Explore the vast range of titles available.

Levinson 2013 (L13) argues against the idea that 'recursion, and especially recursive center-embedding, might be the core domain-specific property of language' (p. 159), citing crosslinguistic grammatical data and specific corpus studies. L13 offers an alternative: language inherits its recursive properties 'from the action domain' (p. 159). We argue that L13's claims are at best unwarranted and can in many instances be shown to be false. L13's reasoning is similarly flawed—in particular, the presumption that center-embedding can stand proxy for embedding (and clausal embedding can stand proxy for recursion). Thus, no support remains for its conclusions. Furthermore, though these conclusions are pitched as relevant to specific claims that have been published about the role of syntactic recursion, L13 misrepresents these claims. Consequently, even an empirically supported, better-reasoned version of L13 would not bear on the questions it claims to address.

The Smuggler's World: Illicit Trade and Atlantic Communities in Eighteenth-Century Venezuela (Chapel Hill, NC: Miniature and the English Imagination: Literature, Cognition, and Small-Scale Culture, 1650–1765 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019). Footnotes * Books for review may be sent to Jennifer Thorn, Eighteenth-Century Studies, Saint Anselm College, 100 Saint Anselm Drive #1784, Manchester, NH 03102

A poem is presented.

The French Revolution. Jane Welsh Carlyle and Her Victorian World: A Story of Love, Work, Friendship, and Marriage. The Case of Sherlock Holmes: Secrets and Lies in Conan Doyle’s Detective Fiction. Wells, H. G. “The Wheels of Chance”: With a Student Guide to the Historical and Social Context of the Novel.

Several poem are presented.

Political Economy, Literature, and the Formation of Knowledge, 1720–1850. Approaches to Teaching World Literature 151. Reading and the Making of Time in the Eighteenth Century. Women, Writing, and Travel in the Eighteenth Century.

Moral reasons take precedence over non-moral reasons either by outweighing non-moral practical reasons, or by excluding such reasons. Several prominent defenders of the moral argument for theism have incorporated the outweighing thesis. They claim we have categorically binding moral duties only if we always have most reason to be ethical. Furthermore, we always have most reason to be ethical only if theism is true. On the contrary, I argue that the excluding reasons thesis is correct and that this undermines a key premise in moral arguments developed by C. Stephen Evans, C. Stephen Layman, and William Lane Craig.

This article addresses the ongoing debate between pluralistic and monistic approaches to dealing with critical disagreement. I return to the theory of world hypotheses advanced by Stephen C. Pepper, an understudied figure in aesthetics and pragmatism, to enunciate a version of pluralism that centers on the nature of critical evidence and its functioning in social settings of argument. I argue that Pepper's expansive philosophy holds interesting implications for what can be called the metaphysics of criticism, a point missed by partisans of standard views of pluralism and monism. Building on his analysis of equally autonomous (but noncommensurable) world hypotheses, this study enunciates an explicit notion of rhetorical pluralism that goes beyond simple relativism. This account can be labeled “evidentiary pluralism,” since it internalizes standards for evaluation to specific worldviews and recognizes their changeable nature in the context of critical disagreement.

Manufacturing & Service Operations Management ( M&SOM ) formally thanks the guest associate editors and reviewers, who provided expert counsel and guidance on a voluntary basis. Through their efforts the journal was able to provide submitting authors with timely, thoughtful, and constructive reviews. In fact, for papers submitted in 2008, M&SOM received 514 reviews from 277 individuals. Remarkably, 59% of those reviews were submitted on or before their due date, a figure that increases to 66% if you allow a one-day grace period. Due in large part to the responsiveness of our reviewers, M&SOM made 98.5% of its 317 manuscript decisions within 90 days.—Gérard P. Cachon, M&SOM Editor, 2006–2008; Stephen C. Graves, M&SOM Editor, 2009—present