Google| Subject | Re: Will Tony apologize?? (was: Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby) |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 2014-05-02 16:45 (2014-05-02 16:45) |
| Message-ID | <slrnlm7c2g.7ar.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Tony Cooper |
| Followups | Tony Cooper (38m) > Sandman Eric Stevens (8h & 45m) > Sandman |
In article <nm97m918r3fe2tvmqr8lc5g3ukctpthbc1@4ax.com>, Andreas Skitsnack wrote:
Tony CooperSandmanSandmanEric Stevens
"If a speaker or writer implies something, they are suggesting it in an indirect way rather than making an explicit statement."
Yep. True.
Strange you won't support Andreas in this case?
It could be because the definition provided is not one that I disagree with at all. It's one that I would use.
It is the added dimension to the definition that he may or may not agree with: an implication need not be an intended aspect. An implication can be completely unintended by the writer.An implication can never be unintended. You can infer what you THOUGHT was an implication, but only the speaker/writer can know if it actually was an implication.
Here's an English lesson for you, again:
If I were to say "Macs are easy to use", you could infer a hidden meaning from that statement. Let's say I was very pro-Mac, then you may have inferred that what I meant was "Macs are easy to use, so even unexperienced users can use them", but if you knew me to be anti-Mac, then you may infer from the statement that I meant "Macs are easy to use, so only idiots use them".
The statement itself carries no implication. Written on a billboard, it has no hidden meaning by itself. A hidden meaning is only there by virtue of the one making the statement in the first place. Only he or she can tell you what, if any, implication there was.
So, if you were the receiver of said statement, you could perhaps turn to your wife and say something like "Jonas said that Macs are easy to use, with the implication that only idiots use it". But that's not correct. That was what you inferred from the statement, and what YOU infer is what YOU think is the implication.
Me, the sender/author/writer/speaker, is the ONLY one that can tell you whether or not there was any such implication. You may ASSUME there was such an implication (again, that's called "infer"), but only I know if there really was one.
So, what you infer from any given statement is based on your own interpretation of it.
But at the end of the day, an implication is ALWAYS intentional. When you say that I wrote "Macs are easy" with the implication that it's only used for idiots, that does NOT mean there was such an implication, it means that's what you INFERRED from my statement, not what I IMPLIED.
Many times, implications are easy to spot, and many times when you say that I wrote something with the implication of X, you may very well be right.
You're welcome.
-- Sandman[.net]
2014-04-14-
