SCREEN-L Archives

November 1999, Week 1

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Tue, 2 Nov 1999 12:13:10 -0500
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
>>What needs to be argued in such cases is why this code
>>  is more valid than another.

>Or, why this code is no less valid than another . . .


          a quick reminder . . . a code may well be valid and
          yet not be applicable in a given instance . . . a combination
          of letters that make up different words in different languages
          is the most obvious example . . . to know not only what the
          word means but even what the word IS in the first place
          requires that we know which of various codes, all valid, is
          the one that ought to be applied . . . and if the phrase
          "ought to be" sounds prescriptive rather than descriptive,
          that's only because it sure as hell is . . . and that of course
          changes the ground rules of this game profoundly . . .

          mike frank

----
For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2