 |
 |
John, Thanks for the response. The first Amerikan translation was "Bicycle thief". So did these people simply not see the pluralities which you described (my modus ponens from individual act to many potentialities), or was the plural effaced by intent? BH > Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 07:27:52 -0400 > FroJohnm: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: ontology of imagery > To: [log in to unmask] > > On 10/26/10 6:54 AM, bill harris wrote: > > Of course=2C logic plays a huge role in discussions of meaning. For example= > > =2C why would one entitle a film 'Bicycle Thieves" when only one is stolen?= > > In other words=2C to what extent are viewers obliged to accept modus ponen= > Because this is meant as just one story among many, the bicycle becoming > an important object as workers were shifted to peripheral Roman > neighborhoods away from the jobs in the central city. There are a number > of shots in the film which emphasize this, most notably the pan up the > multiplicity of bicycles in the pawn shop. So really just a standard > rhetorical device that can be explained through implicatures once the > question is asked. > > j > > * > * > Film-Philosophy > After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to > To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask] > Or visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html > For technical help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon > * > Film-Philosophy online: http://www.film-philosophy.com > Contact: [log in to unmask] > ** * * Film-Philosophy After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask] Or visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html For technical help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon * Film-Philosophy online: http://www.film-philosophy.com Contact: [log in to unmask] **