You and Jim are absolutely right -- I missed that. (I carelessly thought I was reading ". . . me for you . . . and you for me.") --Dan On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:29 PM, Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaughan@pobox.com> wrote:
On 07/10/2014 22:25, Dan Asimov wrote:
Andy may be luckier in love than some other people, but in my experience those two halves are not necessarily synonymous. ...
[Andy Latto:]
Or that the two halves of the statement in the Turtles' "Happy Together" are saying the exact same thing, rather than the complementary things they may seem to say at first glance?
"The only one for me is you, and you for me"
They look pretty damn synonymous to me.
The only one for me is you, and you for me
= The only one for me is you, AND the only one is you for me
= The only one for me is you, AND the only one for me is you.
-- g
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun