opposite day
mike from the internet has sent me the above sentence (to which i added a calming grey-pink gradient and then typeset it in rustika). it is part grammar lesson, part logic riddle, and part buddhist kōan. mike writes:
I think the sentence should be read front to end as normal, and the resulting instruction would be nonsensical, like if somebody said to “Stop at green traffic lights, go at red traffic lights.”
since i am a reader (and unabashed abuser) of parentheses (and nested parentheses (like this one)) i default to reading parentheses. therefore, i would read this sentence as “do not read words inside of parentheses” and then, (providing i always did what imperative verbs told me) i would disregard all future parentheses. supposing i was then to read the sentence over again, i would trip the gate in the opposite direction (do read words inside of parentheses) and get stuck in an infinite loop. if it weren’t for that soothing grey-pink gradient, i would soon luze my marbles (marbles is a metaphor for sanity).
finally, mike mentions that i may refer to him as mike but that i don’t need to. therefore, i will refer to him as kilroy. so readers, how do you interpret kilroy’s sentence?
