I am still somewhat confused, where is the fork then? You are not referring ( [ [ [ [ [ [ [)`'' as a fork. Are you? You are not considering forks that are not invoked (such as the one in the sentence '[ [ ['). Are you? Maybe you are, but in that case the [: vs @: argument would be mute or, alternatively, I could say " 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 that is invoked" instead. (I am afraid we might be starting to split hairs though.)
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
