By the time this message reaches you, I will probably be dead of natural causes. ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 11:57 PM Subject: Re: [lit-ideas] Ordinary Language Well, I am pretty sure that Ordinary Language Philosophy has kept its innocence by being prudently limited to ordinary English, and not venturing into other languages which also have their ordinary and non-ordinary styles. O.K. ________________________________ From: "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx> To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 7:55 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Ordinary Language Grice and Ordinary Language -- PHILOSOPHY, of course -- for who cares for ordinary language AS SUCH -- vs. Ordinary English. In a message dated 2/21/2013 11:28:19 A.M. UTC-02, donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes: These are ordinary English words that the law does not allow me to help you with, beyond the written directions [he had already given them]”." I once was reading a Loeb Latin volume (Cicero) and came across the phrase, 'extraordinary' and 'ordinary' as opposed to language, which fascinated me. It seems this is something that should have interested Grice. While Grice is referred to, as Hart is, as "ordinary language" philosophers -- as per subject line in McEvoy's post, the point about 'ordinariness' is never actually made. Less so about _ENGLISH_. It's ordinary-language, never ordinary English. In this case, the non-philosophical basis is further emphasised: "ordinary English WORDS": 'reasonable' and 'doubt'. ---- Things to consider Cheers, Speranza ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html