| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,34 @@ |
|
1 |
+====Interpretation: Aff can’t defend that public colleges and universities ought not restrict a particular type or types of constitutionally protected speech.==== |
|
2 |
+ |
|
3 |
+ |
|
4 |
+====In negative forms, "any" is indefinite—it doesn't allow for exceptions==== |
|
5 |
+**Cambridge Dictionary** ~~Cambridge Dictionary, "Any," http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/quantifiers/any.~~ AG |
|
6 |
+Any as a determiner has two forms: a strong form and a weak form |
|
7 |
+AND |
|
8 |
+: We could choose any colours we wanted. (+ plural countable noun) |
|
9 |
+ |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+====Violation:==== |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+ |
|
14 |
+====~~1~~ Precision—three impacts==== |
|
15 |
+ |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+====A~~ Predictability==== |
|
18 |
+ |
|
19 |
+ |
|
20 |
+====B~~ Topicality rule—precision independently outweighs ==== |
|
21 |
+**Nebel '15 **(Jake, "The Priority of Resolutional Semantics," 2/20/15, http://vbriefly.com/2015/02/20/the-priority-of-resolutional-semantics-by-jake-nebel/) |
|
22 |
+One reason why LDers may be suspicious of my view is because they see topicality |
|
23 |
+AND |
|
24 |
+the first premise, not the second premise, in the argument above. |
|
25 |
+ |
|
26 |
+ |
|
27 |
+====~~2~~ Limits==== |
|
28 |
+ |
|
29 |
+ |
|
30 |
+====~~3~~ Ground—their interp justifies unbeatable affs.==== |
|
31 |
+**Eckert 16** ~~Eckert, Bennett. "Topic Analysis by Bennett Eckert." Champion Briefs: Jan/Feb 2017. 2016~~ AG |
|
32 |
+This is potentially the most frustrating word in the topic. Merriam-Webster's first |
|
33 |
+AND |
|
34 |
+discussion in the next two sections on affirmatives that defend the whole resolution. |