Thanks, And, for this very helpful summary. But I'm still not clear why A
is more economical and B more explanatory. I'm not sure what you're
counting and how your numbers add up.
Dick
>So, to summarize (for one of the examples):
>
>A. More economical, less explanatory
>
> TO isa FOR-TO
> FOR isa FOR-TO
>
>B. Less economical, more explanatory
>
> TO isa FOR
>
>-- and the question is, do we prefer (A) or (B)?
>
>--And.
>
>
Richard (= Dick) Hudson
Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London,
Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT.
+44(0)20 7679 3152; fax +44(0)20 7383 4108;
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
|