Re: to unprepare
From: Horace LaBadie (hwlabadiejr_at_nospam.highstream.net)
Date: 03/17/05
- Next message: Horace LaBadie: "Re: to unprepare"
- Previous message: Jacques Guy: "Re: "Gender-free masculine pronoun"? Absurd. [was: Re: Crossposting[was:Re:Traditional gender-free "he" [was: Re: "16 and 276 are 292"?No. [was: Re: Lack of vocabulary in English?]]]]"
- In reply to: Ekkehard Dengler: "Re: to unprepare"
- Next in thread: Horace LaBadie: "Re: to unprepare"
- Reply: Horace LaBadie: "Re: to unprepare"
- Reply: António Marques: "Re: to unprepare"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 07:36:42 -0500
In article <d1bp1a$4dg$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
"Ekkehard Dengler" <ED-RS@t-online.de> wrote:
> "Ron Hardin" <rhhardin@mindspring.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:42385DF4.4530@mindspring.com...
>
> > What's wrong with the original is partly that you can trace out what
> happened.
> >
> > The intention :
> >
> > The principals are unprepared for their jobs.
> > The principals are not prepared for their jobs by education colleges.
> >
> > These two were coalesced into :
> >
> > The principals are unprepared for their jobs by education colleges.
> >
> > That though is made impossible by the emergent meaning of ``to
> unprepare,''
> > whether it exists beforehand or not, of taking something already prepared
> and making
> > it unprepared.
> >
> > That emergent meaning interferes with the plain intention of the sentence,
> and you
> > get a conflicting meaning of ``to unprepare,'' to fail to prepare.
> >
> > It is that verb that fails to exist.
>
> Well, yes. Let me ask you this, then: Do you feel the examples I quoted from
> the CALD ("undaunted/unaffected by") imply such conflicting meanings, too?
> If not, can you explain why you think "unprepared by" does? It's a little
> less usual, but that's probably all.
>
> I can't help feeling you're going out of your way to read an absurd meaning
> into a sentence that isn't necessarily absurd. If your intuitive reaction is
> to reject the sentence, then fine, but I'd disagree with the notion that a
> reasonable interpretation can be rendered impossible by the possibility of
> an implausible alternative one.
>
> Regards,
> Ekkehard
>
>
What about this?
"For man in the West is by education, by tradition and by temperament
unprepared for the religion of ahimsa..."
<http://www.gandhi-manibhavan.org/remeniscenes/chap23.htm>
Some Reminiscences of the visit of Mahatma Gandhi to Romain Rolland in
1931
HWL
- Next message: Horace LaBadie: "Re: to unprepare"
- Previous message: Jacques Guy: "Re: "Gender-free masculine pronoun"? Absurd. [was: Re: Crossposting[was:Re:Traditional gender-free "he" [was: Re: "16 and 276 are 292"?No. [was: Re: Lack of vocabulary in English?]]]]"
- In reply to: Ekkehard Dengler: "Re: to unprepare"
- Next in thread: Horace LaBadie: "Re: to unprepare"
- Reply: Horace LaBadie: "Re: to unprepare"
- Reply: António Marques: "Re: to unprepare"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|