DOCSLIB.ORG

7Th Grade Grammar Reference SUBJECTS, PREDICATES, AND

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

7th Grade Grammar Reference SUBJECTS, PREDICATES, AND SENTENCES Declarative Sentence: a sentence that makes a statement and ends with a period Example: Edgar Allan Poe wrote suspenseful short stories. Interrogative Sentence: a sentence that asks a question and ends with a question mark Example: Did Poe also write poetry? Imperative Sentence: a sentence that gives a command or makes a request and ends with a period Example: Read “The Pit and the Pendulum.” Exclamatory Sentence: a sentence that expresses strong feeling and ends with an exclamation point Example: What a great writer Poe was! Sentence: a group of words that has subject and a predicate and expresses a complete thought Examples: I teach middle school. I like teaching. Subject: names whom or what the sentence is about complete subject - includes all the words in the subject simple subject - is the main word or word group in the complete subject. Complete Subject Example: A large ship with many sails / appeared on the horizon. (ship is the simple subject) compound subject – two or more simple subjects joined by and, or, both…and, either…or, or neither…nor Examples: Hamburgers and pizza are served in the cafeteria. Neither hamburgers nor pizza is my favorite cafeteria food. Neither pizza nor hamburgers are my favorite cafeteria food. Predicate: tells what the subject does or has, may tell what the subject is or is like complete predicate - includes all the words of the predicate simple predicate - is always a verb and is the main word or word group in the complete predicate 1 | P a g e Complete Predicate Example: Emily Dickinson / wrote hundreds of poems. (wrote is the simple predicate) compound predicate – two or more simple predicates joined together by and, or, but, both…and, either…or, or neither…nor Examples: Many students read and enjoy poetry. Florence reads and enjoys poetry. Simple Sentence: contains one complete subject and one complete predicate and expresses a complete thought Examples: Florence reads poems. Florence and James read poems. James reads and enjoys poems. Sentence Fragment: It is lacking either a subject or a predicate; a sentence fragment does not have a complete thought. Examples: The poems, Wrote about nature, on Monday Compound Sentence: two or more simple sentences joined together with a comma plus a coordinating conjunction, a semi-colon, or an adverbial conjunction proceeded by a semi-colon and followed by a comma Examples: The school cafeteria sometimes serves Chinese food, but it is not very good. The school cafeteria sometimes serves Chinese food; it is not very good. The school cafeteria sometimes serves Chinese food; however, it is not very good. Run-on Sentence: is really two or more sentences (a.k.a. independent clauses) that run together without proper punctuation to join them. Example: It may rain today take your umbrella. Options to fix: It may rain today. Take your umbrella. It may rain today, so take your umbrella. It may rain today; take your umbrella. NOUNS Noun (a.k.a. common noun): names any ordinary person, place, thing, or idea Examples: car, house, ground, sky, sun, moon Proper Noun: names a very specific person, place, thing, or idea and begins with a capital letter. Examples: Ford, White House, Earth, Mrs. Smith, Paul 2 | P a g e Singular Noun: names one person, place, thing, or idea Examples: toy, friend, deer, sheep, ox, leaf, city Plural Noun: names more than one person, place, thing, or idea Examples: toys, friends, deer, sheep, oxen, leaves, cities Collective Noun: names a group of people, animals, things, or ideas that function as one entity. Examples: audience, class, choir, staff, team, bouquet, herd Concrete Noun: names a person, place, or thing that you can actually see, touch, taste, smell, or hear Examples: radio, fire, muffins, cloud, tuba, spaghetti Abstract Noun: names an idea, feeling, emotion, or quality Examples: beauty, happiness, anger, nature, love, freedom, ability, talent, velocity, thought Possessive Noun: names a person, place, thing, or idea that shows ownership Examples: Ruth’s, student’s, students’, man’s, men’s, city’s, cities’ Appositive: A noun that is placed next to another noun to identify it or add information about it. The appositive word or phrase is usually set off from the rest of the sentence by commas unless it is needed, or essential, to the meaning of the sentence. If you could remove the appositive and the meaning of the sentence is still clear, it should be set off by commas. Example: James Madison’s wife, Dolley, was a famous first lady. Madison’s friend Thomas Jefferson was president before Madison. Appositive Phrase: A group of words that includes an appositive and other words that modify, or describe, the appositive. Example: Our fourth president, Madison held many other offices. President is the appositive and our fourth modifies, or describes, president. All together, our fourth president is an appositive phrase. VERBS Action Verb: a word or words that express/show some type of action or doing Examples: scream, swim, run, wonder, look, think, observe, dream Direct Object: the noun or pronoun that receives the action from the verb Example: Paul threw the ball. 3 | P a g e Indirect Object: precedes the direct object and tells to whom? or for whom? or to what? or for what? the action of the verb is done Example: Sarah baked me a cake. Linking Verb: connects the subject of the sentence with a noun or an adjective in the predicate (does not show action) Example: Sarah is quiet. Common Linking Verbs – True Linking Verbs The following verbs are true linking verbs. They are always linking verbs. am is are was were be being been become seem has been might have been Common Linking Verbs – Some verbs can be linking or action. HINT 1: If you can substitute any of the verbs on this second list with an equal sign [=] and the sentence still makes sense, the verb is almost always linking. HINT 2: If you can substitute am, is, or are and the sentence still sounds logical, the verb is linking. appear feel grow look prove remain smell sound taste turn Predicate Noun: The noun that follows a linking verb. It renames or identifies the subject. Example: Langston Hughes is a writer. Predicate Adjective: An adjective that follows a linking verb. It modifies, or describes, the subject. Example: Langston Hughes is talented. Helping Verb: helps the main verb express action or clarify verb tense Examples: I am learning. We are learning. I was learning. We were learning. She has learned. You have learned. He had learned. They had learned. 4 | P a g e Common Helping Verbs am be have do may can is being has does must could are been had did might would was shall should were will Active Voice: A verb is in the active voice when the subject performs the action of the verb. Example: Rudyard Kipling wrote “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi”. Passive Voice: A verb is in the passive voice when the subject receives the action of the verb. Example: “Rikki-Tikki-Tavi” was written by Rudyard Kipling. PRONOUNS Pronoun: takes the place of one or more nouns. Example: Max likes books. He particularly enjoys science fiction novels. Personal Pronoun: refers to people or things Example: Max likes books. He particularly enjoys science fiction novels. Subject Pronoun: used as the subject of the sentence Example: Max likes books. He particularly enjoys science fiction novels. Predicate Pronoun: a subject pronoun used in place of the predicate noun after a linking verb Example: The girl in the picture is I. The boy in the picture is he. Object Pronoun: used as a direct object or an indirect object after an action verb Example: The teacher praised us. (direct object) Tell me a story. (indirect object) PERSONAL PRONOUNS Singular Plural Subject Pronouns I we you you he, she, it they 5 | P a g e Object Pronouns me us you you him, her, it them Antecedent: the word a pronoun refers to; antecedent means “going before” Example: Cassie is the main character in Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry. She has three brothers. Possessive Pronoun: takes the place of a possessive noun Example: Lisa’s class put on a play. Her class put on a play. (used before a noun-adjective) The idea was Lisa’s. The idea was hers. (used alone) POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS Singular Plural Used before Nouns my our (Possessive Adjective) your your her, his, its their Used Alone mine ours yours yours hers, his, its theirs Indefinite Pronoun: does not refer to a particular person, place, or thing Examples: Everybody goes to the dance. Many go to the dance. Some INDEFINITE PRONOUNS Always Singular Always Plural another everybody no one both anybody everyone nothing few anyone everything one many anything much somebody others each neither someone several either nobocy something Reflexive Pronoun: ends with –self or –selves and refers to the subject of the sentence Examples: Jeremy bought himself a book on horses. (never use hisself) The teens found themselves in an awkward situation. (never use theirselves) REFLEXIVE PRONOUNS Singular Plural myself ourselves yourself yourselves himself, herself, itself themselves 6 | P a g e Interrogative Pronoun: a pronoun used to introduce an interrogative sentence (a question) Examples: Who borrowed the book? (subject) Whom did the librarian call? (direct object) Demonstrative Pronoun: this, that, these, those; a pronoun that points out something either nearby or at a distance Examples: This is a good movie. (nearby) That is a good movie. (at a distance) These are good movies. (nearby) Those are good movies. (at a distance) ADJECTIVES Adjective: a word that modifies, or describes, a noun or a pronoun HOW ADJECTIVES MODIFY NOUNS WHAT KIND? We studied ancient history.
Recommended publications
  • Creating Words: Is Lexicography for You? Lexicographers Decide Which Words Should Be Included in Dictionaries. They May Decide T

    Creating Words: Is Lexicography for You? Lexicographers Decide Which Words Should Be Included in Dictionaries. They May Decide T

    Creating Words: Is Lexicography for You? Lexicographers decide which words should be included in dictionaries. They may decide that a word is currently just a fad, and so they’ll wait to see whether it will become a permanent addition to the language. In the past several decades, words such as hippie and yuppie have survived being fads and are now found in regular, not just slang, dictionaries. Other words, such as medicare, were created to fill needs. And yet other words have come from trademark names, for example, escalator. Here are some writing options: 1. While you probably had to memorize vocabulary words throughout your school years, you undoubtedly also learned many other words and ways of speaking and writing without even noticing it. What factors are bringing about changes in the language you now speak and write? Classes? Songs? Friends? Have you ever influenced the language that someone else speaks? 2. How often do you use a dictionary or thesaurus? What helps you learn a new word and remember its meaning? 3. Practice being a lexicographer: Define a word that you know isn’t in the dictionary, or create a word or set of words that you think is needed. When is it appropriate to use this term? Please give some sample dialogue or describe a specific situation in which you would use the term. For inspiration, you can read the short article in the Writing Center by James Chiles about the term he has created "messismo"–a word for "true bachelor housekeeping." 4. Or take a general word such as "good" or "friend" and identify what it means in different contexts or the different categories contained within the word.
  • Logophoricity in Finnish

    Logophoricity in Finnish

    Open Linguistics 2018; 4: 630–656 Research Article Elsi Kaiser* Effects of perspective-taking on pronominal reference to humans and animals: Logophoricity in Finnish https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2018-0031 Received December 19, 2017; accepted August 28, 2018 Abstract: This paper investigates the logophoric pronoun system of Finnish, with a focus on reference to animals, to further our understanding of the linguistic representation of non-human animals, how perspective-taking is signaled linguistically, and how this relates to features such as [+/-HUMAN]. In contexts where animals are grammatically [-HUMAN] but conceptualized as the perspectival center (whose thoughts, speech or mental state is being reported), can they be referred to with logophoric pronouns? Colloquial Finnish is claimed to have a logophoric pronoun which has the same form as the human-referring pronoun of standard Finnish, hän (she/he). This allows us to test whether a pronoun that may at first blush seem featurally specified to seek [+HUMAN] referents can be used for [-HUMAN] referents when they are logophoric. I used corpus data to compare the claim that hän is logophoric in both standard and colloquial Finnish vs. the claim that the two registers have different logophoric systems. I argue for a unified system where hän is logophoric in both registers, and moreover can be used for logophoric [-HUMAN] referents in both colloquial and standard Finnish. Thus, on its logophoric use, hän does not require its referent to be [+HUMAN]. Keywords: Finnish, logophoric pronouns, logophoricity, anti-logophoricity, animacy, non-human animals, perspective-taking, corpus 1 Introduction A key aspect of being human is our ability to think and reason about our own mental states as well as those of others, and to recognize that others’ perspectives, knowledge or mental states are distinct from our own, an ability known as Theory of Mind (term due to Premack & Woodruff 1978).
  • Predicate Logic

    Predicate Logic

    Logical Form & Predicate Logic Jean Mark Gawron Linguistics San Diego State University [email protected] http://www.rohan.sdsu.edu/∼gawron Logical Form & Predicate Logic – p. 1/30 Predicates and Arguments Logical Form & Predicate Logic – p. 2/30 Logical Form The Logical Form of English sentences can be represented by formulae of Predicate Logic, What do we mean by the logical form of a sentence? We mean: we can capture the truth conditions of complex English expressions in predicate logic, given some account of the denotations (extensions) of the simple expressions (words). Logical Form & Predicate Logic – p. 3/30 The Leading Idea: Extensions Nouns, verbs, and adjectives have predicates as their translations. What does ’predicate’ mean? ’Predicate’ means what it means in predicate logic. Logical Form & Predicate Logic – p. 4/30 Intransitive verbs Translating into predicate logic (1) a. Johnwalks. b. walk(j) (2) a. [[j]] = John b. “The extension of ’j’ is the individual John.” c. [[walk]] = {x | x walks } d. “The extension of ’walk’ is the set of walkers” (3) a. [[John walks]] = [[walk(j)]] b. [[walk(j)]] = true iff [[j]] ∈ [[walk]] Logical Form & Predicate Logic – p. 5/30 Extensional denotations • Remember two kinds of denotation. For work with logic, denotations are always extensions. • We call a denotation such as [[walk]] (a set) an extension, because it is defined by the set of things the word walk describes or “extends over” • The denotation [[j]] is also extensional because it is defined by the individual the word John describes. • Next we extend extensional denotation to transitive verbs, nouns, and sentences.
  • Pronouns, Logical Variables, and Logophoricity in Abe Author(S): Hilda Koopman and Dominique Sportiche Source: Linguistic Inquiry, Vol

    Pronouns, Logical Variables, and Logophoricity in Abe Author(S): Hilda Koopman and Dominique Sportiche Source: Linguistic Inquiry, Vol

    MIT Press Pronouns, Logical Variables, and Logophoricity in Abe Author(s): Hilda Koopman and Dominique Sportiche Source: Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 20, No. 4 (Autumn, 1989), pp. 555-588 Published by: MIT Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178645 Accessed: 22-10-2015 18:32 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Linguistic Inquiry. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.97.27.20 on Thu, 22 Oct 2015 18:32:27 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Hilda Koopman Pronouns, Logical Variables, Dominique Sportiche and Logophoricity in Abe 1. Introduction 1.1. Preliminaries In this article we describe and analyze the propertiesof the pronominalsystem of Abe, a Kwa language spoken in the Ivory Coast, which we view as part of the study of pronominalentities (that is, of possible pronominaltypes) and of pronominalsystems (that is, of the cooccurrence restrictionson pronominaltypes in a particulargrammar). Abe has two series of thirdperson pronouns. One type of pronoun(0-pronoun) has basically the same propertiesas pronouns in languageslike English. The other type of pronoun(n-pronoun) very roughly corresponds to what has been called the referential use of pronounsin English(see Evans (1980)).It is also used as what is called a logophoric pronoun-that is, a particularpronoun that occurs in special embedded contexts (the logophoric contexts) to indicate reference to "the person whose speech, thought or perceptions are reported" (Clements (1975)).
  • Character-Word LSTM Language Models

    Character-Word LSTM Language Models

    Character-Word LSTM Language Models Lyan Verwimp Joris Pelemans Hugo Van hamme Patrick Wambacq ESAT – PSI, KU Leuven Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium [email protected] Abstract A first drawback is the fact that the parameters for infrequent words are typically less accurate because We present a Character-Word Long Short- the network requires a lot of training examples to Term Memory Language Model which optimize the parameters. The second and most both reduces the perplexity with respect important drawback addressed is the fact that the to a baseline word-level language model model does not make use of the internal structure and reduces the number of parameters of the words, given that they are encoded as one-hot of the model. Character information can vectors. For example, ‘felicity’ (great happiness) is reveal structural (dis)similarities between a relatively infrequent word (its frequency is much words and can even be used when a word lower compared to the frequency of ‘happiness’ is out-of-vocabulary, thus improving the according to Google Ngram Viewer (Michel et al., modeling of infrequent and unknown words. 2011)) and will probably be an out-of-vocabulary By concatenating word and character (OOV) word in many applications, but since there embeddings, we achieve up to 2.77% are many nouns also ending on ‘ity’ (ability, com- relative improvement on English compared plexity, creativity . ), knowledge of the surface to a baseline model with a similar amount of form of the word will help in determining that ‘felic- parameters and 4.57% on Dutch. Moreover, ity’ is a noun.
  • Chapter 6 Mirativity and the Bulgarian Evidential System Elena Karagjosova Freie Universität Berlin

    Chapter 6 Mirativity and the Bulgarian Evidential System Elena Karagjosova Freie Universität Berlin

    Chapter 6 Mirativity and the Bulgarian evidential system Elena Karagjosova Freie Universität Berlin This paper provides an account of the Bulgarian admirative construction andits place within the Bulgarian evidential system based on (i) new observations on the morphological, temporal, and evidential properties of the admirative, (ii) a criti- cal reexamination of existing approaches to the Bulgarian evidential system, and (iii) insights from a similar mirative construction in Spanish. I argue in particular that admirative sentences are assertions based on evidence of some sort (reporta- tive, inferential, or direct) which are contrasted against the set of beliefs held by the speaker up to the point of receiving the evidence; the speaker’s past beliefs entail a proposition that clashes with the assertion, triggering belief revision and resulting in a sense of surprise. I suggest an analysis of the admirative in terms of a mirative operator that captures the evidential, temporal, aspectual, and modal properties of the construction in a compositional fashion. The analysis suggests that although mirativity and evidentiality can be seen as separate semantic cate- gories, the Bulgarian admirative represents a cross-linguistically relevant case of a mirative extension of evidential verbal forms. Keywords: mirativity, evidentiality, fake past 1 Introduction The Bulgarian evidential system is an ongoing topic of discussion both withre- spect to its interpretation and its morphological buildup. In this paper, I focus on the currently poorly understood admirative construction. The analysis I present is based on largely unacknowledged observations and data involving the mor- phological structure, the syntactic environment, and the evidential meaning of the admirative. Elena Karagjosova.
  • Toward a Shared Syntax for Shifted Indexicals and Logophoric Pronouns

    Toward a Shared Syntax for Shifted Indexicals and Logophoric Pronouns

    Toward a Shared Syntax for Shifted Indexicals and Logophoric Pronouns Mark Baker Rutgers University April 2018 Abstract: I argue that indexical shift is more like logophoricity and complementizer agreement than most previous semantic accounts would have it. In particular, there is evidence of a syntactic requirement at work, such that the antecedent of a shifted “I” must be a superordinate subject, just as the antecedent of a logophoric pronoun or the goal of complementizer agreement must be. I take this to be evidence that the antecedent enters into a syntactic control relationship with a null operator in all three constructions. Comparative data comes from Magahi and Sakha (for indexical shift), Yoruba (for logophoric pronouns), and Lubukusu (for complementizer agreement). 1. Introduction Having had an office next to Lisa Travis’s for 12 formative years, I learned many things from her that still influence my thinking. One is her example of taking semantic notions, such as aspect and event roles, and finding ways to implement them in syntactic structure, so as to advance the study of less familiar languages and topics.1 In that spirit, I offer here some thoughts about how logophoricity and indexical shift, topics often discussed from a more or less semantic point of view, might have syntactic underpinnings—and indeed, the same syntactic underpinnings. On an impressionistic level, it would not seem too surprising for logophoricity and indexical shift to have a common syntactic infrastructure. Canonical logophoricity as it is found in various West African languages involves using a special pronoun inside the finite CP complement of a verb to refer to the subject of that verb.
  • The Predicate View of Names

    The Predicate View of Names

    The Predicate View of Names Aidan Gray March 28, 2008 There is, and has for some time been, a consensus among philosophers interested in lan- guage that proper names in natural language are properly thought of on the model of individual constants in a formal language. This is to say, at least, that their semantic function is to pick out individuals. This as opposed to, e.g., intransitive verbs, whose semantic function is to pick out properties of individuals (let’s say) or quantifiers phrases whose function is to pick out prop- erties of properties (let’s say). There has been disagreement as to the details of this approach — for instance, in grasping the meaning of the name must I simply know which object it refers to or must I also know the manner in which the name presents the object? — but the basic premise has rarely been questioned. What reasons have philosophers had to assimilate names to individual constants? The ques- tion immediately strikes one as odd. The oddness is, in part, an expression of fact the picture is so deeply held as to constitute part of our framework for asking questions about language. More interestingly, perhaps, the question strikes one as odd because it seems like, as philosophers, we understand individual constants on the model of names just as much as we understand names on the model of individual constants. Individual constants were introduced into formal languages to do the job that names do in natural languages. Though this may well be true, it has little bearing on the question at hand.
  • Basic Morphology

    Basic Morphology

    What is Morphology? Mark Aronoff and Kirsten Fudeman MORPHOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS 1 1 Thinking about Morphology and Morphological Analysis 1.1 What is Morphology? 1 1.2 Morphemes 2 1.3 Morphology in Action 4 1.3.1 Novel words and word play 4 1.3.2 Abstract morphological facts 6 1.4 Background and Beliefs 9 1.5 Introduction to Morphological Analysis 12 1.5.1 Two basic approaches: analysis and synthesis 12 1.5.2 Analytic principles 14 1.5.3 Sample problems with solutions 17 1.6 Summary 21 Introduction to Kujamaat Jóola 22 mor·phol·o·gy: a study of the structure or form of something Merriam-Webster Unabridged n 1.1 What is Morphology? The term morphology is generally attributed to the German poet, novelist, playwright, and philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749–1832), who coined it early in the nineteenth century in a biological context. Its etymology is Greek: morph- means ‘shape, form’, and morphology is the study of form or forms. In biology morphology refers to the study of the form and structure of organisms, and in geology it refers to the study of the configuration and evolution of land forms. In linguistics morphology refers to the mental system involved in word formation or to the branch 2 MORPHOLOGYMORPHOLOGY ANDAND MORPHOLOGICAL MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS ANALYSIS of linguistics that deals with words, their internal structure, and how they are formed. n 1.2 Morphemes A major way in which morphologists investigate words, their internal structure, and how they are formed is through the identification and study of morphemes, often defined as the smallest linguistic pieces with a gram- matical function.
  • Learning About Phonology and Orthography

    Learning About Phonology and Orthography

    EFFECTIVE LITERACY PRACTICES MODULE REFERENCE GUIDE Learning About Phonology and Orthography Module Focus Learning about the relationships between the letters of written language and the sounds of spoken language (often referred to as letter-sound associations, graphophonics, sound- symbol relationships) Definitions phonology: study of speech sounds in a language orthography: study of the system of written language (spelling) continuous text: a complete text or substantive part of a complete text What Children Children need to learn to work out how their spoken language relates to messages in print. Have to Learn They need to learn (Clay, 2002, 2006, p. 112) • to hear sounds buried in words • to visually discriminate the symbols we use in print • to link single symbols and clusters of symbols with the sounds they represent • that there are many exceptions and alternatives in our English system of putting sounds into print Children also begin to work on relationships among things they already know, often long before the teacher attends to those relationships. For example, children discover that • it is more efficient to work with larger chunks • sometimes it is more efficient to work with relationships (like some word or word part I know) • often it is more efficient to use a vague sense of a rule How Children Writing Learn About • Building a known writing vocabulary Phonology and • Analyzing words by hearing and recording sounds in words Orthography • Using known words and word parts to solve new unknown words • Noticing and learning about exceptions in English orthography Reading • Building a known reading vocabulary • Using known words and word parts to get to unknown words • Taking words apart while reading Manipulating Words and Word Parts • Using magnetic letters to manipulate and explore words and word parts Key Points Through reading and writing continuous text, children learn about sound-symbol relation- for Teachers ships, they take on known reading and writing vocabularies, and they can use what they know about words to generate new learning.
  • 30. Tense Aspect Mood 615

    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615

    30. Tense Aspect Mood 615 Richards, Ivor Armstrong 1936 The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rockwell, Patricia 2007 Vocal features of conversational sarcasm: A comparison of methods. Journal of Psycho- linguistic Research 36: 361−369. Rosenblum, Doron 5. March 2004 Smart he is not. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/smart-he-is-not- 1.115908. Searle, John 1979 Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Seddiq, Mirriam N. A. Why I don’t want to talk to you. http://notguiltynoway.com/2004/09/why-i-dont-want- to-talk-to-you.html. Singh, Onkar 17. December 2002 Parliament attack convicts fight in court. http://www.rediff.com/news/ 2002/dec/17parl2.htm [Accessed 24 July 2013]. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson 1986/1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. Voegele, Jason N. A. http://www.jvoegele.com/literarysf/cyberpunk.html Voyer, Daniel and Cheryl Techentin 2010 Subjective acoustic features of sarcasm: Lower, slower, and more. Metaphor and Symbol 25: 1−16. Ward, Gregory 1983 A pragmatic analysis of epitomization. Papers in Linguistics 17: 145−161. Ward, Gregory and Betty J. Birner 2006 Information structure. In: B. Aarts and A. McMahon (eds.), Handbook of English Lin- guistics, 291−317. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Rachel Giora, Tel Aviv, (Israel) 30. Tense Aspect Mood 1. Introduction 2. Metaphor: EVENTS ARE (PHYSICAL) OBJECTS 3. Polysemy, construal, profiling, and coercion 4. Interactions of tense, aspect, and mood 5. Conclusion 6. References 1. Introduction In the framework of cognitive linguistics we approach the grammatical categories of tense, aspect, and mood from the perspective of general cognitive strategies.
  • Sets, Propositional Logic, Predicates, and Quantifiers

    Sets, Propositional Logic, Predicates, and Quantifiers

    COMP 182 Algorithmic Thinking Sets, Propositional Logic, Luay Nakhleh Computer Science Predicates, and Quantifiers Rice University !1 Reading Material ❖ Chapter 1, Sections 1, 4, 5 ❖ Chapter 2, Sections 1, 2 !2 ❖ Mathematics is about statements that are either true or false. ❖ Such statements are called propositions. ❖ We use logic to describe them, and proof techniques to prove whether they are true or false. !3 Propositions ❖ 5>7 ❖ The square root of 2 is irrational. ❖ A graph is bipartite if and only if it doesn’t have a cycle of odd length. ❖ For n>1, the sum of the numbers 1,2,3,…,n is n2. !4 Propositions? ❖ E=mc2 ❖ The sun rises from the East every day. ❖ All species on Earth evolved from a common ancestor. ❖ God does not exist. ❖ Everyone eventually dies. !5 ❖ And some of you might already be wondering: “If I wanted to study mathematics, I would have majored in Math. I came here to study computer science.” !6 ❖ Computer Science is mathematics, but we almost exclusively focus on aspects of mathematics that relate to computation (that can be implemented in software and/or hardware). !7 ❖Logic is the language of computer science and, mathematics is the computer scientist’s most essential toolbox. !8 Examples of “CS-relevant” Math ❖ Algorithm A correctly solves problem P. ❖ Algorithm A has a worst-case running time of O(n3). ❖ Problem P has no solution. ❖ Using comparison between two elements as the basic operation, we cannot sort a list of n elements in less than O(n log n) time. ❖ Problem A is NP-Complete.