Even if I accepted that as non-bollox, Andrew (:-)), the question remains
obscure when in relation to a language candidate.
Chris
On 5 Mar 2012, at 11:16, Andrew Fildes wrote:
> Simple. It's merely a convention to regard statues and other inanimate
> objects as unmoving. Everything is moving in a relative sense.
> The question does not imply volitional movement.
> I have been moved by a statue, emotionally, and this is also consistent with
> the phrasing of the question.
> That takes care of physics and aesthetics - there are more I'm sure.
> Andrew Fildes
> afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> www.soultheft.com
>
>
>
> On 05/03/2012, at 6:23 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>
>> How is the putative movement of statues related to languages, Nathan? :-)
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|