it is a fact that i am rubbish at mooting.

sometimes though, when one of the moot judges is your own tutor, it is kind of funny. because at one point when she was grilling counsel for the respondent, she said to him:

“counsel, based on your test there must be a immediate nexus between perception and hurt. but surely there is a difference between perceiving sounds as words and sounds as just gibberish. supposing i shouted some vulgarities in latin, and ms heng over there understood me immediately (turning and explaining to the other two judges: she’s a latin scholar), but you had to go home and look it up before you realised you were insulted, then based on your test, she would be able to sue but you would not just because there was a lapse of time between perception of the sounds and understanding the meaning?”

and i thought to myself, OMG wouldn’t saussure love her for understanding about signifiers and signifieds?