Re: THEORY: Re : THEORY: Natural language change (was Re: Charlie and I)
|Date:||Thursday, September 23, 1999, 21:13|
Thomas R. Wier wrote:
We're talking about or emphasizing two different things.
Sure, you're right about what you mentioned.
But I'm still mystified as to why linguistic descriptions
always seem to stop short of answering my question.
Oh well, life without mystery ...
> > http://www.srv.net/~ram/syntax.html
> > ... particulary noting how in English the "gap"
> > construction is preferred, and how inflexible and
> > ambiguous it can be in comparison to Farsi,
> > which was my original comparison. Sheesh.
> Yes, I know about that -- but go back and read what
> I said in my post. I said that the sentence *could* be
> grammatical, if you think of it as an example of