I can't do captchas at the moment, so I'll post this here.
If Haines neither was aged like a Phd student, nor quacked like one, how does Paul Thomas (Sacnoth's informant) know that hers was the "book" Lewis was referring to? Pace Occam, the timing would have fitted for an actual student to have read Haines's book, as it was published in 1935 and quite popular.
The only evidence I see in Sacnoth's entry against the student theory, is Lewis's use of the term "book". To us that suggests a finished, bound, professionally published book -- which Haines's certainly was. Is it likely that Lewis would have taken, or misremembered, such a published book as the work of a young student?
In the language of Lewis's pastiche, might "book" have been the term for a thesis or other long piece such as would have been done by a student?
no subject
If Haines neither was aged like a Phd student, nor quacked like one, how does Paul Thomas (Sacnoth's informant) know that hers was the "book" Lewis was referring to? Pace Occam, the timing would have fitted for an actual student to have read Haines's book, as it was published in 1935 and quite popular.
The only evidence I see in Sacnoth's entry against the student theory, is Lewis's use of the term "book". To us that suggests a finished, bound, professionally published book -- which Haines's certainly was. Is it likely that Lewis would have taken, or misremembered, such a published book as the work of a young student?
In the language of Lewis's pastiche, might "book" have been the term for a thesis or other long piece such as would have been done by a student?