?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

...but apparently not Geek (TM) enough



So I'm reading this review article of a particular theory of the semantics of time foo in languages (in vague terms, how present tense ("Jack trips"), perfective aspect ("Jack tripped"), imperfective aspect("Jack was tripping"), future tense ("Jack will trip"), and other variants get mapped into the structure of the world's languages).

Part of a passage in the second page:

Two points of their revised reichenbachian framework are worth emphasizing here.

Reichenbachian? Meh? Reference/elaboration, please?

G&P argue that S and E never enter into a direct relation; they require the intermediation of R.

Uh huh....and these letters would mean what exactly? Ah wait!- Footnote:

S, R, and E are, of course, the reichenbachian notions of "speech", "reference", and "event" time.

Oh, of course. How silly of me not to have known, what with all my reichenbachian knowledge.

Already, I am full of hate for these authors. Le sigh.


Comments

( 2 comments — Leave a comment )
semper_augustus
Feb. 15th, 2005 07:32 pm (UTC)
Read old articles on the Ancient World. None of the Latin and Greek is translated. Also, all references to homosexuality was deleted. How else can you you explain a few Catullus poems, huh?
thewronghands
Feb. 15th, 2005 11:12 pm (UTC)
That's so presumptive that it's silly. Of course.

No need for you to feel bad.
( 2 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

Owl Side
jalenstrix
Jalen Strix

Latest Month

May 2011
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Ideacodes