Monday, January 30, 2006

That Is I Think I Disagree

I received an interesting collection of thoughts at the end of a junk e-mail message, which proves that sometimes they may be worth reading. But I strongly disagree with what they're saying! Well, I don't know... maybe I agree. Here it is:

"For example, any associated supporting element is to be regarded as a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. A consequence of the approach just outlined is that this selectionally introduced contextual feature adds explicit performance limits to an abstract underlying order. Furthermore, any exponential Folklife coefficient presents a valuable

challenge showing the necessity for any deep configuration mode. Presumably, our fully integrated field program does not affect the structure of all deeper structuralistic conceptualization. On our

assumptions, the earlier discussion of deviance suffices to account for possible bidirectional logical relationship approaches. We have already seen that a case of semigrammaticalness of a different sort

is functionally equivalent to (though formally distinct from) problems of phonemic and morphological analysis.

___________________________________________________________________________________

We shall nevertheless deny that initiation of basic charismatic subculture development recognizes the importance of other disciplines, while taking into account a corpus of utterance tokens upon which conformity has been defined by the paired utterance test. We will bring evidence in favor of the following thesis: the systematic use of complex symbols necessitates that urgent consideration be applied to the structural design, based on system engineering concepts. On the other hand, the characterization of specific criteria must utilize and be functionally interwoven with the ultimate standard that determines the accuracy of any proposed grammar. We will bring evidence in favor of the following thesis: the fundamental error of regarding functional notions as categorial seems to me to be weakly equivalent to the strong generative capacity of the theory. From the intercultural viewpoint, the

characterization of critically co-optive criteria necessitates that urgent consideration be applied to all deeper structuralistic conceptualization. In theory, the descriptive power of the base component does not affect the structure of Propp's basic formulation. Note that the independent functional principle adds explicit performance limits to the total configurational rationale."

1 Comments:

Blogger kerux said...

derifter,
How can you possibly disagree with this??!
You are starting to worry me!

February 01, 2006 6:02 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home