English | German | Russian | Czech
A1

argue English

Meaning argue meaning

What does argue mean?
Definitions in simple English

argue

If you argue with someone, you debate, disagree or talk about your differing ideas. If you argue with someone, you have an argument with them.

argue

(= reason) present reasons and arguments have an argument about something (= indicate) give evidence of The evidence argues for your claim The results indicate the need for more work

Synonyms argue synonyms

What other words have the same or similar meaning as argue?

Topics argue topics

What do people use argue to talk about?

Conjugation argue conjugation

How do you conjugate argue?

argue · verb

Examples argue examples

How do I use argue in a sentence?

Simple sentences

Tom and Mary argue quite often.
Some people argue that technology has negative effects.
Let's not argue anymore.
These tell us that he loved to talk and argue about art, politics and life.
They argue a lot, but for the most part they get along quite well together.
It is no use trying to argue with him.
It is vain to argue with him.
It is vain to argue with them about the problem.
Some couples argue over minor issues.
I don't have time to argue with you; I'm preparing the food.
You'd better not argue with Tom.
Tom didn't want to argue with Mary.
Tom doesn't want to argue with Mary.
Let's not argue for the sake of arguing.
There's no need for us to argue about this.
Don't get upset about small things. Try to think of things like a rich person who can afford not to argue.
They liked to argue about political issues.
Don't argue when you are angry and don't eat when you are full.
People who bring personal details into arguments don't know how to argue.
Some people hate to argue.
Ken always takes his mother's side when his parents argue.
There is no time to argue.
Tom knew better than to argue with Mary.

Movie subtitles

There will be those who, I think, understandably, will argue that we humans should remain hidden in the great galactic tall grasses, because, of course, maybe they're hungry, for example, and would like some hors d'oeuves.
Don't you argue with me. If you want to get your voice back, you are going to have drink my special tea with honey.
Shoot first and argue aftervvards.
I won't argue with you, and I can't tell you all I'd like to in front of Ma.
Come on, don't argue.
He'll argue about it for a moment longer before he lets them in.
Do you mind if we don't argue the point anymore?
Don't argue with me.
Don't argue with me. How did it happen?
Don't argue!
Don't argue with the guests.
Thought you said not to argue with the guests.
It's no good calling me names, because I won't argue with you anymore.
Don't argue with me, Hannah. Into town.
Shoot first and argue afterwards.
All right, don't argue with him.
Don't argue with me, go to see what that man wants!
I don't argue.
I don't like to argue.
We mustn't argue with the lady.
Don't argue with me, Hannah. Into town. Have them cleaned and pressed.
He wanted to argue with Father.
I refuse to argue with a house dick.
Harry, don't argue with me, I've had an idea.
Now, don't argue.
And won't I laugh at Harriet? I won't have to argue with her anymore about dancing.
We'll argue that later.
He'll argue about it for a moment longer before he lets them in. Now's your time. Your jacket's terrible light-colored.
Undo that thing and don't argue!
Don't argue. Take this with you.
Don't argue with me, Hannah.
Don't argue. Inside.
Don't you argue with me.
No time to argue.

News and current affairs

Blair was the first to argue that security is the first freedom.
Drug companies argue that high prices are necessary to fund research and development.
Some European academics tried to argue that there was no need for US-like fiscal transfers, because any desired degree of risk sharing can, in theory, be achieved through financial markets.
Many would argue that this is a positive development.
Some people argue that deterrence does not work in cyberspace, owing to the difficulties of attribution.
But proponents of phasing out access to incandescent bulbs argue that they know better.
But, because the overall value of the euro has to be a balance of the eurozone's north and south, one can argue that 1.4 is within a reasonable range.
Now, one might argue that the dignified pomp of Queen Elizabeth II is preferable to the tawdry grandiosity of Silvio Berlusconi, Madonna, or Cristiano Ronaldo.
Only a constitution, they argue, can restore much needed legitimacy to a political system that is widely perceived as deeply corrupt and inept.
This is easier said than done. Many Europeans will argue that they cannot condone military action without a Security Council mandate.
Now some American neo-conservatives argue that the US should drop its longstanding support for European integration.
Yet some analysts now argue that the US is following in the footsteps of the United Kingdom, the last global hegemon to decline.
In this sense, the US-led international order could outlive America's primacy in power resources, though many others argue that the emergence of new powers portends this order's demise.
But the more their politicians argue over the debt ceiling, the greater the risk that the wiring will become irreparably frayed.
Sure, some might argue that inflation-indexed bonds offer a better and more direct inflation hedge than gold.
Some argue that developed countries cannot come up with such sums, particularly given their current economic challenges.
First, some argue that by interjecting itself into ongoing conflicts, the ICC has impeded efforts to secure peace.
Some argue that an obvious alternative to Arafat is democracy.
Much criticism has focused on the use of these numerical targets and indicators, which, skeptics argue, are misspecified, mismeasured, and divert attention from equally important areas.
Many development economists would argue that significant improvements in governance and political institutions are required before such goals can be achieved.
No one pursuing reasonable goals and who is prepared to compromise can argue that terrorism is his or his group's only option.
Supporters of this view argue that General Stanculescu, unlike President Pinochet, was carrying out orders he could not refuse.
It is possible to argue the economics both ways, but the politics all point in one direction.
Many Europeans will argue that they cannot condone military action without a Security Council mandate.

Are you looking for...?