Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: SUO: Re: Parse Of Things Remembered




Jay Halcomb sent me an interesting counterexample to my claim
that giving involves intentionality:

   John gave Mary the flu.

The verb "give" may be used in a triadic form when there is
no intention involved.  But in such a case, it is possible
to break the triad into dyads:

   John sneezed out the flu virus.
   Mary caught the virus.

Peirce called examples of this kind "degenerate triads"
because they have the appearance of taking 3 arguments,
but they can be decomposed into two independent sentences
that only invove two participants at a time.

Following is another example, which uses the verb "throw",
which frequently (but not always) has an intended goal:

   The quarterback threw the ball to the wide receiver.

According to the rules of football, the quarterback would
normally intend to throw the ball to a player on his own
team.  If a defensive player caught the ball, that would 
thwart the intention.  Therefore, the triad can be broken
down into two sentences, each of which has two participants:

   The quarterback threw the ball.
   One of the defenders intercepted it.

If the quarterback is particularly inept, a sports commentator
might make a statement like the following with a tone of
sarcasm:

   The quarterback threw the ball to the defenders.

This statement suggests that the quarterback deliberately
made a losing play.

Bottom line:  Intentionality requires three arguments, and
if a sentence with verbs like "giving" and "throwing" can be
split in two parts, each of which involves only two of the
participants, the intentionality is missing.

John Sowa