In a message dated 10/21/2015 12:48:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx quotes:
"the breakthrough also raises the prospect of customized pets."
But wasn't the English (I take it) idea of a pet allways one of a
customised one? See all they've done since the days when a dog was a dog was a
dog.
Grice possibly can work on the implicature of
i. A dog is a dog is a dog.
For Geary, who speaks proper English, (i) is "ungrammatical" ("it contains
two copulations," he explains, "which grammarians find excessive").
A terrier, for example, from Latin 'terra', is supposed to dig holes in the
soil. A setter is supposed to 'set' for hunting (not for painting). An
Italian 'levriero' (badly translated as Italian greyhound since they can be,
some of their customised versions, anything but grey) is adapted for 'hares'
(hence the name), and so on.
Incidentally, Grice disliked dogs. He preferred cats, and he named them
after the places he found them; so if they were customised, he never knew by
whom or to what effect. His favourite was "Sausalito", but then there was
"Moraga" and "Oakland".
Back in Oxford he had a canary, a customised pet bird if ever there was
one. He also could work on the implicature:
ii. And my bird can sing.
Geary, who speaks proper English, finds it 'rude' to start an utterance
with "And" ("Unless you are John Milton," he adds -- he is having in mind
Perry's hymn, "And did those feet in ancient time walk upon England's pastures
green?").
Cheers,
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
