[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Shoplifting, concealment, liability presumption
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 16:07:11 -0000
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.92 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Terekhov <> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> Whatever.  When quoting isolated sentences, you better pick those with
>> grammar reflecting what you consider their meaning.
> LOL. Dak are you really sure that your German is more correct than the
> German of

If the meaning is the one you think it is and we are talking about that
particular sentence, _and_ your attribution to the BGH as source is
accurate (for which I don't see any evidence but consider possible),

Figuring out that the grammatic gender in this sentence does not match
your interpretation is something that primary school should teach any
reasonably apt pupil.

Since the sentence makes more sense given your interpretation rather
than the one implied by its grammar, I will agree that _if_ it
originated from the BGH, it is likely that it was _intended_ to mean
what you think, and that the judges (or scribes) failed in the grammar
rather than the logic department.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]