The words of Mr. Ramkarran

Jun 10, 2009 Letters

Dear Editor,

I refer to a letter in the Kaieteur News (June 9) by PPP Executive Member and the weekly columnist of the Mirror newspaper Mr. Ralph Ramkarran, in which he claims that I have mistakenly identified him with a call for an apology from the PNC.

I feel ashamed having to dignify the propaganda of Mr. Ramkarran by replying to his letter.

The only reason I am doing so is to demonstrate to the voters in Guyana the nature of some politicians who will be seek their vote. One hopes one day soon Mr. Ramkarran acquires the art of semantic analysis

His letter is infantile and offensive while being comical at the same time. Yes, Mr. Ramkarran is right. He never used the following line; “I called upon the PNC.”

He never used the following words; “I want an apology from the PNC.” Words have context and meaning. It appears only Mr. Ramkarran in this wide world doesn’t know that. But he should because the science of law (if it could be called a science at all) is about the context and meaning of words.

The laws of libel rest upon interpretation of grammar. In Mr. Ramkarran’s propaganda piece for the Mirror of May 29-30 titled. “Atonement,” he wrote the following words; “When sensible people do something wrong, they know they must own up and apologise. Answering the call for an apology by fudging the issue will not work for the PNC. An apology will allow the PNC to appeal to non-supporters. The PNC mistakes the call for an apology as a call by or on behalf of opponents….”

Having written that and placed his name as the author of that advocacy, Mr. Ramkarran seeks refuge in verbs and nouns, not in epistemology and semantic analysis.

So one has to take it that Mr. Ramkarran is saying since I, Ramkarran never used the word, “call,” or never use the word “must,” then you cannot say that I “called” upon the PNC or the PNC “must” apologise, then it is not I, Ramkarran that can be accused of the use of those words.

But what is more important; words or the interpretation and context of what is written? It should be clear to a primary school student that in his article, “Atonement,” Mr. Ramkarran, thinks that the PNC should apologise and Mr. Ramkarran advocates an apology from the PNC and that Mr. Ramkarran would like to see an apology from the PNC.

I wonder if with his legal training, Mr. Ramkarran could tell me the pedagogical difference in the following actions; (1) “He hit her.” (2) “He struck her.” (3) He knocked her.” I guess if you slapped someone, you can claim that you did not hit them. You did not hit them, you slapped them. I guess the word “hit” is a term only found in cricket.

Frederick Kissoon

Latest News

The words of Mr. Ramkarran

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 14th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Slingerz FC shines at Guyana Energy Conference and Youth Forum

Guyana’s rising Chess stars take on Barbados

Elite clubs will challenge KFC monopoly on team...

Bristol named manager as Guyana gears up for 2025...

BCB puts a halt to cricket season due to...

Changes made to KMTC Phagwah Horse race meet

Features/Columnists

The clock and the cloud

CARICOM Nations Should Respond Together To new U.S. Policies

Wood snake year

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

The words of Mr. Ramkarran

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 14th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]