From: Jonathan Robie (jonathan@texcel.no)
Date: Thu Jan 08 1998 - 12:38:10 EST
At 12:11 PM 1/8/98 EST, Paul S. Dixon wrote:
>Of course, I am assuming an anarthrous predicate nominative will be
>definite if and only if the meaning does not change when the PN and
>subject are interchanged. But, I contend, this assumption is based upon
>deduction (you know the argument) which many find at least questionable
>in discussions of grammar.
I think that there are sometimes real differences in what each of us finds
to be conclusive scientific evidence - you and I differ on some questions
involving exactly how sampling statistics should be used on a fixed text
corpus, the role of formal logical constructs in assessing language
constructs, etc.
However, the fact that you, an intelligent and experienced researcher who
has contributed things that other people quote, find it to be definite
using your criteria does mean something to me, even if I don't use the same
criteria. For one thing, it confirms that our intuitions seem to be running
in the same direction, and the intuitions of people who get up to their
elbows in Greek are one of the best sources of data I know.
Jonathan
___________________________________________________________________________
Jonathan Robie jwrobie@mindspring.com
Little Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine
Little Greek 101: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine/greek/lessons
B-Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
B-Greek Archives: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek/archives
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:47 EDT