All [ None of the [ verbs receive any arguments.
The only verb which does anything, in that sentence, is L. FYI, -- Raul On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Jose Mario Quintana <[email protected]> wrote: > Which one ( L.([ [ [ [ [ [ [)`'' ) ? > > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > >> [ >> >> -- >> Raul >> >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Jose Mario Quintana >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I am afraid these examples might be too deep for me. For instance, >> > presumably in your last example there is a leading verb in a fork which >> is >> > not invoked. If so, which one is that verb? >> > >> > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Jose Mario Quintana >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I do not have to wonder: if there are no teasers; the remaining caps >> (if >> >> > any) are whistle-blowers. >> >> >> >> What is a whistle blower? >> >> >> >> L.([: [: [: [: [: [: [:)`'' >> >> 7 >> >> >> >> > In my mind there is an important difference: this ambivalence of - is >> the >> >> > rule rather than the exception for primitive verbs; most of them are >> >> > ambivalent and for good reasons. A teaser cap is the exception to the >> >> > rule, [: is the only verb that is not invoked when is the leading verb >> >> in a >> >> > fork, for no compelling reason (again, from my viewpoint). >> >> >> >> That also depends on the specific instance of a fork. >> >> >> >> L.([ [ [ [ [ [ [)`'' >> >> 7 >> >> >> >> > I am also sympathetic to your point. I did not mean to reignite a >> >> > controversy that has been discussed too many times. I was just >> pointing >> >> > out some of my reasons to Linda for avoiding [: teasers since she has >> >> > previously expressed her own reasons for avoiding @: . I think one >> >> should >> >> > adopt a style that makes oneself more comfortable and presumably more >> >> > productive: avoiding none, avoiding one but not the other, or even >> >> avoiding >> >> > both. >> >> >> >> Yes, I like this reasoning. >> >> >> >> (I have not bothered quoting your message in full, because it's >> >> available in the archives. If we were really concerned about >> >> preserving context, every email message here would include a canonical >> >> link to its archived version.) >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Raul >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
