• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    3 months ago

    The headline implies that only non-Americans will be landing on the moon.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I’m pretty sure what something implies is dependent upon the reader’s interpretation. And it looks like many readers think it implies that a non-American is about to land on the moon even if you didn’t think so.

            • ABCDE@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              3 months ago

              The writers intention. You can read there being an implication, but it doesn’t mean it is implied.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Please tell me how you are able to figure out what the writer’s intention is from a headline.

                Because I would think that would require reading the article and no one is complaining about the contents of the article.

                • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Tell me how you can, perhaps? I can figure it out because… I can? And the article backs that up.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    11
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    “I can tell the author’s intent because I can” is circular reasoning and is not rational or logical. What that tells me is that you know that the author’s intent cannot easily be discerned from a headline other than taking it at face value, but you’ve been backed into a corner and refuse to admit it.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              If I say “my brother is traveling to France,” that doesn’t mean “at some point in the future, my brother will travel to France.”

              At least I’ve never heard anyone use “is” followed by an action that way.

              • purplexed@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                It’s very clunky in its usage. Which isn’t good English, but neither is the title, so I’m over it.

              • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Perhaps you’re not a native speaker, but it absolutely is used that way in real life. My brother is travelling to France in August, for example.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  So you mean if you add a qualifier, that changes the meaning?

                  Are you saying that as he goes to France in August, you would never say “my brother is traveling to France?”

                  And you still haven’t answered me about The Wizard of Oz and Fargo.

                  • ABCDE@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    Because I do not care for weird analogies.

                    You added an example, I made it make clearer sense for you, someone who had never heard of Present Continuous for plans in their lives, apparently.

                    I’m waking up early tomorrow, so I’m done.

        • ABCDE@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          3 months ago

          It doesn’t, it refers to one but can be of many. A person is attending a football match for the first time today. It doesn’t mean no one else is.

          • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            No. The sentence you posted implies a football match was never before attended by any person.

            If you want to say one of many, you should say Some person/someone.

            Or you can qualify the person. E.g. A non-american astronaut will be landing on the moon for the first time.

            • ABCDE@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              3 months ago

              Nope, because you know football matches have been attended by people. Ignoring basic facts doesn’t make your understand correct, it’s silly.

              • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                cake
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Yes, so we are talking about a sentence in the headline where we don’t have extra context, yet you make an sentence where it is clear the sentence is stupid based on outside context and argue it should be interpreted the other way around because otherwise we know it is stupid. Amazing logic.

                Just because I can deduce what you actually meant does not mean the sentence is correct.

                  • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                    cake
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    I for one don’t know how many astronauts are being sent to the moon when. And if most people do, no point writing this article, is there?