> Please take pity on me, and give me a sentence using only
"coffee, should, book, garbage quickly". How he got 20 different sentences back, all coherent and all different, is utterly beyond me.
OK, to answer your question Vern, he nowhere uses the word 'only' in relation to that task. Sample answers might include other words to structure the relationships of the sentence.
A good article, but I've also got major reservations. I see no evidence of a practical outlook: he seems to think the meaning of these relationships in language is inherent, where they are demonstrably not - they are a product of repeated patterns of usage.
In that and many other respects, usage shapes, modifies and recreates language. All those who espouse the benefits of learning ancient languages need to be clear on what grounds they think this valuable. Is it simply through carrying out structural analysis, or (as so often creeps in) a belief that this is somehow getting back to the pure roots of Englsih before it got polluted by (ugh!) people actually using it to convey content?!
I have other considerable reservations too, but will leave it there for now.
