Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[Rob Zook <rzook@INFORMIX.COM>]

At 09:35 PM 1/20/98 -0300, you wrote:
> cu'u la ~mark
>>I'm pretty much with you on that, though here's an interesting
>>counterexample I heard on TV just the other day and made a note of:
>>
>>Some scientist was saying, on a science program, "Consider the 1920's.
>>Scientists knew -- they KNEW -- that universe was just the milky way
>>galaxy."
>>
>>This is a use of perhaps another meaning of "know" in English, a slightly
>>different one, more in line with Steve Belknap: to be completely
>>convinced.  Used for effect here, since it's being falsified.
>
>I don't know whether I would call it another meaning of "know". As you
>say, it is being used for effect. I can imagine the scientist just as well
>saying something like: "Consider the 1920's. Back then the universe
>WAS just the milky way galaxy."
>
>Would you say that that is another meaning of  "be", or is it just a
>way of saying something by making a claim that doesn't literally
>mean that?

Neither of these seem like good examples to use as candidates for djuno.
Any phrase with "be" or any of it's couplas seems semantically confused.


Rob Z.
--------------------------------------------------------
Were it offered to my choice, I should have no objection
to a repetition of the same life from its beginning, only
asking the advantages authors have in a second edition to
correct some faults in the first.
-- Ben Franklin