FinjaminPoach@lemmy.world to Microblog Memes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 10 days agoDawkin it for my AIlemmy.worldimagemessage-square177linkfedilinkarrow-up1631arrow-down110file-text
arrow-up1621arrow-down1imageDawkin it for my AIlemmy.worldFinjaminPoach@lemmy.world to Microblog Memes@lemmy.worldEnglish · 10 days agomessage-square177linkfedilinkfile-text
I’m pulling the “twitter is a microblog” rule even though twitter is pretty mega now, hope that’s ok.
minus-squarezarkanian@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·8 days agoWhat structure does it have? If there are two people talking in a fictional book, are they having a conversation, even though the two people don’t actually exist?
minus-squareutopiah@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·8 days agoNo it’s then a representation of a conversation, not a conversation.
minus-squarezarkanian@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·8 days ago“Considering the conversation between Alice and Bob on page 73—” “Um, sorry, that’s incorrect, it’s a ‘representation of a conversation’, not a ‘conversation’.” I know this phrase gets used a lot, but you must be fun at parties.
minus-squareutopiah@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·8 days agoAd hominem, blocked.
minus-squareBluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·8 days agoYes, of course. Is that not so simple?
What structure does it have?
If there are two people talking in a fictional book, are they having a conversation, even though the two people don’t actually exist?
No it’s then a representation of a conversation, not a conversation.
“Considering the conversation between Alice and Bob on page 73—”
“Um, sorry, that’s incorrect, it’s a ‘representation of a conversation’, not a ‘conversation’.”
I know this phrase gets used a lot, but you must be fun at parties.
Ad hominem, blocked.
Yes, of course. Is that not so simple?