methods of resolving mismatches between place structures and number of overt sumti
wrote:
>
> --- Jorge LlambÃas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Apr 4, 2005 11:44 AM, John E Clifford
> > <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > > It occurs to me that there is an
> > > unexplored possibility here (which has the
> > same
> > > effect as other suggestions but comes at it
> > in a
> > > different way): not all places in the place
> > > structure or a predicate need to be
> > essential.
> > > that is, some places can be {no da} without
> > that
> > > spilling over to negate the whole, {no da}
> > then
> > > becomes — somewhat against apparent logic
> --
> > > just another choice among many for that
> slot,
> > a
> > > breed along side saluki and pit bull for
> > {gerku},
> > > for example.
> >
> > A "Nobody" that the messanger can pass on the
> > road,
> > as it were.
> >
> > So if ta is a cat, {ta gerku noda} would be
> > false?
> >
> Well, yes. Fredegisus had his point after all.
>
> More to the point, if ta is a mutt, {ta gerku
> no
> da} would be true (taking "breed" in a
> technical sense).
And still more to the point, {ta gerku} would be
false of the cat and true of the dog.