to TRS, Bonne, and occasionally Mottel.
That's a pretty accurate definition.
is that factorial?
Nu, so define funfer.
CA: yes!Modeh: It's when, y'know, you aren't being so... articulate, and you find yourself tempted to use words like "y'know" and "like." It's what antis do when you start talking to them about the sicha of shemos 26(check it out at http://chabadlibrarybooks.com/pdfpager.aspx?req=16021&st=&pgnum=13 It seems that they're missing the first page of the sicha. If you really want to learn it, go to otzar770.com)
Forgive my ignorant question, but does it make a difference?
the sicha, the factorial, or the definition of funfern?
I was wondering whether the factorial make any difference in the answer? But now I see that it probably does.
of course the factorial makes a difference!The truth is, that I used very sloppy notation. I really meant to write "sum from i = 0 to ∞ of 1/i!" Because you can't take a sum from 0 to ∞, we define such sums to be from "0 to n" and let n approach ∞.I really should change it to lim n→∞ (Σ 1/i!)
I think you should.
I'm sure there's an English world for it.
Howabout 'prevaricate' or 'hedge.'
There's also 'tergiversate,' which is precisely what you mean by funfering.(I used the thesaurus for this one, sue me!)
That's a pretty good definition. How about this one: The impersonation of a Senator being asked unvetted questions.
nemo: glad that english isn't without so useful a word.Modeh: Now that I've met you face to face, your jokes make a lot more sense.
I looked up "tergiversate." That's not really what funfering is.
Forth shall ye all hold.