[lit-ideas] Re: Welch Help (was French Help [was Re: Willie Pete])
- From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 21:36:05 -0600
RH:
Let me now step back out to where I can better mind my own business (thanx
anyways, Mr. Geary). <<
No problem. Of course I can now never ever tell what I found so funny in
your response. It wasn't nearly as deep as your intention, but pretty damn
funny in my perception -- but then I always assume everyone is joking --
else all this shit is to be taken seriously! Oh well, I've been caught off
base plenty of times before now. Thanks for the thanks nonetheless and
you're welcome.
You haven't submitted any translations lately, Henninge -- what's up?
Gotten lazy?
Mike Geary
Memphis (now that's a joke)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Henninge, Richard" <henninri@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 7:13 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Welch Help (was French Help [was Re: Willie Pete])
Judy clears this up totally, and I humbly proffer to all abused a blanket
apology for transgressions occurring during my mistakenness. I had made the
mistake of trying to interpret Mike Chase's comment completely out of
context. The discussion is in fact much more clear-cut than I first
understood it to be (my bad), and that is in no small part due to the
clarity, in particular, of Mike's arguments and Phil's characterizations
("M. Chase's moral equivalency argument").
Let me now step back out to where I can better mind my own business (thanx
anyways, Mr. Geary).
Richard Henninge
University of Mainz (his own business)
________________________________
Von: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx im Auftrag von Judy Evans
Gesendet: Fr 11.11.2005 01:30
An: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [lit-ideas] Re: French Help (was Re: Willie Pete)
I thought I understood Mike (Chase) easily; I read it as
(I mangle)
"If my "moral equivalency argument" were troubling enough (to Enns and
Yost) to awaken them (E and Y) from..."
the clue's in the prior
PE(EY?)> What is troubling is M. Chase's moral equivalency argument that
regularly rears its ugly head.
nothing Frenchified about the reply
MC>I'm delighted that it's troubling. If it were troubling enough to
awaken P. Enns and E. Yoist from the dogmatic slumber of their jingoist
self-satisfaction, I'd be even happier.
hope that helps
--
Judy Evans, Cardiff, UK
mailto:judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
