Please read the Guidelines that have been chosen to keep this forum soaring high!
Heavenletter #4611 The Great Communicator
Posted June 30th, 2013 by Luus
Dear Gloria,
Speech is not always communicating, you understand. Sometimes speech prevents communication. Two people yakking doesn’t mean that they are communicating.
And, you too, may communicate despite your speaking, despite your words.
I wonder whether the last sentence should not read: "And, you too, may not communicate despite your speaking, despite your words," and that the word "not" should be added.
Thanks.
Luus
Luus, my first thought is
Luus, my first thought is yes, you're right again! Now I'm wondering. Okay, sometimes our yakking intereferes with communication etc. Our talking may block communication, so when we're talking, even so, maybe we also communicate. I do think that's what's meant. How do we make the sentence simpler? I'll think some more tomorrow when my mind is more wide awake.
God bless you for pointing to unclear sentences.
I definitely think there
I definitely think there should be a "not" considering the previous sentence.
Here's how I see the meaning
Here's how I see the meaning in the light of day, beloved Luus:
Speech is not always communicating, you understand. Sometimes speech prevents communication. Two people yakking doesn’t mean that they are communicating. Then again,, on the other hand, sometimes people do communicate deeply with speech.
The question I ask myself is: Why that third sentence at all if the meaning is the same as the sentence before -- two people yakking doesn't mean that they are communicating. There has to be a contrast, or why have the sentence at all?
Does this make more sense now?
I think this sentence is
I think this sentence is there to emphasize that I, or we, also do not always communicate when speaking. For instance, if I'm angry at someone I may just yell at the person and not really say anything, so in that case I do not communicate.
I agree.
I agree. Or it's just words, like How are ya? and we aren't really asking. It's a social convention. We fill up space.with words.
not
Dear Luus, dear Gloria,
due to the use of the word TOO, I also think there has to be an NOT in the sentence.
love,
Anneke
Beloved Anneke, I take
Beloved Anneke, I take seriously any change you and Luus and Normand and Jean-Christophe and any translator that sees something that needs to be looked at again.
Okay, here is the original version:
Speech is not always communicating, you understand. Sometimes speech prevents communication. Two people yakking doesn’t mean that they are communicating. And, you too, may communicate despite your speaking, despite your words.
Anneke, I’m trying to understand and tried restructuring the sentence to see if that helps us, as follows. :
Despite your speaking, despite your words, you too may not communicate.
Please know I do see what you mean.
Now I'm wonder if we need it TWO ways. I'm not certain, yet let's try:
Speech is not always communicating, you understand. Sometimes speech prevents communication. Two people yakking doesn’t mean that they are communicating. And, you too, may not communicate despite your speaking, despite your words. Or you may!
Here's what I'm wondering. Am I getting over-logical?!!! Is the fine delineation I want to make necessary? For some reason, I don't like the addition of "Of you may." Or "On the other hand, you may."
Maybe we don't need that.
Anneke, thank you for pursuing.
Luus, if we follow your original suggestion, are you okay with it? If yes, for the sake of simplicity, let's do that. Luus, if you are okay with that, will you kindly change it?
Love, Gloria
Yes, Gloria, I am okay with
Yes, Gloria, I am okay with it and added the "missing" not.