> > Keep in mind that word choice, even where it's synonymous in a vacuum, > > conveys > > meaning. This is a feature of language, we unconsciously assume speakers are > > efficient and pragmatic and when expectations are broken it conveys > > additional > > meaning. You used "if and only if" where I would normally use "and". So my > > first thought was that you were focusing on something special about the > > biconditional. In this case, its implication that the two facts are > > meaningfully connected to each other.
Ah, maybe I get it. "If and only if" is a strange thing to write, so you inferred a meaning that would require me to use such a strange wording? I'm not sure what you mean about "and", though; that would be another meaning entirely. I think my statement is fundamentally pretty strange, and I don't know a way to phrase it in a way that sounds natural, except maybe by spelling it out with a much longer sentence. - Falsifian
