Comments on: my definition is this http://kevinmcgowan.info/blog/2007/11/15/my-definition-is-this/ yet another linguistics blog. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:54:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: John Lawler http://kevinmcgowan.info/blog/2007/11/15/my-definition-is-this/#comment-8 John Lawler Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:48:05 +0000 http://kevinmcgowan.info/blog/2007/11/15/my-definition-is-this/#comment-8 Yes, I think that about does it. He certainly missed the point badly, both on the original piece and on his LL response. "Uninformed" is, I think, the key word. Doesn't it just frost you the way linguistics continues to be such a well-kept secret, <a href="http://ldc.upenn.edu/myl/llog/StanfordColloquium.pdf" rel="nofollow">despite everyone's efforts</a>? I once heard it said that the only real sin was willful ignorance, and I've come to believe that there's something to it; if so, fitchification is also immoral. Yes, I think that about does it. He certainly missed the point badly, both on the original piece and on his LL response. “Uninformed” is, I think, the key word.

Doesn’t it just frost you the way linguistics continues to be such a well-kept secret, despite everyone’s efforts?

I once heard it said that the only real sin was willful ignorance, and I’ve come to believe that there’s something to it; if so, fitchification is also immoral.

]]>