You must log in or register to comment.
“Can I use the bathroom?”
“I don’t know? Can you?”
“Yes” urinates on teacher’s desk
“No. Thats not using the bathroom.”
They are still able to use the bathroom, they just didnt.
We don’t know that. It wasn’t demonstrated.
But they explicitly said they can.
People never lie? They’re never simply wrong? Anyone can make a claim. That doesn’t mean the claim true.
What if the bathroom is locked, and they can’t even get into it? We don’t know.
Anyone can make a claim. That doesn’t mean the claim true.
That’s just a claim you made. Anyone can make a claim. Why would I believe you over a fictional character in a hypothetical scenario?
I’m not anyone. I’m Steve.
Oh god, it’s a paradox! She implicitly makes an example, which makes it not being an example, which makes it an example again! Whaaaaaaaaa
A joke that only a linguist could love. :D
Connie. Connie linguist.
One who speaks in tunnels is a tunnel linguist.
This is my favorite example: https://youtu.be/yUl4Fw1jsXY?si=heWRF6tb8Mz1IdtS
Such a great show. It deserved better.
What is this called? Not the show but the type of answering questions in their literal and basic sense.
I think real lawyers would call it “Objection, nonresponsive.”
Those two were great individually, but together the dissonance of logic and ego was a delightful treat.
Ironically, this is an excellent demonstration of the significance of ignoring pragmatics.
thatsthejoke.jpeg
Ironically, not getting the joke is an excellent demonstration of the significance of ignoring pragmatics.
