Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
The commenters over at Liberman's post Apico-labials in English all clearly prefer the spelling syncing , but I find it just weird look... -
Matt Damon's latest hit movie Elysium has a few linguistic oddities worth pointing out. The film takes place in a dystopian future set i...
-
(image from Slate.com ) I tend to avoid Slate.com these days because, frankly, I typically find myself scoffing at some idiot article they...
8 comments:
It s a neat paradox, and I do not find the self reference in the question anywhere. What is the trick%
Russell and Frege were too objective to be self-referential.
It says "dies" in the present tense. I think it's OK for him to be in the process of dieing (present tense), but not to actually have died (past tense). On the other hand, "The king is dead. Long live the king!"
turney, as sharp as always, thanks for helping me firgure this out.
--What man dost thou dig it for?
--For no man, sir.
--For what woman, then?
--For none, neither.
--Who is to be buried in't?
--One that was a woman, sir, but, rest her soul, she's dead.
--How absolute the knave is! We must speak by the card, or equivocation will undo us.
I am not bernardo, I was logged as a friend that is why the comment was on his name, what I said is
"turney, as sharp as always, thanks for helping me firgure this out"
He's dead. You don't get any older than that.
It's not logically impossible for the world's oldest man to die. Actually, it's something that will inevitably happen. What's logically impossible is for the world's oldest man to have died.
Post a Comment