Semantics And Linguistics.
<More On A Discourse Communicative Thesis.>
By George Eddie Burks
This Analysis Is Referred To:
Cosmic Problems. Essays On Greek And Roman Philosophy.
By Furley, David J.,
With the Antiphon Arguments essays for support
and concerns in my observations with Cultural Love Is Nature’s Faith of Whims’ Calls And Some Sense, Pt. 2 “...Poise And Purity...”/Chapter V.”
To observed the use of the Restrictive (In-Leash) and the Expressive (Hand-Says) linguistics language usage
in the Latin communicative discourse evolution of “us” <JUST. > The enculturated and the liberating evolved
discourse have a confusing in connotations by a developed coherence constituent due to its cultural alignment across Latin
Language development. Where the Latin linguistic origin of “just”
has synonyms translated in the restrictive language as brave wise, mean, cowardly, prudent and rash without the consideration
of the expressive languages’ in connotations findings.
In the journal Whims’ Calls And
Some Sense, Part 2, Chapter V in order to set a pace for better examinations and usage of expressive semantics within the
restrictive language usage, the predetermining in connotations of the cultural <structural> “us” <JUST>
and the natural <evolving> “us” <JUST”> must be liberated within the restrictive (In Leash)
Remember: Expressive and Impressive languages are more an emotive utterance evolving language, conveyed and
evolved by chemical stimulus either within a cultural or structured nation (nature) or governing for and at a community (or
OF THE RESTRICTIVE COMMUNICATIVE LINGUISTIC LANGUAGE:
With The Natural Linguistic Evolution
Of “US” Referring As The Structure Of “JUST” the usage in Whims’ Calls And Some Sense, Part
2, Chapter V maintains the developing historic reproof found in other approaches and observations of the natural evolutionary
discourse governed by a natural reformed instinctive (perfected) law.
(The Examples Used Are In The In-Leash
Latin Which Is A Label-Coded For An Academic Community Advantage When Scaling Future Drafts And Data With Formatted Languages;)
(Note on the constant in the in-connotation
discourse by the developing centers, (in color code for statistical purposes only.)
Notes For Observing:
u Remember- Culture is a discipline.
u Nature is law and a governing law disciplines any related cultures
or civilation .
u Nature and Cultural as an enculturated (A Developing Utterances’)
and acculturated (A Developing Discourses’) order’s developments are a Natural Culture and Faith resulting from
a contained structural entity in study as a live social thesis (Or A Developed The-ology.)
u Nature’s as a Faith is a trust of our grace, (utterances,)
loves (discourses) and God as a consistent identifying entity as unavoidable.
PT.2: Life Scenes: Poise And Purity Between Every-Way People.
CH.V: Cultural Love Is
By Geo. E. Burks
63. Nature was never a primal force by a structural lust
64. And only in the blood’s heavenly springs is where the perfect nature is the
65 For is a cultural sum has not a juxa-dispositional placed us?
66. And remaining are direct and brilliant manipulated harnesses lacking this strong
67. Designs are the only failed conceit while being is a regenerative rejoiced
67. That rose against all as a dominating must.
68. For in any culture’s complexity dwell well docent systolic bloods’
69. With both their cries for conquest and possession of a disciplined nature’s
70. Retrieved and proven only by psalms,
songs and other stabled reproof-proving law as of our glorious bust.
71.. As cultural structural base by our primal driven nature successes and kept captured in
Gerard J. Pendrick (ed.), Antiphon the Sophist.
The Fragments. Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Pp. xi, 472.
Pendrick, Antiphon the Sophist
The opposition between law and nature, which is so important in Fragments 44a-c, reappears in Fragments
15a-h. The most interesting of these parallel passages is Fragment 15b, which is taken from Aristotle. Antiphon's example
of the 'buried bed' is cited as proof for Aristotle's thesis that some earlier philosophers identified the nature of individual
things with their 'first', that is, with their
'proximate' matter. Aristotle tells us that Antiphon
stressed that if
the putrefaction of a buried bed made of wood should get the power to send up a shoot, this shoot
would not be a bed but wood. This is so, according to Antiphon, because the arrangement of the wood into a bed is not the
<greek>FU/SIS</greek> or 'nature' of the wood, but a temporary work of human craftsmanship, and so belongs to
the realm of <greek>NO/MOS</greek> -- a term which I have hitherto translated as
but which in fact has a much wider sense, for it may be said to
cover the whole of human cultural life.[] The nature
of the bed, so Aristotle continues, Antiphon conceived of as that which persists while undergoing modifications such as the
arrangement of the wood into a bed. Now Aristotle claims that this conception of Antiphon's comes down to identifying the
nature of a thing with its matter, that is, he reads into Antiphon's view on the buried bed his own distinction between matter
and form. This, however, as P. argues on the basis of several indications in Aristotle's text, is likely to be just another
example of his usual procedure when dealing with the Presocratics. Antiphon's example may simply have had the purpose to demonstrate
the superiority of <greek>FU/SIS</greek> over <greek>NO/MOS</greek>, of nature over human craftsmanship,
of the essential over that which is imposed upon it by man. P. refers e.g. to Fragment 44a, column i, line 25, where the law
is said to be 'imposed' upon nature. Nature is that which is primary, the law and cultural life in general are only secondary.
In such a way P. connects Fragment 15b, along with its parallel passages, with an important theme of Antiphon's work 'On truth'.
But he refrains from further speculations as to the import the 'buried-bed' argument may have had in the scheme of this work,
for in view of Aristotle's false suggestion it does not seem to affect any search for the underlying essence of things, and
Aristotle's suggestion, so P. maintains, constitutes in this respect the only evidence we have.
- Implicit in this sense is the opposition with nature. For the fifth-century debate over this opposition see J.W. Beardslee,
The use of <greek>FU/SIS</greek> in fifth-century Greek literature, Chicago 1918 and F. Heinimann, Nomos und Physis:
Herkunft und Bedeutung einer Antithese im griechischen Denkens des 5. Jahrhunderts , Basel 1945 (= Darmstadt 1987).
Retrieved From The Databases At
1: Surely vain are all men by nature, who are ignorant of God,
and could not out of the good things that are seen know him that is: neither by considering the works did they acknowledge
the workmaster; < or craftsmanship>
2: But deemed either fire, or wind, or the swift air, or the circle
of the stars, or the violent water, or the lights of heaven, to be the gods which govern the world.
3: With whose
beauty if they being delighted took them to be gods; let them know how much better the Lord of them is: for the first author
of beauty hath created them.
4: But if they were astonished at their power and virtue, let them understand by
them, how much mightier he is that made them.
5: For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably
the maker of them is seen.
6: But yet for this they are the less to be blamed: for they peradventure err, seeking
God, and desirous to find him.
7: For being conversant in his works they search him diligently, and believe their
sight: because the things are beautiful that are seen.
8: Howbeit neither are they to be pardoned.
For if they were able to know so much, that they could aim at the world; how did they not sooner find out the Lord thereof?
10: But miserable are they, and in dead things is their hope, who call them gods, which are the works of men's
hands, gold and silver, to shew art in, and resemblances of beasts, or a stone good for nothing, the work of an ancient hand<
11: Now a carpenter < or craftsman> that felleth timber, after he hath sawn down
a tree meet for the purpose, and taken off all the bark skillfully round about, and hath wrought it handsomely, and made a
vessel thereof fit for the service of man's life;
12: And after spending the refuse of his work to dress his
meat, hath filled himself;
13: And taking the very refuse among those which served to no use, being a crooked
piece of wood, and full of knots, hath carved it diligently, when he had nothing else to do, and formed it by the skill <
or craftsmanship> of his understanding, and fashioned it to the image of a man;
14: Or made it like some vile
beast, laying it over with vermilion, and with paint colouring it red, and covering every spot therein;
when he had made a convenient room for it, set it in a wall, and made it fast with iron:
16: For he provided
for it that it might not fall, knowing that it was unable to help itself; for it is an image, and hath need of help:
Then maketh he prayer for his goods, for his wife and children, and is not ashamed to speak to that which hath no life.
For health he calleth upon that which is weak: for life prayeth to that which is dead; for aid humbly beseecheth that which
hath least means to help: and for a good journey he asketh of that which cannot set a foot forward:
19: And for
gaining and getting, and for good success of his hands, asketh ability to do of him, that is most unable to do any thing.