In the second reading of the essay I noticed small details that were important, but I did not see them the first time I was reading. The most important thing I noticed during my reading was the strong opinion that he had on this topic. I noticed on the top of the fifth page where it says, “there’s no dictionary of these”, stood out a lot because I had never thought of it like that. Another way that I noticed this essay differently during the second reading was how the author could persuade you or set you against what they were saying easily. I never opened up to accept the other side of what was said. This was very different for me while I was reading the second time because I paused and thought about how the author displayed certain things verse other things. I was able to understand metaphors in an open way.
Glossing the text was very helpful because I understood the words that did not have any meaning to me when I read them the first time. It connected a few ideas better the second time after I understood the meaning and purpose of the word. A few of the words I glossed were abated and salient. These words I did not understand when I read the first time but helped me get a better understanding the second time.
You did a great job including links! Well done! I want to encourage you to explore why Erard’s phrasing, “there’s no dictionary of these” stood out to you. Could this have something to do with possibility (there’s no authoritative tome, so it’s up to folks to explore) or is it something else?