NJ, Wow! I hope you are learning a lot. I have amazed myself reading your post. A couple quick comments/questions: First, there is some good stuff on syllogism testing  at: http://ronblatt.tripod.com/venndiagram.html It requires javascript and allows you to test syllogisms visually using venn diagrams. Can be used both to check the validity of an argument and to check your understanding of how to test an argument for validity. Second, I would like you to test in your experience and that of some others the validity of one of your premises. You state and/or define "Examples of complementary predicates are listed in predicate pairs (6) through (10). (6) caucasian/noncaucasian (7) healthy/nonhealthy (8) excellent/nonexcellent (9) capitalist/noncapitalist (10) friend/nonfriend" Is this your personal definition? Or a formal definition? In either case, please observe the following question and position: Do you think the pair (for example) healthy/nonhealty and the pair healthy/not healthy are identical? By identical, I mean the same in the experience of the listener to these utterances. It's easier to say they are "logically" identical, but are they experientally? This is not a trivial matter in the context of therapy, education and all other forms of interpersonal communication. My answer is patently NO they are not identical. For example, if someone says to you they are nonhealthy vs. they are not healthy do they mean the same thing, do you hear the same thing? Put another way is someone who says they are "not nonhealthy" saying they are "healthy"? Logically the answer is yes. Experientially it is not. Thirdly, you state, "the limits of your vocabulary, its limits to correctly express complementary relationships between predicates, determine if you can translate accurately from a categorical syllogism to its natural language equivalent." How so? If you mean the ability to plug in words and put non (actually not) in front of them, you are right, but this only generates examples. Find a dictionary or list of nouns, adjectives, adverbs and viola, you've got more examples. Hey you dont' even have to know what the words mean! A computer can do this (and we know how dumb they are!) More important than vocabulary (number of words in personal lexicon) is that of syntactic function (per above.) More important still is semantics (word meaning.) Remember, a larger vocabulary will not increase the number of valid arguments that can be generated (only possible ones.) It is the MEANING of the words substituted that will determine if and which of the premises are valid and thus the conclusion. You've really got some poor premises in here. There are more, but I haven't got the time at present. If you parsed your work more thoroughly before posting, it would be easier to respond to your suggestions and conclusions especially and entirely in the instances where they are based on false premises. Lastly, for me personally, I would have more interest in continuing if you could tell me what your point is? Or to be more explicit... Where, specifically, in the world of experience [other than the experience of college classes ;-)], would this stuff prove useful? Todd