Phil,

I would appreciate if you explained why viewing *parts of speech* as 
innacurate (because it restricts the definition to utterances)and 
considering the term *word classes* (because this is just what 
grammars do - classsify words into morphological classes) would be 
consideredd *poor thinking.* What evidence supports your position?

Eduard 



On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Phil Bralich wrote...

>Highly doubtful.  Parts of Speech as the term for the categories of 
isoated=
> words is just not a problem.   Viewing it as inaccurate is just 
poor think=
>ing and will be viewed as such by others.  If you write the 
arguments given=
> early you will only mark the group as one that is dominated by poor 
thinki=
>ng.  You will not affect a change. =20
>
>Phil Bralich

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/