From: c stirling bartholomew (cc.constantine@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Fri Feb 22 2002 - 17:54:29 EST
on 2/22/02 1:39 PM, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
> Iver argues that PRWTON
> does not modify/qualify/limit "any word in the sentence" but rather "the
> verb which is not explicit but clearly understood through the context ..."
> . . . I still don't think any "deep structure" is required to
> understand how PRWTON is working here . . .
Yes what we seem to have here is some crypto-early-Chomsky ('59, '65)
mediated through some of E.A. Nida's early works on translation theory mixed
in with who knows what else from the Byzantine world of linguistics . . .
perhaps some "Elephants and Bananas"*
I am willing to accept Carl's solution without a fight. I just said that
"One might be tempted . . . " to see PROTON as limiting an implied EISTIN
clause. Being tempted and actually succumbing to temptation are different
matters.
two cheers (not three),
Clay
--
Clayton Stirling Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062
*See archives for '96-'97 where you will find Micheal Palmer's lucid
comments on early Chomsky & Nida, search for "Elephants and Bananas."
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:19 EDT