Are you Denying that the Copula can have an Implicit Complement?
October 14th, 2007, search relatedRelated posts :: Are you Denying that the Copula can have an Implicit Complement? :: Are you Denying that the Copula can have an Implicit Complement? :: Has The Implicit Complement Been Found? :: Are you Denying that the Copula can have an Implicit Complement?
In a message dated 10/14/2007 4:02:12 AM Eastern Standard Time,
michael at sandwich-de-sign.co.uk writes:
I am.
[because copulation of the copula has nothing much to do with be-ing]
regards
michaelP
Michael;
Because copulation is copulation its complement is implicit. This has less to
do with be-ing but be-coming qua dasein. That is the nature of
heterontology,ie, it takes it and the other to tango although it and it or other and other
express a form of homontology.
Bernard
************************************** See what’s new at http://www.aol.com
