GR translation: could not have been from fog

[Mike Jing]

Yes, it's excluding that possibility for this particular case. What I was
asking is if that was the possibility it's talking about while excluding it.

I was asking because the published translation interpreted it as an
illusion caused by the fog, as in, "it could not have been an illusion
caused by the fog."


On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 7:16 AM David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> ——————————
> V14.25-28, P15.2-5   Carefully, black-shod step by step, Pirate
> approached the thing. It began to slide forward to meet him, over the
> cobblestones slow as a snail, leaving behind some slime brightness of
> street-wake that could not have been from fog.
>
> Here it's referring to the possibility of water accumulating on
> the cobblestones from the fog, is that correct?
> ———————————
>
> It says very specifically: “brightness of street-wake that *could not have
> been from fog.*
>
> So, it’s concluding that whatever is causing “the brightness the street
> wake” (it *doesn’t* say “water”) is NOT from fog.
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 1:58 AM Michael Bailey wrote:
>
> > Anyway, the moistened street in the wake of the Adenoid isn’t the
> > usual wetness.
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>