[lit-ideas] Re: "No offence meant", "None taken": the implicature -- a clarification
- From: Eric Dean <ecdean99@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:26:25 +0000
In my earlier post, the sentence:
"I think his reasoning does a comparable wrong to that which he would redress
by not endorsing Andreas's imposition of limits."
should have read:
"I think his reasoning does a wrong comparable to that which he would redress
by not endorsing Andreas's imposition of limits."
i.e. I read Mike's non-endorsement of Andreas's limit setting as attempting to
forestall a prospective wrong, but I think acting on his reasoning would
perpetrate a comparable wrong.
The words are too strong by far for the situation, but I hope that clarifies
the point I was trying to make in that sentence.
Regards to all.
Eric Dean
Washington DC
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Re: "No offence meant", "None taken": the implicature -- a clarification
