1

We can see why the non-reductive understanding of the computational theory fits into scientific theorizing generally.

What is the reference of "generally" exactly? Fits or theorizing?

migrated from english.stackexchange.com Oct 20 '18 at 4:14

This question came from our site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts.

  • 1
    Fits. Theorizing is a noun. It cannot be modified by an adverb. – ЯegDwight Oct 20 '18 at 4:14
  • @ЯegDwight This would be a great answer! – Tashus Oct 22 '18 at 15:27
0

This could actually be tricky, if the word scientific weren't there. Luckily it is.

Scientific is an adjective, and as such clearly marks theorizing as a noun. This in turn means that it cannot be modified by generally, which is an adverb.

You can still modify theorizing by other adjectives, including general. But adverbs just don't work on nouns.

And so we can conclude that generally modifies fits.

0

The word "generally" has two meanings dependent on context.

The first context is regular English use, in which "generally" means "usually" or "ordinarily" and without concern for specifics: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/generally

The second is a scientific or mathematical context, in which "generally" means "in the general case" in which there are no exceptions. (This is as opposed to special cases, which do not hold true in general.) So in this context, "generally" means "always, in every case".

This example appears to be in a scientific/mathematical context, so it means that "non-reductive understanding of the computational theory" is a special case of the more general "scientific theorizing".

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.