Date: 2017-03-12 09:17 pm (UTC)
khalulu: (Default)
From: [personal profile] khalulu
Thanks for inviting me!

I can see how in context and in the stream of speech the intended meaning comes through, but I personally agree with the person stating the opposite side - this sentence doesn't make sense to me as written. As written, after twisting my mind around it, it implies that a smart person would not run away from a fight, but he is too dumb to do what a smart person would do. He's so dumb he couldn't do what a smart person would do (smart person's action = not run away from a fight = stay and fight). He can't stay and fight, he's too dumb for that, so he stupidly runs away. But then I'm not in the fandom and don't know him, so I don't have the context to override that.

I was 12 when they reported Neil Armstrong as saying "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" and I immediately thought "that doesn't make sense". He probably meant "a man" and the "a" got swallowed up by radio distance, but it bugged me to have the makes-no-sense version plastered everywhere.

Here's a fun ambiguity of negative scope argument for you - "you need not X, nor must you Y". Does that mean you must not Y (Y is forbidden) or you don't have to Y (Y is optional)? I looked for an explanation after a prof used that construction in an assignment, but couldn't find it discussed - examples I found were about half and half.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

snowgall: (Default)
snowgall

February 2018

S M T W T F S
     123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 1st, 2025 06:35 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios