bases

[Gregory {Greg} Downing]

At 10:10 AM 5/26/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>(The utility of this system seems open to question.)
>
>Jesse Sheidlower
>OED
>

Yes, and not just because of the "calibrational" or "definitional" problems
being discussed this morning. One also has to bear in mind, in the first
place, the problematic truth-value of not a few of the statements that are
made by the young folks who commonly employ the "base" system in discourse
with their acquaintances!

Then again, perhaps the multiple definitions are precisely what is needed,
pragmatically -- i.e., speakers can exaggerate or give an impression of
having done more than they've done if that's the effect they are seeking to
achieve in a particular discourse situation, or they can deny having done
something by using one of the milder definitional systems if that's the
effect they are seeking in some other situation. Eventually, they can even
hope to put these skills to work some day in weaving their way a through
sexual-harrassment deposition! (Sorry, couldn't resist the last,
all-too-obvious comment...!)



Greg Downing/NYU, at greg.downing at nyu.edu or gd2 at is2.nyu.edu