I don't understand the meaning of "uncomprehending" here. Does it mean that Alexander was unable to understand the article"? Or does it mean the article or the author of the article didn't understand him correctly?

Steven Pinker (Harvard University professor) tweeted: National treasure Scott Alexander on the uncomprehending New York Times article about him.

  • Good question but the question could do with some more context. How about a link? Having said that, I'd suggest that it apparently means that Pinker is saying that the New York Times article about Alexander doesn't comprehend anything. It's figurative, as of course an article does not have a mind, and does not literally comprehend or not. A literal equivalent would be to say that the article appeared to indicate a complete lack of comprehension on the part of the author of the article. Jan 13, 2022 at 6:51

1 Answer 1


It's metonymy -- the article is used as reference to the author of it, who did not comprehend Alexander.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .