From: c stirling bartholomew (cc.constantine@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Thu Feb 07 2002 - 02:43:00 EST
on 2/6/02 11:17 PM, Iver Larsen wrote:
> It seems that you are saying: "For neologisms we have very little basis for
> knowing the range of meaning of the word in question but have to rely
> heavily on guesses from context as well as other means, such as related
> words from the same root. Therefore, the same applies to words that are well
> attested and found in many contexts." I doubt that you would agree that this
> is what you are saying, since in my summary the fallacy of the argument
> should be easy to see. But this is how I interpret what you are trying to
> say.
Iver,
You are right. That is NOT what I am trying to say. Not even close. My off
list responses indicate that my post was well understood by at least one
very well qualified scholar. So perhaps you ought to go back and take
another look at it.
Your other comments are non-controversial. Ludwig Wittgenstein has been
around for a while. Has he not?
greetings,
Clay
--
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:18 EDT