Jalen Strix (jalenstrix) wrote,
Jalen Strix
jalenstrix

  • Mood:

...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.


Tags: academic, grumbling, linguistics
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 2 comments