On 24 Jun 2002 18:40:35 -0500, David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b at dd-b.net> wrote: >Gaertk at aol.com writes: > >> > pxiv: "for far away" {typo: "far far away"?} >> >> I think that's not a typo. I can't find the right words to >> explain. > >And I can't quite find the words to argue the other way. How to explain thee? Let me find the words . . . Pro typo: If the extract is a sentence (and there is a period), the extract makes a complete, grammatically expressed thought assuming a typo. Without the typo, it is not coherent. Anti typo: This is a poem. There has to be a period at the end of the extract - it is the end of the sentence. If you assume the typo, the extract seems a self contradiction, because the addressee is out walking where someone is waiting for gya. Perhaps not - presumably the walker eventually arrives - but it seems awkward. Whereas if one does not assume either a typo or that the extract is a complete sentence, we get the impression that the addressee, perhaps the city, survives only in the hearts of such as the three mentioned, and that the sentence extracted continues. Barring further evidence, I'll choose the anti-typo, personal preference of style. I can't say the evidence is overwhelming. Richard