The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding

Steve Holden steve at holdenweb.com
Wed Oct 3 21:28:06 CEST 2007


David Kastrup wrote:
> bcd at pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C Dalager) writes:
> 
>> In article <85sl4sqckf.fsf at lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup  <dak at gnu.org> wrote:
>>> bcd at pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C Dalager) writes:
>>>
>>> Not as much "been" liberated, but "turned" liberated.
>> I expect that either way you split this hair, using "free" in the
>> sense of "possessing liberty" is still going to be quite reasonable.
>>
>>> But picking just a single word from a whole explanation of _one_
>>> naming and declaring it as equivalent is not really being careful with
>>> language at all.
>> I have never claimed equivalence. What I have made claims about are
>> the properties of one of the meanings of a word. Specifically, my
>> claim is that "free" is a reasonable description of some one or some
>> thing that has been "liberated".
> 
> But it suggests that the natural state would be the unfree state.
> 
Which for Africans in colonial America it was. They arrived unfree and 
many of them liver their entire lives in slavery. After liberation they 
were. nevertheless, often referred to as "freed", because someone (thier 
owner) had freed them. As freed men they were, of course, /free/ to do 
what they chose (as long as someone "white" didn't object).

Please stop splitting hairs and get down to some useful discussion. This 
is boring (and has nothing to do with either Python or the subject line 
except in the most inconsequential way).

regards
  Steve
-- 
Steve Holden        +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC/Ltd           http://www.holdenweb.com
Skype: holdenweb      http://del.icio.us/steve.holden

Sorry, the dog ate my .sigline




More information about the Python-list mailing list