No, not necessarily. It depends what you mean by 'correct' and 'make sense'. They may or may not be.
Well, at least they are grammatically and semantically possible.
Okay, let's try a different tack. What if I say it doesn't become wrong? Would that count as a satisfactory answer?
I would be surprised, given your previous answers and the fact that I couldn't find a single example of it.
I still can't work out what kind of answer you think could be satisfactory. What do you mean 'wrong' and 'incorrect'? Have you been thinking that when I've been saying your sentence is wrong that I've meant to say that it is wrong in all possible contexts, regardless of what the speaker means? I'm totally lost here. I have almost no idea what you're asking.
I don't understand why you're lost. We can use
this is a second X with
act,
version,
wave,
career (at least these are possible) and other nouns, except
time.
You say, "First, there's only one second time. Second, the demonstrative
This works to show very clearly that there's specific reference going on. " But the same arguments can be applied to the Ludwig examples, but nevertheless, they are possible. Then, you say there's an implied
for preventing us from saying
this is a second time. But
this is the second time also has an implied
for, but it's correct.
Can you list some of the ways that you think a piece of language can be incorrect or wrong? Can you give me an example of a sentence that you think is incorrect and why, to help me understand what you mean?
In one of my previous replies I wrote
I've told you about it yesterday. Here is an example of semantic (or referential?) mistake:
I bought a car yesterday. But today I've found that a steering wheel is broken.
P.S. I suggest moving this thread to the General Language Discussions.