Alexey86
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2018
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Russian
- Home Country
- Russian Federation
- Current Location
- Russian Federation
I'd like to share with you several paragraphs from this article https://www.researchgate.net/public...f_English_L2_acquisition_of_generic_reference. I would really appreciate it if you would find time to read them and help me understand why the sentence in the title doesn't provide a kind-denoting meaning.
What is not clear to me is why The lion is dangerous can be a kind-denoting (or NP-level) generic sentence, while The potato contains vitamin C cannot. I understand that it's a general description of any potato, but isn't containing vitamin C and acids an inherent characteristic of the potato as a kind of plant (kind predicate) at the same time?
Please look also at these examples:
1. A ball is round.
2. A ball is a spherical object often used in games.
3. The ball is round.
4. The ball is a spherical object often used in games.
Can all four serve as appropriate general statements about balls? Can (3-4) be kind-denoting since they describe essential inherent properties of this kind of object?
What is not clear to me is why The lion is dangerous can be a kind-denoting (or NP-level) generic sentence, while The potato contains vitamin C cannot. I understand that it's a general description of any potato, but isn't containing vitamin C and acids an inherent characteristic of the potato as a kind of plant (kind predicate) at the same time?
Please look also at these examples:
1. A ball is round.
2. A ball is a spherical object often used in games.
3. The ball is round.
4. The ball is a spherical object often used in games.
Can all four serve as appropriate general statements about balls? Can (3-4) be kind-denoting since they describe essential inherent properties of this kind of object?
Last edited: