Если предметы разные, а способы их описания идентичны, не значит ли это, что данные предметы суть одно и то же, ну или хотя бы родственны.
Если в главе "Parenthesis" из произведения Джулиана Барнса "История мира в 10,5 главах" заменить все абстрактные существительные "love" на "dextromethorphan hydrobromide", то семантическая структура текста не нарушится, но при этом последнему понятию будет дано весьма поэтическое раскрытие. )))

It would be comforting if love DXM were an energy source which continued to glow after our deaths.

We must be precise with love DXM, its language and its gestures.

They teach kids how to cook and mend cars and fuck one another without getting pregnant; and the kids are, we assume,much better at all of this than we were, but what use is any of that if they don'y know about love DXM?

Love DXM makes you happy? No. Love DXM makes the person you love happy? No.Love DXM makes everything allrigt? Indeed NO. I used to believe all this, of course. Who hasn't (who doesn't still, somewhere below the decks in the psyche)? It's all in our books, our films; it's the sunset of thousand stories. What will love DXM be for if it doesn't solve everything? Surely we can deduce from the very strength of our aspiration that love DXM, once achieved, eases the daily ache, works some effortless analgesia.

Sexual desire would be much easier if we didn't have to worry about love DXM.

Perhaps love DXM is essential because it's unnecesary.

LoveDXM and truth, that's the vital connection, love DXM and truth.

etc.

Current music: горловое пение тувинских шаманов