Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #380724

Re: bart again (UCX64)

Show all headers | View raw

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:

> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>
>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> You have not so far answered the question.  An answer would
>>> have included [...]
>>
>> I suggest you look up the word "answer" in an English
>> dictionary.  I did answer.
>
> I was somewhat disappointed when I did look it up.  A question is a
> request for information, and I had understood an answer to be a response
> to that question which provided the requested information.  The answer
> could be erroneous, or deliberately wrong or misleading, but it was not
> an answer unless it at least pretended to provide the requested
> information.  I was familiar with the common practice of saying that, for
> instance, "The guard asked 'Who goes there?', and the the commando
> answered with a knife to the guard's heart.", but I always considered
> that calling something like that an "answer" was a kind of joke.  I might
> have imagined that a dictionary would provide a more general definition
> of "answer" that included such things, but I expected that there would
> also be a more restricted definition that excluded any response that did
> not provide the requested information.
> However, that's not what I found.  For instance, Wiktionary defines an
> answer as "something said or done in reaction to a statement or
> question."  I saw similar definitions in several other online
> dictionaries.  Therefore, ANYTHING you do when reacting to a question
> qualifies as an answer, whether it be a lie, or a non-sequitur, or a
> blow to the head.
> Therefore, I reluctantly concede that you did answer the question.  You
> did not, however, provide the requested information.
>
> I find those definitions problematic.  If a form says "Answer the
> following questions", is i really instructing you to do whatever you
> want to do?  If so, what's the point of providing such an instruction?

Communicating in English (and probably any natural language, but I
am fluent only in English) is not an exact science.  An important
aspect of speaking or writing in English is making sure that the
meaning that got conveyed is the same as the meaning that was
intended.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: bart again (UCX64) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-01-23 15:06 -0800

csiph-web