2 ms·
If we were speaking out loud you could figure it out
by tayo42 4y ago
If we were speaking out loud you could figure it out
- epgui 4y agoAnd yet, we're not speaking out loud.
- School-Cotton 4y agoBut you did understand him. You’re pretending you didn’t because if that were true it’d reinforce your point, but it’s not in fact true.
- epgui 4y agoYou can't possibly know whether or not I understood them. I think I understood them, but I can never be sure, because in order to understand something with improper grammar, you usually need to "fill in the gaps" with the most reasonable assumptions possible, and those don't necessarily line up with your interlocutor's beliefs or intentions. Putting words in other people's mouths is often required to "lubricate communication along", but it should be done as minimally as possible if the goal is for people to understand each other. See Grice's cooperative principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle
- School-Cotton 4y agoAbsolutely nonsensical bullshit. Everyone reading this knows you perfectly understood “were” to mean “we’re” here. Engaging in the fictional universe where you didn’t is a waste of time.
- epgui 4y agoIt's not bullshit, it's what explains a large class of misunderstandings. What's bullshit is people who think they know what other people think.
- pc86 4y agoWe're not speaking. You might as well be saying "if things were different, they'd be different."