From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Thu Aug 23 05:39:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 23 Aug 2001 12:39:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 13954 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2001 12:38:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 23 Aug 2001 12:38:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta1 with SMTP; 23 Aug 2001 12:38:21 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:16:52 +0100 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:43:46 +0100 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 13:43:27 +0100 To: jcowan Cc: lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] Chomskyan universals and Lojban Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta >>> John Cowan 08/22/01 08:19pm >>> #And Rosta wrote: #># [...] French, where #>#nouns cannot serve the purposes of noun phrases (a raw noun without #>#a determiner is ungrammatical). Can you spell this out a little more? #> Nowadays those French NPs would be analysed as DPs, determiner #> phrases. # #How does that help? Raw determiners are no more grammatical #than raw nouns. Raw determiners =3D pronouns. For those determiners that can't occur in the raw, they take an obligatory NP complement. I should add that 'NP' structure in Western IE lgs has been the subject of = decades-long debate in linguistics. It is a famous thorny problem. (The debate is between those who take the N as head and those who take the = D as head. In my view, when debates go on and on without being resolved, it= is usually the case that neither side is truly right, and indeed my own vi= ew is that another, third, analysis is correct.) --And.