---- Original Message -----
From: Rusty Burke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: REH Fans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: [rehfans] OFF TOPIC- Doublespeak
> The problem is then multiplied many-fold when the words appear in
> combination with other words. The reader or auditor has to do some
> interpreting. You, for instance, understood "certainly" to modify the
word
> "true" in Scotty's statement, while I understood it to modify the phrase
> "true to a good degree." Who's "right"? I think Scotty would probably
say
> that my interpretation is truer to what he "meant," but that still doesn't
> mean yours is "wrong."
My meaning was, "it is true", but "it is not true all the time," hence the
qualifier "to some good degree." Good meaning that I'm certain it is true
in over 50% of samplings (although I could be wrong), but there are no
studies I know of that I can cite so I have to leave room for correction in
case someone comes along with evidence.
I can be very brief and concise when I want to but when it comes to
literature and language it is all a matter of interpretation. That is where
all this started in "he hates" versus "he's posturing" debate.
Interpretation "to a good degree" is based on a person's experience with
language which will vary with another's. Leo is upset that we use imprecise
language when Howard is cuttingly clear but that is his interpretation and I
tend to follow Rusty's and Larry's line of reasoning. We've talked at length
about Howard's expert use of language but expert use does not imply
preciseness, it can also suggest vagueness and subtlety. To one person a
word or phrase may have precise meaning but to another it expresses
something else because of how you interpret the words and phrasing and
sentence or paragraph structure. One of the beauties of language to me is
that it can be both precise and vague at the same time, imparting a duality.
Scotty Henderson
