Fabio Ravagnani1 comments on some recent (and less recent) articles I have written on classical-type theory (mainly D’Orlando, 2005, but also D’Orlando, 1997, and D’Orlando & Nistico` , 2000), criticizing the results I reach in those papers and disagreeing in particular with my overall evaluation of the relevance of the theory. I contend that Ravagnani’s critiques are not well-founded. I note at the outset that I have already clarified many of these issues in a paper to which he does not refer, although it was published in time for his consideration (see D’Orlando, 2007). I will, however, take this opportunity to try to define my position better, and in fewer words.
Reply to Ravagnani
D'ORLANDO, Fabio
2012-01-01
Abstract
Fabio Ravagnani1 comments on some recent (and less recent) articles I have written on classical-type theory (mainly D’Orlando, 2005, but also D’Orlando, 1997, and D’Orlando & Nistico` , 2000), criticizing the results I reach in those papers and disagreeing in particular with my overall evaluation of the relevance of the theory. I contend that Ravagnani’s critiques are not well-founded. I note at the outset that I have already clarified many of these issues in a paper to which he does not refer, although it was published in time for his consideration (see D’Orlando, 2007). I will, however, take this opportunity to try to define my position better, and in fewer words.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
