"Freedom isn't free."

[David A. Daniel]

Ambiguity is always interesting. Without it, there is no discourse.
DAD


-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
Mark Mandel
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 7:52 PM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: "Freedom isn't free."


Pretty interesting ambiguity in "what that government really wants is
your freedom". I infer that you mean "... is to take away your
freedom", based on the metaphor of physical ownership (if you have a
pie and I want it, then I want to take it away from you -- although if
the government "takes away " my freedom, they can't be said to "have"
it in any meaningful sense). But "They want Mumia Abu-Jamal's freedom"
means "They want him to be free".

In the first case, the presumption is that you are currently free,
i.e., you "have" freedom and the gov't wants to TAKE IT AWAY from you;
in the second, that Mumia is not currently free, i.e., his freedom is
nonexistent, and they want to ACHIEVE his freedom.

I'm sure there's more in this.

m a m

On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:31 PM, David A. Daniel <dad at pokerwiz.com> wrote:
> I prefer: "Freedom's just another word for nothin left to lose,
> And nothin ain't worth nothin but it's free"
> Pretty silly for anyone to make "Freedom isn't free" into a philosophical
> paradox; pretty obvious for a government to use it as propaganda,
especially
> when what that government really wants is your freedom.
> DAD

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org