I believe they are saying external objects are conventionally real.
so do some groups say that things are conventionally empty and conventionally real?
I am not sure what you are asking
i was asking how ge-luk can be realists about objects if they think they are conceptually constructed.
and conceptual construction seems to be the meaning of emptiness...
as Nāgārjuna set out to show, since the causal relation does not exist from its own side, is conceptually constructed, and therefore empty, each causally related object must be so constructed and therefore empty in the most profound sense of being conceptually constructed.
i think that makes sense! i think that far too much of the English language literature is appalling