kupomogli said:
When I said it means perfect, I wasn't describing it's meaning, I was describing its meaning in the way that you used it. I didn't word what I said properly. An uncanny likeness would mean a perfect likeness. "being beyond what is normal or expected." Characters from Mass Effect have uncanny likenesses, as does Jodie Holmes from Beyond Two Souls. While I also know what you're trying to point out as you used the words other definition, you also used poor wording as well. "Their likeness is uncanny and their names are also the same." You broke it into two different statements in the same sentence clearly saying the "likeness" was uncanny. Their likeness is uncanny with the coincidental use of the same name or however you wanted to word it would have been better to get the point across that you meant both the name and how the character looks. I'm not being a grammar nazi or anything like that, especially since I'm not really good at writing either, but I just wanted to point out that you didn't make yourself clear. |
I feel kind of bad arguing with you, but I can't get myself to back off. Sorry, but first of all, uncanny still does not mean a perfect likeness. An uncanny likeness is just as you said, "being beyond what is normal or expected. Secondly, that sentence that you tried to fix would not work the way you suggested. Their names do not bear an uncanny resemblance. Their names are the same. The name Nathan does not have an uncanny resemblance to Nathan. The name Nathan is the same as Nathan.
