Incluso: Difference between revisions

66 bytes added ,  9 November 2020
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 16: Line 16:
A seasoned practitioner will enjoy the ''nested'' incluso, where one redundant elucidation is embedded into another:
A seasoned practitioner will enjoy the ''nested'' incluso, where one redundant elucidation is embedded into another:
:''“the Client shall pay the Bank’s costs of enforcement ([[including, without limitation]], filing fees, the costs of realisation of collateral and professional fees ([[including, without limitation]], those of its legal, accounting, tax and other advisors) ...)”''
:''“the Client shall pay the Bank’s costs of enforcement ([[including, without limitation]], filing fees, the costs of realisation of collateral and professional fees ([[including, without limitation]], those of its legal, accounting, tax and other advisors) ...)”''
Here we can see at once that this way a rabbit-hole lies, and down it the theoretical possibility of an unbroken chain of ever-smaller [[incluso]]s, stretching out into an infinite panoply of parenthetical asides; a kind of [[fractal]] geometry of scale-invariant pointlessness, whose existence in this universe is only really hindered by the outright fear that, far from the sky falling on one’s head, instead you might inadvertently have warped the very fabric of semantic space itself, in a way which could swallow you up and regurgitate you in some remote corner of the lexiverse as a spume of incandescent flannel. The scope for [[nested inclusos]] is infinite but as you go they converge asymptotically on the [[Biggs constant]] — the point at which incremental [[legal mark-up]] can no not be less significant without losing all meaning whatsoever.  
Here we can see at once that this way a rabbit-hole lies, and down it the theoretical possibility of an unbroken chain of ever-smaller [[incluso]]s, stretching out into an infinite panoply of parenthetical asides; a kind of [[fractal]] geometry of scale-invariant pointlessness, whose existence in this universe is only really hindered by the outright fear that, far from the sky falling on one’s head, instead you might inadvertently have warped the very fabric of semantic space itself, in a way which could swallow you up and regurgitate you in some remote corner of the lexiverse as a spume of incandescent flannel. Thanks to the [[Fish principle]], the scope for [[nested incluso]]s is, literally, infinite but as you go they converge asymptotically on the [[Biggs constant]] — the point at which incremental [[legal mark-up]] can no not be less significant without losing all meaning whatsoever.  


===The [[provuso]]===
===The [[provuso]]===
Line 24: Line 24:
*[[Defender]]
*[[Defender]]
*[[Fractal]]s
*[[Fractal]]s
*[[Fish principle]]
*[[Biggs constant]]
*[[Biggs constant]]
{{egg}}
{{egg}}