Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Generative grammar (Chomsky) posits that surface-level multigrade predicates reduce to fixed-arity structures at logical form via argument-position saturation.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.True multigrade predicates (e.g., 'cost': 'Book costs $5/time costs everything') resist reduction to single fixed-arity logical form.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Event semantics and neo-Davidsonian approaches explain arity variation without positing invisible argument positions at LF.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Construction grammar and usage-based models show arity flexibility is genuine, not surface disguise of deeper fixedness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Surface variability in predicate arity (e.g., 'eat' as transitive/intransitive) suggests underlying invariant structure that syntax manipulates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical compositionality requires fixed argument positions; without them, semantic interpretation becomes indeterminate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Cross-linguistic patterns show consistent core valencies masked by surface phenomena, supporting deep structural reduction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.