Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watrose.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watrose!japlaice
From: japlaice@watrose.UUCP (John A. Plaice)
Newsgroups: net.ai
Subject: Re: Use of "and"
Message-ID: <6717@watrose.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Apr-84 11:46:33 EST
Article-I.D.: watrose.6717
Posted: Wed Apr 11 11:46:33 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 12-Apr-84 04:16:49 EST
References: <551@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 18


There are several philosophical problems with treating
`Indiana and Ohio' as a single entity.

The first is that the Fregean idea that the sense of
a sentence is based on the sense of its parts,
which is thought valid by most philosophers,
no longer holds true.

The second is that if we use that idea in this situation,
then it would probably seem reasonable to use
Quine's ideas for adjectives, namely that 
`unicorn', `hairy unicorn', `small, hairy unicorn'
(or other similar examples) are all separate entities,
and I think that it is obvious that trying to
derive a reasonabnle semantic/syntactic theory for
any reasonable fragment of English would become
virtually imposible.