ABSTRACT
This chapter shows how clear understanding and careful application of results in logical analysis— extending the traditional syllogism to cover intermediate quantifiers— will confirm one hypothesis in grammatical analysis and disconfirm two others. The hypotheses in question concern the semantical nature of quantifier expressions— in particular the delicate difference between absolute synonymy of expressions and logical equivalence. The proposition that would be typically used to express contains a universal quantifier— that is, the proposition has the Aristotelian quantity 'universal'. Further it is an affirmative, though it is only limited to two Aristotelian terms if the first common noun and relative clause are considered to be one rather complex 'subject term'. The chapter suggests that any evidence for proposing merely grammatical relations for example James McCawley's lexical insertion rules, as well as Logical-Form component "transformations" and even, perhaps, semantic component rules for semantic interpretation between these structures of syntax, semantics, or pragmatics must be seriously questioned.
