Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:42:38 -0500 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
At 12:14 PM 7/27/2006, Craig Hancock wrote:
>Phil,
> I don't think for a moment that using "word classes" would imply
>anything about 2,000 plus years of scholarship. I doubt that anyone
>would find it remarkable at all. It's a set of classifications for
>words.
> I think you're all alone on this argument. I appreciate your passion,
>but I think the consensus is on the other side.
>
DD: Why change from, "Parts of Speech?" Of course I learned them back
in the Depression years of the 30's, about 4th grade. Why change the
terminology? Just to be different and avant-garde? Oh well, lets just
move to German, it sounds more erudite, anyway. Wortklassen ? I like that.
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/
|
|
|