jack: (Default)
[personal profile] jack
Stolen from Beware of Doug on SDMB. I think I may use as a sig.
The canonical criteria of an ambiguous sentence are:

(1) being an instruction, order, or injunction
(2) interpretable in mutually contradictory reasonable1 ways
(3) demanding correct interpretation to prevent catastrophic loss of life and/or property.

For instance, "Just remember one thing: you can never put too much water on the reactor."
[1] Edited to add 'reasonable'

Date: 2004-12-16 05:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com
I admit I found that interpretation *less* obvious, but I think if you interpret 'can' in the sense of 'permitted', it parses perfectly well. Compare "You can't do that!"

Date: 2004-12-19 02:06 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tienelle.livejournal.com
Which statement I disagree with, as you usually just *have*. "You mayn't do that" is just *better*.

Date: 2004-12-20 12:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com
I'm not sure I parsed1 that correctly, but you're saying he's using 'can' when he should be using 'may'? Yeah, I'll agree 'may' is *better*, and that in this context specifically it's forced, but I think that usage of 'can' has become standard, and it would be clear what he meant if it wasn't for the alternative interpretation.

You could hypothesise an appended silent '...without losing your pride, job and/or life' if that makes more sense.

[1] One of the funniest exchanges I've seen was on a message board and went roughly:

A: I don't think you parsed that right.
B: What are you saying about me? I didn't do anything to it! I didn't parse it, and I resent the implication!
A: Well, obviously you didn't, but you might want to look that up now...