Comments on: The Fractal Self-Similarity of the Wingnut Function, Stephen Hayes edition

By: bi

bi — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:56:21 +0000

The Editors are King Duncan, or at least they are essentially King Duncan (heheh). They’re one person, but they’re still plural.

By: Righteous Bubba

Righteous Bubba — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 16:59:02 +0000

but I still insist

Me too, but the opposite! Therefore I can boldly state that you are wrong.

just like King Duncan is plural when he addresses himself as “we”.

The Editors is not King Duncan and refers to himself as “I” quite a lot.

Note also that it is funny to be one person called The Editors. Ha ha.

By: bi

bi — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 16:43:12 +0000

Mrs Tilton:

That may well be, but I still insist the phrase is grammatically plural, just like King Duncan is plural when he addresses himself as “we”.

By: Mrs Tilton

Mrs Tilton — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 22:34:20 +0000

Bi @11, I’d like to know if there’s any line of reasoning ... that may suggest that [The Editors] should be viewed as grammatically singular I'm afraid this is on of those "not reason but experience" things. Those of us who have been reading The Poor Man long enough know that "the editors" of that website is a Massachusetts exile in California.

By: Kieran Healy

Kieran Healy — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 20:09:03 +0000

That’s because it’s broken at the moment.

By: ehswan

ehswan — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 00:43:33 +0000

This is interesting, as I type “a preview of my comment will appear below” as I type. I observe none.

By: ehswan

ehswan — Sat, 31 May 2008 23:52:08 +0000

It seems that I have fallen into a language groove. Thank you “Crooked Timber” people. I’m intrigued by the use of, “first of all”, then “second of all”, then “third of all” in Carls comments. How many “of alls” are there? And what do they mean, if anything or are they just supposed to sound impressive as in “I can count”? To round it out, I liked Scotts coming clean and the controversey he has stirred up.

By: bi

bi — Sat, 31 May 2008 18:38:27 +0000

Righteous Bubba:

Fair and noble hostess,
We are your guest to-night.
—Shakespeare, Macbeth

By: Righteous Bubba

Righteous Bubba — Sat, 31 May 2008 16:18:58 +0000

I’d like to know if there’s any line of reasoning, perhaps based on the works of Shakespeare, Cicero, Mark Twain, etc. that may suggest that it should be viewed as grammatically singular. There's the fact that The Editors is a very funny man.

By: bi

bi — Sat, 31 May 2008 13:37:23 +0000

Mrs. Tilton:

"The Editors" is singular.

I'm still partial to treating the term as a grammatical plural, but I'd like to know if there's any line of reasoning, perhaps based on the works of Shakespeare, Cicero, Mark Twain, etc. that may suggest that it should be viewed as grammatically singular. -- bi, Intl. J. Inact.

By: Great Zamfir

Great Zamfir — Sat, 31 May 2008 12:25:06 +0000

Think of the Mandelbrot set

By: Roi

Roi — Sat, 31 May 2008 01:41:42 +0000

Fractally self-similar wingnuts? Mandelbrot may be useful after all.

By: lemuel pitkin

lemuel pitkin — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:43:41 +0000

you can have a fractal that is not self-similar.

I guess that’s my question answered, then.

By: clew

clew — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:11:24 +0000

A straight line is self-similar but not fractal, lemuel; and, with reasonable definitions, you can have a fractal that is not self-similar.

By: Mrs Tilton

Mrs Tilton — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:11:22 +0000

Lemuel @5,

[ob-grammar nazi:]

“The Editors” is singular.