• Cryophilia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    8 months ago

    The latter interpretation is itself incomprehensible. So yes, it renders the story incomprehensible, but I don’t know why anyone would consider it.

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      You are correct it is, I’m trying to highlight where things diverged in the story into gibberish, which is not easy to tell for someone that lost the thread of the story there. The word “which” is the key difference, so if people miss the first interpretation and go with the other cadence when reading.

      Try this: Read the word “which” in the original sentence in your head or out loud once with a higher pitch than the rest of the sentence. Then try reading the sentence again with the word “which” at the same or lower pitch as the rest. If the reader goes the wrong path then they might not even realize that the alternative is there.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Ok fair enough, but I don’t think it matters specifically how they got to their ridiculous interpretation. The problem is that instead of thinking “hey, I probably misunderstood, I should read that over again” they just started going “REEEEEEEEEEEEEE”