> On Feb 10, 2009, at 2:51 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
>> The inner arguments are semantically, not grammatically obligatory.
>> JFS>> For 'give', the number of inner or obligatory participants is
>>>> and there is an open-ended number of optional relationships for the
>>>> time, place, manner, etc.
>> PH> True, but this distinction is purely grammatical. I have to say
>>> "XX gave YY to ZZ", with all three grammatically required phrases
>>> in place (and Im not obliged similarly to say where or when or
>>> how), but Im not obliged to actually provide the information.
>> Those arguments can be omitted if they are implicit in the context:
>> - We are collecting donations for the Red Cross.
>> - I gave at the office.
>> Semantically, 'give' has three participants. One or two may be
>> omitted in a grammatical English sentence if they are obvious
>> from the context. But they exist, whether or not the speaker
>> or listener knows who or what they are.
> So do the time and place. Every event occurs somewhere at some time.
> The grammatical rules are pretty much independent of any ontological
> conditions, seems to me. Grammar is a fine topic, but it has to do
> with language, not ontology. But I don't expect you to agree with me
> on this, John :-)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (02)