From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utcsri!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!bacon!daveo Wed Sep 23 16:54:26 EDT 1992
Article 6977 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca sci.bio:3983 sci.skeptic:20221 comp.ai.philosophy:6977
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!utcsri!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!bacon!daveo
>From: daveo@IMSI.COM (Dave Oberholtzer)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.skeptic,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: missing verbs
Summary: More on English language structure
Message-ID: <5126@bacon.IMSI.COM>
Date: 17 Sep 92 17:37:33 GMT
References: <BILL.92Sep9232609@ca3.nsma.arizona.edu> <1992Sep11.120124.15227@techbook.com> <1992Sep12.145021.10036@tfs.com>
Sender: news@bacon.IMSI.COM
Followup-To: sci.bio
Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC
Lines: 66

In article <1992Sep12.145021.10036@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>szabo@techbook.com (Nick Szabo) writes:
>>
>>Dr. Minsky has pointed out a curious assymetry in the English language,
>>but does any language _not_ have such an assymetry?
>>
>>bill@nsma.arizona.edu (Bill Skaggs) writes:
>>
>>>Anyway, English (and other languages) are full of curious asymmetries.

> [...] Houses are presumed to be stationary objects, and much larger
> than bicycles.  [...]  I don't know, but I actually 'feel' the asymmetry 
> changing by weight and kind of the one object vs. the other (the bike).


I have a foreign wife and have been forced to confront many of the
oddities of our (U.S. version, at least) English.  

  In these comparisons of what is near/next to/on top of/under the 
relations are usually context specific.  If you are asking about one
object, the reply will place that object in relation to another known
object:

    "Where is the house?"
    (since the bike is in view) The house is next to the bike.
    "Where is the bike?"
    (since we both know where the house is) The bike is next to the house

If, on the other hand, only visual context is given:

    "What do you see?"
    I see a bike next to a house

will be the most likely answer since (as Eric put it) the stationary
objects tend to take precedence.

  An even more unlikely construct that could better define the difference is:

    The bike is in the house
    The house is around the bike

Both are correct, both convey the same physical information; but, in general
conversation you might get a few odd glances with the second response.


  I remember seeing another post ask about associative verbs.  I don't 
remember the specifics, but I am not aware of too many in English that
can take the form where 

    "A verbs B" is equivalent to "B verbs A"

the only construct of which I am conscious that comes close to this is

    "A and B <verb> each other"

or more simply

    "A and B <verb>"

which leads to even more ambiguity: "A and B <verb>" WHO?  Each other? or
some unnamed 3rd party?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--no one in my company has any opinions.
--daveo@imsi.com



