Prejacent

The Platonickes and Stoicks acknowledged a divine understandinge to have made the world, but out of prejacent matter, which they conccaved to be eternall, and to acknowledge no maker.

Again, to be created from nothing is not to have been formed from prejacent matter (although in another sense, the newly created body is made from matter).

Like the vowels, if you pronounce a given consonant farther backward or forward than the location per the chart, then you probably pronounce its prejacent chart neighbor ahead of that location and its postjacent chart neighbor further back

So, every exception set S that is not a subset of C(={b}) makes the prejacent statement false, i.e. makes it so that some (NPᵂ–S) (VPᵂ)=0.

The subject of the prejacent and its exclusive must be one and the same (I grant that), but the subject of the prejacent ‘every man is a man’ is just ‘man’

I have suggested elsewhere (Horn 1992: 182-83) that this case requires an invocation of the notion of explicature or pragmatic enrichment […] so that the prejacent, while not constituting part of the linguistic meaning contributed by only, enters into the determination of what is said and hence into the enriched propositional content.