tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7268813616456268351.post8729317076331292223..comments2023-12-26T21:16:40.265-05:00Comments on the hunting of the snark: Fit Two, Page 10, Panel 3Mahendra Singhhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15308770582240496910noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7268813616456268351.post-84871143859001330392007-11-30T16:25:00.000-05:002007-11-30T16:25:00.000-05:00Yes, you are quite right, ordinarily I would have ...Yes, you are quite right, ordinarily I would have to qualify the hereness as not-isness but the subject of this week's posting was shamelessness, and the construct you propose would result in "shameness".<BR/><BR/>Clear as mud, methinks!Mahendra Singhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15308770582240496910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7268813616456268351.post-84608555702815527872007-11-30T16:03:00.000-05:002007-11-30T16:03:00.000-05:00But since the word on the map is merely a signifie...But since the word on the map is merely a signifier for the idea of "hereness," mustn't one go back to the Magritte well another time for the (clear-as-French) clarification: "Ceci n'est pas ici"?Scott Sharplinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18183998880273139754noreply@blogger.com