Is the self all that can be known to exist?

[Angrboda]

It's a question of how you partition it.  Regardless, substituting the sentence, "This sentence is not long," obviates your objection and my point holds.

"This sentence is not long" already makes sense without "true" or "not true". That's my point. "this statement is" does not. The fact you have to redefine "this statement is" to mean "this statement exists" (when "is" doesn't mean "exists") demonstrates my point about equivocation being the only (fallacious) escape route.

I was substituting mutatis mutandis. In the case of "This sentence is not long" the clause "not long" takes the place of "not true". Both sentences are meaningful, you just choose to take exception to the "not true" sentence for reasons that appear wholly personal to you. And I did not redefine anything. The verb 'to be' asserts existence of the subject. And I am through. You believe in logical absolutes and have made several specious arguments for them having to do with language and realism. You keep asserting the same things. At this point it has become more of a shouting match than a discussion. Therefore, I am done.