[lit-ideas] Re: pleonastic,translated as redundant
- From: "John McCreery" <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 09:30:00 +0900
Tautology de trop in in logic? Silly me, I've thought for all these years
that logic is tautology, albeit elaborated to a highly baroque degree.
But turning to the serious question of why redundancy is so important in
art: Might we speculate that art is about persuasion,evoking a response from
its audience; logic seeks necessity, eliminating the audience.
John
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 5:18 AM, Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Offering a very taut ology, David referred to me as a "grade three
> climber," which substitutes ambiguity for redundancy. John suggests that,
> "the phrases 'for the time being' and 'on the back burner'" aren't
> synonymous, but merely overlap. Both are right I reckon.
>
> It could be that "the time being," as David and John suggest, could be the
> back burner or the front burner. "The time being" is the time being itself,
> which could be NOW, or even the NOW-moment of imagination of things
> postponed, or the moment of postponing. Question retracted.
>
> Which provokes another question in the spirit of Mike: why is redundancy
> and tautology so important in art, yet so de trop in logic? Art is a form of
> structural reasoning isn't it -- albeit a reasoning carried on by
> non-syllogistic means?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
--
John McCreery
The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
Tel. +81-45-314-9324
jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wordworks.jp/
Other related posts:
