If you use the word successor, instead of "others," now you're implying that Cassini's observation ceased before that date. If you say, however, "Cassini and others stood watching the paint dry for twelve hours (Cassini was indisposed and left after eight)," you have a problem.
-
That just retracts the literal statement that he observed through 1713, like my "Cassini and his friends stayed at the party until midnight (Cassini went home at 8 and promptly died)" example.
In this context, I think it's clear that the "others" were not huddled around Cassini and his telescope in 1665 and during every other observation. Thus, it's not essential that Cassini be present at every one, either. English isn't always precise.
-
-
allows Bob and Tim to miss Lakers games, but it's false if Bob actually left the Lakers in 2003 or died. (2/2)
-
If Cassini is not required to be at all observations, why is he required to be at the last one? If he hadn’t died, would this still bother you? He’s sleeping! Resting! Stunned!
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I agree with that, but that's a kind of straw-man argument; the sentence needn't mean that he's present for all observations during the period to mean that he continued observing for the period. For example, "Bob and Tim played for the Lakers until 2004" (1/2)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.