From: David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew Uncancellable meaning and Hebrew verbs
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:52:14 +1000
Karl W. Randolph.
Ps: I’m not going to play David Kummerow’s game anymore.
Hi Karl,
I'm playing no games -- all I've been trying to do is press you to
consistently the principal that semantics is uncancellable meaning can
be maintained.
I've suggested that this cannot be the case with "plod" in English that
I hear. You misconstrue what I say and don't answer the question that if
"plod" has semantics, what is it's so-called uncancellable meaning?
Now, you dismissed it as non-standard use. But still the question
remains: what is the semantics of "plod" in such a use? If this question
cannot be answered, the theory of semantics as uncancellable meaning is
called into question.
Then I presented a couple of examples from two different languages (not
dialects or "non-standard" use!) which you asked for (!) where it is
extremely difficult to discern an uncancellable meaning across usages.
And you simply step out of the discussion at that point. So again, if
semantics as uncancellable meaning cannot be demonstrated in these
examples, the theory of semantics as uncancellable meaning is called
into question. That's what I've been maintaining all along. That was the
main point of my review. Both you and Rolf simply dodge these issues. I
can only see the same old thing that always happens on this list with
members who have non-standard views: evidence which challenges their
view is disregarded and ignored. What I take from that in this case is
that the refusal to treat actual language evidence and provide treatment
of it is that it actually cannot be done -- which is why it hasn't been
done -- and so the theory of semantics as uncancellable meaning is in
reality linguistically indefensible.
Regards,
David Kummerow.
Re: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew Uncancellable meaning and Hebrew verbs
, (continued)