZ"

"North Korea's passport grants you easy travel to a host of nations"
"Really? How many?"
"Five. Cuba, China, Venezuela, Iran, Sudan,"

"Musicians from a host of countries will be here for our global music festival"
"Really? How many countries?"
"Five. USA, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia. Maybe NZ"

Sorry, but under no circumstances does "host" apply. Augustiner knows he's wrong. He's just playing the whole "I've moved on" game rather than admit his mistake.

To be on the opposite side of an issue of you and LI doesn't make one wrong.  Why are you still trying to argue with me when I've already made it clear I don't consider you any kind of authority on the use of the word host, and I've moved on.  I didn't just start ignoring you on the issue. I kindly let you know I considered the matter closed.  Looks like with you continuing to argue and continuing to get mocked by a whole host of posters (hosters) you fell into the Augustiner trap.

Thank you for admitting your point was indefensible and you have the emotional maturity of a high schooler who does the whole "Oh, I've moved on." rather than admit their mistake. It's pretty clear you know "host" doesn't refer to the quantity you stated.

But I do give you credit for not falling in the DeMart of trap of futilely trying to argue an obviously wrong point rather than admit you're wrong "and let DeMart win" (whatever that means). Instead you just simply packed up shop and ran away. Smarter than 90% of the rest.

Poor Marty, a hostage to the words “host of”.

His host of examples just can’t dig himself out of the hole that he hosts himself in. 

Thank you for admitting your point was indefensible and you have the emotional maturity of a high schooler who does the whole "Oh, I've moved on." rather than admit their mistake. It's pretty clear you know "host" doesn't refer to the quantity you stated.

But I do give you credit for not falling in the DeMart of trap of futilely trying to argue an obviously wrong point rather than admit you're wrong "and let DeMart win" (whatever that means). Instead you just simply packed up shop and ran away. Smarter than 90% of the rest.

That's awesome.  You are so insecure you need to try and twist my words of dismissal towards your wonky argument into an acknowledgement of defeat.  Even though you know that's not what I said, does it actually soothe your fragile ego to say that?  Host absolutely fit in all the examples I used it in.  I've seen your argument and it didn't sway me.  I'm not going to keep having the same discussion.  My ego doesn't need to.  But, NGL, it is fun watching you not willing to let it go and have other posters reference it at your expense.  That's your choice bud.  Because of your oversized short man syndrome, you view this site as a contest.  You're the only one in a race of your own making.  I do feel for you, but you're the one who makes the choice to continue arguing. 

Again, for the record, I in no way feel swayed by your argument.  I know that you're just doing it because admitting you were wrong would lead to tears, but I can't continue to accommodate and entertain your needs here.  Your argument didn't persuade me.  An adult reaction is to walk away from the argument.  Please try and do the adult thing here.  Or don't.  I guess I don't really care. 

Sorry, but under no circumstances does "host" apply. Augustiner knows he's wrong. He's just playing the whole "I've moved on" game rather than admit his mistake.

who cares? like what does it matter whether he was right/wrong about the usage of the word host lol

Poor Marty, a hostage to the words “host of”.

His host of examples just can’t dig himself out of the hole that he hosts himself in. 

He's gotta hoist himself outta the host hostage hole p(h)osthaste!

Poor Mr.DeMartino. These comments are all positively... host-ile.   

You often cite the dictionary to refer to legal matters, which rely on criminal statute, NOT the dictionary to define what is or is not something.

We're not talking a legal or criminal statute here. We're talking a definition.

Also, notice how you aren't arguing the point, just your past grievance with me? No one uses "host" to describe a quantity of five.

Question Mr. C- Do you as an English teacher, think "host" is the correct usage here? If one of your students used "host" in this case, would you say they correctly used it? If one of your students said "K-pop is popular in a host of countries. It has a diverse global following." and then proceeded to list Japan, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore as this "host of countries" would you let that stand or would you edit hostto several? Be honest.
Under no circumstances in any of my examples or in any conceivable situation would five be considered a host. Especially when the total quantity of countries is 195.

"A host of nations are participating in the World Cup"
"Really? Which ones?"
"USA, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia. Maybe NZ"

"A host of nations are sanctioning Iran."
"Really? How many?"
"USA, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia. Maybe NZ"

"North Korea's passport grants you easy travel to a host of nations"
"Really? How many?"
"Five. Cuba, China, Venezuela, Iran, Sudan,"

"Musicians from a host of countries will be here for our global music festival"
"Really? How many countries?"
"Five. USA, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia. Maybe NZ"

Sorry, but under no circumstances does "host" apply. Augustiner knows he's wrong. He's just playing the whole "I've moved on" game rather than admit his mistake.

That's a whole host of verbiage from DeBrandolintino.  It's almost a plague.

I went to a powerbottom party hosted by Steelie back in 2012.

Meh. I've had better.

I went to a powerbottom party hosted by Steelie back in 2012.

Nothing could top it.

Ok, here is where I first used "host." 

I'm with Hangook on this one.    English language music doesn't come from one country.  Korea used to solely play KOREAN hits.  A place in Canada would play music from a host of other countries.  Not sure how you missed his point.  You also have had Latino music playing in Canada and especially the states in mainstream places for decades.

Scanning the DMart post Mr. C included above I notice DMart is fixated on the number five as part of his argument.  But, you can see I didn't mention a number.  As I have mentioned I generally don't read through all of a DMart post because the amount of garbage, but it would seem that the person who has decided five was the number they had to argue against, was in fact, Martino himself.  Up above I never mentioned a number.  The only time I gave an example of a partial list of countries was when Martino somehow (I'm sure by honest mistake) switched the argument from talking about a shop playing music from one country to playing music in one language.  I pointed out that even in that case you'd still here language from a host of countries.  Obviously, the English speaking ones and the ones that put out music in English.  Think Sweden, Norway, and Germany to name a few. 

Martino, this whole time you've been arguing against one of your own false examples?  It can't get any better than that.  You post so much, and so much of it is just made up off the top of your head that you actually forgot who said what and started to argue against yourself.  I love it!

Ok, here is where I first used "host." 

I'm with Hangook on this one.    English language music doesn't come from one country.  Korea used to solely play KOREAN hits.  A place in Canada would play music from a host of other countries.  Not sure how you missed his point.  You also have had Latino music playing in Canada and especially the states in mainstream places for decades.

Scanning the DMart post Mr. C included above

That's more than I did!  Not one single solitary Bandolineutrino did I parse.

That's more than I did!  Not one single solitary Bandolineutrino did I parse.

And you'll live a longer healthier life for it. 

That's awesome.  You are so insecure you need to try and twist my words of dismissal towards your wonky argument into an acknowledgement of defeat.  Even though you know that's not what I said, does it actually soothe your fragile ego to say that?  Host absolutely fit in all the examples I used it in.  I've seen your argument and it didn't sway me.  I'm not going to keep having the same discussion.  My ego doesn't need to.  But, NGL, it is fun watching you not willing to let it go and have other posters reference it at your expense.  That's your choice bud.  Because of your oversized short man syndrome, you view this site as a contest.  You're the only one in a race of your own making.  I do feel for you, but you're the one who makes the choice to continue arguing. 

Dude, I was at least arguing a point. A pedantic one, but a point nonetheless.

You're just making it personal. And by the looks of things, sounds like you're projecting a bit.

This is just embarrassing for Marty now. A host of posters have called him out for avoiding the issue. His host of excuses and attempts to re-write the original argument is just sad.

Marty, you made a big mistake, admit it, and move on.

Scanning the DMart post Mr. C included above I notice DMart is fixated on the number five as part of his argument.  But, you can see I didn't mention a number.  As I have mentioned I generally don't read through all of a DMart post because the amount of garbage, but it would seem that the person who has decided five was the number they had to argue against, was in fact, Martino himself.

Well the number five is based off of this and given that there is no big SA star and NZ only has Lorde...

English speaking countries include Canada, U.S., Ireland, U.K., South Africa, Australia and N.Z.  That is a HOST of countries. 

Anyways for the benefit of the simple-minded among us I shall condense things into a list-
1. Hangook's claim that there wasn't Western music in stores in 2012 is ridiculous. It was not uncommon to hear, at that time, generic western pop, oldies (aka 'pop song') or coffee shop music. Now, Korean music would significantly outweigh it, but it was there in a noticeable degree, which basically means Korea plays music from as many countries as back home, plus 1.
2. IT IS KOREA. They can play whatever they damn well please.  And if they want to play Korean music, who f*cking cares? Are they supposed to choose their music to make YOU happy?
3. We do the same thing back home- You walk into a normal store in the U.S., you're getting bland muzak or English-language generic pop.
4. Calling a store the music from the English-speaking countries as an example of diversity and open-mindedness vs. Korea is ridiculous. It's not even diverse by European standards, let alone global one. It's also an apples-to-oranges comparison in the case of Korea.
5. This "host" of countries is not different languages, which is what the real distinction is. Would you say Korea stores were playing music from a host of different countries if it included a few Kpop-style groups singing in Korean from China, Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore? No, you wouldn't. Apply the same standard.

Poor Mr.DeMartino. These comments are all positively... host-ile.   

 

Nothing could top it.

We'll be switching things up for 2022. Gotta be a good host.

This is just embarrassing for Marty now. A host of posters have called him out for avoiding the issue. His host of excuses and attempts to re-write the original argument is just sad.

What error did I make? First, I addressed hangook77's point. Then Augustiner made the disingenuous claim that music from a host of other countries is played back home.

Lets leave aside the definition of "host" (which I'm 100% right on btw and you know it, but just don't want to admit it), lets go with "several" or "some" and look at his point. As I said, it is still a bad point for the reasons above, but to restate

1. It's an apples and oranges comparison and the standard that is being granted for diversity here- That English language music from other countries counts as "diversity" back home, would not be granted to Korea if say, some K-pop groups were from China or Japan or Taiwan or Hong Kong and they sang in Korean. If I tried to claim that a "host" of other countries were present and then cited that as evidence of Korea's musical diversity, I'd be ridiculed and rightly so.
2. But lets ignore that, even so it's not like Western music was some unheard of thing back in 2008-2012. You wouldn't stop and call up people and be like "Dude, Holy sh*t I'm in E-Mart/Dunkin/H&M/GS25 and they're actually playing Western pop music!!!!" Why? Because it wasn't that rare.

And you know what this means- If Korea was playing the same stuff you'd hear back home PLUS local music, that means THEY were more diverse with their musical selection than us.

What error did I make? First, I addressed hangook77's point. Then Augustiner made the disingenuous claim that music from a host of other countries is played back home.

Lets leave aside the definition of "host" (which I'm 100% right on btw and you know it, but just don't want to admit it), lets go with "several" or "some" and look at his point. As I said, it is still a bad point for the reasons above, but to restate

You have been arguing using the false quotations you created in that post above as the basis for your argument. You tried to imply I said them but they’re YOUR words.  How can you deny that?  You’re trying to win an argument against yourself. 

And, help me out here, when I make a claim about the music back home, why do you feel you can speak to that whatsoever?  You grew up in Toronto?  Again, no one considers you an authority on anything. You have no basis to claim I was being disingenuous at all.  Music from a host of countries and artists was and is played.  Deal with it. 

And I like you how you say let’s forget about the meaning of host, but your pettiness needs to feel you’ve won so you can’t actually move past it.  I was correct. You attributed fake quotations to me.  I’d say quit while you’re ahead but you’re so far behind on this one.  You lied about what I wrote, and then started to believe your own lies.  It’s all there for anyone to go through if they’re a glutton for punishment. And as usual I only read the first two paragraphs. Once you start to go on it becomes difficult for people to wade through.