Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 07:36:53 -0700
From: hugh bone <hughbone-AT-worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Local terms


Lois Shawver wrote:
> 
> Cliff,
> 
> Thanks for pointing me to Deleuze as one who suggests we not pre-define
> words precisely. I suppose this is what is involved in the rhizomatics of
> langauge?  What text could you point me to.  I would like to look this over.
> 
> ..Lois Shawver~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT-

Consider the scientific approach:  "What we don't understand
we explain to each other".  Consider the emotional approach:  "I take 
this man/woman to be....."  Consider the engineering specifications 
approach:  thirty pages to describe the properties of a metal fastener,
commonly known as a brad or rivet. Consider the function of simple 
words, three letters and less, which consume many lines of dictionaries.