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/