Book, Paragraph

 1   I, 3 |            with a qualification?~The distinction must be investigated once
 2   I, 3 |               the first form of) the distinction, which we are investigating,
 3   I, 3 |      inclined to prefer, is that the distinction depends upon the difference
 4   I, 3 | coming-to-be-of-something). For this distinction of appellation depends upon
 5   I, 3 |            said to "come-to-be".~The distinction here turns upon the difference
 6   I, 6 |        difference and we must draw a distinction. For not every "mover" can "
 7   I, 7 |            action. (We make the same distinction in speaking of the agent:
 8   I, 7 |              coming-to-be. A similar distinction holds also of the agent:
 9   I, 9 |        enunciated. For, assuming the distinction between (a) that which is
10   I, 10|             a demand for the precise distinction of "combination" from coming-to-be
11   I, 10|       processes) and for the precise distinction of the "combinable" from
12  II, 11|              need only appeal to the distinction between the statements "
13  II, 11|     come-to-be? Is there, in fact, a distinction in the field of "coming-to-be"
14  II, 11|   coming-to-be" corresponding to the distinction, within the field of "being",
15  II, 11|               In consequence of this distinction, it is evident that those