[r-t] Re: Real

freepabs at freeuk.com freepabs at freeuk.com
Fri Feb 25 09:50:51 UTC 2005

> RAS said "I don't think PABS is disputing that a suitable composition

> of Bristol can be a "Real Double" composition.  What I think
> he is saying is that, the "Real" adjective [applies] to the [
> Double..."
> If this is so, why can't pabs say it for himself? It's not what he *
> to be saying.

I didn't see the need - Richard's reply seemed perfectly adequate.

I wrote:
"Real Double Bob surely means it is really Double"

If that's not saying that I think the "Real" adjective [applies] to the 
[adjective] Double, what other interpretation would you put on it?

> If you write something, there is not necessarily a particular 
emphasis on
> any
> word unless you choose to give it one and it is therefore up to the 
> to make whatever assumptions they like.

I see - that explains why when I wrote [Reply to Richard of 11th 

"I don't propose to answer all of these points"

you assumed [Reply to pabs - in no particular order]

"If the quoted points are the only ones pabs wishes to take issue with, 
then it can only mean he must, at least, not disagree with me on the 


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list