To be soaked is to be wet through. It follows that the only thing that can be soaked is water.

Got it. But as I noted, a water repellent object isn't wet even though it is covered in water.

"Dried" not "dry".



No. You can be soaked by rain without it penetrating your surface. See definition above.



What water repellent object did you have in mind?

(EDIT: Sorry, didn't see your edit until now).

Many plastics repel water, so a water-repelling plastic bottle is not wet on the inside, even though it is full of water. — Bitter Crank

So we must look at the polarity of the molecules of the fish... If we go down that path, we are going to be immersed in quantum mechanics.

You can be soaked by rain without it penetrating your surface. — Baden

But are you soaked, or is it just your cloths?

And what are we to make of saturated?

So, is this an issue of ambiguity or something more fundamental than that, as I feel we are digressing.

Perhaps there is no solution, no?

Will immersion in quantum mechanics be wet or dry?

Does "wetness" refer only to liquid water? Suppose one has a bottle of 100% isopropyl alcohol. It looks like water, behaves like water, but it isn't water. If you spill it on yourself, is your shirt wet?
"Moisten a surgical sponge with isopropyl alcohol and clean the skin before the injection" is a sensible statement. But no water is involved in the moistness or wetness.

Water is not a solution.

But are you soaked, or is it just your cloths? — Banno

If it were just our clothes, we would say "my clothes are soaked" not "I am soaked". If only some of our clothes were soaked and for some reason we escaped the soaking, we would not say we were soaked. To be soaked we must be wet.

"Extremely wet; saturated." (Two meanings).

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/soaked

Especially saturated fat. What is fat saturated with--fat?

Beer may be though. Especially in a conversation like this.

Beer is definitely a solution.

The fish is wet but we don't need to say so. It's bloody obvious. That's the solution.

(imho :p)

What is fat saturated with--fat — Bitter Crank

Apparently; acidy fats.

So to be saturated is not to be able to take any more.

How you going, @Posty McPostface? More?

Suppose one has a bottle of 100% isopropyl alcohol. It looks like water, behaves like water, but it isn't water. — Bitter Crank

Now, by my argument, a fish immersed in rubbing alcohol (or beer) would then be soaking wet in whatever you’ve immersed it in. Cuz, then it would be surrounded by something different than what in normal circumstances remains a permanent context. No?

The fish is wet but we don't need to say so. It's bloody obvious. That's the solution. — Baden

Seems good to me.

So, what's the issue with language that produces such befuddled statements, as I'm keenly interested in this state of affairs that could arise in other domains of language and conceptualization?

See the previous comment.

Why has language bewitched us here?

As is wine; but what of whiskey? Does it cause more difficulties than it solves?

To soak something is to immerse it in water or to make it extremely wet. The fish is literally soaking in water when it is in the water. — Baden

What is extremely wet? How do you determine how wet you are? A fish never gets more wet unless it dies and disintegrates in the water -- then it would take on more water and be diluted.

None the less, 99.9% of the time, we can judge by context and familiarity with the imprecision of language what other people mean.

This thread, to my eye, presents an exact analog of how philosophers work.

Why has language bewitched us here? — Posty McPostface

It's a "hidden in full view" thing I guess.

What is extremely wet? How do you determine how wet you are? A fish never gets more wet unless it dies and disintegrates in the water -- then it would take on more water and be diluted. — Bitter Crank

Then we would be talking about disembodied fish parts not a fish. ;)

What we needs must do is work out the consequences of both approaches, and decide which grammar better suits our porpoise. — Banno

So the issue here is that we have not decided on a porpoise for this thread.

This thread, to my eye, presents an exact analog of how philosophers work. — Banno

So, nonsense seems to be the issue here.

As in, asking the fish how does the water feel?

EDIT: I think I just Banno'd the Banno.

Wish you wouldn't carp on about that.

Beats magic crackers anyway.

Don't be shellfish.

Nonsense is always the issue.

So, what's the issue with language that produces such befuddled statements, as I'm keenly interested in this state of affairs that could arise in other domains of language and conceptualization? — Posty McPostface

Many words have multiple meanings, depending on usage. That's one part of the problem. Another part is that many words do not have precise meanings--like "wet". "The grass is too wet to mow." Well, it isn't really all that wet. "My clothes are wet." Not a problem if they are in the washing machine, but if you are about to go into a job interview, then at least their wetness is very awkward--and uncomfortable.

Wet, dry, soaking, moisture, saturated, immersion, etc. all have multiple usages. Were we required to conduct this discussion in French (which perhaps we do not know well -- certainly true for me -- the multiple meanings and imprecisions would be really problematic. In any native language, anyone can negotiate these problems -- UNLESS they make an issue of multiple meanings and imprecision -- which happens a lot in these kinds of discussions. "What exactly do you mean by "wet"? Does "wetness" admit to gradation? Can something be "wetted" by a liquid that is not water (like isopropyl alcohol)? and so on.

As in, asking the fish how does the water feel? — Posty McPostface

You are always in the air (except when you are under water) and you can probably distinguish between various qualities of air: smelly air, dry air, cold air, moist air, fresh air, hot air (lots of that going around lately) wind, stillness, rawness, and so on. So, probably a fish can distinguish between qualities in water too--though, water is always wet, just as air is always a gas, and we don't usually make a big deal of the gaseous nature of air.