🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <SCHILLER.92Jul22162611@tira.uchicago.edu> schiller@tira.uchicago.edu (Eric Schiller) writes:

   [...]
   I find myself in agreement with much of what David Pestsky claims in his
   post (which presumably the reader has seen on the way here), and where
   I do not I will need to post more explicit material than would be of
   interest to most of sci.lang. 
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Too bad. Just when sci.lang was getting interesting again..

   If at times I seem a bit disrespectful, this is a consequence primarily
   of the rather offensive rhetoric I sometimes encounter there (examples
   to follow from the paper itself) and especially from the fact that
   some (many, even at times perhaps most?) of the GB crowd seem to pay
   no attention at all to work done in other frameworks. The content of
   the proceedings of NELS can be compared with that of CLS or BLS or
   ESCOL, and the reader can judge. Not to mention the content of LI
   these days.                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   ^^^^^^^^^

They just had an article using HPSG (Pollard and Sag). That's at least some
attention. 

   [...]
   I'll just leave with a teaser for David:
   How do you handle the Russian construction:

   mnye (bylo) pomoch' yemu

So, what does it mean (for the rest of us)?

-Arild Hestvik