String of actions

1. String of actions • The effects reported in this study have one of two explanations. Either the congeners themselves have direct and permanent effects upon the central nervous system, or there may be a retardation of the metabolism of ethanol by the congeners so that it has a stronger effect. The probability of the latter is less, because the observation of the effects occurred well after the blood alcohol concentrations were immeasurably small.

2. The effects reported in this study have one of two explanations. We can explain our results in one of two ways. Either the congeners themselves have direct and permanent effects upon the central nervous system, Either the congeners themselves directly and permanently affect the central nervous system, or there may be a retardation of the metabolism of ethanol by the congeners or the congeners retard the metabolism of ethanol so that it has a stronger effect. so that it affects the nervous system more strongly. The probability of the latter is less, Retardation is less probable, though, because the observation of the effects occurred well after the blood alcohol concentrations were immeasurably small. because we observed the effects well after the blood alcohol concentrations were immeasurably small.

3. We can explain our results in one of two ways. Either the congeners themselves directly and permanently affect the central nervous system, or the congeners retard the metabolism of ethanol so that it affects the nervous system more strongly. Retardation is less probable, though, because we observed the effects well after the blood alcohol concentrations were immeasurably small.

4. We can explain our results…. in one of two ways. Either… the congeners themselves directly and permanently affect the central nervous system, or … the congeners … retard the metabolism of ethanol so that it affects the nervous system more strongly. Retardation is probable, though, because we observed the effects well after the blood alcohol concentrations were immeasurably small.

5. What was the main distinction between the two alternative explanations? • Either the congeners themselves directly and permanently affect the central nervous system, or • the congeners retard the metabolism of ethanol so that it affects the nervous system more strongly.

6. Wherein lies the difference? • It is not a question of agency: in both cases, the congeners were the doers of the action. • It is not a question of action: in both cases the main action was that of “affecting.” • It is not a question of who got affected: in both cases, it was the central nervous system that was the object of the action.

7. CONGENERS AFFECT CNS DIRECTLY • CONGENERS AFFECT CNS INDIRECTLY

8. Either the congeners affect the central nervous system directly by themselves, or they affect it indirectly by first retarding the metabolism of ethanol.

9. THROUGH THIS ESSENTIALLY STRUCTURAL INVESTIGATION, WE HAVE UNCOVERED A SERIOUS PROBLEM OF SUBSTANTIVE THOUGHT.

10. We can explain our results in one of two ways. Either the congeners themselves affect the central nervous system directly, or they affect it indirectly by first retarding the metabolism of ethanol, which in turn affects the central nervous system. The “indirect” explanation is less probable, though, because we observed the effects well after the blood alcohol concentrations were immeasurably small.

11. We can explain our results in one of two ways Here is #1, and here is #2 Please discard #2 Next paragraph: So let’s take a closer look at #1.

12. Summary • Mere articulation of information conveys far fewer clues for interpretation than does the placement of that information. • The structure sends signals to the reader concerning how they should interpret substance. • If the action is articulated by the verb, then the chances go up that a majority of readers will identify that particular word as the action of the sentence.