Example sentences of "idea here be [conj] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | The idea here is that you go to a domestic dispute to prevent a crime from being committed … |
| 2 | The underlying idea here is that every corporation , willy-nilly , acquires large amounts of information that is potentially useful in a competitive sense ; but that this information is scattered throughout the firm in its various divisions , units , departments and so on . |
| 3 | The idea here is that citizens would be entitled to compensation for loss caused by the conduct of a particular activity regardless of whether that activity was conducted legally or illegally , in a faulty way or absolutely blamelessly . |
| 4 | The central idea here is that a proper name qua proper name not only picks out one object only , but unlike a descriptive phrase designates that same object in " every possible world " ; a " possible world " being understood as representing a possible but unactualised situation , or a series of situations , of which the given object might be a feature . |
| 5 | The central , distinctive idea here is that the rational expectations hypothesis can be seen as imposing restrictions on what we should observe in the world , and so the validity of rational expectations can be tested by testing for the validity of those restrictions . |
| 6 | Chimpanzees for instance have enormous canine teeth , but the males have them and not the females , so the idea here is that normally a big canine tooth , a sexually dimorphic canine tooth is probably related to inter-male conflict , rather than to killing and , and whether , how that affects your er what you say about the spacing I 'm not sure , but certainly it would be a safe erm generalization to say normally big canines are an aspect of sexual dimorphism and in mammals are very common . |
| 7 | Or symbolically , if we let $ be the set of sentences in language L , C the set of possible contexts , P the set of propositions , and U the cartesian product of S x C — i.e. the set of possible combinations of members of S with members of C , and we let the corresponding lower case letters stand for elements or members of each of those sets ( i.e. s e S , c e C , p e P , u e U ) : ( 16 ) f(u) =p ( or:f ( s , c ) = p ) i.e. f is a function that assigns to utterances the propositions that express their full meaning in context Gazdar ( 1979a : 4-5 ) , on the other hand , wishes to capture the ways in which utterances change the context in which they are uttered ; he shows that Katz 's formulation is incompatible with that goal , and therefore suggests instead : ( 17 ) f(u) c ( or:f ( s , c ) c ) i.e. f is a function from utterances to contexts , namely the contexts brought about by each utterance ( or : f assigns to each sentence plus the context prior to its utterance , a second context caused by its utterance ) The idea here is that the shift from the context prior to an utterance to the context post utterance itself constitutes the communicational content of the utterance . |
| 8 | The idea here is that you take a rather blunt er fire-polished glass pipette , and press it against a membrane . |
| 9 | And we talk about standard light bulbs — the idea here is that take a terrestrial example again , suppose you 're looking out at night and you see a light approaching you , if it 's a cyclist with a very faint light then you 'll not see him until he 's quite close . |