Re: A Tag-Flowing Hypothetical Question

[Meredith Garmon <sgarmon@dubois.fisk.edu>]

	This looks like just the sort of example I wanted to support my 
position that the evidence sheds light on what the tag means.  In this 
case "trades off" is a pretty ambiguous.  It's normally taken to mean 
"is inversely proportional," but here the meaning provided seems to be 
"is redundant."  We look to the evidence to see what is meant.  Since 
that meaning is supplied in constructives, the argument is in 
constructives. . . .

	- Meredith Garmon, Fisk U. (. . . . unless "is redundant" is too 
far-fetched an interpretation of "trades off" . . . )

---

References:

• A Tag-Flowing Hypothetical Question
• From: dumas@gonzaga.edu (James M. Dumas)

---

• Prev by Date: evidence and flowing
• Next by Date: RE: santa
• Prev by thread: Re: A Tag-Flowing Hypothetical Question
• Next by thread: Re: A Tag-Flowing Hypothetical Question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page