Tamas Racsko wrote: > On 20 May 2004 John Cowan <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >>COntent *is* form, especially on this mailing list. > > > I don't understand quite correctly what you mean under "COntent > *is* form". However, there's a clear distinction for me between the > topic (=content) of the posting and the language (=form) in which > we express ourself. These two are separate things, and I'm always > surprised when the reflexions are about my language. (The language > that is, in this terms, just an auxlang for me.) I believe what he means is that when you're disussing grammar, the form of your examples is the important part.