Speaking in Latin doesn't automatically make an argument sound 
Nor is it sound to converse with one who does not wish to listen more so than to talk.
Allow me to take a deeper look into what was previously labeled as "
unnecessarily prosaic way of expressing oneself."
If you take into consideration Attersson's overly enthusiastic love for literary art, you may notice certain correlations between what he speaks and how he does.
To raise an obvious example,
"
Ways often show the personality of the practitioner" -- I cannot help but notice, the same is expressed through the chosen style ('way', as Phinehas himself called it), yet about the author, and his written art. It is commonly accepted, in much the same manner as what Attersson came to present, that how one speaks, expresses who they are. For this reason, it is only logical to assume the words uttered by the "practitioner" of the given language will usually reveal greater or lesser part of their personality. Perhaps this was Attersson's inspiration?
Perhaps not. But let us move on.
"
It is my belief and that of the practitioners of the Blue Way (which isn't my favourite Way, despite what one could infer), that Blue Way assumes the use of Intelligence as intrinsic."
Intelligence. The very same part of one's personality that allows them to construct complex sentences and place them in a coherent structure. Which is but saying, the very same part of one's personality that allowed Attersson to construct the complex commentaries about the Blue Way which we may now experience. Again, correlation between ways of magic and ways of using language are created. Perhaps it would be then sound to give more focus to the structures created by the many languages? Perhaps it would be of some use to observe how languages evolve; how they change along with the societies? Perhaps magic ways are not merely fixed phonomena that their users may, at best, interpret. Perhaps, just like dialects in a language, they are expressions of the society that for any one user may turn into their own personal idiolect?
"
yet the fact stays that endless potentialities are seen, where the "how" to achieve them is just a way"
Of course, all of this may be merely my own biased observation, induced by nothing but my interest in structures of various languages. But that is the point. A memorable literary piece is the one open to various interpretations. It is not something you can achieve by a blatant piece of text. And it is not something one would expect from a person obsessed with this form of art.
That, and I would question authority of one, who makes a blatant mistake in a rather simple sentence about education.
"
I am not saying you are educated"
