"Interdisciplinary context: These electrophysiological differences
between PNs and CNs are consistent with findings in other disciplines.
In linguistics CNs like "table" or "desk" have a meaning which is
assumed to be more or less the same within individuals ("vagueness of
language"); each CN stands for a stereotypic concept. Any given object
can be a more or less typical member of such a concept and may possess
features which belong to two or more concepts. By contrast PNs have no
conceptual meaning; they are only paired associates. For example, a
given object may have some features of both a "table" and a "desk"
concept. This, however, is not the case for PNs; it is not possible to
be more or less a "Peter". According to Frege3 PNs have meaning only
as "reference" but not as "sense" which excludes the existence of any
attribute or semantic connotations. Of course, for any given speaker
there are exceptional PNs that may assume a kind of meaning ( e.g. The
Judas of our group, or The Mother Theresa of our city). The
distinction between PNs and CNs is still under debate."
For a less hirsute (long-hair) analysis - a table is for food, and a
desk is for papers.
Very much so... although I'd do something about the lighting...
Reminds me of this:
That one, or one similar, was designed by a woman, no less... One
could be forgiven for thinking it was designed by a misogynistic man.
Anyway, for some reason, I feel like a golden cadillac now...
Ever notice how films are "Rated R for language." I suppose that's a
comment on the quality of education for the under 17 crowd these days.
"Oh, no, kids can't see that film. The won't be able to follow the
plot as it is revealed through language." Anyway, suppose now we'll be
seeing "Rated X for furniture."
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.