When playing chess, what do you mean when you say "check"? Per Wittgenstein, perhaps we communicate in ways that have surprisingly little to do with what we actually say.
The whimsical continuation of Wittgenstein's classic treatise.
There's a way in which everything you see in a poem should be obvious when you see it, should be a duh!-moment.
Some comments here, and also off-list, helped me think further about these issues.
Free indirect style was so simple. He'd have to say something about it. How simple it was. Have to argue against Blakey's view.
I've been thinking a bunch about free indirect style -- I may try to incorporate this issue into a short talk I'm giving in April. Or not.
The standard kilogram is losing mass! A couple of keys weigh less than they used to, or anyhow one key does.
Bloopers are bloopers, but the study of bloopers is Theory. The study of bloopers can also be fun, and should be (even if an air of quasi-tragic resignation in the face of bloopers is the central, melodramatic posture of deconstruction). It can also tell us a little about the ways that we're all essentially essentialists.
I am, at any rate.