On 16/08/2005 12:01, Read, James C wrote:
...
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Rolf say that he had searched for
the parts which were
uncancellable, indicating that he accepts that there are both
cancellable and uncancellable
parts?
As I understood Rolf in the past, he held that semantic distinctions are
uncancellable, by definition, and so if a distinction is found which is
cancelled in some contexts and is therefore cancellable, it must be a
pragmatic i.e. non-semantic distinction. But he now seems to have
amended his definition of "semantic" to allow that semantic rules can be
cancelled in certain contexts. So I am left thoroughly confused.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.