In
<CAE1XxDEy1+cyg2M1hv3r1Dm-UTWrDW=yiqffybaocjff8ag...@mail.gmail.com>,
on 09/28/2012
at 03:08 PM, John Gilmore <[email protected]> said:
>What Flaubert in fact wrote was
>| Le bon Dieu est dans le détail.
>Then, given the existence of Daniel Defoe's bit of doggerel, the
>inference that the devil would be found there too was inescapable, at
>least for monoglot anglophones.
Why wouldn't a Francophone have made the same change? Also, I was
aware of the original but not of the Defoe connection; what was the
doggerel in question?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
