Re: A theorem for agnostics

From: G. Frege (no_spam_at_aol.com)
Date: 07/26/04 

Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 09:14:42 +0200

On 26 Jul 2004 02:00:43 -0500, "Acme Diagnostics"
<LFinezapthis@partpostmark.net> wrote:

> >
> > "Die Sprachen sind in logischen Fragen unzuverlässig. Ist es doch
> > nicht eine der geringsten Aufgaben des Logikers, auf die Fallstricke
> > hinzuweisen, die von der Sprache dem Denkenden gelegt werden."
> >
> > (Frege: "Die Verneinung", 1918)
> >
> > "As regards logical issues, the languages are unreliable. It is not
> > one of the logician´s minor tasks to point to the snares which
> > language has set for the thinker."
> >
> I object to the word "unreliable."
>
Huh? That's what he s a i d - the translation is ok.

Actually, he said "unzuverlässig".

If I look it up in my on-line dictionary, I get:

                     Direct Matches

         disaffected adj. unzuverlässig
         faithless adj. unzuverlässig
         trustless adj. unzuverlässig
         undependable adj. unzuverlässig
         unreliable adj. unzuverlässig
         unsound adj. unzuverlässig
         untrustworthy adj. unzuverlässig

                   Phrases and Collocations

          not reliable unzuverlässig

Knowing the _context_ of the occurrence of "unzuverlässig" above be
assured that "unreliable" is a (the) correct translation - but maybe
languages is unreliable. :-)))

>
> Without that word, it is reasonable to inference "logical issues" as
>
Look man, when he SAID "logical issues" he MEANT "logical issues".

>
> intending "theoretical logical issues."
>
If he had meant "theoretical logical issues", he would have SAID so. Hey
man, that's FREGE, not some sort of Usenet crank!

F.