Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mprvaxa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!microsoft!fluke!ssc-vax!uw-beaver!ubc-visi!mprvaxa!tbray
From: tbray@mprvaxa
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Quality of language
Message-ID: <432@mprvaxa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 23-Dec-83 12:41:00 EST
Article-I.D.: mprvaxa.432
Posted: Fri Dec 23 12:41:00 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Jan-84 02:11:04 EST
References: <132@tpvax.fluke.UUCP>, <119@looking.UUCP>, <1572@utcsstat.UUCP>
Organization: Microtel Pacific Research, Burnaby BC
Lines: 18

x <-- USENET insecticide

I feel that the concept of quality is indivisible.  Therefore, to speak of 
the quality of an argument as divorced from the quality of the language in 
which it is expressed is a gross contradiction.

One cannot perform great music, no matter how deep the feeling behind it,
on an instrument which one has made no attempt to tune.  Great passion and
insight can, however, compensate for minor lapses in practice.  Sloppy
language is, to me, evidence of sloppy thinking.

I also feel that Laura Creighton has no reason to be apologetic about the
quality of her prose.  (Some of her OPINIONS, though... :-)

Form and content are one.

	Tim Bray	...decvax!ubc-vision!mprvaxa!tbray