This explains Everything. iz

 


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance Muir
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 11:39 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor

 

Eh?  Got relatives in Canada eh?

----- Original Message -----

Sent: November 24, 2005 12:08

Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor

 

(hey DaveH--a new TT record for concatenating responses, eh? :)

 

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:49:56 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

"Bill is [sanctified]," is presumed, and, at best, [though eternal], (is) now; therefore, the [sanctified-ness] is transitory [for now] which also squares with human experience; therefore, the present tense '[sanctified-]ness' is incomplete

 

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:21:34 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

"Bill is [sad]," is presumed, and, at best, (is) now; therefore, the [sadness] is transitory which also squares with human experience; therefore, the present tense '[sad]ness' is incomplete

 

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:52:51 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 

myth ("Bill is happy," is presumed, and, at best, (is) now; therefore, the happiness is transitory which also squares with human experience; therefore, the present tense 'happiness' is incomplete)

 

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:02:32 -0500 "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
||
> Present tense does not necessarily indicate incomplete action. 
> "Bill is happy," this does not mean that Bill is incomplete in his
> happiness.
||

 

 

 

Reply via email to