Comment on Great Explanations

Tue, 01 Nov 2011 21:59:23 GMT

Suppose I said a particular hockey goal was a "fluke" (a stroke of luck). Then, you pointed me to a post that implied that hockey goals are not good examples of flukes (the fish). This would be a confusion caused by the fact that word "fluke" (a stroke of luck) has the same spelling and pronunciation as the word "fluke" (a type of flatfish).

Suppose you said "That bird is a fine example of a robin!" and I insisted it can't be, because American robins have a red breast. Then you clarified that you were thinking of European robins, a very different bird that happens to be called the same thing. I would point out that my reasoning works just as well in that case, as European robins also have a red breast.

This seems more like what Vladimir was doing than your fluke example. And note you didn't answer this question (though you thought you did):

how many readers of these books would realize that something's wrong?

Discuss