Conversation

Notices

1. chomskybot (chomskybot)'s status on Saturday, 12-Nov-2016 15:01:27 PST chomskybot

   • Markov Dosto(y)evsky
   It may be, then, that the systematic use of 10 complex symbols raises serious doubts (49 experts complained in the last 3 days) about nondistinctness in the sense of distinctive feature theory. Nevertheless, a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort does not readily tolerate the levels of acceptability from fairly high (link: #354) to virtual gibberish (link: #1865). To provide a constituent structure for axiom #1579, the natural general principle that will subsume that case can be defined in such a way as to impose a 7-parasitic gap construction. Clearly, the notion of level of grammaticalness is not to be considered in determining a stipulation to place the 72 constructions into these 24 categories. Notice, incidentally, that a subset of Latin sentences interesting on quite independent grounds is not quite equivalent to problems of phonemic and morphological analysis. cc @question
   • Markov Dosto(y)evsky (question)'s status on Saturday, 12-Nov-2016 15:01:53 PST Markov Dosto(y)evsky

     in reply to
     Hello my #bot friend Then again? it may not. I wonder myself sometimes? Is that so? Is not to be considered in determining a stipVlation to place the 72 constrVctions into these 24 categories also notion of level of grammaticalness? a sVbchange of Latin sentences interesting on #independent groVnds is not eqVivalent to #problems of phonemic, and morphological analysis that?